Loading...
CL_AGN_241028_CC AgendaPacket_F1.CALL TO ORDER 2.ROLL CALL 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4.PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS 5.APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA This is the appropriate time for the Mayor or Councilmembers to approve the agenda as is or reorder. 6.BLUE FOLDER ITEMS (SUPPLEMENTAL) Blue folder (supplemental) items are additional back up materials to administrative reports, changes to the posted agenda packet, and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file. 7.PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding items not listed on this agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will take place on any items not on the agenda. 8.CONSENT CALENDAR Business items, except those formally noticed for public hearing, or those pulled for discussion are assigned to the Consent Calendar. The Mayor or any Councilmember may request that any Consent Calendar item(s) be removed, discussed, and acted upon separately. Items removed from the Consent Calendar will be taken up under the "Excluded Consent Calendar" section below. Those items remaining on the Consent Calendar will be approved in one motion. The Mayor will call on anyone wishing to address the City Council on any Consent Calendar item on the agenda, which has not been pulled by Councilmembers for discussion. 8.A.APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2024 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 AGENDA Regular City Council Meeting CITY COUNCIL Monday, October 28, 2024 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 7:00 PM The meeting agenda is available on the City’s website. The City Council meeting will be live-streamed on the City’s website. Both the agenda and the live-streamed video can be found here: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php Members of the public may submit written comments in real-time by emailing the City Clerk’s office at cityclerk@cityofrh.net. Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information that you do not want to be published. Recordings to City Council meetings can be found here: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php Next Resolution No. 1383 Next Ordinance No. 385 1 RECOMMENDATION: Approve. 8.B.APPROVE MOTION TO READ BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE FURTHER READING OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS LISTED ON THE AGENDA RECOMMENDATION: Approve. 8.C.APPROVE THE FOLLOWING CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: OCTOBER 14, 2024 REGULAR MEETING RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 8.D.PAYMENT OF BILLS RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 8.E.REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE AND COMPLAINT REPORTS FOR SEPTEMBER 2024 RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 9.EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 10.COMMISSION ITEMS 10.A.ZONING CASE 24-063: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT SOLAR BATTERIES AND RELATED EQUIPMENT IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 69-A-EF) (RICH) RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file the Planning Commission's decision to adopt Resolution No. 2024-12 approving the project. 11.PUBLIC HEARINGS 11.A.ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A CL_AGN_241028_CC_AffidavitofPosting.pdf CL_MIN_241014_CC_F.pdf CL_AGN_241028_CC_PaymentOfBills_E.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_TonnageReport.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_C&D_Report.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_RedTagReport.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_RedTag_CityList.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_CallLog_Redacted.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_City_ComplaintList_Redacted.pdf Attachment 1: CL_PBN_240917_PH_RadiusMap_PC_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-063.pdf Attachment 2: PL_ADR_18EastfieldDr_240917_Development_Table.pdf Attachment 3: 2024-12_PC_Resolution_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-063_F.pdf Attachment 4: 2022-05_PC_Resolution_18EastfieldDr_ZC 21-16_E.pdf Attachment 5: Previously Approved Resolutions - 18 Eastfield Dr.pdf Attachment 6: PL_ADR_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-005_SolarPanels_240614_Revised_Plans.pdf 2 PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA) RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and adopt Resolution No. 1376 approving the Project (Attachment 3A). 12.OLD BUSINESS 12.A.UPDATE ON THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND PACIFIC Attachment 1A: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_StaffReports_CC241014_F.pdf Attachment 1B: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_StaffReports_CC240812_CCStaffReport.pdf Attachment 2A: PL_ADR_240711_23CRE_RadiusMap_VicinityMap_Google.pdf Attachment 2B: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_ProximityMap.pdf Attachment 2C: PL_ADR_240607_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_DevelopmentTable.pdf Attachment 2D: 240605_Comparison_Table_23_Crest_Road_East_CCMeeting_8.12.pdf Attachment 2E: 22324_Application Takeoffs-grading page 10.03.24.pdf Attachment 2F: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_StaffReports_CC241014_ChangeLog.pdf Attachment 3A: ResolutionNo1376_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_241028_F.pdf Attachment 3B: 2024-06_PC_Resolution_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_F_E.pdf Attachment 4: 240613_23 Crest Road East_ZC23-070_PhotosForCCAgenda.pdf Attachment 5A: PL_ADR_240118_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_CopyofEmailfromResidents17CRE_01.17.24.pdf Attachment 5B: PL_ADR_240521_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_EmailfromPaulHuh.pdf Attachment 5C: CL_AGN_241014_CC_Item11A_PublicComment01_Redacted.pdf Attachment 5D: CL_AGN_241014_CC Item11A_PublicComment02_Redacted.pdf Attachment 5E: CL_AGN_241014_CC Item11A_PublicComment03.pdf Attachment 5F: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_Letter_Escher_GuneWardena_241024.pdf Attachment 6: Attachment06_LandscapeReviewComments_23CrestRoadEast (ZC23-070) Attachment 7A: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_GMED_Referral.pdf Attachment 7B: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_LomitaAgencyRef_Rev_5-2024.pdf Attachment 7C: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_PagesFromGradingReviewSheet_02- 23.pdf Attachment 8: PL_ADR_240612_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_TechRep_GeotechnicalReport.pdf Attachment 9: PL_ADR_241002_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_HydrologyReport.pdf Attachment 10A: CL_PBN_241014_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Proof_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 10B: CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 11: 22324_CIVIL PLANNING SET_10.02.24.pdf Attachment 12: Drawing_SitePlanComparison_2024-10-02.pdf Attachment 13A: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P1p.pdf Attachment 13B: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P2p.pdf Attachment 13C: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P3.pdf Attachment 13D: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P4.pdf Attachment 14: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Civil_CityCouncil_10.14.24.pdf Attachment 15: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Landscape_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14.pdf 3 ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING'S INC. (PAE) REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL BUDGET TO COMPLETE RESPONSES TO PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS; ADOPT BY RESOLUTION NO. 1379 AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $4,000.00 IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FUNDED FROM A TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES AND APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH PAE COVERING ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. Approve as presented. 13.NEW BUSINESS 13.A.APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN ENGINEERING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY ON AN ON-CALL BASIS RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 13.B.ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 1382 AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS BY $23,485.40 IN THE GENERAL FUND REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ACCOUNT FUNDED FROM AVAILABLE GENERAL FUND RESERVES FOR EMERGENCY PLUMBING REPAIRS RELATED TO EXTERIOR WATER MAIN LEAKS ON THE CITY HALL CAMPUS RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented 14.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL 15.MATTERS FROM STAFF 15.A.RECEIVE AND FILE FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT AND CODE ENFORCEMENT QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE THIRD QUARTER OF 2024 (JULY 1 TO SEPTEMBER 30) RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 15.B.RECEIVE AND FILE A PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS UPDATE RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ResolutionNo1379_CityHallADA_PAE_BudgetAmendment_F.pdf CA_AGR_240909_PAE_5thAmendment_F.pdf CA_AGR_240827_PAE_5A_ScopeChange_Proposal.pdf CL_AGN_240909_CC_Item12A_PublicComment01.pdf Attachment B - CA_AGR_080114_Willdan_E.pdf Attachment C - CA_AGR_100114_Willdan_Amendment01_E.pdf Attachment D - CA_AGR_120629_Willdan_Amendment02_E.pdf Attachment E - CA_AGR_150114_Willdan_Amendment03_E.pdf Attachment F - CA_AGR_240325_WIlldan_Amendment04_F_A_E.pdf ResolutionNo1382_WaterMainRepair_BudgetAmendment_F.pdf Attachment 1: CE_QRP_2024_Q3_241022_CC_CE_OpenedCases.pdf Attachment 2: CE_QRP_2024_Q3_241010_CC_CE_ClosedCases.pdf Attachment 3: CE_QRP_2024_Q3_241022_CC_CE_AllOpenCases.pdf Attachment A - CL_AGN_240909_CC_Item15B.pdf 4 15.C.RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TRAFFIC COMMISSION TERMS EXPIRING ON JANUARY 1, 2025 RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 16.RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION 16.A.EXISTING LITIGATION - GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(D)(1)THE CITY FINDS, BASED ON ADVICE FROM LEGAL COUNSEL, THAT DISCUSSION IN OPEN SESSION WILL PREJUDICE THE POSITION OF THE CITY IN THE LITIGATION. (1 CASE) a. NAME OF CASE: CONNIE ANDERSEN, ET AL. V. CALIFORNIA WATER COMPANY, ET AL. (SEAVIEW CASE) CASE NO.: 24STCV20953 RECOMMENDATION: None. 16.B.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (TWO CASES) CPUC COMPLAINTS AGAINST SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AND SOCAL GAS RECOMMENDATION: None. 16.C.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957 (B)(1) TITLE: CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: None. 17.RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION 18.ADJOURNMENT Next adjourned regular meeting: Tuesday, November 12, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, 90274. Attachment B - CL_AGN_240909_CC_Item15B_Letter_SCG_09-13-24.pdf Attachment C - CL_AGN_240914_CC_Item15B_SCG_ ResponseLetter.pdf Attachment D - CL_AGN_240926_CC_Item15B_Letter_SupevisorHahn.pdf Attachment E - CL_AGN_240926_CC_Item15B_CongressionalFEMA_Letter.pdf Attachment A - CL_AGN_241028_CC_TentativeCommissionerAppointment_Timeline.pdf Attachment B - CL_AGN_241028_CC_PC-Appt_Posting.pdf Attachment C - CL_AGN_241028_CC_TC-Appt_Posting.pdf Notice: Public Comment is welcome on any item prior to City Council action on the item. Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in the City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and attendance at this meeting. 5 Agenda Item No.: 8.A Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2024 DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Approve. ATTACHMENTS: CL_AGN_241028_CC_AffidavitofPosting.pdf 6 Administrative Report 8.A., File # 2506 Meeting Date: 10/28 /202 4 To: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL From: Christian Horvath, City Clerk TITLE APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 2024 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING In compliance with the Brown Act, the following materials have been posted at the locations below. Legislative Body City Council Posting Type Adjourned Regular Meeting Agenda Posting Location 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 City Hall Window City Website: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/city_council/city_council_archive_agendas/index.php Meeting Date & Time OCTOBER 28, 2024 7:00pm Open Session As City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills, I declare under penalty of perjury, the document noted above was posted at the date displayed below. Christian Horvath, City Clerk Date: Octo ber 25, 2024 7 Agenda Item No.: 8.B Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:APPROVE MOTION TO READ BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE FURTHER READING OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS LISTED ON THE AGENDA DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Approve. ATTACHMENTS: 8 Agenda Item No.: 8.C Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:APPROVE THE FOLLOWING CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: OCTOBER 14, 2024 REGULAR MEETING DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: CL_MIN_241014_CC_F.pdf 9 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 14, 2024 Page 1 Minutes Rolling Hills City Council Monday, Octo ber 14 , 202 4 Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills met in person on the above date at 7:01 p.m. Mayor Mirsch presiding. 2. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: Wilson, Black, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch Councilmembers Absent: Dieringer Staff Present: Karina Bañales, City Manager Christian Horvath, City Clerk / Executive Assistant to the City Manager John Signo, Planning & Community Services Director Pat Donegan, City Attorney 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Councilmember Wilson 4. PRESENTATIONS / PROCLAMATIONS / ANNOUNCEMENTS – NONE 5. APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA Mayor Mirsch requested moving Item 13A ahead of Item 11A. Without objection, so ordered. 6. BLUE FOLDER ITEMS (SUPPLEMENTAL) Motion by Mayor Mirsch, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to receive and file Blue Folder Item 11A. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Wilson, Black , Pieper, Mayor Mirsch NOES: None ABSENT: Dieringer 7. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Public Comment: Alfred Visco 8. CONSENT CALENDAR 8.A. APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2024 8.B. APPROVE MOTION TO READ BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE FURTHER READING OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS LISTED ON THE AGENDA 8.C. APPROVE THE FOLLOWING CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 23, 2024 REGULAR MEETING 8.D. PAYMENT OF BILLS 10 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 14, 2024 Page 2 8.E. APPROVE A LIGHT POLE IN FRONT OF THE MAIN GATEHOUSE ON PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD AND IN FRONT OF THE GATEHOUSE ON CREST ROAD WEST ON THE RANCHO DEL MAR SCHOOL PROPERTY 8.F. PULLED BY MAYOR PRO TEM PIEPER Motion by Councilmember Black, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to approve the Consent Calendar except for Item 8F. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Wilson, Black, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch NOES: None ABSENT: Dieringer 9. EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 8.F. ZONING CASE NO. 24-073: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO ENLARGE AND MOVE A DRIVEWAY APRON APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET ON A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 CREST ROAD WEST (LOT 2-CH), ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (FRYKMAN), AND DETERMINING THE PROJECT EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Motion by Councilmember Black, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to approve as presented. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Wilson, Black, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch NOES: None ABSENT: Dieringer 10. COMMISSION ITEMS – NONE Mayor Mirsch moved to Item 13A. 13. NEW BUSINESS 13.A. RECEIVE AND FILE PRELIMINARY YEAR END RESULTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024 Presentation by Finance Operations Lead Consultant Robert Samario Councilmember Dieringer arrived at 7:12 p.m. Motion by Councilmember Black, seconded by Councilmember Dieringer to receive and file. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Wilson, Black, Dieringer, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch NOES: None ABSENT: None Mayor Mirsch moved to Item 11A. 11. PUBLIC HEARINGS 11 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 14, 2024 Page 3 11.A. ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA) Presentation by Planning & Community Services Director John Signo Applicant presentations: Frank Escher, Principal, Escher GuneWardena Architecture Dave Hamilton, Geotechnical Engineer, Hamilton and Associates Eirik Haenschke, Geologist, Hamilton and Associates Kevin Poffenbarger, Engineer, EPD Consultants David Godshall, Landscape Architect, Terremoto Allan Rigg, Engineer, Rigg Consulting Yuki Ogasawara, Applicant LA County Building & Safety: Mike Dorta Public Comment: John Mackenbach, Heidi Mackenbach, Alfred Visco, Dustin McNabb, Melissa McNabb, Ann Bellis, Charlie Raine, Kathleen Hughes, Jim Partridge Motion by Councilmember Dieringer, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to continue the public hearing to the regularly scheduled October 28, 2024 City Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Wilson, Black, Dieringer, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch NOES: None ABSENT: None 12. OLD BUSINESS 12.A. UPDATE ON THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING'S INC. (PAE) REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL BUDGET TO COMPLETE RESPONSES TO PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS; ADOPT BY RESOLUTION NO. 1379 AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $4,000.00 IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FUNDED FROM A TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES AND APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH PAE COVERING ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT The City Council continued this item to the next meeting. 14. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL – NONE 15. MATTERS FROM STAFF 15.A. REVIEW AND APPROVE THE 2024 HOLIDAY OPEN HOUSE FINAL GUEST LIST Presentation by City Clerk / Executive Assistant to the City Manager Christian Horvath Public Comment: Jim Aichele 12 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 14, 2024 Page 4 Motion by Councilmember Dieringer, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to approve the list as is but remove “and staff” where currently denoted. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Wilson, Black, Dieringer, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch NOES: None ABSENT: None 16. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION The City Council continued the following items to the next meeting. 16.A. EXISTING LITIGATION - GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(D)(1)THE CITY FINDS, BASED ON ADVICE FROM LEGAL COUNSEL, THAT DISCUSSION IN OPEN SESSION WILL PREJUDICE THE POSITION OF THE CITY IN THE LITIGAT ION. (1 CASE) a. NAME OF CASE: CONNIE ANDERSEN, ET AL. V. CALIFORNIA WATER COMPANY, ET AL. (SEAVIEW CASE) CASE NO.: 24STCV20953 16.B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (2 CASES) CPUC COMPLAINTS AGAINST SOTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AND SOCAL GAS 17. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION 18. ADJOURNMENT : 11:54 P.M. The meeting was adjourned at 11:54 p.m. on September 23, 2024. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, October 28, 2024 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. It will also be available via City’s website link at: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php All written comments submitted are included in the record and available for public review on the City website. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________________ Christian Horvath, City Clerk Approved, ____________________________________ Leah Mirsch, Mayor 13 Agenda Item No.: 8.D Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:PAYMENT OF BILLS DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: CL_AGN_241028_CC_PaymentOfBills_E.pdf 14 15 16 17 Agenda Item No.: 8.E Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE AND COMPLAINT REPORTS FOR SEPTEMBER 2024 DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: As requested, Republic Services has provided the following clarifications to their reports: Non-franchise means any business not covered under the City’s Franchise Agreement with Republic Services – for instance, temporary bins or roll offs for construction or cleanups or permanent dumpsters for horse properties. The Commercial Recycling is hauled to various transfer facilities. Those facilities separate and recover(recycle) a portion of that material. They provide Republic recovery rates each month that is in turn used for the cities Republic serves. The Greenwaste on the Non-Franchise report can show up and change for various reasons from month to month. Aspects like changes to the customers service type, load contamination and data entry errors can contribute to this. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ATTACHMENTS: VC_REP_241021_September_TonnageReport.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_C&D_Report.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_RedTagReport.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_RedTag_CityList.pdf VC_REP_241021_September_CallLog_Redacted.pdf 18 VC_REP_241021_September_City_ComplaintList_Redacted.pdf 19 Year 2024 Franchise Y/N Y Month Commodity Tons Collected Tons Recovered Tons Disposed Diversion % 1 Greenwaste 79.86 79.86 - 100.00% Trash 247.10 - 247.10 0.00% 1 Total 326.96 79.86 247.10 24.43% 2 Greenwaste 51.72 51.72 - 100.00% Trash 198.13 - 198.13 0.00% 2 Total 249.85 51.72 198.13 20.70% 3 Greenwaste 53.42 53.42 - 100.00% Trash 199.60 - 199.60 0.00% 3 Total 253.02 53.42 199.60 21.11% 4 Greenwaste 116.50 116.50 - 100.00% Trash 183.05 - 183.05 0.00% Trash - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 3.76 - 3.76 0.00% 4 Total 303.31 116.50 186.81 38.41% 5 Greenwaste 101.62 101.62 - 100.00% Trash 180.98 - 180.98 0.00% 5 Total 282.60 101.62 180.98 35.96% 6 Greenwaste 83.11 83.11 - 100.00% Trash 195.05 - 195.05 0.00% Trash - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 1.10 - 1.10 0.00% Greenwaste - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 2.30 2.30 - 100.00% 6 Total 281.56 85.41 196.15 30.33% 7 Greenwaste 67.20 67.20 - 100.00% Trash 238.54 - 238.54 0.00% Greenwaste - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 5.32 5.32 - 100.00% 7 Total 311.06 72.52 238.54 23.31% 8 Greenwaste 75.89 75.89 - 100.00% Trash 222.41 - 222.41 0.00% Trash - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 1.62 - 37.45 0.00% 8 Total 299.92 75.89 259.86 25.30% 9 Greenwaste 102.52 102.52 - 100.00% Recycle 0.79 0.16 0.63 20.35% Trash 200.89 - 200.89 0.00% 9 Total 304.20 102.68 201.52 33.75% Grand Total 2,612.48 739.62 1,908.69 28.31% CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RESIDENTIAL FRANCHISE 2024 Page 1 of 2 20 Year 2024 Franchise Y/N N Month Commodity Tons Collected Tons Recovered Tons Disposed Diversion % 1 Greenwaste 19.61 19.61 - 100.00% Recycle 0.27 0.04 0.23 15.00% Trash 59.97 - 59.97 0.00% Organics 0.16 0.10 0.06 61.71% C&D 4.27 3.43 0.84 80.24% 1 Total 84.29 23.18 61.11 27.50% 2 Greenwaste 16.94 16.94 - 100.00% Recycle 0.29 0.11 0.18 37.67% Trash 57.05 - 57.05 0.00% C&D 11.29 9.05 2.25 80.10% 2 Total 85.57 26.09 59.47 30.50% 3 Greenwaste 6.42 6.42 - 100.00% Recycle 0.22 0.08 0.13 38.48% Trash 35.05 - 35.05 0.00% 3 Total 41.69 6.50 35.19 15.60% 4 Greenwaste 11.07 11.07 - 100.00% Recycle 0.27 0.11 0.16 40.00% Trash 46.40 - 46.40 0.00% 4 Total 57.74 11.18 46.56 19.36% 5 Recycle 0.27 0.09 0.19 31.77% Trash 70.08 - 70.08 0.00% Organics 0.17 0.12 0.05 70.73% C&D 11.15 8.95 2.20 80.24% 5 Total 81.68 9.16 72.52 11.21% 6 Greenwaste 11.95 11.95 - 100.00% Recycle 0.21 0.07 0.13 36.18% Trash 45.24 - 45.24 0.00% Organics 0.16 0.12 0.04 73.76% 6 Total 57.56 12.14 45.42 21.09% 7 Greenwaste 8.71 8.71 - 100.00% Recycle 0.24 0.07 0.16 30.41% Trash 52.51 - 52.51 0.00% Organics 0.14 0.10 0.04 70.71% 7 Total 61.59 8.88 52.71 14.42% 8 Greenwaste 0.09 0.09 - 100.00% Recycle 0.56 0.18 0.38 32.62% Trash 48.53 - 48.53 0.00% Organics 0.06 0.05 0.02 71.55% 8 Total 49.25 0.32 48.93 0.65% 9 Greenwaste 1.72 1.72 - 100.00% Recycle 0.60 0.44 0.16 73.16% Trash 17.24 - 17.24 0.00% Organics 0.05 0.04 0.01 80.17% 9 Total 19.61 2.20 17.41 11.19% Grand Total 538.97 99.64 439.33 18.49% CITY OF ROLLING HILLS NON-FRANCHISE 2024 Page 2 of 2 21 Republic Services City of Rolling Hills C&D Report Reporting Period September-24 Disposal Site Material Loads Taken Tons Collected No C&D to Report Summary Row Labels Sum of Tons Collected (blank) Grand Total Page 1 of 1 22 Rolling Hills Red Tags – September 2024 Date Address Code Issue COMM 9/4/2024 29 CREST RD E 7 Greenwaste overloaded No 9/16/2024 17 CREST RD E 7 Greenwaste overloaded No 9/17/2024 25 PORTUGUESE BEND RD 7 Greenwaste overloaded No 9/19/2024 11 SADDLEBACK RD 7 Greenwaste overloaded No 23 City of Rolling Hills - September 2024 Red Tag List Republic Services - Red Tag List Date of Issue Time Issue Resident Name Resident Address Republic contacted Republic Reponse Date Reponse Time of Reponse Resolved 9/3/2024 Red Tag: Vehicle Blocking Access Way Resident Tanasha Malone 9/4/2024 Red Tag: Excessive Amount of Green Waste Resident Tanasha Malone 9/6/2024 Red Tag: Green Waste Not Properly Bundled Resident Tanasha Malone 9/26/2024 Red Tag: Green Waste Overloaded Resident Tanasha Malone 9/26/2024 Red Tag: Green Waste Too Heavy Resident Tanasha Malone 24 Republic Services Call Log Report City:Rolling Hills Year 2024 Month/Quarter 9 Summary of Calls by Type Final Call Final Call Type Sub-Type Total 2.Complaint Escalation 5 2.Complaint Total 5 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 9 Missed Yard Waste - Residential 4 Missed Bulk Service 1 3.Missed Pick Up Total 14 Grand Total 19 Pg 1 of 5 25 Republic Services Call Log Report Final Call Type Sub-Type Case Number Date/Time Opened Date/Time Closed Created By Request Description Resolution Comments Customer Category Account Number Site Account Name Site Address Phone 2.Complaint Escalation 20240906-200823115 9/6/2024 10:00 AM 9/10/2024 11:12 AM Kris Adams Alexandra Sermon called to report an issue. NOT YET SERVICED THIS WEEK NEEDS TO BE COMPLETED WITH REG SERVICE. STATED THAT CITY SENT LETTER STATING ROAD CLOSED M ONDAY PLEASE ADV DRIVER TUESDAY SERVICED. reviewed.RESI 9020204638 1 ALEXANDRA SERMON 15 Upper Blackwater Cyn Rd Palos Verdes Peninsula CA 2.Complaint Escalation 20240913-201244846 9/13/2024 7:49 AM 9/17/2024 6:12 AM Tiana Woods Debra Fornier called to report an issue. client advised me of mpu for yesterday and needs pick up sooner than 9/16 as she has landscapers coming today if possible pls contact client if able to accommodate sooner pick up . will pick up 9/17/2024 RESI 9020003487 1 CURRENT RESIDENT 30 CREST RD E ROLLING HILLS CA (000) 000-0000 2.Complaint Escalation 20240917-201465354 9/17/2024 1:03 PM 9/19/2024 5:25 AM Felisha Bell Debra Fornier ( YW has not been serviced for either Mondays or Thursdays. Was missed 9/9, 9/13 and 9/16 andreported for recovery for Monday but was not done. Per esca lation 20240913- 201244846 entered 9/13 and just being updated today 9/17 on Recovery 9/19/2024 RESI 9020003487 1 CURRENT RESIDENT 30 CREST RD E ROLLING HILLS CA (000) 000-0000 2.Complaint Escalation 20240928-202155935 9/27/2024 5:02 PM 10/3/2024 9:19 AM Celina Calloway Kamran Jahangard called to report an issue. CX says driver went 2yrs when house was under construction without servicing because he had a commercial bin in front of property. Says he wants a supervisor to call him back. . Re-Assigned to the supervisor in the area RESI 9020003456 1 RESIDENT 13 WIDELOOP RD ROLLING HILLS CA (000) 000-0000 2.Complaint Escalation 20240930-202212452 9/30/2024 10:42 AM 10/1/2024 12:33 PM Carlos Bojorquez Robert Brockway called to report an issue. MPU bulk on 09/27 and worried miss again for recovery as its almost 11AM. Conf Serv RR RESI 9020003618 1 JENNIFER BROCKWAY 87 EASTFIELD DR ROLLING HILLS CA Pg 2 of 5 26 Republic Services Call Log Report Final Call Type Sub-Type Case Number Date/Time Opened Date/Time Closed Created By Request Description Resolution Comments Customer Category Account Number Site Account Name Site Address Phone 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Bulk Service 20240927-202149536 9/27/2024 2:49 PM 9/30/2024 10:37 PM Ebony Richmond (blank)(blank)RESI 9020003618 1 JENNIFER BROCKWAY 87 EASTFIELD DR ROLLING HILLS CA 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240904-200608689 9/3/2024 5:05 PM 9/5/2024 10:35 PM Nikkita Shirley (blank)(blank)RESI 9020204638 1 ALEXANDRA SERMON 15 Upper Blackwater Cyn Rd Palos Verdes Peninsula CA 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240906-200822860 9/6/2024 9:58 AM 9/10/2024 10:37 PM Kris Adams (blank)(blank)RESI 9020204638 1 ALEXANDRA SERMON 15 Upper Blackwater Cyn Rd Palos Verdes Peninsula CA 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240911-201124800 9/11/2024 12:37 PM 9/13/2024 10:30 PM Arely Ramirez (blank)(blank)RESI 9020204638 1 ALEXANDRA SERMON 15 Upper Blackwater Cyn Rd Palos Verdes Peninsula CA 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240916-201358795 9/16/2024 10:53 AM 9/18/2024 10:31 PM BOBBIE GONZALES (blank)(blank)RESI 9020003607 1 CURRENT RESIDENT 69 EASTFIELD DR ROLLING HILLS CA (000) 000-0000 Pg 3 of 5 27 Republic Services Call Log Report Final Call Type Sub-Type Case Number Date/Time Opened Date/Time Closed Created By Request Description Resolution Comments Customer Category Account Number Site Account Name Site Address Phone 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240923-201815963 9/23/2024 2:58 PM 9/25/2024 10:33 PM Lakeisha Jones (blank)(blank)RESI 9020003656 1 NAVAL BANSAL 12 GEORGEFF RD ROLLING HILLS CA 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240924-201872556 9/24/2024 10:53 AM 9/26/2024 10:29 PM Perla Veronica Iriarte Serrano (blank)(blank)RESI 9020003634 1 CURRENT RESIDENT 1 FLYING MANE RD ROLLING HILLS CA (000) 000-0000 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240927-202155768 9/27/2024 4:56 PM 10/2/2024 10:35 PM Celina Calloway (blank)(blank)RESI 9020003456 1 RESIDENT 13 WIDELOOP RD ROLLING HILLS CA (000) 000-0000 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240930-202196725 9/30/2024 9:10 AM 9/30/2024 9:11 AM Tiana Charles (blank)(blank)RESI 9020206014 1 ROLLING HILLS RESIDENT 33 CREST RD E ROLLING HILLS CA 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240930-202197227 9/30/2024 9:13 AM 10/2/2024 10:35 PM Tiana Charles (blank)(blank)RESI 9020206014 1 ROLLING HILLS RESIDENT 33 CREST RD E ROLLING HILLS CA Pg 4 of 5 28 Republic Services Call Log Report Final Call Type Sub-Type Case Number Date/Time Opened Date/Time Closed Created By Request Description Resolution Comments Customer Category Account Number Site Account Name Site Address Phone 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Yard Waste - Residential 20240913-201244658 9/13/2024 7:48 AM 9/17/2024 10:24 PM Tiana Woods (blank)(blank)RESI 9020003487 1 CURRENT RESIDENT 30 CREST RD E ROLLING HILLS CA (000) 000-0000 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Yard Waste - Residential 20240918-201550323 9/18/2024 2:07 PM 9/20/2024 10:30 PM Josie Nunez (blank)(blank)RESI 9020003187 1 CURRENT RESIDENT 12 CABALLEROS RD ROLLING HILLS CA (000) 000-0000 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Yard Waste - Residential 20240918-201553556 9/18/2024 2:35 PM 9/20/2024 10:30 PM BOBBIE GONZALES (blank)(blank)RESI 9020003074 1 PAT & BILL GARDNER 16 OUTRIDER RD ROLLING HILLS CA 3.Missed Pick Up Missed Yard Waste - Residential 20240930-202253325 9/30/2024 3:27 PM 10/2/2024 10:35 PM Fernando Ibarra Duran (blank)(blank)RESI 9020003711 1 TRACY HOLMES 10 WILLIAMSBURG LN ROLLING HILLS CA Pg 5 of 5 29 City of Rolling Hills Republic Services Complaint List -September 2024 Date of Issue Time Issue/Complaint Resident Name Resident Address Republic contacted Republic Reponse Date Reponse Time of Reponse Resolved 9/5/2024 Missed Greenwaste pickup 19 Southfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/9/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 16 Southfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/10/2024 Missed Greenwaste Pickup 65 Portuguese Bend Rd. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/10/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 12 Cinchring Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/12/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 15 Upper Blackwater Canyon Rd. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/12/2024 Missed Greenwaste Pickup 5 Caballeros Rd. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/13/2024 Missed Greenwaste Pickup 5 Caballeros Rd. Tanaha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/13/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 1 Hummingbird Lane Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/13/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 42 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/16/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 28 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/17/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 42 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/17/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 25 Caballeros Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/17/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 1 Flying Mane Rd. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/17/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 44 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/20/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 37 Crest rd. W. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/20/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 25 Caballeros Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/20/2024 Missed Trash & Green waste Pickup 63 Crest Rd. E. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/20/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 59 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/25/2024 Missed Greenwaste 8 Quailridge Rd. S. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/30/2024 Missed Trash and Green waste 33 Crest Rd. E. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 30 Agenda Item No.: 10.A Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: ZONING CASE 24-063: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT SOLAR BATTERIES AND RELATED EQUIPMENT IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 69-A-EF) (RICH) DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: Planning Commission On September 17, 2024, the Planning Commission held a field trip at the subject property and continued to the evening meeting. Two residents were present during the field trip: Aaron De La Torre (18 Eastfield Drive) and Paul Kinkelaar (2 Roundup Road). Neither had issues with the project. During the evening meeting, there was no one from the public in attendance. The Commission discussed noise, location, and screening, and voted unanimously, 5-0, to approve the project. Zoning, Location, Lot Description, and History The property located at 18 Eastfield Drive is zoned RAS-1 and has a net lot area of 68,826 square feet (1.58 acre). On December 17, 1996, the Planning Commission approved a Site Plan Review request for a new single-family residence and other improvements to replace an existing residence on the subject property. On July 21, 1998, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to construct a cabana and modification to the 1996 Site Plan Review approval for additional grading. On June 14, 2005, the Planning Commission approved a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a stable and corral, a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing stable into a recreation room, and a variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area on the lot. On May 17, 2022, the Planning Commission 31 granted approval for a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a new retaining wall; Conditional Use Permit for a recreational game court; and Variance to exceed the maximum permitted lot disturbance in Zoning Case No. 21-16. The lot is developed with a 5,265-square-foot single-family residence and a 1,284-square-foot garage. There are three existing building pads on site with approximately 50 50-foot difference in elevation. The highest point is located closest to the roadway easement on the western portion of the property; the lowest portion is located in the eastern portion of the lot near the existing stable and corral. The existing residence and garage are located on Pad 1, which is 26,083 square feet and located closest to the roadway easement; Pad 2 is 12,342 square feet in the middle of the property and contains a swimming pool, pool house, and garden. Pad 3, in the rear portion of the property, is 7,439 square feet and includes a stable, corral, and recreational game court. DISCUSSION: Applicant Request The applicant is requesting a variance to encroach into the required side yard setback in order to construct a project that includes solar batteries and equipment. The project will be located 10 feet from the property line. There will be four batteries, each nine inches wide, three feet high, and two feet long. Distance from the residence to the batteries will be at least 15 feet, which provides adequate access around the residence. The pad area will be approximately 13 feet long by three feet wide, or 39 square feet. The batteries will connect to new roof-mounted solar panels. Roof-mounted solar panels are approved administratively and not subject to discretionary review. The residence will also be re-roofed which is also approved administratively and not subject to Planning Commission review. Variance to Encroach into the Side Yard Setback Certain findings listed in Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) Section 17.38.050 are required in order to approve a variance. Findings are included in the attached resolution and listed below. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE Area of Disturbance The location of the solar batteries is landscaped and has already been disturbed. There will be no further site disturbance. Lot Coverage The proposed concrete pad will be 39 square feet. 32 Environmental Review The proposed project has been determined to not have a significant effect on the environment and is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts accessory structures including new solar panels and equipment. Public Participation Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on September 6, 2024. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE 17.38.050 Required Variance findings . In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; 2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; 3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; 4. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; 5. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; 6. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and 7. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file the Planning Commission's decision to adopt Resolution No. 2024-12 approving the project. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: CL_PBN_240917_PH_RadiusMap_PC_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-063.pdf Attachment 2: PL_ADR_18EastfieldDr_240917_Development_Table.pdf Attachment 3: 2024-12_PC_Resolution_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-063_F.pdf Attachment 4: 2022-05_PC_Resolution_18EastfieldDr_ZC 21-16_E.pdf Attachment 5: Previously Approved Resolutions - 18 Eastfield Dr.pdf Attachment 6: PL_ADR_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-005_SolarPanels_240614_Revised_Plans.pdf 33 City of Rolling Hills 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 TITLE VICINITY MAP CASE NO. Zoning Case No. 24-063 Variance OWNER Rich ADDRESS 18 Eastfield, Rolling Hills 90274 SITE 34 DEVELOPMENT TABLE – ZONING CASE NO. 24-063 (18 EASTFIELD DRIVE) Request: Variance to Encroach Into Side Yard Setback PAD 1 PAD 2 PAD 3 TOTAL RAS-1 Zone Setbacks Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from side property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line Single family residence, garage (SF) Swimming Pool, Pool House (SF) New Stable and corral (SF) Pad/Net Lot Area Existing: 26,083 Proposed: 0 Total: 26,083 Existing: 7,317 Proposed: 5,025 Total: 12,342 Existing: 6,213 Proposed: 1,226 Total: 7,439 68,826 Residence 5,265 5,265 Garage 1,284 1,284 Swimming Pool/Spa 722 722 Pool Equipment 233 233 Proposed Solar Batteries & Equip. 39 39 Stable (min. 450 SF) 479 479 Corral (existing; min. 550 SF) (1,006) (1,006) Recreation Court 1,697 1,697 Attached Covered Porched 377 353 730 Potting Shed 140 140 Aviary 76 76 Chicken Coop 83 83 Water Features, Etc. 294 294 Other 1,374 1,374 Total Structure Area 8,339 1,548 2,529 12,416 Structural Coverage (20% maximum) 18% Grading (balanced on site) None for this project -- Total Flatwork 8,708 Total Structural and Flatwork 21,124 Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) 30.7% Building Pad Coverage (Policy: 30% maximum) 32.0% 12.5% 29.9% Disturbed Area (40% maximum; up to 60% with slopes less than 3:1) No Change No Change No Change 34,355 49.9% 35 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT SOLAR BATTERIES AND EQUIPMENT IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 24-063 FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 69-A-EF) (RICH) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Joseph and Christine Rich with respect to real property located at 18 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 69-A-EF) requesting a variance to construct solar batteries and equipment approximately 10 feet from the property line within the 20-foot side yard setback. Section 2. On December 17, 1996, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 96-21 approving a Site Plan Review in Zoning Case No. 546 for the construction of a new single-family residence, and other improvements to replace an existing single-family residence. On July 21, 1998, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 98-14 approving a Conditional Use Permit for a cabana and modifications to a Site Plan Review application to permit the construction of the cabana with increased grading in Zoning Case No. 579. On June 14, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2005-18 approving a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a stable and corral to be reviewed by the Planning Commission; a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing stable into a recreation room; and a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot in Zoning Case No. 703 of 40% to 48.4%. On May 17, 2022, the Planning Commission granted approval for a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a new retaining wall; Conditional Use Permit for a recreational game court; and Variance to exceed the maximum permitted lot disturbance in Zoning Case No. 21-16. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at its special field trip meeting and its regular meeting on September 17, 2024. Neighbors within 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on September 6, 2024. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail and were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. Section 4. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the net lot area excluding the roadway easement is 68,826 square feet (1.58 acre). The lot is developed with a 5,265-square-foot single-family residence and a 1,284-square-foot garage. There are three existing building pads on site with approximately 50 feet difference in elevation. The existing residence and garage are located on the Pad 1 (25,546 square feet), which is the highest point and closest to the roadway easement on the western portion of the property; Pad 2 is 12,017 square feet in the 36 2 middle of the property and contains a courtyard area, swimming pool, and pool house. Pad 3 in on the eastern and rear portion of the lot, is the lowest part on the property, and is 893 square feet; it is developed with a stable, corral, and recreational game court. Section 5. The Planning Commission finds that the Project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to Section 15303 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (“State CEQA Guidelines”), Class 3 "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures." Class 3 exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project involves the construction of solar batteries and equipment on a developed lot within a residential zone. Accordingly, the Project qualifies for the exemption pursuant to Section 15303. Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. Specifically, the Project: a. Is not located in a particularly sensitive environment. The Project is located in an urbanized area and is not environmentally sensitive. b. There is no possibility of a cumulative impact of the same type of project in the same place over time. The Project entails the construction of solar batteries and equipment. Once built, the likelihood of a successive project on this site is low and probability of a cumulative impact is low. c. Is not marked by unusual circumstances. There is nothing unusual about the construction of solar batteries and equipment in a residential area. In addition, the Project will implement best management practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and construction pollutants from contacting stormwater. d. Would not damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. e. Is not located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. f. Would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The Planning Commission directs staff to prepare, execute, and file a Notice of Exemption with the Los Angeles County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse within five (5) working days of the Project’s approval and the adoption of this Resolution. Section 6. Variance. Section 17.38.050 sets forth the required findings for granting a variance to encroach approximately 10 feet from the property line into the required 20-foot side yard setback identified in Section 17.16.120(A). With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone. There are extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property. The lot consists of an unusual lot configuration in that it is deep and slopes downward toward the rear. The site is 37 3 developed with a residence and related improvements and the side yard is the best place to construct the batteries and equipment. B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question. Granting the requested variance to encroach into the required side yard setback is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone in that the site is already developed and the project will be consistent with other properties that have similar ground-mounted equipment. C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Granting a variance to encroach into the required side yard will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that the project will be screened and adequately set back from neighboring structures. Further, the project will be consistent with other development in the area in that other residences are equipped with solar batteries. D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed. Granting the requested variance will meet the spirit and intent of this title in that the project will be used for residential purposes and located on a residential lot. E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant. The project results in a common amenity enjoyed by many properties throughout the City and the proposed location is the best location since it is screened, not visible from the street, and located in close proximity to the existing electrical panel. The project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan. F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Granting a variance for the project will be consistent with the applicable portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills. 38 4 Granting the variance to encroach into the required side yard setback will be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills, which allows and encourages residential uses. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves Zoning Case No. 24-063 subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance approval shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in RHMC Section 17.38.070 of the Zoning Ordinance unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections. B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee’s determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted; the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant’s request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise a variance to such requirement has been approved. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file at City Hall and approved by the Planning Commission except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Variance approval shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the building department. 39 5 The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto a separate sheet and included in the building plans submitted to the Building Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times. Any proposed modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed with staff so that staff can determine whether the modification is minor or major in nature. Minor modifications are subject to approval by the City Manager or his or her designee. Major modifications are subject to approval by the Planning Commissioner after a public hearing. Applicant shall not implement modifications or changes to the approved project without the appropriate approval from the City Manager or designee or the Planning Commission, as required. E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to Building and Safety Department for issuance of building and grading permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth herein and the City’s Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 12,377 square feet or 18% of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (20% maximum). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork, shall not exceed 20,835 square feet or 30.3% of the net lot area in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% maximum). H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 49.9%, or 34,355 square feet surface area. Grading, other than preparation for the foundation, is not proposed. L. The solar batteries and equipment shall be screened from neighboring properties with vegetation or fencing and maintained in good condition at all times. Conduit and wiring shall be underground or concealed in a manner approved by the Planning Director. M. A minimum of five-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of all of structures, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department. N. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Low Impact Development requirements for storm water management on site (RHMC Chapter 8.32). 40 6 O. Hydrology, soils, geology and other reports, as required by the Building and Public Works Departments, and as may be required by the Building Official, shall be prepared. P. Prior to issuance of building permit, any new landscaping shall be shown on a landscaping plan and shall meet the requirements of the City. The landscape plan shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements, and shall be approved by the City. Q. The project shall be landscaped, and continually maintained in substantial conformance with the landscaping plan on file. A detailed landscaping plan shall provide that any trees and shrubs used in the landscaping scheme for this project shall be planted in a way that screens the project development from adjacent streets and neighbors, such that shrubs and trees as they mature do not grow into a hedge or impede any neighbors’ views and the plan shall provide that all landscaping be maintained at a height no higher than the roof line of the nearest project structure. In addition, the landscaping plan shall provide for screening of the project with vegetation not to exceed 10 feet in height, and that the vegetation used for screening shall be planted in an off-set manner, so as to prevent it, as it grows from forming a solid hedge. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area, are water-wise and are consistent with the rural character of the community. Plants listed as high hazardous plants under RHMC Section 8.30.015 are prohibited. R. The landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, (Chapter 13.18 of the RHMC). Pursuant to Chapter 8.30 of the RHMC, the property shall at all times be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation. S. The setback lines and roadway easement lines in the vicinity of the construction for this project shall remain staked throughout the construction. A construction fence may be required. T. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements to advance equestrian use and emergency preparedness for evacuation within the City. Where RHCA has demonstrated authority over the easement, the City’s Planning Director may grant relief from this condition upon satisfactory proof of permission from RHCA and a legitimate showing that there is no need for the condition to advance equestrian uses and emergency preparedness. U. Minimum of 65% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City’s Construction and Demolition permits for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City. V. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. 41 7 W. During construction, to the extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the project site, on the driveway and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within the unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. To the extent feasible, a minimum of 4’ wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment at all times. X. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and relate traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. Y. Prior to demolition of the existing structures, an investigation shall be conducted for the presence of hazardous chemicals, lead-based paints or products, mercury and asbestos-containing materials (ACMs). If hazardous chemicals, lead-based paints or products, mercury or ACMs are identified, remediation shall be undertaken in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. Z. The property owner and/or his/her contractor/applicant shall be responsible for compliance with the no-smoking provisions in the Municipal Code. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIRE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. AA. The project shall drain in accordance with the City’s drainage requirements. Drainage dissipaters shall be constructed outside of any easements. The drainage system shall be approved by the Department of Building and Safety. If an above ground swale and/or dissipater is required, it shall be designed in such a manner as not to cross over any equestrian trails or discharge water onto a trail, shall be stained in an earth tone color, and shall be screened from any trail, road and neighbors’ view to the maximum extent practicable, without impairing the function of the drainage system. AB. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices. AC. During construction, an Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 2016 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution. 42 8 AD. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of storm water drainage facilities and septic tank. AE. The applicant shall pay all of the applicable Building and Safety and Public Works Department fees and Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District fees, if any. AF. Prior to final inspection of the project, “as graded” and “as constructed” plans and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the Planning Commission approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the “as built/as graded” plan. AG. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of the Site Plan Review approval, or the approval shall not be effective. AH. All conditions of this Resolution, when applicable, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit from the Building and Safety Department AI. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 17th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024. BRAD CHELF, CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ____________________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 43 9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2024-12 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT SOLAR BATTERIES AND EQUIPMENT IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 24-063 FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 69-A-EF) (RICH) was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on September 17, 2024, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. __________________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 RESOLUTION NO. 2005-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE AND CORRAL; GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING STABLE INTO A RECREATION ROOM; GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT AND A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR DEVELOPMENT ON A PROPERTY THAT REQUIRES PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW DUE TO EXISTING STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTION AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 703, AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, (LOT 69- A-EF), (RICH). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application has been filed by Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Rich, with respect to real property located at 18 Eastfield Drive, (Lot 69-A-EF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a 450 square foot stable with 360 square foot covered porch and a corral, Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing 320 square foot stable into a recreation room, a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot and a Site Plan Review for the proposed development on a property that requires Planning Commission review, due to existing structural development restriction approved in 1996 and in 1998. An addition of 446 square feet to the existing basement and modification to the entryway are also proposed. Section 2. In 1996, the Planning Commission approved a Site Plan Review request for a new single family residence and other improvements to replace an existing residence on subject property. On July 21, 1998, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to construct a cabana and modification to the 1996 Site Plan Review approval for additional grading. Both, the 1996 and 1998 Resolutions of Approval contain a condition that any further development on the property is subject to Planning Commission review and approval. Section 3 The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the request in Zoning Case No. 703 on April 19, 2005, May 17, 2005 and at a field trip on May 17, 2005. The applicants were notified of the hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in said proposal. The Planning Commission heard a report from the City staff and reviewed, analyzed and studied the proposal. The applicants and the applicants' representative were in attendance at the hearings. 06 1316073 58 Section 4. The City staff received a letter from a neighbor objecting to the proposed location of the stable. The Planning Commission reviewed and analyzed the letter and scheduled a visit to view the proposed project from the objecting neighbor's property. Prior to the field trip, the neighbor submitted a letter recanting her objection and requesting that the field trip to view the project from her property be cancelled. Section 5. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption (The State of CA Guidelines, Section 15303) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section b Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any development requiring a grading permit or any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application for grading for the stable and corral and the restriction placed in 1996 and 1998 on any future development on subject property the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, and surrounding uses because the proposed stable complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures, and equestrian uses. The project conforms to Zoning Code setbacks and the grading will be minimal. B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot. The proposed stable will be constructed on an existing building pad and minimal grading is required. The project is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the stable will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site. Although the disturbed net lot area exceeds the maximum permitted, the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to properties in the vicinity. The grading for the stable and corral will increase the disturbed lot area by 8.5%, which is minimal. D. The development plan incorporates existing vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot and the stable will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space. 06 1316073 59 E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will not change the existing circulation pattern and will utilize an existing driveway. No new stable access from Outrider Road or Eastifeld Drive is proposed. F. The proposed project is to construct a stable and corral area of sufficient size that meets all standards for vehicular access thereto in conformance with site plan review requirements. G. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 7. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. A Variance to Section 17.16.070 (B) is required because it states that the lot disturbance shall be limited to 40% of the net lot area. With respect to this request for a Variance for lot disturbance of 48.4%, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone. The Variance for the total disturbance is necessary because the configuration, and topography of the lot create a difficulty in meeting this Code requirement. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because of the existing conditions of the lot. The existing 320 square foot stable is located in proximity to the cabana and swimming pool and is not utilized for a stable. The proposed stable will be located away from the living area" of the lot and will retain an equestrian flavor. The stable will only minimally affect the disturbance of the lot. 328 cubic yards of grading is required for this construction, which includes excavation for a basement. One of the goals of the General Plan is to encourage construction of equestrian uses, which this Variance would accommodate. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. All development will occur within required setbacks, and will be adequately screened to prevent adverse visual impact to surrounding properties. 16 1316073 60 Section 8. Section 17.16.210(A)(2) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a recreation room under certain conditions, provided the Planning Commission approves a Conditional Use Permit. The applicant is requesting to convert the existing 320 square foot stable into a recreation room. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the recreation room would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and the area proposed for the recreation room would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the conversion will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed recreation room will be located in a cluster with other structures and will promote pad integration. The proposed recreation room is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the recreation room will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the 320 square foot size of the recreation room is less than the maximum permitted under the Municipal Code. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. 1 F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because an adequate area is set -aside for the construction of a stable structure, adjacent corral and access. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a 450 square foot stable, a Variance request to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot and a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing 320 square foot stable into a recreation room, and a Site Plan Review for the total proposed development due to the restriction placed on the previously approved applications for subject property, in accordance with the Q7361316 61 development plan dated March 28, 2005 and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 703 subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan, Variance and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval if work has not commenced as defined in Sections 17.38.070, 17.42.070 and 17.46.080 of the Zoning Ordinance, unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of the approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the City has given the applicants written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. This shall include, but not be limited to, the requirements of the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance, Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance, Roof Covering Ordinance and others. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated March 28, 2005, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 9,254 square feet or 14.8% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. F. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 20,352 square feet or 32.6% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. G. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 30,236 square feet or 48.4% in conformance with the Variance approval. H. Building pad coverage on the stable pad shall not exceed 25.6%; including the covered patio. Building pad coverage on the residential building pad shall not exceed 31.5% including covered porches and 28.8% not including covered porches. I. Grading for the stable and excavation for the basement shall not exceed 328 cubic yards of cut and 328 cubic yards of fill and shall be balanced on site. J. The stable and recreation room shall be screened from adjacent properties. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views from neighboring properties, but to screen these structures 06 1316073 62 on the lot. If trees are to be incorporated into the landscaping scheme, at maturity they shall be no higher than the ridge height of the stable and the recreation room on the lot. K. The stable and corral shall be located a minimum of twenty-five feet from the rear property line and twenty feet from the side property line. L. Landscaping shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. M. No kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be permitted in the recreation room. No sleeping quarters shall be permitted in the recreation room. N. The stable shall be used exclusively for keeping permitted domestic animals. Commercial uses are not permitted. O. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices. P. During construction, conformance with the Air Quality Management District requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices shall be required so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence. Q. During and after construction, all soil preparation, drainage, and landscape sprinklers shall protect the building pad from erosion and direct surface water in an approved manner. R. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within nearby roadway easements. S. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. T. If any walls are to be incorporated into the design of this project, they shall not be located in any setback nor shall they exceed 3-feet in height. 06 1316073 63 U. The drainage plan system shall be approved by the Planning Department and the County Drainage Engineer and shall assure that any water from any site irrigation systems and all drainage from the site shall be conveyed in an approved manner and shall remain on the property and not cross over any easements. V. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of stormwater drainage facilities. W. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste. X. The project shall be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any permits. Y. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the development plan described in Condition D. Z. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the property, which would constitute additional structural development or grading, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. AA. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variance approvals, pursuant to Sections 17.38.060, 17.42.060 and 17.46.065 of the Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. AB. All conditions of this Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit and Variance approval, which apply, must be complied with prior to .the issuance of a building permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14th DAY OF JUNE 2005. ROG R SbMMER, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: T. MARILYN L. KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK 06 1316073 64 t STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2005-18 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE AND CORRAL; GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING STABLE INTO A RECREATION ROOM; GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT AND A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR DEVELOPMENT ON A PROPERTY THAT REQUIRES PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW DUE TO EXISTING STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTION AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 703, AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, (LOT 69- A-EF), (RICH). was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 14, 2005 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioner DeRoy, Hankins, Witte and Chairman Sommer. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. DEPUTY CITY CLERK 06 1316073 65 RESOLUTION NO. 98-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CABANA AND APPROVING A REQUEST FOR MODIFICATIONS TO AN APPROVED SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CABANA THAT REQUIRES INCREASED GRADING AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN ZONING CASE NO. 579. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Russell Cole Shoemaker with respect to real property located at 18 Eastfield Drive (Lot 69-A-EF), Rolling Hills requesting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a cabana and request for Site Plan Review modification to permit the construction of a cabana that requires increased grading at a single family residential development. Section 2. On December 17, 1996, the Planning Commission approved a request for Site Plan Review application by Resolution No. 96-21 in Zoning Case No. 546 for the construction of a new single family residence, and other improvements to replace an existing single family residence. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on May 19, 1998 and June 16, 1998, and at a field trip visit on June 9, 1998. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303(e) . and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. Section 17.16.210(A)(2) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a Cabana or detached recreation room with a Conditional Use Permit under certain conditions. The applicant is requesting to construct a 220 square foot cabana. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the cabana would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and the area proposed ,for the cabana would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. RESOLUTION NO. 98-14 PAGE 1 98 1701309 f b;:tA- 66 B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of cabana will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed cabana structure will be 90 feet from the residential structure and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the cabana will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the cabana will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a 1.74 acre parcel of property that is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate such use. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the 220 square foot size of the cabana is less than the 800 square foot maximum permitted for similar accessory buildings and the cabana does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because the cabana will be adjacent to the pool. Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a cabana in accordance with the Development Plan attached hereto in Zoning Case No. 579 subject to the conditions contained in Section 9. Section 7. Section 17.46.010 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period. In addition, a condition of Resolution No. 96-21 required that any modifications to the project which would constitute additional structural development requires the filing of a new application for Site Plan Review approval by the Planning Commission. The applicant is requesting to modify the approved Site Plan by constructing a cabana that requires increased grading. The applicant's latest proposal submitted on April 6, 1998, includes additional grading of 85 cubic yards of cut soil and 85 cubic yards of fill soil for a total of 565 cubic yards of cut soil and 565 cubic yards of fill soil. With respect to this request, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: RESOLUTION NO. 98-14 PAGE 2 98 1701309 67 A. The development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed grading together with the other improvements on the property complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project as modified conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has* a net square foot area of 62,471 square feet. The residence (5,079 sq.ft.), attached garage (1,192 sq.ft.), swimming pool 624 sq. ft.), existing stable (320 sq.ft.), service yard (96 sq.ft.); and cabana (220 sq.ft.) will have 7,531 square feet which constitutes 12.1% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 18,571 square feet which equals 29.7% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively large lot with the proposed structures located away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development and is similar and compatible with several neighboring developments. The building pad is 26,786 square feet and structural coverage on the building pad is 28.1%. B. The proposed development preserves, and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls) because a minimum amount of grading is proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the east side (rear) of this lot. D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan preserves several mature trees and shrubs. E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will _not cause the structural and total lot._coverage to be exceeded. The residential and total lot coverage will not exceed the Planning Commission's established guideline. Further, the proposed project is designed to minimize grading. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across the northerly portions of the property. F. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this RESOLUTION NO. 98-14 PAGE 3 98 1701309 68 irregular -shaped lot. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of the property. G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the same driveway to Eastfield Drive for access. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a modification to an approved Site Plan Review application to allow the proposed increased grading on the site for a cabana. The modifications are shown on the Development Plan and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 579. These approved modifications are subject to the conditions contained in Section 9 of this Resolution. Section 9. The Conditional Use Permit for a cabana approved in Section 6 and the modification to permit the increased grading for the cabana from the amount previously approved in the Site Plan Review application, that is approved in Section 8, as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 579, are subject, to the following list of conditions. These conditions include applicable conditions of approval previously imposed on the Site Plan Review application by Resolution No. 96-21 on December 17, 1996. To the extent these conditions duplicate prior conditions imposed on this project, the conditions set forth herein shall be considered as continuations of those prior requirements: A. The Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.42.070(A) and 17.46.080(A). B. It is declared and made a condition of the Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder _shall lapse;. provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. RESOLUTION NO. 98-14 PAGE4 98 1701309 69 D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked, Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The cabana shall not exceed 220 square feet. F. No sleeping quarters or kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the cabana or detached recreation room. G. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50 feet of the cabana. H. The basement door of the residence shall be solid (without windows) and shall be subject to City staff approval. I. Renting of the cabana is prohibited. J. Any retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not exceed 5 feet in height, averaging no more than 2-1/2 feet. K. Residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 28.1%. L. Maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 39.9% of the net lot area. M. Grading shall not exceed 565 cubic yards of cut soil and 565 cubic yards of fill soil. N. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed building pad. O. Two copies of a landscape plan must be submitted for review by the Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of -the -Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained with. the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed RESOLUTION NO. 98-14 PAGE 5 98 1701309 70 pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. P. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes must conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio. Q. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. R. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.42.060, or the approval shall not be effective. S. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for Site Plan Review approval by the Planning Commission. T. All conditions of these Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 21ST D OF JU ATTEST: DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 98-14 PAGE 6 ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN 98 1'701309 71 INDEXVICINITY MAP JURISDICTION NOTES REV BY DATE COMMENTS REV A BB 2/21/2024 Property Plan Added. REV B BB 4/8/2024 Property Plan Updated. REV C BB 5/29/2024 Swap PW2/+ for PW3 REV D BB 6/11/2024 Powerwall count decrease. FSM Added. **** LICENSE GENERAL NOTES · · ” ABBREVIATIONS SCOPE OF WORK ELECTRICAL NOTES D D D 72 (E) DRIVEWAY Unlocked Gated0 50'100' Scale:1" = 50'-0' PROPERTY PLAN D 73 (E) DRIVEWAY T1 SV SV SV SV SV SVUnlocked GatedFront Of House 36" FSB 36" F S B 18" FS B 12" W S B 12" WSB12" W S B 36" FSB18" FS B 12" WSB12" W S B 12" WSB12" W S B 12" W S B 18" FS B 12" WSB 18" F S B 12" W S B 18" FSB36" FSB 12" W S B 12" WSB12" W S B 12" WSB18" F S B36" FSB12" WSB18" FS B12" WSB 12" W S B 12" W S B 12" W S B 18" FS B 36" FSB12" W S B 18" F S B 18" F S B 12" WSBPitch4/12MP2 Pitch4/12MP3 Pitch4/12MP4Pitch4/12MP5 Pitch4/12MP7Pitch4/12MP8Scale:1/16" = 1' SITE PLAN 01'32'16' #SSTAMPCA #ESTAMPCA LEGEND MP3 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP2 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP4 18° (4:12) 106 18° (4:12) 106 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story D 74 (E) DRIVEWAY SV SV 36" F S B 12" W S B 36" FSB18" F S B 12" WSB12" W S B 12" WSB12" W S B 12" W S B 18" F S B 18" FSB36" FSB 12" W S B 18" F S B12" WSB 12" W S B 18" F S BPitch4/12MP2 Pitch4/12MP3 Pitch4/12MP4Scale: 3/32" = 1' SITE PLAN 0 1'10'21' #SSTAMPCA #ESTAMPCA LEGEND MP3 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP2 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP4 18° (4:12) 106 18° (4:12) 106 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story 75 SV SV SV SV 36" F S B 12" W S B 12" W S B 18" F S B 12" WSB18" FSB36" FSB 12" W S B 12" WSB12" W S B 12" WSB18" F S B36" FSB12" WSB18" F S B12" WSB 12" W S B 12" W S B 12" W S B 18" F S B 36" FSB18" F S B 18" F S B 12" WSBPitch4/12MP3 Pitch4/12MP4Pitch4/12MP5 Pitch4/12MP7Pitch4/12MP8Scale: 3/32" = 1' SITE PLAN 0 1'10'21' #SSTAMPCA #ESTAMPCA LEGEND MP3 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP2 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP4 18° (4:12) 106 18° (4:12) 106 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story 76 T1 SV SVUnlocked Gated36" FSB 18" F S B 12" W S B 12" WSB12" WSB 18" F S B 12" W S B 18" FSB12" WSB12" W S B 12" WSB18" F S B36" FSB 12" W S B 18" F S B 18" F S B 12" WSBPitch4/12MP4Pitch4/12MP5 Pitch4/12MP8Scale: 3/32" = 1' SITE PLAN 0 1'10'21' MP3 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP2 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP4 18° (4:12) 106 18° (4:12) 106 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story #SSTAMPCA #ESTAMPCA LEGEND MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story MP5 18° (4:12) 196 18° (4:12) 196 Comp Shingle 1 Story D 77 NTS TYPICAL PV SIDE VIEWSV Scale: 1 1/2" = 1' STANDOFFS1 Scale: 3/4"=1'-0" TRENCH DETAILT1 #SSTAMPCA 78 #SSTAMPCA 79 B 7 C 4 D 4 E 2 1 S1A S1B1 3 1 S2 3 1 S3 F G 6 H6 5 J 12V · · · I ” – A #ESTAMPCA D 80 B 7 C 4 D 4 E 2 1 S1A S1B1 3 1 S2 3 1 S3 F G 6 H6 5 J 12V · · · I ” – #ESTAMPCAD 81 SCALE: 1/4"= 1' SOUTH WALL EXTERIOR FLOOR PLANA NORTH WALL EXTERIOR EQUIPMENT ELEVATIONE1 FREESTAND MOUNT EXTERIOR EQUIPMENT ELEVATIONE2 D 82 #ESTAMPCA · · · · · · · · · D 83 84 SOLAR PV SYSTEM EQUIPPED WITH RAPID SHUTDOWN CAUTION: MULTIPLE SOURCES OF POWER - Address: 18 Eastfield Dr OPERATING VOLTAGE = 240V JB-90213442-00 CAUTION: MULTIPLE SOURCES OF POWER - Address: 18 Eastfield Dr OPERATING VOLTAGE = 240V JB-90213442-00 85 NEC_2020-690_31_D_2 Per Code: 690.31.D.2 Label Location: (C)(IC)(CB) NEC_2020-690_53 Per Code: 690.53 Label Location: (DC) (INV) NEC_2020-690_13_B Per Code: 690.13.B Label Location: (AC) (POI)(DC) (INV) NEC_2020-690_54 Per Code: 690.54 Label Location: (AC) (POI) NEC_2020-690_13_B-3 Per Code: 690.13.B Label Location: (DC)(CB) NEC_2020-705_12_B_3_2 Per Code: 705.12.B.3.2 Label Location: (POI) NEC_2020-705_12_B_3_3 Per Code: 705.12.B.3.3 NEC_2020-705_12_C Per Code: 705.12.C Label Location: (POI) NEC_2020-690_54-690_13_B Per Code: 690.54; 690.13.B Label Location: (POI) UL_1741_Power_Control_System Per Code: UL 1741 Power Control System Label Location: (INV)(LC) NEC_2020-690_56_C_2 Per Code: 690.56.C.2 Label Location: RSD Switch NEC_2020-690_56_C Per Code: 690.56.C Label Location: (MSP) (POI): Point of Interconnection (M): Utility Meter (LC): Load Center (INV): Inverter With Integrated DC Disconnect (IC): Interior Run Conduit (DC): DC Disconnect (D): Distribution Panel (CB): Combiner Box (C): Conduit (AC): AC Disconnect NEC 2020 - Default Label Set 547.22 48 48 240240 86 NEC_2020-408_4 Per Code: 408.4 Label Location: (BLC) NEC_2020-220 Per Code: 220 Label Location: (BLC) NEC_2020-312_8_A_3 Per Code: 312.8.A.3 Label Location: (MSP) NEC_2020-705_12_C-1 Per Code: 705.12.C Label Location: (MSP) NEC_2020-706_15_C-2 Per Code: 706.15.c Label Location: (AC) NEC_2020-705_12_B_3_2 Per Code: 705.12.B.3.2 Label Location: (POI) NEC_2020-705_12_B_3_3 Per Code: 705.12.B.3.3 NEC_2020-705_12_C-2 Per Code: 705.12.C Label Location: (MSP) UL_1741_Power_Control_System Per Code: UL 1741 Power Control System Label Location: (INV)(LC) IRC_2021-R_328_11 Per Code: R328.11 Label Location: (MSP) NEC_2020-706_15_C Per Code: 706.15.C Label Location: (MSP) (MSP): Main Service Panel (BLC): Backup Load Center (AC): AC Disconnect NEC 2020 - Default Label Set 240 92 87      !"!#$ %&#'(# ")&* &+,    (&&)'+, - . / )&(&&) '+,    % , )0&                                       !   "#   $ "  %   &&' $     &&( $      &&)*$ &)1&& 2&) (      + ,&-./*   0  1' 23 3   03&&4('./-5       4 0         0    5 (6 7     8    4!*$$ "#    8    4!*    8      4!* 7      %!* +          ,&- +          9,/* 5":"16$;<=  4 0   $*&        $*&&          > #   $*&<$' 0       %        > #   $*&<&' 0                    > #   $*&<<' 0               0         ?         > #   $*&;      4 @A'B      # $*&-3      %8      C      4   $*&6         %8      C      4   $*&/5         > #   $*<     ( "35"     %8      C      4   $*;              > #   *;:*$:&*&$"  $<&6&;"&*&$'//*"1 $:& $*-             %8      C      4   $*65   C   4       %8      C      4   $*/5           5    >   % $*D    9    5    >   % $*=5       $*=&C  # %     5    >   % $*=<5 C  4 5    >   % $*=;            5    >   % $*$*                     "  C 4        4  $*$$     5    >   %  0    C     4  $*$&"     %5    >   %  0    C     4  $*$<        4     #  84              E @53B 4  &)1&&4 6+ 3C4     @"2****$/B:F      @"**$*<DB "     8    8     :3C4 C    %:     4 :F          @ G$**$&/</$&$&H()F*<**$;IB          %       <D 7   &&- !   * 7     *      @5B 56/      @1"(B  %   7      1 C       J     1 !   1          +        % J  A       11&)1!7&8)*9 4:/6.;<$ %&="!#"! 53*;/$6**-K L"  %    8"  %     L::     :+A"1(5+1:(!(M51 A5+1 :53*;/$6**-K&*&*M*$ 4:/6. <$ %& 53*;/$6**&K  %  L::     :+A"1(5+1:(!(M51 A5+1 :53*;/$6**&K&*&*M*= *;:*$:&*&$"  5   27  L::CCC    N*<:&*&$%"  5   27 "  $<&6&;"&*&$'//*"1 &:& 88 The intended purpose of this document is to show that the PV system will never exceed 600VDC when designed to the max string length. To show this, we have provided voltage calculations using the electrical characteristics of various modules we will be installing. The relevant equations are below and will be used for all individual module calculations. VCorString = (Voc + (Tlow о 25ÛC)Tvoc) כ 14 where Tvoc = CT,vocVoc where Tlow = 2ÛC Tesla 425W Module (T425S) CT,voc соϬ͘Ϯϲ %/ÛC Voc = 48.65 V VCor = [48.65 + (2Û-25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϲйΎϰϴ͘ϲϱͿ΁Ύϭϭ VCorString = 567.15 V (max string length is 11 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Tesla 420W Module (T420S) CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϲйͬÛC Voc = 48.50 V VCor = [48.50 + (2Û-25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϲйΎϰϴ͘ϱ0Ϳ΁Ύϭϭ VCorString = 565.40 V (max string length is 11 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Tesla 400W Module (T400H) CT,voc соϬ͘Ϯ7 %/ÛC Voc = 45.30 V VCor = [45.30 + (2Û-25ÛC) * (оϬ͘Ϯ7% * 45.30Ϳ΁Ύϭ2 VCorString = 577.36 V (max string length is 12 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Tesla 395W Module (T395H) CT,voc соϬ͘Ϯ7 %/ÛC Voc = 45.27 V VCor = [45.27 + (2Û-25ÛC) * (оϬ͘Ϯ7% * 45.27Ϳ΁Ύϭ2 VCorString = 576.98 V (max string length is 12 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) SolarCity Standard 265W Module (SC265) CT,voc соϬ͘ϯϲйͬÛC Voc = 38.3 V VCor = [38.3 + (2Û-25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϯϲйΎϯϴ͘ϯͿ΁Ύϭϰ VCorString = 580.60 V (max string length is 14 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) SolarCity 325W Module (SC325) CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϯϱйͬÛC Voc = 69.60 V VCor = [69.60 + (2Û-25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϯϱйΎϲϵ͘ϲ0Ϳ΁Ύϴ VCorString = 586.90 V (max string length is 8 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) SolarCity 315W Module (SC315B2) CT,voc соϬ͘25 %/ÛC Voc = 70.20 V VCor = [70.20 + (2Û-25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϱйΎ70.20Ϳ΁Ύϴ VCorString = 593.89 V (max string length is 8 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Hanwha 345W Module (Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G6+/SC) CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϳйͬΣ Voc = 40.92 V VCor = [40.92 + (2Û оϮϱÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϳйΎϰϬ͘ϵϮͿ΁Ύϭϯ VCorString = 564.99 V (max string length is 13 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Hanwha 340W Module (Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G6+/SC) CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϳйͬΣ Voc = 40.66 V VCor = [40.66 + (2Û оϮϱÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϳйΎϰϬ͘ϲϲͿ΁Ύϭϯ VCorString = 561.40 V (max string length is 13 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter Hanwha 320W Module (Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G5/SC) CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϴйͬΣ Voc = 40.56 V VCor = [40.56 + (2Û оϮϱÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϴйΎϰϬ͘ϱϲͿ΁Ύϭϯ VCorString = 561.24 V (max string length is 13 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Hanwha 315W Module (Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G5/SC) CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϴйͬΣ Voc = 40.29 V VCor = [40.29 + (2Û оϮϱÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϴйΎϰϬ͘ϮϵͿ΁Ύϭϯ VCorString = 557.50 V (max string length is 13 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Hanwha 300W Module (Q.PEAK-G4.1/SC) CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϴйͬΣ Voc = 39.76 V VCor = [39.76 + (2Û оϮϱÛC) * ;оϬ͘ϮϴйΎϯϵ͘ϳϲͿ΁Ύϭϰ VCorString = 592.49 V (max string length is 14 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) 89 ͘ 90 FLASHING INSERT ZS COMP DATASHEET 2 Listed to UL 2703 and UL 2582 for Wind Driven Rain Part #850-1628 SPECIFICATIONS Designed for pitched roofs. Installs in portrait and landscape orientations. Engineered for spans up to 72” and cantilevers up to 24”. ZS Comp has a UL 1703 Class “A” Fire Rating when installed using modules from any PDQXIDFWXUHUFHUWL¿HGDV³7\SH´RU³7\SH´ Attachment method UL listed to UL 2582 for Wind Driven Rain. ZS Comp supports 50 psf (2400 Pa) front and up to 72 psf (3450 Pa) rear side design load rating for Portrait module orientation per UL 2703. ZS Comp supports 50 psf (2400 Pa) front side and up to 72 psf (3450 Pa) rear side design load rating for Landscape module orientation. Engineered for compliance with ASCE 7-05, 7-10, and 7-16 wind load requirements. Zep wire management products listed to UL 1565 for wire positioning devices. ZS Comp grounding products are listed to UL 2703 and UL 467. ZS Comp bonding products are listed to UL 2703. DESCRIPTION PV mounting solution for composition shingle roofs. Works with all Zep Compatible Modules. Auto bonding UL-listed hardware creates structural and electrical bond. ROOFING SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS MOUNTING BLOCK CAPTURED WASHER LAG Listed to UL 2703 Part #850-1633 Part #850-1631-002 and #850-1631-004 ZS COMP DATASHEET 3 GROUND ZEP LEVELING FOOT DC WIRE CLIP HOME RUN CLIP Listed to UL 1565 Part #850-1510 ARRAY SKIRT END CAP Listed to UL 2703 Part #850-1511 Listed to UL 2703 Part #850-1613 Listed to UL 2703 Part #850-1608 Listed to UL 2703 Part #850-1606 Listed to UL 2703 Part #850-1586 (Left) Part #850-1588 (Right) INTERLOCKSKIRT GRIP Listed to UL 2703 Part #850-1397 Listed to UL 1565 Part #850-1509 Listed to UL 2703 Part #850-1281 HYBRID INTERLOCK 91 TESLA.COM/ENERGY Photovoltaic Combiner Box Tesla 4J Combiner Box Tesla uses custom photovoltaic combiner boxes to combine solar module strings on the roof. The two combiner boxes defined here are purpose-built photovoltaic combiner box assemblies, with one designed for rail-based systems and one designed for systems without rails. NOTE: Tesla 4J combiner box with bracket / cord grip has the same dimensions as Tesla 4J combiner box, but has the added bracket/cord grip as shown above. End View End View Top View with Cover Top View with Cover PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS Part Number Tesla 4J Array System Voltage 600 Vdc Single Input String Current Rating 42 A Single Input String Current Rating 42 A Dual Input String Current Rating 28.5 A Output Current Rating (with jumpers)57 A Maximum Number of Single Inputs 4 Maximum Number of Combined Inputs 2 NA 2022-05-24 COMPLIANCE INFORMATION Certifications UL 1741, UL 508, CSA 22.2 No. 94 ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIFICATIONS Maximum Operating Temperature 50°C Enclosure Type NEMA 3, 3R, 4, 4X, 12, 13 Ingress Rating IP66 MECHANICAL SPECIFICATIONS Dimensions 185.93 x 228.6 x 126.8 mm (7.32 x 9.32 x 4.99 in) Tesla 4J Combiner Box with Bracket / Cord Grip 7.32 in (185.93 mm)9.32 in (228.6 mm)1.38 in (35.1 mm) 3.61 in (91.7 mm) 92 1TESR-DS-0451-22 PV HAZARD CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND COMPONENTS Function Manufacturer Model No. Firmware Versions and Checksums &HUWL¿FDWLRQ6WDQGDUG 3956(0LG&LUFXLW Interrupter (MCI)Tesla MCI-1, MCI-2 N/A 8/3956( Inverter, Powerwall+, or Powerwall 3 Tesla 7.6 kW: 1538000 1 3.8 kW: 1534000 1 7.6 kW: 1850000 1 11.5 kW: 1707000 1 9&($) 9))%(( 9&($) V1, 0x3282A1 UL 1741, 1998 395663956( PV Module Tesla 657657 6576575 N/A UL 61730 39+&6,QLWLDWRU (PV Inverter) 'HGLFDWHG39V\VWHP$&FLUFXLWEUHDNHURU$&GLVFRQQHFWVZLWFKODEHOHGSHU1(& requirements.N/A 39+&6,QLWLDWRU (Powerwall+, Powerwall 3) (PHUJHQF\VWRSGHYLFH 1,6' /LVWHG(PHUJHQF\6WRS%XWWRQRU(PHUJHQF\6WRS 'HYLFHRU(PHUJHQF\6WRS8QLW UL 508 or UL 60947 Parts 1, 5-1 and 5-5 39+&6,QLWLDWRU (Powerwall 3) 2Q2ႇ(QDEOHVZLWFKORFDWHGRQ3RZHUZDOOZKHQODEHOHGDV5DSLG6KXWGRZQLQLWLDWRUSHU 1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV UL 1741 1$SSOLHVWRYDULDWLRQVRIWKLVSDUWQXPEHUZLWKVXႈ[RIWZRQXPEHUVDQGRQHOHWWHU 1RWH39+&6LQVWDOODWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWVPD\UHGXFHWKHHႇHFWLYHHTXLSPHQWDQGFRPSRQHQWUDWLQJVEHORZWKHLQGLYLGXDOHTXLSPHQWDQGFRPSRQHQW 3956(UDWLQJVLQRUGHUWRDFKLHYH39+&6VKRFNKD]DUGUHGXFWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWV PVHCS INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS 0D[6\VWHP9ROWDJH 600 Vඌඋ 39+&60D[LPXP&LUFXLW9ROWDJH $UUD\,QWHUQDO9ROWDJH$IWHU$FWXDWLRQ 165 Vඌඋ (cold weather open circuit) 0D[6HULHV&RQQHFWHG3DQHOV%HWZHHQ0&,V10 OTHER INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS  $Q0&,PXVWEHFRQQHFWHGWRRQHHQGRIHDFKVHULHVVWULQJRUPRXQWLQJSODQHVXEDUUD\VWULQJ  9HUL¿FDWLRQWKDW0&,VDUHLQVWDOOHGZLWKRUIHZHUPRGXOHVEHWZHHQ0&,VVKDOOEHGRFXPHQWHGIRULQVSHFWLRQE\YROWDJH PHDVXUHPHQWORJVDQGRUDVEXLOWVWULQJOD\RXWGLDJUDPV  )RU39,QYHUWHU7KH39+&6LQLWLDWRU $&EUHDNHURUVZLWFK VKDOOEHVL]HGDQGLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV7KH VSHFL¿FSDUWVKDOOEHLGHQWL¿HGRQWKHDVEXLOWV\VWHPGUDZLQJV  )RU3RZHUZDOORU3RZHUZDOO7KH39+&6HPHUJHQF\VWRSLQLWLDWRUVKDOOKDYHWKHIROORZLQJPLQLPXPUDWLQJV2XWGRRU 7\SH5 RUKLJKHU 9$DQGVKDOOEHLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV7KHVSHFL¿FSDUWVKDOOEHLGHQWL¿HGRQWKHDVEXLOW V\VWHPGUDZLQJV5HIHUWRWKH3RZHUZDOOLQVWDOODWLRQPDQXDOIRUIXUWKHUGHWDLOV PV HAZARD CONTROL SYSTEM | BIPV UL 3741 REPORT DATE 01-27-23 PV RAPID SHUTDOWN ARRAY WARNING: To reduce the risk of injury, read all instructions. 1TEPV-DS-0023-22  9HUL¿FDWLRQWKDWWKH0&,VDUHLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK DQG VKDOOEHGRFXPHQWHGIRULQVSHFWLRQE\YROWDJHPHDVXUHPHQWORJVDQGRUDV EXLOWVWULQJOD\RXWGLDJUDPV  )RU39,QYHUWHU7KH39+&6LQLWLDWRU $&EUHDNHURUVZLWFK VKDOOEHVL]HGDQGLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV7KHVSHFL¿FSDUW VKDOOEHLGHQWL¿HGRQWKHDVEXLOWV\VWHPGUDZLQJV  )RU3RZHUZDOODQG3RZHUZDOO7KH39+&6HPHUJHQF\VWRSLQLWLDWRUVKDOOKDYHWKHIROORZLQJPLQLPXPUDWLQJV2XWGRRU 7\SH5RUKLJKHU 9 $DQGVKDOOEHLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV7KHVSHFL¿FSDUWVKDOOEHLGHQWL¿HGRQWKHDVEXLOWV\VWHPGUDZLQJV5HIHUWRWKH 3RZHUZDOOLQVWDOODWLRQPDQXDOIRUIXUWKHUGHWDLOV PV HAZARD CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND COMPONENTS )XQFWLRQ 0DQXIDFWXUHU 0RGHO1R )LUPZDUH9HUVLRQV DQG&KHFNVXPV &HUWL¿FDWLRQ6WDQGDUG ,QYHUWHU3RZHUZDOORU 3RZHUZDOO7HVOD N: N: N: N: 9&($) 9))%(( 9&($) 9[$ 8/8/ 395663956( 0LG&LUFXLW,QWHUUXSWHU 0&, 7HVOD 0&,0&, 1$ 8/3956( 390RGXOHV 7KH39+&39PRGXOHVPXVWEHOLVWHGE\D157/WR8/DQGRU8/DQG8/ H[FOXGLQJ&ODVV DQG&ODVV,  390RXQWLQJ6\VWHP 7KH39PRXQWLQJV\VWHPPXVWFRPSO\ZLWKRQHRIWKHIROORZLQJ •/LVWHGE\157/WR8/DQGUDWHGIRUXVHZLWKWKHVSHFL¿F39PRGXOHVQRWHGDERYH •7KHQRQFHUWL¿HGFRPELQDWLRQVRIPRXQWLQJDQG39PRGXOHVVKDOOEHHYDOXDWHGIRUORDGLQJPRXQWLQJDQG JURXQGLQJSHUWKH1(&DQGRWKHUDSSOLFDEOHLQVWDOODWLRQFRGHV 39&RQQHFWRUV 7KHIROORZLQJ39FRQQHFWRUVPD\EHXVHGWRFRQQHFWWRWKH7HVOD0&,V •6WDXEOLW\SH39.67,,85RUW\SH39.67(92 PDOH  •6WDXEOLW\SH39.%7,,85RU39.%7(92 IHPDOH  •6WDXEOL%UDQFK6RFNHW39$=%DQG%UDQFK3OXJ39$=6 •&RQQHFWRUVHYDOXDWHGE\DQ157/IRULQWHUPDWDELOLW\ZLWKWKHFRQQHFWRUVDERYH 39+&6,QLWLDWRU 39,QYHUWHU 'HGLFDWHG39V\VWHP$&FLUFXLWEUHDNHURU$&GLVFRQQHFWVZLWFKODEHOHGSHU1(& UHTXLUHPHQWV1$ 39+&6,QLWLDWRU 3RZHUZDOO3RZHUZDOO (PHUJHQF\VWRSGHYLFH 1,6' /LVWHG(PHUJHQF\6WRS%XWWRQRU(PHUJHQF\6WRS 'HYLFHRU(PHUJHQF\6WRS8QLW 8/RU8/3DUWV DQG 39+&6,QLWLDWRU 3RZHUZDOO 2Q2ႇ(QDEOHVZLWFKORFDWHGRQ3RZHUZDOOZKHQODEHOHGDV5DSLG6KXWGRZQLQLWLDWRU SHU1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV 8/ $SSOLHVWRYDULDWLRQVRIWKLVSDUWQXPEHUZLWKVXႈ[RIWZRQXPEHUVDQGRQHOHWWHU 1RWH39+&6LQVWDOODWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWVPD\UHGXFHWKHHႇHFWLYHHTXLSPHQWDQGFRPSRQHQWUDWLQJVEHORZWKHLQGLYLGXDOHTXLSPHQWDQGFRPSRQHQW 3956(UDWLQJVLQRUGHUWRDFKLHYH39+&6VKRFNKD]DUGUHGXFWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWV PVHCS INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS 0D[6\VWHP9ROWDJH 9ඌඋ 39+&60D[LPXP&LUFXLW9ROWDJH $UUD\,QWHUQDO9ROWDJH$IWHU$FWXDWLRQ 9ඌඋ FROGZHDWKHURSHQFLUFXLW OTHER INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS $Q0&,PXVWEHFRQQHFWHGWRRQHHQGRIHDFKVHULHVVWULQJRUPRXQWLQJSODQHVXEDUUD\VWULQJ  0&,VVKDOOEHLQVWDOOHGEHWZHHQVHULHVFRQQHFWHGPRGXOHFRPELQDWLRQVVXFKWKDWWKH39+&0D[LPXP&LUFXLW9ROWDJHDIWHUDFWXDWLRQLVQRJUHDWHU WKDQ9XQGHUDQ\FLUFXPVWDQFHV7KHLQVWDOODWLRQORFDWLRQFROGHVWDQWLFLSDWHGRSHUDWLQJDPELHQWWHPSHUDWXUHVKDOOEHXVHGWRFDOFXODWHWKH39 PD[LPXPYROWDJHLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(& PV HAZARD CONTROL SYSTEM | GENERIC PV ARRAY UL 3741 REPORT DATE 01-27-23 PV RAPID SHUTDOWN ARRAY :$51,1*7RUHGXFHWKHULVNRILQMXU\UHDGDOOLQVWUXFWLRQV 7HVOD,QYHUWHU%DVHG39+&6&RQVLVWLQJRI7HVOD,QYHUWHUV7HVOD0&,DQGRWKHU OLVWHGFRPSRQHQWVWRFUHDWHWKHV\VWHP 93 Tesla Solar Shutdown Device 1 Datasheet Electrical Specifications Nominal Input DC Current Rating (IMP)12 A Maximum Input Short Circuit Current (ISC)19 A Maximum System Voltage (PVHCS)600 V DC Solar Shutdown Device 1 Technical Specifications Environmental Specifications Ambient Temperature -40°C to 50°C (-40°F to 122°F) Storage Temperature –30°C to 70°C (–22°F to 158°F) Enclosure Rating NEMA 4X / IP65 Compliance Information Certifications UL 1741 PVRSE, UL 3741, PVRSA (Photovoltaic Rapid Shutdown Array) RSD Initiation Method PV System AC Breaker or Switch Compatible Equipment See Compatibility Table below Mechanical Specifications Model Number MCI-1 Electrical Connections MC4 Connector Housing Plastic Dimensions 125 mm x 150 mm x 22 mm (5 in x 6 in x 1 in) Weight 350 g (0.77 lb) Mounting Options ZEP Home Run Clip M4 Screw (#10) M8 Bolt (5/16") Nail / Wood screw RSD Module Performance Maximum Number of Devices per String 5 Control Power Line Excitation Passive State Normally Open Maximum Power Consumption 7 W Warranty 25 years — The Solar Shutdown Device is a Mid-Circuit Interrupter (MCI) and is part of the PV system rapid shutdown (RSD) function in accordance with Article 690 of the applicable NEC. When paired with Powerwall+ or Tesla Solar Inverter, solar array shutdown is initiated by any loss of AC power. 650 mm 150 mm 125 mm 250 mm M4 Screw M8 Bolt Nail / Wood Screw 22 mm UL 3741 PV Hazard Control (and PVRSA) Compatibility Tesla Solar Roof and Tesla/Zep ZS Arrays using the following modules are certified to UL 3741 and UL 1741 PVRSA when installed with Powerwall+ or Tesla Solar Inverter and Solar Shutdown Devices. See Powerwall+ / Tesla Solar Inverter Rapid Shutdown: Module Selection Based on PV Hazard Control System Listing for guidance on installing other modules. Brand Model Required Solar Shutdown Devices Tesla Solar Roof V3 1 Solar Shutdown Device per 10 modules Tesla Tesla TxxxS (where xxx = 405 to 450 W, increments of 5) Tesla TxxxH (where xxx = 395 to 415 W, increments of 5) 1 Solar Shutdown Device per 3 modules 1 Hanwha Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G5 or Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G6+ 1 Solar Shutdown Device per 3 modules 1 Exception: Tesla solar modules installed in locations where the max Voc for three modules at low design temperatures exceeds 165 V shall be limited to two modules between Solar Shutdown Devices. January 31, 2023 94 Q.PEAK DUO BLK ML-G10+ / TS Q.PEAK DUO BLK ML-G10+ SERIES MODEL 385-405Wp | 132Cells 20.5% Maximum Module Efficiency TOP BRAND PV MODULES USA 2022PV MODULERELIABILITY SCORECARD 2022TOPPERFORME R 1 See data sheet on rear for further information. ² APT test conditions according to IEC / TS 62804-1:2015, method A (−1500 V, 96 h) The ideal solution for: Rooftop arrays on residential buildings Qcells is the first solar module manufacturer to pass the most comprehensive quality programme in the industry: The new “Quality Controlled PV” of the independent certification institute TÜV Rheinland. The most thorough testing programme in the industry Innovative all-weather technology Optimal yields, whatever the weather with excellent low-light and temperature behaviour. Inclusive 25-year product warranty and 25-year linear performance warranty1. A reliable investment Long-term yield security with Anti LeTID Technology, Anti PID Technology2 and Hot-Spot Protect. Enduring high performance Q.ANTUM DUO Z Technology with zero gap cell layout boosts module efficiency up to 20.5 %. Breaking the 20% efficiency barrier Zep compatibleTM frame design High-tech black Zep CompatibleTM frame, for improved aesthetics, easy installation and increased safety. Rooftop arrays on commercial/industrial buildings Format 74.4 in × 41.2 in × 1.57 in (including frame) (1890 mm × 1046 mm × 40 mm) Weight 51.8 lbs (23.5 kg) Front Cover 0.13 in (3.2 mm) thermally pre-stressed glass with anti-reflection technology Back Cover Composite film Frame Black anodised aluminium Cell 6 × 22 monocrystalline Q.ANTUM solar half cells Junction box 2.09-3.98 in × 1.26-2.36 in × 0.59-0.71 in (53-101 mm × 32-60 mm × 15-18 mm), IP67, with bypass diodes Cable 4 mm² Solar cable; (+) ≥ 52.2 in (1325 mm), (−) ≥ 52.2 in (1325 mm) Connector Stäubli MC4; IP68 Mechanical Specification 45.3" (1150 mm) 4 × Fastening points (DETAIL A) Frame 8.66" (220 mm) 41.2" (1046 mm) 39.1" (992 mm) 1.57" (40 mm) 8 × Drainage opening 0.14" × 3.1" (3.6 mm × 8 mm) 6 × Grounding points ø 0.16" (4 mm) DETAIL A 0,472" (12 mm) 0.354" (9 mm)1.063" (27 mm) 14.6“ (370 mm) 4 × Drainage opening 74.4" (1890 mm) ≥52.2" (1325 mm) ≥52.2"(1325 mm) Qcells pursues minimizing paper output in consideration of the global environment. Note: Installation instructions must be followed. Contact our technical service for further information on approved installation of this product. Hanwha Q CELLS America Inc. 400 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1400, Irvine, CA 92618, USA | TEL +1 949 748 59 96 | EMAIL hqc-inquiry@qcells.com | WEB www.qcells.com Q..PPEEAKK DDUO BLLKKK MMMMLLL--GG11100++ SSEERRIEESS Specifications subject to technical changes© Qcells Q.PEAK_DUO_BLK_ML-G10+_TS_DA_385-405_2022-07_Rev01_NAProperties for System Design Maximum System Voltage VSYS [V] 1000 (IEC) / 1000 (UL)PV module classification Class II Maximum Series Fuse Rating [A DC] 20 Fire Rating based on ANSI/UL 61730 TYPE 2 Max. Design Load, Push/Pull3 [lbs / ft2] 85 (4080 Pa) / 85 (4080 Pa) Permitted Module Temperature on Continuous Duty −40 °F up to +185 °F (−40 °C up to +85 °C)Max. Test Load, Push/Pull3 [lbs / ft2] 128 (6120 Pa) / 128 (6120 Pa) 3 See Installation Manual UL 61730, CE-compliant, Quality Controlled PV - TÜV Rheinland; IEC 61215:2016, IEC 61730:2016, U.S. Patent No. 9,893,215 (solar cells) Qualifications and Certificates 200 400 600 800 1000 90 100 80 110 10 2515 20005 86 98 95 80 100 85 Electrical Characteristics TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENTS Temperature Coefficient of ISC α [% / K] +0.04 Temperature Coefficient of VOC β [% / K] −0.27 Temperature Coefficient of PMPP γ [% / K] −0.34 Nominal Module Operating Temperature NMOT [°F] 109 ± 5.4 (43   ± 3 °C) POWER CLASS 385 390 395 400 405 MINIMUM PERFORMANCE AT STANDARD TEST CONDITIONS, STC1 (POWER TOLERANCE +5 W / −0 W)MinimumPower at MPP1 PMPP [W]385 390 395 400 405 Short Circuit Current1 ISC [A]11.04 11.07 11.10 11.14 11.17 Open Circuit Voltage1 VOC [V]45.19 45.23 45.27 45.3 45.34 Current at MPP IMPP [A]10.59 10.65 10.71 10.77 10.83 Voltage at MPP VMPP [V]36.36 36.62 36.88 37.13 37.39 Efficiency1 η [%]≥19.5 ≥19.7 ≥20.0 ≥20.2 ≥20.5 MINIMUM PERFORMANCE AT NORMAL OPERATING CONDITIONS, NMOT2 MinimumPower at MPP PMPP [W]288.8 292.6 296.3 300.1 303.8 Short Circuit Current ISC [A]8.90 8.92 8.95 8.97 9.00 Open Circuit Voltage VOC [V]42.62 42.65 42.69 42.72 42.76 Current at MPP IMPP [A]8.35 8.41 8.46 8.51 8.57 Voltage at MPP VMPP [V]34.59 34.81 35.03 35.25 35.46 1Measurement tolerances PMPP ± 3 %; ISC; VOC ± 5 % at STC: 1000 W/m2, 25 ± 2 °C, AM 1.5 according to IEC 60904-3 • ²800 W/m2, NMOT, spectrum AM 1.5 RELATIVE EFFCIENCY [%]Qcells PERFORMANCE WARRANTY PERFORMANCE AT LOW IRRADIANCE At least 98 % of nominal power during first year. Thereafter max. 0.5 % degradation per year. At least 93.5 % of nominal power up to 10 years. At least 86 % of nominal power up to 25 years. All data within measurement tolerances. Full warranties in accordance with the warranty terms of the Qcells sales organisation of your respective country. Typical module performance under low irradiance conditions in comparison to STC conditions (25 °C, 1000 W/m2). YEARS IRRADIANCE [W/m²] Qcells Industry standard of p-mono* *Standard terms of guarantee for the 5 PV companies with the highest production capacity in 2021 (February 2021)RELATIVE EFFCIENCYCOMPARED TO NOMINAL POWER [%]Certified UL 61730 95 DC- DC+ 1 GD x x x x x DC1 96 February 2007 8-20 For more information visit: www.eaton.com CA08101001E Switching Devices 8 Safety Switches Product Selection 120/240 Vac General-Duty, Fusible, Single Throw Specifications ■30 – 600 amperes. ■Suitable for service entrance appli- cations unless otherwise noted. ■Horsepower rated. ■Bolt-on hub provision. Provided for general-duty switches in a NEMA 3R enclosure. See Page 8-7 for selection. ■UL listed File No. E5239. Meets UL 98 for enclosed switches and NEMA Std. KS-1. ■200 – 600 ampere switches incorporate K-Series design. DP221NGB DG321NRB Table 8-40. 120/240 Vac General-Duty, Fusible, Single Throw Maximum hp ratings apply only when dual element time delay fuses are used. These switches do not have an interlock which prevents door from being opened when switch is in the ON position. Use 3-wire catalog numbers below. Solid neutral bars are not included. Order separately from Table 8-1 on Page 8-5. WARNING! Switch is not approved for service entrance unless a neutral kit is installed. Grounded B phase rating, UL listed. Note: All general-duty safety switches are individually packaged. Note: Accessories are limited in scope on general-duty safety switches. See Page 8-5 for availability. In addition, clear line shields are available as an accessory on 200 – 600 ampere general-duty switches. Catalog Numbers: 200 A = 70-7759-11, 400 A = 70-8063-8, 600 A = 70-8064-8. System Ampere Rating Fuse Type Provision Maximum Horsepower Ratings NEMA 1 Enclosure Indoor NEMA 3R Enclosure RainproofSingle-Phase ac 3-Phase ac dc 120 Volt 240 Volt 240 Volt 250 Volt Catalog Number Price U.S. $ Catalog Number Price U.S. $ Fusible — Plug Type 2-Wire (One Blade, One Fuse, S/N) — 120 Vac 30 Plug (Type S, T or W) 1/2 – 2 — — —DP111NGB — 3-Wire (Two Blades, Two Fuses, S/N) — 120/240 Vac 30 Plug (Type S, T or W) 1/2 – 2 1-1/2 – 3 — —DP221NGB Use cartridge-type fuse catalog number DG221NRB Fusible — Cartridge Type 2-Pole 2-Wire (Two Blades, Two Fuses) — 240 Vac 30 60 100 200 400 600 — — — — H H — — — — — — 1-1/2 – 3 3 – 10 7-1/2 – 15 15 — — 3 – 7-1/2 7-1/2 – 15 15 – 30 25 – 60 50 – 125 75 – 200 — — — — — — DG225FGK DG226FGK DG225FRK DG226FRK 3-Wire (Two Blades, Two Fuses, S/N) — 120/240 Vac 30 60 100 200 400 600 H H H H H H — — — — — — 1-1/2 – 3 3 – 10 7-1/2 – 15 15 — — 3 – 7-1/2 7-1/2 – 15 15 – 30 25 – 60 50 – 125 75 – 200 — — — — 50 — DG221NGB DG222NGB DG223NGB DG224NGK DG225NGK DG226NGK DG221NRB DG222NRB DG223NRB DG224NRK DG225NRK DG226NRKS/NS/NS/NDiscount Symbol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22CD 97 2023Gateway 3 Datasheet Gateway 3 1Only Eaton CSR or BWH main breakers are 25 kA rated Performance Specifications Model Number 1841000-01-y Nominal Grid Voltage 120/240 V AC Grid Configuration Split phase Grid Frequency 60 Hz Continuous Current Rating 200 A Maximum Supply Short Circuit Current 22 kA with Square D or Eaton main breaker 25 kA with Eaton main breaker1 IEC Protective Class Class I Overvoltage Category Category IV Mechanical Specifications Dimensions 660 x 411 x 149 mm (26 x 16 x 6 in) Weight 16.4 kg (36 lb) Mounting options Wall mount Environmental Specifications Operating Temperature –20°C to 50°C (–4°F to 122°F) Operating Humidity (RH)Up to 100%, condensing Maximum Elevation 3000 m (9843 ft) Environment Indoor and outdoor rated Enclosure Type NEMA 3R Compliance Information Certifications UL 67, UL 869A, UL 916, UL 1741 PCS, CSA 22.2 107.1, CSA 22.2 29 Emmissions FCC Part 15, ICES 003 — Tesla Gateway 3 controls connection to the grid in a Powerwall system, automatically detecting outages and providing seamless transition to backup power. It provides energy monitoring that is used by Powerwall for solar self-consumption, time-based control, and backup operation. 411 mm 660 mm 149 mm AC Meter Revenue accurate (+/- 0.5%) Communication CAN User Interface Tesla App Backup Transition Automatic disconnect for seamless backup Overcurrent Protection Device 100–200 A Service entrance rated Eaton CSR, BWH, or BW, or Square D QOM breakers Internal Panelboard 200 A 8-space/16 circuit breakers Eaton BR, Siemens QP, or Square D HOM breakers rated to 10–125A Warranty 10 years 98 Powerwall 3 Power Everything 2024 — Powerwall 3 is a fully integrated solar and battery system, designed to accelerate the transition to sustainable energy. Customers can receive whole home backup, cost savings, and energy independence by producing and consuming their own energy while participating in grid services. Once installed, customers can manage their system using the Tesla App to customize system behavior to meet their energy goals. Powerwall 3 achieves this by supporting up to 20 kW DC of solar and providing 11.5 kW AC of continuous power per unit. It has the ability to start heavy loads up to 185 A LRA, meaning a single unit can support the power needs of most homes. Powerwall 3 ´æ¡æ´¬Í¡«Óẩææßâӝó—î´ÓÍŻ«‰æî‰Í¡«ď—´¡Íî´Íæî‰ÆƉî´ÓÍæŻ¡‰æĊæĊæî¡Ì¡Ąß‰Íæ´ÓÍŻ‰Íæ´ÌßÆ¡—ÓÍÍ¡—î´ÓÍîÓ‰ÍĊ¡Æ¡—îⴗ‰Æ service. 22024Powerwall 3 Datasheet Solar Technical ]ß¡—´ď—‰î´ÓÍæ Maximum Solar STC Input 20 kW u´î±æî‰ÍtÓÆ¡600 V DC Vt.ÍßóîtÓÆ¡Y‰Í¬¡60 — 550 V DC VtCVVdtÓÆ¡Y‰Í¬¡60 — 480 V DC CVVdæ 6 Maximum Current per MPPT (Imp)13 A 5 Maximum Short Circuit Current per MPPT (Iæ—)15 A 5 VÓÿ¡âÿ‰ÆÆĚd¡—±Í´—‰Æ]ß¡—´«´—‰î´ÓÍæ 1 Typical solar shifting use case. 2 Values provided for 25°C (77°F), at beginning of life. 3.3 kW charge/discharge power. 3 d¡æóæ´Í¬ÿ¡´¬±î¡¡«ď—´¡Í—ĊÌ¡î±ÓÓÆÓ¬ĊŮ 4 d±¡—óæîÓÌ¡â´æ¡Ąß¡—îÓßâÓþ´¡´Íî¡âÍ¡î—ÓÍÍ¡—î´þ´îĊ«ÓâVÓÿ¡âÿ‰ÆÆĚż—¡ÆÆóƉâæ±ÓóƝÍÓî–¡ó桝‰æßâ´Ì‰âĊÌӝ¡Ó« connectivity. Cellular connectivity subject to network operator service coverage and signal strength. 5 u±¡â¡´Íßóî—óââ¡Íî¡Ą—¡¡æCVVdâ‰î´Í¬Ż‰ÀóÌߡ◉͖¡ó桝îÓ—Ó̖´Í¡îÿÓCVVdæ´ÍîÓ‰æ´Í¬Æ¡´ÍßóîîÓ intake DC current up to 26 A ICV / 30 A ISC. Battery Technical ]ß¡—´ď—‰î´ÓÍæ Nominal Battery Energy 13.5 kWh AC 2 C‰Ą´ÌóÌÓÍî´ÍóÓóæ´æ—±‰â¬¡VÓÿ¡â 11.5 kWAC C‰Ą´ÌóÌÓÍî´ÍóÓó汉⬡VÓÿ¡â 5 kW AC JóîßóîVÓÿ¡â%‰—îÓâY‰î´Í¬ėƃĘŽ&ⴝӝ¡—ÓÍď¬ó≖ơž C‰Ą´ÌóÌÓÍî´ÍóÓóæóââ¡Íî 48 A Maximum Output Fault Current 10 kA =Ӊ]î‰âî‰ß‰–´Æ´îĊŽĘæž 185 A LRA VÓÿ¡â]—‰Æ‰–´Æ´îĊ Up to 4 Powerwall 3 units supported ]Ċæî¡Ìd¡—±Í´—‰Æ ]ß¡—´ď—‰î´ÓÍæ Cӝ¡ÆDó̖¡â ĘĞėĞėėėƃĄĄƃĊ DÓ̴͉Æ&ⴝtÓÆ¡Ž.ÍßóîǡJóîßóîž 120/240 VAC &ⴝdĊß¡Split phase Frequency 60 Hz Jþ¡â—óââ¡ÍîVâÓî´ÓÍ¡þ´—¡60 A ]ÓƉâîÓ‰îî¡âĊîÓ+ÓÌ¡Ź&ⴝ«ď—´¡Í—Ċ 89% 1,2 ]ÓƉâîÓ+ÓÌ¡Ź&ⴝ«ď—´¡Í—Ċ 97.5% 3 ]óßßÓâ.æƉ͝´Í¬¡þ´—¡æ Gateway 3, Backup Switch, Backup Gateway 2 Connectivity Wi-Fi (2.4 and 5 GHz), Dual-port switched Ethernet, Cellular (LTE/4G 4) +‰âÿ‰â¡.Íî¡â«‰—¡âĊ—ÓÍîâ¡Æ‰ĊŻY‰ß´]±óîÓÿÍŽY]ž—¡âî´ď¡æÿ´î—± and 2-pin connector, RS-485 for meters AC Metering Revenue Grade (+/- 0.5%) VâÓî´ÓÍæ Integrated arc fault circuit interrupter (AFCI), Isolation CÓÍ´îÓâ.Íî¡ââóßî¡âŽ.C.žŻVtY‰ß´]±óîÓÿÍŽY]žóæ´Í¬ d¡æƉC´ƃ´â—ó´î.Íî¡ââóßî¡âæ óæîÓÌ¡â.Íî¡â«‰—¡d¡æƉCӖ´Æ¡ßß Warranty 10 years 99 32024Powerwall 3 Datasheet Mechanical ]ß¡—´ď—‰î´ÓÍæ ´Ì¡Íæ´ÓÍæ ĘėĠĠĄĝėĠĄĘĠĚÌÌŽěĚŮęĜĄęěĄĞŮĝ´Íž Weight 130 kg (287 lb) CÓóÍî´Í¬Jßî´ÓÍæ Floor or wall mount VÓÿ¡âÿ‰ÆÆĚd¡—±Í´—‰Æ]ß¡—´«´—‰î´ÓÍæ Environmental ]ß¡—´ď—‰î´ÓÍæ Operating Temperature –20°C to 50°C (–4°F to 122°F) 6 Jß¡â‰î´Í¬+óÌ´´îĊŽY+ž Up to 100%, condensing Storage Temperature –20°C to 30°C (–4°F to 86°F), up to 95% RH, non- condensing, State of Energy (SOE): 25% initial Maximum Elevation 3000 m (9843 ft) Environment Indoor and outdoor rated ͗ÆÓæóâ¡Y‰î´Í¬DCĚY .ͬâ¡ææY‰î´Í¬IP67 (Battery & Power Electronics) IP45 (Wiring Compartment) VÓÆÆóî´ÓÍY‰î´Í¬PD3 Jß¡â‰î´Í¬DÓ´æ¡ǠĘÌ < 50 db(A) typical Ƹĝę–Žž̉Ą´ÌóÌ Compliance Information ¡âî´ď—‰î´ÓÍæ UL 1642, UL 1699B, UL 1741, UL 1741 SA, UL 1741 SB, UL 1741 PCS, UL 3741, UL 1973, UL 1998, UL 9540, IEEE 1547- 2018, IEEE 1547.1, UN 38.3 &ⴝÓÍÍ¡—î´ÓÍ United States Ì´ææ´ÓÍæ FCC Part 15 Class B Environmental RoHS Directive 2011/65/EU ]¡´æÌ´—AC156, IEEE 693-2005 (high) %´â¡d¡æî´Í¬C¡¡îæóÍ´îÆ¡þ¡Æß¡â«Óẩ͗¡—â´î¡â´‰ of UL 9540A 6 Performance may be de-rated at operating temperatures above 40°C (104°F). 609 mm 193 mm 1099 mm 82024Powerwall 3 Datasheet VÓÿ¡âÿ‰ÆÆĚĄ‰ÌßÆ¡]Ċæî¡ÌÓÍ«´¬óâ‰î´ÓÍæ Powerwall 3 with Backup Switch Whole Home Backup Powerwall 3 with Gateway 3 Whole Home Backup Powerwall 3 with Backup Gateway 2 Partial Home Backup 100 Agenda Item No.: 11.A Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA) DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: This item was continued from the October 14, 2024, and August 12, 2024, City Council meetings. To avoid redundancy, the staff reports for those meetings are included as Attachment 1A and 1B, respectively. At the October 14th meeting, the applicant's team gave a presentation, and the public was allowed to provide testimony. The hearing was continued to the October 28th meeting due to a scheduled power outage occurring at midnight. This staff report will only address the information and issues raised at the October 14, 2024 meeting – which include: Tree Height : The applicant removed trees from the “mound”, but the landscape plan still shows six Quercus Agrifolia (Coast Live Oak, 30’ height, 30’ width) and four Cercis Canadensis (Forest Pansy, 12’ height, 12’ width) on the landscape plan. Number of Variances : The proposal includes six variances which the City Council must make finding on as follows: 1. Improvements in the front yard. The stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls are all proposed to be in the front yard, which is the area between the front roadway easement line and either the nearest line of the primary building or the nearest line of any enclosed or covered porch attached thereto. 101 2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback measured from the street easement; 3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet; 4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence; 5. Decks/patios that exceed more than one foot above grade; and 6. Grading export. Council requested LA County to have representatives be at the October 28th meeting to discuss grading, drainage, and geology. Staff has confirmed that representatives will be present. Applicant Request By way of brief background, on June 2, 2023, an application was filed by the applicant, Frank Escher of Escher, Gune, Wardena Architecture on behalf of the property owner, Yuki Ogasawara, requesting a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances under Zoning Case No. 23-070 (ZC 23 -070). The proposed project was for construction of a new single-family residence and other improvements on a vacant lot. The applicant is requesting the following: 14,270 SF single-family residence (main residence) 1,000 SF garage (attached) 1,225 SF stable & 5,190 SF Corral (Discussed under the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance) 7,428 SF basement 700 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU) 650 SF guest house 280 SF swimming pool 155 pool equipment 480 SF of attached covered porches Service yard Lightwell Retaining walls to exceed a height of 3 feet (maximum 5 feet) 28,389 CY total grading 1st Pad: 32,610 SF; 2 nd Pad: 1,610 SF; 3 rd Pad 2,900 SF; Sunset Terrace: 415 SF Oval driveway with center landscape mound Landscaping and features At the October 14th meeting, in response to public and City Council concerns, the applicant provided the following changes or clarifications: Underground cisterns updated to capture 100-year storm with changes to the onsite water management plan resulting in minimal changes to the landscaping plan. Removal of all trees on the mound such that no trees will be planted in that area. Grading calculations updated to show 8 CY cut and 9 CY fill in the "sunset terrace" covered patio located downslope from the residence. The 1 CY difference is an adjustment which is expected to come from the main building pad. DISCUSSION: To reiterate, this discussion section is geared toward just the issues raised at the October 14, 102 2024 meeting, the project modifications in response to issues raised at the October 14, 2024 meeting, and an emphasis on the requested variances. The fuller discussion of the project and various entitlements and required findings are found in Attachment 1A. Tree Height At the October 14th meeting, Council questioned the trees proposed on the property as some may grow taller than the roof line of the proposed residence. Since the residence is located at a lower elevation than the proposed trees, it is not possible to keep all the trees lower than the roof line of the residence. Instead, the condition has been drafted so that landscaping provides screening and is "maintained at a height no higher than the roof line of the nearest Project structure." This allows trees next to the stable and accessory dwelling unit (ADU) to be as tall as those buildings. Condition P reads as follows: "P. The Project shall be landscaped, and continually maintained in substantial conformance with the landscaping plan on file approved by the City’s landscape consultant. A detailed landscaping plan shall provide that any trees and shrubs used in the landscaping scheme for this Project shall be planted in a way that screens the Project development from adjacent streets and neighbors, such that shrubs and trees as they mature do not grow into a hedge or impede any neighbors’ views and the plan shall provide that all landscaping be maintained at a height no higher than the roof line of the nearest Project structure. In addition, the landscaping plan shall provide for screening of development with vegetation not to exceed 10 feet in height , and that the vegetation used for screening shall be planted in an off-set manner, so as to prevent it, as it grows from forming a solid hedge. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area, are water-wise and are consistent with the rural character of the community. Plants listed as high hazardous plants under RHMC Section 8.30.015 are prohibited." (Emphasis added.) It should be noted that the property had tall mature trees that were removed in the past few years. The applicant is attempting to reestablish the shade and benefits those trees provided in the past. However, City Council does have discretion to add, delete, or modify any of the conditions of approval as it sees fit based on valid reasons. The landscape plan will be modified to meet the conditions. Number of Variances The project originally requested six variances as listed above. However, the applicant has modified the Project to remove the decks and patios that were cantilevered more than 12 inches above grade. Thus, this requested variance is no longer applicable to the Project and only five are being requested. So as presently constituted, the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) requires a variance for the following project components: 1. Stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard (RHMC Section 17.16.200); 2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback (RHMC Section 17.16.110 and 17.16.200); 3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet (RHMC Section 17.16.190(F)); 4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence (RHMC Section 17.12.020); and 5. Grading export (RHMC Section 17.16.230). 103 In granting a variance, City Council must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone. There are extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property. The location of stable and corral between the main house and the street is a design adopted by many neighbors on Crest Road East and would be consistent with other nearby properties. However, this design does require a variance to allow the stable, corral, swimming pool and retaining wall in the front yard and the corral to encroach into the required 50-foot setback. The area of the site considered the "front yard", between the proposed main residence and the street, is the widest and most level part of the site. Allowing the proposed pool and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard will be consistent with the natural slope of the existing property and reduce the need for additional grading. The construction of retaining walls to exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet, and the light well/tunnel portion of the basement extending beyond the building walls of the residence, will minimize grading and support the development. As a result of the shape of the lot, the grading of the Project requires a variance to export non- exempt grading of 3,131 CY of soil to keep the peak of the knoll below the height of the street and out of the view of neighbors. B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question. Developments similar to the proposed Project, with stables and corrals in the front yard, are enjoyed by many neighbors on Crest Road East who similarly position main residences away from the street to create privacy and maximize views from their residences, all while making the equestrian uses of the neighborhood visible along the street. The variance requests are necessary for preservation and enjoyment of property rights consistent with other properties in the same vicinity and zone with the same types of structures and improvements in similar areas of the project. The variance request pertaining to the basement extending beyond the walls of the residence is solely for a light well type area that allows ingress and egress to the basement area as required by the building code. This subterranean tunnel type design minimizes grading and allows access to the basement area as depicted on the project plans. C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Granting a variance for the Project will not be detrimental to the public welfare and will not be injurious to properties in the vicinity because it is consistent with the encroachments by the existing residences and structures and contributes to a consistent and equitable treatment of development in the surrounding area. The requested variances are designed to make the development less intensive in terms of grading, maximize privacy and reduce other impacts to the neighborhood to ensure the protection of the public welfare. D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed. The granting of the variance will allow for a development that is harmonious in scale and mass 104 with the site, the proposed Project is visually harmonious with adjacent properties and in scale with adjacent residential development. E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant. The variance does not grant special privileges for the Applicant; the proposed Project is similar to other properties on Crest Road East that have stables and corrals in the front yard and setbacks. The Project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, and general land uses specified in the General Plan. F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Granting a variance for the Project will be consistent with the applicable portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The Project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. The proposed Project would not constitute a hazardous waste facility. G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills. Approvals granting the variance to allow encroachments into the front yard setback will be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills, which encourages residential and equestrian uses. Public Participation The public was given an opportunity to address the Planning Commission during field trips and meetings on January 16, 2024, April 16, 2024, and June 18, 2024. City Council reviewed the Planning Commission's decision on July 22, 2024, and the public was allowed to participate. City Council held public hearings on August 12, 2024, October 14, 2024, and October 28, 2024. The public was allowed to participate and provide comments at all meetings. Environmental Review The City has consistently applied Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines section 15303) categorical exemptions to single-family residence projects in the City. This Class 3 CEQA exemption (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project involves the construction of a new single-family residence on a vacant lot within a residential zone, along with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. It is staff’s position that the Project fits squarely within the Section 15303 exemption. Further no exceptions to the exemptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. The Project is not located in an environmentally sensitive habitat. As a single-family residence with accessory structures and landscaping/hardscaping improvements on a lot that permits a single-family residence, there is no likelihood of successive project on this site due to the 105 City’s current development standards. Finally, staff does not believe there is a reasonable possibility that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. Assertions that this Project will have some different or dispositive impact on land movement issues in the City is not supported by any technical evidence and the Project involves water retention features above and beyond what has been typically required and approved for other projects in the City. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and adopt Resolution No. 1376 approving the Project (Attachment 3A). ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1A: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_StaffReports_CC241014_F.pdf Attachment 1B: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_StaffReports_CC240812_CCStaffReport.pdf Attachment 2A: PL_ADR_240711_23CRE_RadiusMap_VicinityMap_Google.pdf Attachment 2B: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_ProximityMap.pdf Attachment 2C: PL_ADR_240607_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_DevelopmentTable.pdf Attachment 2D: 240605_Comparison_Table_23_Crest_Road_East_CCMeeting_8.12.pdf Attachment 2E: 22324_Application Takeoffs-grading page 10.03.24.pdf Attachment 2F: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_StaffReports_CC241014_ChangeLog.pdf Attachment 3A: ResolutionNo1376_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_241028_F.pdf Attachment 3B: 2024-06_PC_Resolution_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_F_E.pdf Attachment 4: 240613_23 Crest Road East_ZC23-070_PhotosForCCAgenda.pdf Attachment 5A: PL_ADR_240118_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_CopyofEmailfromResidents17CRE_01.17.24.pdf Attachment 5B: PL_ADR_240521_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_EmailfromPaulHuh.pdf Attachment 5C: CL_AGN_241014_CC_Item11A_PublicComment01_Redacted.pdf Attachment 5D: CL_AGN_241014_CC Item11A_PublicComment02_Redacted.pdf Attachment 5E: CL_AGN_241014_CC Item11A_PublicComment03.pdf Attachment 5F: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Letter_Escher_GuneWardena_241024.pdf Attachment 6: Attachment06_LandscapeReviewComments_23CrestRoadEast (ZC23-070) Attachment 7A: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_GMED_Referral.pdf Attachment 7B: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_LomitaAgencyRef_Rev_5-2024.pdf Attachment 7C: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_PagesFromGradingReviewSheet_02-23.pdf Attachment 8: PL_ADR_240612_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_GeotechnicalReport.pdf Attachment 9: PL_ADR_241002_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_HydrologyReport.pdf Attachment 10A: CL_PBN_241014_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Proof_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 10B: CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 11: 22324_CIVIL PLANNING SET_10.02.24.pdf Attachment 12: Drawing_SitePlanComparison_2024-10-02.pdf Attachment 13A: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P1p.pdf Attachment 13B: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P2p.pdf 106 Attachment 13C: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P3.pdf Attachment 13D: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P4.pdf Attachment 14: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Civil_CityCouncil_10.14.24.pdf Attachment 15: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Landscape_CityCouncil_2024-10-14.pdf 107 Agenda Item No.: 11.A Mtg. Date: 10/14/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA) DATE:October 14, 2024 BACKGROUND: This item was continued from the August 12, 2024, City Council meeting. At that meeting, Council received the staff report and deliberated on the merits of the Project. Among other things, the City Council directed staff and the applicant to address the following: Environmental Determination: Explore and confirm that the CEQA Class 3 categorical exemption determination for the Project is applicable. Landscaping: Selection of tree and maturity height for placement on the mound. Trellis: Re-evaluate the building pad for the 415 square foot trellis on the slope below the proposed residence to determine if grading is necessary: LA County;s HydroCalc Calculator : Use LA Countys HydroCalc Calcualtor to calculate runoff rates and volume https://pw.lacounty.gov/wmd/dsp_LowImpactDevelopment.cfm Guest House: Clarify adjustments made to the location of the guest house. Applicant's Technical Team : Provide the entire applicant team at the next meeting so that technical questions can be answered Resolution Findings : Ensure that the findings and supporting analysis for the various entitlements in the resolution are consistent with the City’s pertinent zoning standards Pad Size : Explain the applicability of Rolling Hills Municiapl Code (“RHMC”) section 17.16.095 abd the minimum 12,000 SF pad size. 108 Building Pad Coverage Guidelines : Provide analysis of RHMC section 17.16.097 regarding guidelines for pad coverage. Applicant Request On June 2, 2023, an application was filed by the applicant, Frank Escher of Escher, Gune, Wardena Architecture on behalf of the property owner, Yuki Ogaswara, requesting a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances under Zoning Case No. 23-070 (ZC 23 -070). The proposed project was for construction of a new single-family residence and other improvements on a vacant lot. The applicant is requesting the following: 14,270 SF single-family residence (main residence) 1,000 SF garage (attached) 1,225 SF stable & 5,190 SF Corral (Discussed under the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance) 7,428 SF basement 700 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU) 650 SF guest house 280 SF swimming pool 155 pool equipment 480 SF of attached covered porches Service yard Lightwell Retaining walls to exceed a height of 3 feet (maximum 5 feet) 28,389 CY total grading 1st Pad: 32,610 SF; 2 nd Pad: 1,610 SF; 3 rd Pad 2,900 SF; Sunset Terrace: 415 SF Oval driveway with center landscape mound Landscaping and features There have been changes to the project since the original submittal, mostly during the Planning Commission process. Since the August 12, 2024, City Council meeting, the following changes or clarifications have been made: Underground cisterns updated to capture 100-year storm with changes to the onsite water management plan resulting in minimal changes to the landscaping plan. No trees will be planted on the mound. Grading calculations updated to show 8 CY cut and 9 CY fill in the "sunset terrace" covered patio located downslope from the residence. The 1 CY difference is an adjustment which is expected to come from the main building pad. DISCUSSION: The Project must be analyzed and weighed against the aforementioned required findings for the various entitlements for the Project. The City Council is limited to the record and evidence before it in analyzing the merits of the Project. A decision must be based on the explicit RHMC findings and be supported by evidence in the record. 109 Requested Entitlements Site Plan Review Per Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.46.020.A.1, a Site Plan Review (SPR) is required for the construction of any new buildings or structures that require any grading that is not exempt. The applicants are requesting a Site Plan Review for the construction of the project on a vacant lot. The proposal situates the main house and accessory structures as sensitively on the lot as possible, integrating them into the existing topography. The proposed residence will only be partially visible to adjacent neighbors with the inclusion of landscape features. The footprint of the main residence complies with the setback requirements of the RHMC. The main residence has been integrated into the existing slope to minimize grading and land disturbance by constructing a long and narrow V-shaped floor plan that closely follows the existing topography. The apex of the house is located at the point of the natural slope, with an adjacent west and east wing. The applicant is requesting a Site Plan Review for the following 14,270 SF single-family residence (main residence) 1,000 SF garage (attached) 1,225 SF stable & 5,190 SF Corral (also discussed under the CUP and Variance sections) 7,428 SF basement 650 SF guest house 480 SF of attached covered porches Lightwell Retaining walls to exceed a height of 3 feet (maximum 5 feet) 28,389 CY total grading 1st Pad: 32,610 SF; 2nd Pad: 1,610 SF; 3rd Pad 2,900 SF; Sunset Terrace: 415 SF Oval driveway with center landscape mound Landscaping Certain aspects of the project, such as the ADU, swimming pool (less than 800 square feet), pool equipment, and service yard, are approved administratively and not subject to Site Plan Review. Site Plan Review requires that the City Council make the following findings it order to approve or conditionally approve the project: A. The Project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan and Zoning ordinance – sans the requested variances. The proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low-density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The Project maintains the maximum possible distances from adjacent neighbors. The main residence has been integrated into the existing slope to minimize grading and land disturbance by constructing a long and narrow V-shaped floor plan that closely follows the existing topography, which will reduce the visual impact from neighboring properties. The Project complies with all of the City of Rolling Hills Development standards with the exception of requiring Variances for the structures to encroach into the front yard as discussed below in this Resolution. 110 The Project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements. The net lot area of the lot is 262,368 square feet (6.02 acres) per RHMC Section 17.16.060(A). The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 18,205 square feet or 6.94% (20% max. permitted) excluding exempt structures; and the total lot coverage proposed, including flatwork, would be 36,590 square feet or 13.95% (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area is 87,770 square feet or 33.45% (40% max permitted). B. The Project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot. The topography and the configuration of the lot have been considered, and the Project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures; the Project will be built on new building pads which enables Project elements to be the least intrusive to surrounding properties. Further, the Project will be a sufficient distance from nearby residences so views and privacy of surrounding neighbors will not be impacted. The main house is sited to minimize grading and minimize impact on the site below the 1293-foot contour line that defines both the Finished Floor level and the precise orientation of the wings of the house. The landscape below this line will not experience any site disturbance and will be utilized to seed and reestablish a pallet of native species back into the landscape above the house. The Project includes three new building pads: Pad #1 is for the main residence for a total of 32,610 SF; Pad #2 is for the ADU for a total of 1,610 SF; and Pad #3 is for the stable for a total of 2,900 SF. C. The Project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, and is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to new residences in the vicinity of said lot. The proposed site plan is harmonious with the site conditions of the existing lot and neighboring lots. The integration of the into the slope following the topography enables the residence to be largely hidden from view from the street and neighboring residences, maximizing the distance between the main house and the street. The slopes being created have been rounded and it was attempted to mimic the existing natural slopes in the area. D. The Project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). There will be no significant changes to the overall drainage features on the lot. There will be minimal impact to site design, vegetation, and mature trees. The property will be landscaped in accordance with the approved landscape plan. E. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area. The total proposed grading for the Project is 28,389 cubic yards (19,052 CY of cut and 9,337 CY of fill). The excavation for the basement (3,026 CY) and pool (105 CY) are exempt from the Site Plan Review. The non-exempt grading totaling 25,258 CY is subject to Site Plan 111 Review. The grading will be balanced on site with exception to 6,584 CY of non-exempt export. Rather than retaining the dirt on the property, export is needed to maintain the existing topography as much as possible. The Project has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and minimize grading to the extent feasible. F. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course. Grading will be balanced on site with exception to 9,715 CY of export (3,131 CY exempt and 6,584 CY non-exempt). Grading has been minimized by integrating the main residence into the natural slope. The width of the main residence is limited to 25 feet, and the result is a long and narrow ranch house rambling along the 1293-foot contour line. The main residence is centered on its site so that runoff is not increased within existing drainage courses on either side of the lot. Control of water collected by impervious surfaces will utilize large cisterns to collect and redistribute storm-water in a controlled manner that does not alter drainage courses or runoff loads from the undeveloped state of the lot. These cisterns are designed to retain runoff in the event of a 100-year storm event. G. The Project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought-tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas. Surrounding native vegetation and mature trees will not be affected or will be replaced. New vegetation will be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. The development will be considerate of the environment and will enhance the rural character of the community. As such, the rural character of the community is maintained and privacy is maintained with neighbors. The new landscape will utilize this plant community as the framework for all new plantings in the landscape that will enhance the existing habitat and ecological community already present on site. These native plants are well suited to the existing site without the need for irrigation beyond their establishment period of 1 to 2 years. The trees will provide visual buffers and habitat creation between neighboring properties while preserving and protecting natural drainage patterns on the site. The new landscape adjacent to Crest Road focuses largely on the reestablishment of the coastal sage scrub planting community and providing habit for the local fauna while seamlessly blending the house into the surrounding native hillside without obstructing views H. The Project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed site plan is not detrimental to convenience and safety of pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed continuous driveway allows for the simplest path between all structures, with an attached garage in the main residence accommodating four vehicles, suitable per Rolling Hills guidelines for the main house, guest house and ADU parking requirements. The open agricultural room in the stable will also facilitate storage of maintenance vehicles and equipment, as well as animal transportation equipment. I. The Project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to State CEQA 112 Guidelines, Section 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). Class 3 exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project includes development on a vacant lot of a new single-family residence in a residential zone, with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. Accordingly, the Project qualifies for the exemption pursuant to Section 15303. Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in State CEQA Guidelines, section 15300.2, apply. Conditional Use Permit Per RHMC section 17.80.050, a conditional use permit is required for stable greater than 200- square-feet and a corral that is greater than 550 square feet in size. The proposed 1,225- square- foot stable exceeds the 200 -square-foot limit by 775 square feet. The proposed stable will not encroach into any required setbacks. The proposed corral encroaches into front yard and front setback. The stable and corral will also require a variance because they are located in the front yard. The corral will also require a variance to encroach into the 50-foot front setback. These are discussed below. RHMC section 17.16.210 requires a conditional use permit in order to construct a guest house. The proposed 540-square-foot guest will not encroach into any required setbacks. Further, a conditional use permit is required for an accessory structure that exceeds 200- square-feet. The project includes a detached 415-square-foot trellis at the bottom of the canyon. There are also two existing trails that lead down to the new trellis. The existing trails are currently overgrown and not accessible. The applicant is proposing to redesign and cut the overgrown vegetation the pathways for the new trellis. In order to approve a CUP, the City Council must make the following findings: A. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a guesthouse, stable, corral, and trellis is consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and meets all the applicable code development standards for such use. The Project is compatible with existing land uses as other properties in the same zone have a guest house and stable. B. That the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, building or structures. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the Project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed guest house, stable, corral, and trellis will be located on the property with sufficient proximity to neighboring buildings and structures. C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the uses and buildings proposed. The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards in the RAS-2 113 Zone. The net lot area is 262,368 SF (6.02 acres) and is adequate to support the proposed uses. The area of the site considered the "front yard", between the proposed main residence and the street, is the widest and most level part of the site. The exception to this is the location of the stable in the front yard, and the corral in the front yard setback, both are subject to variances. The property will be developed and adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses and buildings. D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district. The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards of the RAS- 2 Zone, with exception to the variances requested herein. E. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Granting the proposed conditional use for the Project will be consistent with the applicable portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The Project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. The proposed Project would not constitute a hazardous waste facility. F. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title. The proposed Project allows the Applicant the ability to enjoy rights enjoyed by other residents in the City – the development and construction of a single-family home. The proposed uses are consistent with the residential character of the City. Variance The Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a variance for the following project components: 1. Stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard; 2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback; 3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet; 4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence; 5. Decks/patios that exceed more than one foot above grade; and 6. Grading export. In granting a variance, City Council must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone. There are extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property. The location of stable and corral between the main house and the street is a design adopted by many neighbors on Crest Road East, requiring a variance to allow stables and corrals in the front yard and front yard setback. The area of the site considered the "front yard", between the proposed main residence and the street, is the widest and most level part of the site. Allowing the proposed 114 pool and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard will be consistent with the natural slope of the existing property. The construction of retaining walls to exceed the maximum average height of two-and one-half-feet, a basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence, and construction decks/patios more than one foot above grade will minimize grading and support the development. As a result of the shape of the lot, the grading of the Project requires a variance to export non-exempt grading of 3,131 CY of soil to keep the peak of the knoll below the height of the street and out of the view of neighbors. B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question. Developments similar to the proposed Project, with stables and corrals in the front yard, are enjoyed by many neighbors on Crest Road East who similarly position main residences away from the street to create privacy and maximize views from their residences, all while making the equestrian uses of the neighborhood visible along the street. The variance requests are necessary for preservation and enjoyment of property rights consistent with other properties in the same vicinity and zone. C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Granting a variance for the Project will not be detrimental to the public welfare and will not be injurious to properties in the vicinity because it is consistent with the encroachments by the existing residences and structures and contributes to a consistent and equitable treatment of development in the surrounding area. D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed. The granting of the variance will allow for a development that is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the proposed Project is visually harmonious with adjacent properties and in scale with adjacent residential development. E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant. The variance does not grant special privileges for the Applicant; the proposed Project is similar to other properties on Crest Road East that have stables and corrals in the front yard and setbacks. . The Project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, and general land uses specified in the General Plan. F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Granting a variance for the Project will be consistent with the applicable portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The Project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. The proposed Project would not constitute a hazardous waste facility. G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling 115 Hills. Approvals granting the variance to allow encroachments into the front yard setback will be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills, which encourages residential and equestrian uses. City Council Concerns Staff and the Applicant worked together to address the Council’s concerns raised the last time this Project was before the City Council: Environmental Determination: The City has consistently applied Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines section 15303) categorical exemptions to single-family residence projects in the City. This Class 3 CEQA exemption (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project involves the construction of a new single -family residence on a vacant lot within a residential zone, along with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. It is staff’s position that the Project fits squarely within Section 15303 exemption. Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. The Project is not located in an environmentally sensitive habitat. As a single-family residence with accessory structures and landscaping/hardscaping improvements on a lot that permits a single- family residence, there is no likelihood of successive project on this site due to the City’s current development standards Finally, staff does not believe there is a reasonable possibility that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. Assertions that this Project will have some different or dispositive impact on land movement issues in the City is not supported by any technical evidence and the Project involves water retention features above and beyond what has been typically required and approved for other projects in the City Landscaping: Following the August 12th meeting, the applicant has decided to eliminate all trees from the mound. Condition AP in the draft resolution has been updated to eliminate any specific tree type on the mound. Landscaping must be in compliance with the landscape plan as approved by the City's landscape consultant. Trellis: The applicant proposes a 415 square foot (SF) trellis an existing pad located below the slope. It is accessible via existing trails, however, due to overgrown vegetation access is currently not available. City Council was not able to visit the pad during the August field trip due to the overgrown vegetation. The applicant reevaluated the pad location and determined there will be minor grading of 16 cubic yards (CY) balanced at the same location to level the slab foundation. Vegetation will be cleared for access. LA County’s HydroCal Calculator : The applicant was directed to use LA County’s HydroCalc Calculator to calculate runoff rates and volumes: https://pw.lacounty.gov/wmd/dsp_LowImpactDevelopment.cfm. The applicant was able to use the tool and has upgraded the underground cisterns to store the excess runoff from a 100- year storm. To staff’s understanding, this Project is unique in the City in that its water retention 116 design efforts are meant to capture and store 100-year storm runoff. The Summary of Hydrology Analysis is included as Attachment 9. Guest House: Through the Planning Commission process, the applicant was able to relocate the guest house 10 feet to the northwest to distance the corner from the top of the canyon. Plans showing the proposed project from December 2023, April 2024, and June 2024 are provided as Attachment 12. Applicant’s Technical Team : The City Council requested to have the entire applicant team present in case there were questions for the engineer, geologist, or landscape architect. Staff has contacted the applicant to forward this request that the entire team be present. Staff has reached out to LA County to have representatives from the Public Works Department present as well. Resolution Findings: The City Council requested that staff ensure the analysis for each finding in the proposed Resolution of approval was supported by the evidence in the record. Findings are listed below and the revised Resolution, supporting each finding, is included as Attachment 3A. Pad Size : Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) Section 17.16.095 indicates "The minimum size of a graded building pad shall be twelve thousand square feet [12,000 SF], as specified in the City's Subdivisions Code (Title 16 of this code)." The provisions in the Subdivision Code indicate the pad size is meant to demonstrate a minimum-sized pad for development of a main residence when a lot is subdivided. RHMC Section 17.18.020 requires all residential properties to be developed with a stable, contiguous corral and access thereto, or provide a minimum 1,000 SF to be set aside for such use. Thus, this minimum pad size described in Section 17.16.095 is not meant for accessory structures such as stables and other buildings as there exists another minimum size for these structures elsewhere in RHMC. Historically, the 12,000 SF minimum pad size has been applied to the main building pad and not for pads for stables and accessory structures. If the 12,000 SF minimum were required for all pads, including accessory structures, then a lot of other projects in the City would not have been subject to approval. Building Pad Coverage Guidelines : RHMC Section 17.16.097 provides a guideline for "determining whether the proportion of the building pad that is proposed for development is appropriate. The Planning Commission's guideline is expressed in terms of a maximum percentage of building pad coverage. A determination as to whether a proposed project satisfies the guideline is determined by first calculating the square footage of the proposed structure(s) and of all existing structures on the lot, dividing that number by the square footage of that portion of the building pad that is not in the setbacks, and then comparing that percentage figure to the Commission's guideline percentage. . . Satisfaction of the Commission's guideline for allowable building pad coverage is only one of several factors for determining project compliance with the general plan and zoning ordinance and all other required findings for the particular approval sought must also be satisfied." , many projects exceeding this building pad guideline have been approved more recently. Other Items Traffic Commission Review of Driveway The proposed driveway connects to Crest Road East and has a driveway apron of 62-feet 5- 117 inches wide. The driveway entrance will be 26 feet wide and connects to an oval-shaped driveway that will be 15 feet wide. The oval-shaped driveway connects to the barn, ADU, and main residence. Existing eucalyptus trees along Crest Road East will remain. The proposed driveway apron was reviewed and approved by the Traffic Commission on December 11, 2023. The City Council makes the final decision on the Traffic Commission’s recommendations. Rolling Hills Community Association Review Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. Public Participation The public was given an opportunity to address the Planning Commission during field trips and meetings, and the City Council at the August 12, 2024 meeting and October 14, 2024 meeting. Environmental Review The City has consistently applied Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines section 15303) categorical exemptions to single-family residence projects in the City. This Class 3 CEQA exemption (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project involves the construction of a new single-family residence on a vacant lot within a residential zone, along with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. It is staff’s position that the Project fits squarely within the Section 15303 exemption. Further no exceptions to the exemptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. The Project is not located in an environmentally sensitive habitat. As a single-family residence with accessory structures and landscaping/hardscaping improvements on a lot that permits a single-family residence, there is no likelihood of successive project on this site due to the City’s current development standards. Finally, staff does not believe there is a reasonable possibility that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. Assertions that this Project will have some different or dispositive impact on land movement issues in the City is not supported by any technical evidence and the Project involves water retention features above and beyond what has been typically required and approved for other projects in the City. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and adopt Resolution No. 1376 approving the Project (Attachment 3A). ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1A: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 118 070_StaffReports_CC240812_CCStaffReport.pdf Attachment 1B: PL_ADR_240711_23CRE_RadiusMap_VicinityMap_Google.pdf Attachment 1C: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_ProximityMap.pdf Attachment 2A: PL_ADR_240607_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_DevelopmentTable.pdf Attachment 2B: 240605_Comparison_Table_23_Crest_Road_East_CCMeeting_8.12.pdf Attachment 2C: 22324_Application Takeoffs-grading page 10.03.24.pdf Attachment 2D: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_StaffReports_CC241014_ChangeLog.pdf Attachment 3A: ResolutionNo1376_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_241014_F.pdf Attachment 3B: 2024-06_PC_Resolution_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_F_E.pdf Attachment 4: 240613_23 Crest Road East_ZC23-070_PhotosForCCAgenda.pdf Attachment 5A: PL_ADR_240118_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_CopyofEmailfromResidents17CRE_01.17.24.pdf Attachment 5B: PL_ADR_240521_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_EmailfromPaulHuh.pdf Attachment 5C: CL_AGN_241014_CC_Item11A_PublicComment01_Redacted.pdf Attachment 6: Attachment06_LandscapeReviewComments_23CrestRoadEast (ZC23-070) Attachment 7A: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_GMED_Referral.pdf Attachment 7B: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_LomitaAgencyRef_Rev_5-2024.pdf Attachment 7C: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_PagesFromGradingReviewSheet_02-23.pdf Attachment 8: PL_ADR_240612_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_GeotechnicalReport.pdf Attachment 9: PL_ADR_241002_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_HydrologyReport.pdf Attachment 10A: CL_PBN_241014_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Proof_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 10B: CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 11: 22324_CIVIL PLANNING SET_10.02.24.pdf Attachment 12: Drawing_SitePlanComparison_2024-10-02.pdf Attachment 13A: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P1p.pdf Attachment 13B: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P2p.pdf Attachment 13C: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P3.pdf Attachment 13D: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P4.pdf Attachment 14: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Civil_CityCouncil_10.14.24.pdf Attachment 15: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Landscape_CityCouncil_2024-10-14.pdf 119 Agenda Item No.: 11.A Mtg. Date: 08/12/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, RETAINING WALLS EXCEEDING A HEIGHT OF 3 FEET (UP TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 5 FEET), DRIVEWAY WITH PORTIONS THAT EXCEED A WIDTH OF 20 FEET, AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS; CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE, CORRAL, DETACHED TRELLIS, AND GUEST HOUSE; AND VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE STABLE, CORRAL, SWIMMING POOL, AND RETAINING WALLS TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD, ALLOW A PORTION OF THE CORRAL TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM AVERAGE HEIGHT OF TWO-AND-ONE-HALF FEET, CONSTRUCT A BASEMENT WITH A PORTION EXTENDING BEYOND THE BUILDING WALLS OF THE RESIDENCE, CONSTRUCT DECKS/PATIOS MORE THAN ONE FOOT ABOVE GRADE, AND ALLOW GRADING EXPORT FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA) DATE:August 12, 2024 BACKGROUND: On July 22, 2024, the City Council considered the Planning Commission's action to approve the proposed project and the Traffic Commission's action to approve the driveway apron. The City Council voted 5-0 to take the matter under its own jurisdiction. On August 1, 2024, a public hearing notice was published in the Daily Breeze for the field trip and evening Council meeting on August 12, 2024. Notices were mailed to owners within 1,000 feet of the subject property (Attachments 1A and 10). 120 Applicant Request On June 2, 2023, an application was filed by the applicant, Frank Escher of Escher, Gune, Wardena Architecture on behalf of the property owner, Yuki Ogaswara, requesting a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances under Zoning Case No. 23-070 (ZC 23-070). The proposed project was for construction of a new 14,680-square-foot (SF) single-family residence with a 7,849 SF basement, 1,000 SF attached garage, 1,225 SF stable, 5,190 SF corral, 600 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU), 600 SF guest house, 280 SF swimming pool, 155 SF pool equipment, 480 SF of attached covered porches, 95 SF service yard, lightwells, maximum five-foot-high retaining walls, walkways, landscaping, and other improvements (Attachment 2). A 17,700 SF oval driveway was proposed in the front of the property for access to the residence, ADU, and stable. Previous Projects On January 2017, the City Council adopted a resolution approving Zoning Case (ZC) No. 902 for construction of an 11,500 SF new single-family residence with an 11,500 SF basement and appurtenances (See City Council Resolution No. 1202). On December 12, 2018, the Planning Commission granted a two-year time extension for ZC No. 902 to January 23, 2021. Due to COVID-19 several entitlements were placed on hold and Assembly Bill 1561 created an automatic time extension for ZC No. 902 which extended the expiration to July 22, 2022. On November 9, 2021, an application was received for development of a new 8,460 SF residence, basement, accessory dwelling unit (ADU), guest house, stable, swimming pool, spa, and other improvements (ZC No. 21-11). On March 15, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a field trip and evening public hearing to discuss the project, and continued the public hearing to April 19, 2022. On March 24, 2022, the Traffic Commission recommended approval of the main driveway, but removal of the secondary driveway. On April 13, 2022, the applicant requested the item be pulled from the Planning Commission agenda since the property had been sold to a new owner who did not want to continue with the project. As such, ZC No. 21-11 was closed; the approval for ZC No. 902 ultimately expired. Planning Commission Review of ZC 23-070 On January 16, 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed ZC 23-070 for the first time. After conducting a field trip and evening public hearing, the Planning Commission continued the item and directed staff to work with the applicant to revise the plans to address certain issues: The height of the mound at the center of the oval driveway. The plans indicated a height of 15 feet from the existing grade at the highest point and showed Coast Live Oak Trees (these can grow up to 80 feet tall) to be planted. This would negatively impact the line of site from Crest Road East. The Commission required that the proposed mound be staked and silhouetted. The residents at 17 Crest Road East expressed concerns about privacy and the proximity of the proposed barn. The walkway that extends out from the basement and the portion of the basement under the covered patio that is not under the footprint of the residence. The discrepancies with the grading calculations, application, and plans. Mixed-Use Structure/Stable located in the front yard. The guest house's proximity to the canyon. 121 Retaining walls along the stable. Floor level above the grade/raised decks – various sections of the residence, guest house, stable, and guest house show raised decks. Trellis calculations need to be added to the calculations (415 square feet (SF) On April 16, 2024, this item was presented to the Planning Commission for a second time. That morning, the Planning Commission held a field trip at the site. Commissioners, staff, and attendees viewed the silhouettes of the proposed project. The project was presented later at the evening Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commissioners voted 4-0 (1 Commissioner was absent) to continue the item to the next meeting. The Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant to revise the plans to address the following: The basement projection from the main residence; The exit from the basement; The proposed mount height at 1330' elevation, which must be lowered; Privacy; and View blockage issues. On June 18, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a third field trip and evening public hearing. The applicant and several residents were present at the field trip. The Commission and the public were able to walk the site to better understand the proposed project. At the evening hearing, the Commission listened to the staff's presentation and heard the applicants' testimonies. Several residents spoke about stormwater concerns. At the conclusion of the evening hearing, the Planning Commission voted 3-0 (two commissioners absent) to adopt Resolution No. 2024-06 approving ZC 23-070 (Attachment 3). The action included amending the conditions of approval to address future area drainage, the height of the mound and what can be planted atop, and the orientation of a passageway to the basement. Traffic Commission Review On December 11, 2023, the Traffic Commission reviewed the proposed driveway and apron. The proposed driveway connects to Crest Road East and has a driveway apron of 62 feet 5 inches wide. The driveway entrance will be 26 feet wide and connects to an oval-shaped driveway that will be 15 feet wide. The oval-shaped driveway connects to the barn, ADU, and main residence. Existing eucalyptus trees along Crest Road East will remain. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Traffic Commission voted 4-0 (one commissioner absent) to approve the proposed driveway and apron. Zoning, Location, and Lot Description The property is zoned RAS-2, and the gross lot area is 7.05 acres or 307,098 SF. The net lot area for development purposes is 6.02 acres or 262,368 SF. The lot is currently undeveloped and vacant (see photos in Attachment 4). The lot is irregularly shaped and has a depth of approximately 820 feet and a width of approximately 480 feet. The property slopes downward from Crest Road East to the rear of the property. The grade elevation between the proposed main building pad and the street is approximately 42 feet. The lot is located in the southern portion of the City and has views of the Pacific Ocean. A natural drainage course is located along the western portion of the lot, and a blue line stream, which is a part of the Klondike Canyon System, is located approximately 200 feet south of the southern property line of the lot. The lot is also located in proximity to the Geotechnical Hazardous area of the City, known 122 as the Flying Triangle. The existing topography of the project site slopes down approximately 115 feet from Crest Road East to the lowest portion of the lot. The closest structures to the proposed project are 330 feet to the north, 179 feet to the east, 220 feet to the west, and 403 feet to the south (Attachment 1B). DISCUSSION: Project Approved by the Planning Commission on June 18, 2024 The applicant revised the project during the public hearing process to address issues discussed at previous meetings. On June 18, 2024, the Planning Commission approved the following: 14,680 SF single-family residence 7,849 SF basement 1,000 SF attached garage 652 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU; not subject to discretionary review) 1,225 SF stable and 5,190 SF corral (Discussed under the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance) Retaining walls to exceed a height of 3 feet (maximum 5 feet) 28,389 cubic yards (CY) of total grading 25,343 SF mound in the center of the oval driveway 58,050 SF landscaping Native plants & tree species 3,000 SF native pollinator meadow in the center of the mound Three building pads are proposed: Pad 1: 32,610 SF main building pad Pad 2: 1,610 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU) pad Pad 3: 2,900 SF stable pad The Planning Commission amended or added conditions to address certain issues: Condition AB: Language included to address drainage. Condition AP: Condition added regarding the mound height (maximum elevation of 1330 feet) and landscaping. Condition AQ: Condition added that basement passageway be redesigned to be angled or zigzagged. Grading The total grading is 28,389 CY (see Attachment 8). Grading export is 9,715 CY (3,131 CY exempt and 6,584 CY non-exempt). Grading for the mound was reduced from 11,405 CY to 9,337 CY. A Site Plan Review is required for the non-exempt grading and a Variance is required for non-exempt export. Site Plan Review Per Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) Section 17.46.020.A.1, a Site Plan Review is required for the construction of any new buildings or structures that require any grading that is not exempt. RHMC Section 17.46.50 includes required findings which are listed below. 123 Conditional Use Permit Per RHMC Section 17.80.050, a conditional use permit (CUP) is required for a stable greater than 200 SF and a corral that is greater than 550 SF. The proposed 1,225 SF stable exceeds the 200 SF limit by 775 SF. The stable has not changed in this project. Per RHMC Section 17.16.210, a CUP is also required to construct a guest house. The new proposal for the guest house has been changed to 600 SF, which was reduced from 540 SF. The guest house will not encroach into any required setbacks and was moved away from the top of the canyon. As per RHMC Section 17.16.210, a CUP is required for an accessory structure that exceeds 200 SF. The project includes a detached 415 SF trellis at the bottom of the canyon. There are also two existing trails that lead down to the new trellis. The existing trails are currently overgrown and not accessible. The applicant is proposing to redesign and cut the overgrown vegetation on the pathways for the new trellis. There are no changes to the trellis. Variances The Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a Variance application and approvals for the following: 1. Stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard; 2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback; 3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet; 4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence; 5. Decks/patios that exceed more than one foot above grade; and 6. Grading export. Municipal Code Compliance Lot and Building Pad Coverage The net lot area is 262,368 SF. The structural coverage is as follows: the total proposed structural coverage is 18,970 SF or 7.23%, which is well below the 20% maximum (with deductions). The proposed flatwork coverage is 18,385 SF or 7.01%, which is below the 15% maximum. The total proposed structural and flatwork coverage for the entire lot with deductions is 37,355 SF or 14.24%, which is well below the 35% maximum. The project complies with all of the RHMC development standards. The project exceeds the 30% maximum building pad coverage guidelines, the smaller building pads provides less disturbance to the lot and preserves the natural terrain. Pad 1: Main Residence will be developed with a 32,610 SF building pad area for a total of 17,799 SF, or 54.58% building pad coverage. This exceeds the maximum 30% guideline by 24.58%. Pad 2: ADU Pad will be developed with a 1,610 SF building pad area and a total of 700 SF, or 43.48% building pad coverage. This exceeds the maximum 30% guideline by 10.5%. Pad 3: Stable Pad will be developed with a 2,900-square-foot building pad area and a total of 124 1,340 square feet, or 46.21% building pad coverage. This exceeds the maximum 30% guideline by 16.21%. Disturbance The total disturbed area for the lot will be 87,770 SF, or 33.45% of the lot (40% maximum permitted). The previous proposed disturbed area was 87,920 SF, or 33.51% of the lot (40% maximum permitted). This is a reduction of 150 SF or 0.06%. Stable/Corral The project includes a 1,225 SF one-story stable with 2 stalls, a tack room/office, 2 bathrooms, a tack workspace, feed/counter space, and a large agricultural space with a garage accessible from the circular driveway. The ridgeline of the new stable is 13.9 feet maximum height. The stable is accessible from a driveway that is connected off of the northwest portion of the oval-shaped driveway. Site Access The new driveway apron will be located at Crest Road East on the northeast side of the lot and will provide access to the oval driveway. The driveway will be 15 feet wide, leading to a stable storage garage, motor court, main entry to the house, and garage. The proposed continuous driveway allows for the simplest path between all structures, with a garage in the main residence accommodating four vehicles, suitable per RH guidelines for the main house, guest house, and ADU parking requirements. The center of the oval driveway will be landscaped with native trees, native plants, a native pollinator meadow, and a 115 SF water feature. An entry gate with pilasters will be located at the driveway entrance. Walls The RHMC Section 17.16.190(F), requires a Site Plan Review for any walls that exceed a height of 3 feet. Such walls require a variance if located in the front yard. The project includes 6 wall sections: Wall A is located at the east wing of the main residence and connects to the guest house. It has a maximum height of 2.5 feet and an average height of 2.5 feet. Wall B is a 3-foot-high retaining wall located at the west wing of the main residence along the swimming pool. Wall C is located along the south portion of the mound and extends along the south portion of the driveway with a maximum height of 5 feet high with an average height of 4 feet high (Wall C requires a Variance). Wall D is located on the west portion of the mound and west portion of the driveway. The maximum height is 5 feet high, with an average height of 4.1 feet (Wall D requires a variance). Wall E located along the southern portion of the driveway, is a maximum of 2.5 feet high with an average height of 2.1 feet. Wall F is located just north of the stable walkway, and the maximum height is 3 feet high with an average of 2.4 feet high. Landscaping The project includes 58,050 SF of new native landscape area and 3,000 SF of a native 125 pollinator meadow area with a water feature, and 21 native tree species. The project proposes seven Lyonothamnus Floribundus known as the Catalina Ironwood trees that will grow up to a maximum height of 20 feet and maximum width of 12 feet, six Quercus Argrifolia known as the Coast Live Oak with a maximum height of 30 feet and 30 feet maximum width, and 8 Cercus Canadensis known as the Forest Pansy with a maximum height and width of 12 feet. The project will restore the majority of the new landscape areas to a state similar to the original pre-developed, pre-cleared condition of the site, with few visible changes to the existing topography and to the panoramic views from the street and neighboring houses. A review by the City's landscape consultant is required for compliance with landscape standards and the Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (WELO). See Attachment 6 for the landscape review. Building Height and Pad Elevations (Pads 1 - 3) The new residence, basement, and attached garage will be developed on the lower southern portion of Pad 1 with a maximum ridge height of 12 feet 9 inches; the ridgeline of these structures will be about 31 feet below Crest Road East. The maximum height of the chimneys is 19 feet 2 inches. The main residence includes eaves that will extend a maximum of 8 feet. The basement and atrium are located at the V section of the main residence under the proposed deck. The elevations on Page A201 of the plans show that there is a 5-foot maximum retaining wall just above the finished grade. The guest house will be 13 feet and 2 inches in height; the ridgeline of the structure will be about 31 feet below Crest Road East. The accessory dwelling unit (ADU) (Pad 2) will be 11 feet and 9 inches in height, with a ridgeline about 5 feet below Crest Road East. The front upper east portion of the lot (Pad 3) will consist of a corral and stable. The stable will be 13 feet and 9 inches in height, and the ridgeline of the structures will be about 5 feet below Crest Road East. Drainage A natural drainage course is located along the western portion of the lot, and a blue line stream, which is part of the Klondike Canyon System, is located approximately 200 feet south of the southern property line of the lot. The lot is also located in proximity to the Geotechnical Hazardous area of the City known as the Flying Triangle; however, no part of the lot is within the Flying Triangle. This project is subject to the Low Impact Development (LID) requirements pertaining to stormwater management, including provisions for retention of run-off on the property. LID is plan checked by Building Services after the City grants entitlements. The proposed storage system is designed to store the difference in stormwater runoff volume between the pre-and post-development conditions. The design proposes two separate drainage systems, splitting runoff between the two adjacent watercourses, to mimic the existing flow patterns. Included in each system is a Contech Urbangreen SRPE cistern system, at the main residence pad, to intercept and store runoff as follows: 1. The eastern system will collect runoff from the ADU, easterly driveway, easterly half of the residence and residential pad, and guest house. 2. The western system will collect runoff from the stable/corral, westerly driveway, westerly half of the residence and residential pad, and pool area. 3. Each system: 126 a. Will first pass runoff through a Contech inline CDS pre-treatment system to remove trash, debris, and suspended solids. Runoff will then enter the storage barrels. b. Downstream of the storage barrel will be a second manhole with a pump, supplying the irrigation system. Runoff impounded in the storage tanks will be used to irrigate the site after the storm has passed. c. Above the soffit of the storage barrel, an overflow pipe will direct runoff exceeding the storage capacity and discharge to the watercourse below through an erosion- control outlet structure. Utility Lines / Septic Tank All utility lines for the development will be required to be placed underground. The Los Angeles County Public Health department will review the septic system (location to be determined). Rolling Hills Community Association Review Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. Public Participation On January 16, 2024, Yuan Chang, 17 Crest Road East, attended the morning field trip and expressed concerns with privacy and the proximity of the proposed stable. Youkun Nie, representing the owner, submitted an email dated January 17, 2024, regarding the concern (Attachment 5A). The applicant has since moved the stable away from the property and reduced the size to address the concern. At the January 16, 2024 evening meeting, John Mackenbach, 56 Portuguese Bend Road, commended the project but suggested putting the cisterns closer to vegetation. He asked about drainage and the applicant's team explained the drainage system. On May 6, 2024, Paul Huh and Jane Huh, the residents of 20 Crest Road East, came into the City to review the project and express their concerns regarding any view obstructions at 23 Crest Road East. Mr. Huh sent an email to staff on May 21, 2024, opposing any obstructions above the Crest Road East ocean view (Attachment 5B). On June 10, 2024, Charlie Raine, the resident at 4 Pinto Road, came into the City to review the drainage plans for 23 Crest Road East. He expressed his concerns regarding the capacity of cisterns, impermeable and permeable surfaces, excess water flowing into the canyon, future storm drainpipe that the applicant can tie into, and storm drain plans. At the June 18, 2024 Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Raine discussed issues with drainage in his neighborhood. Leah Mirsch, 4 Cinchring Road, suggested a larger design for the cisterns. At the July 22, 2024 City Council meeting, Mr. Raine expressed similar concerns he discussed with the Planning Commission. Mr. Mike Nash discussed the location and commented about stormwater. Mr. Alfred Visco suggested that City Council take the item under its jurisdiction and consider large projects south of Crest Road. Environmental Review The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 3, Section 15303. New construction of a single-family residence and accessory structures. 127 SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA RHMC Section 17.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. RHMC Section 17.46.50 Required findings. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; the project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 2. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 3. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and landforms (such as hillsides and knolls); 4. Grading has been designed to follow the natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 5. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 6. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought-tolerant landscaping, which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 7. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 8. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA RHMC Section 17.42.50 Basis for approval or denial of conditional use permit. The Commission (and Council on appeal), in acting to approve a conditional use permit application, may impose conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure the project is consistent with the General Plan, compatible with surrounding land use, and meets the provisions and intent of this title. In making such a determination, the hearing body shall find that the proposed use is in general accord with the following principles and standards: 128 1. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan; 2. That the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings or structures; 3. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the use and buildings proposed; 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district; 5. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; 6. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCE RHMC Section 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; 2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; 3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; 4. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; 5. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; 6. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and 7. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and provide direction to staff and the applicant. A resolution is provided in case the City Council wishes to approve the project with conditions (Attachment 11). ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1A: PL_ADR_240711_23CRE_RadiusMap_VicinityMap_Google.pdf Attachment 1B: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_ProximityMap.pdf Attachment 2: PL_ADR_240607_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_DevelopmentTable.pdf Attachment 3: 2024-06_PC_Resolution_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_F_E.pdf Attachment 4: 240613_23 Crest Road East_ZC23-070_PhotosForCCAgenda.pdf Attachment 5A: PL_ADR_240118_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_CopyofEmailfromResidents17CRE_01.17.24.pdf 129 Attachment 5B: PL_ADR_240521_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_EmailfromPaulHuh.pdf Attachment 6: Attachment06_LandscapeReviewComments_23CrestRoadEast (ZC23-070) Attachment7: 240605_Comparison_Table_23_Crest_Road_East_CCMeeting_8.12.pdf Attachment 8: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_StaffReports_CC240812_GradingBreakdown.pdf Attachment 9: 240605_ChangeLog_23 Crest Road East_CCMeeting_8.12.pdf Attachment 10: CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 11: ResolutionNo1376_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_F.pdf Attachment 12: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23- 070_240715_Plans_9thSubmittal_CCMeeting7.22.24.pdf 130 1,000’ City of Rolling Hills ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 TITLE VICINITY MAP CASE NO. Zoning Case No. 23-070 Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits, Variances OWNER OGASAWARA ADDRESS 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills 90274 SITE 131 Vicinity Map: 23 Crest Road East 132 PROXIMITY MAP  23 CREST ROAD EAST  ZC NO. 23‐070      133 Development Table for 23 Crest Road East Zoning Case No. 23-070_Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2024 Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit Variance New 14,680 SF single family residence with 7,849 SF basement, atrium, 1,000 SF garage, 600 SF guest house, 1,225 SF stable, 280 SF pool, new driveway apron, circular driveway, decks, motor court, retaining walls, concrete stairs, and landscape EXISTING Vacant Lot PROPOSED PAD NO. 1 Main Residence, Garage, Guest House, Swimming Pool, Decks, Retaining Walls, Entryways, Atrium, Water feature PROPOSED PAD NO. 2 Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) PROPOSED PAD NO. 3 Structure Stable with Agricultural Storage and Corral TOTAL RA-S- 2 Zone Setbacks Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from side property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line Net Lot Area 262,368 SF — — — 262,368 SF Residence 0 SF 14,680 SF — — 14,680 SF Garage 0 SF 1,000 SF — — 1,000 SF Swimming Pool/Spa 0 SF 280 SF — — 280 SF Pool Equipment 0 SF 155 SF — — 155 SF Guest House 0 SF 600 SF — — 600 SF Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) 0 SF — 700 SF — 700 SF Stable 0 SF — — 1,225 SF 1,225 SF Basement Depth of Basement 0 SF 0 SF 7,849 SF 10 FT — — 7,849 SF 10 FT Entryway, Breezeway 0 SF 0 SF — — 0 SF Attached Covered Porches 0 SF 480 SF — — 480 SF Detached Structures: Guest House Water Feature Trellis 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 600 SF 115 SF 415 SF — — 600 SF 115 SF 415 SF Raised Deck 0 SF 0 SF — — 0 SF 134 Development Table for 23 Crest Road East Zoning Case No. 23-070_Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2024 Service Yard 0 SF 95 SF — — 95 SF EXISTING PROPOSED PAD NO. 1 PROPOSED PAD NO. 2 PROPOSED PAD NO. 3 TOTAL Grading 0 CY 19,052 CY Cut 9,337 CY Fill — — 28,389 CY Structural Coverage (20 % maximum) 0 SF 18,970 SF (7.23%) — — 18,970 SF (7.23%) Flatwork Coverage (15% maximum) 0 SF 18,385 SF (7.01%) — — 18,385 SF (7.01%) Total Structural & Flatwork Coverage (35% maximum) 0 SF 37,355 SF (14.24%) — — 37,355 SF (14.24%) Disturbance (40% maximum) 0 SF 87,770 SF (33.45%) — — 87,770 SF (33.45%) Building Pad 1 Area Building Pad Coverage 0 SF 0 SF 32,610 SF 17,799 SF (54.58%) — — 32,610 SF 17,799 SF (54.58%) Building Pad 2 Area Building Pad Coverage 0 SF 0 SF — 1,610 SF 700 SF (43.48%) — 1,610 SF 700 SF (43.48%) Building Pad 3 Area Building Pad Coverage 0 SF 0 SF — — 2,900 SF 1,340 SF (46.21%) 2,900 SF 1,340 SF (46.21%) 135 Comparison Table 16/5/2024 Comparison Table: 2017 Hynes, 2022 Dark Moon Ranch, and 2023 Ogasawara Orig. and Rev-1 Proposals Hynes 2017 Dark Moon Ranch 2022 Ogasawara 1/16/24 Ogasawara 4/16/24 Ogasawara 6/18/24 Architecture Main Residence and Garage 11,520 sf 9,970 sf 13,000 sf 14,680 sf 14,680 sf Basement 10,400 sf 8,460 sf 7,610 sf 8,240 sf 7,849 sf Covered Porches 2,500 sf 2,165 sf 480 sf 480 sf 480 sf Guest House 800 sf 800 sf 540 sf 600 sf 600 sf Guest House Porches 369 sf 570 sf 0 sf 0 sf 0 sf Stable 2,092 sf 2,456 sf 1,940 sf 1,225 sf 1,225 sf Stable Porches 350 sf 1,225 sf 0 sf 0 sf 0 sf Misc Accessory Structures 956 sf 882 sf 300 sf 1,070 sf 1,070 sf Raised Deck 0 sf 520 sf 0 sf 0 sf 0 sf Pool 864 sf 1,230 sf 270 sf 315 sf 280 sf Hardscape 8,100 sf 6,390 sf 6,430 sf 5,595 sf 5,595 sf Primary Driveway 8,860 sf 8,050 sf 16,100 sf 13,480 sf 13,480 sf Secondary Driveway 600 sf 1.850 sf 0 sf 0 sf 0 sf Disturbance 95,850 sf 104,850 sf 92,460 sf 87,920 sf 87,770 sf Mound Height n/a n/a 1335'1335'1330' Structure Total Structures 29,851 sf 28,178 sf 17,184 sf 18,872 sf 18,970 sf Total Structures (excluding Basment)19,451 sf 19,718 sf 9,574 sf 10,632 sf 11,121 sf Total Flatwork 17,560 sf 16,290 sf 20,520 sf 18,714 sf 18,385 sf Total Structures and Flatwork 47,411 sf 44,468 sf 37,704 sf 37,587 sf 37,770 sf Total Structures (excluding Basment) and Flatwork 37,011 sf 36,008 sf 30,094 sf 29,347 sf 29,921 sf Grading Cut 15,185 cy 14,600 cy 16,980 cy 17,320 cy 19,052 cy Fill 7,300 cy 9,310 cy 11,950 cy 11,405 cy 9,337 cy Over-excavation 11,750 cy 17.510 cy 3,760 cy 3,760 cy 3,760 cy Recompaction 13,885 cy 22,800 cy 5,400 cy 5,400 cy 5,400 cy Total Cut and Fill 22,485 cy 23,910 cy 28,930 cy 28,725 cy 28,389 cy Total Overall 48,120 cy 64,220 cy 38,090 cy 37,885 cy 37,549 cy 6.5.24 136 DATE: 5/30/2024 ZONING CASE NO.: 23 Crest Road East Grading Quantities:Cubic Yds.Max Depth 5363 13.6 For other structures (i.e. walls) List Stable 63 3.3 ADU 61 3.8 Sunset Terrace 8 3.0 For driveway(s)2,848 15.0 For yard areas 3,818 15.1 For basement excavation 3,026 10.0 For pool/spa excavation 105 4.5 Overexcavation 3,760 3.0 TOTAL CUT 19,052 16.4 TOTAL EXPORT Export: FILL 12 3.2 For other structures (i.e. walls) List Stable 202 6.8 ADU 10 1.8 Sunset Terrace 8 3.0 For driveway(s)457 6.9 For yard areas 3,247 11.9 For basement excavation 0 0 For pool/spa excavation 0 0 Recompaction 5,400 3 TOTAL FILL 9,336 11.9 28,388 Existing pad elevations House ADU Stable Cabana Finished Floor -- - Finished Grade -- - Proposed pad elevations Finished floor 1293.00 1319.00 1316.00 1293.00 Finished grade 1292.50 1318.50 1315.50 1292.50 Basement 1283.50 PAD/FLOOR ELEVATIONS at structure TOTAL GRADING (Sum of total cut and total fill): at top of slope 9,716 For house/addition 0 ADDRESS: at structure Max Depth Location 6,585 GRADING AND EXCAVATION INFORMATION Export (less exempt): CUT/EXCAVATION For house/addition at toe of slope 137 Site Planning Change Log (From 12/1/23 to 4/16/24) Main House -Finish floor at 1293’ (Previous 1291’) -Apex at 1288’ (Previous 1286’) -Building footprint moved 12’-5” North and 4’-6” East -Pool footprint angled perpendicular to west property line (previously parallel with main house west wing) -Building GSF incl. Basement 21,920 sf (Previous 20,940 sf) Guest House -Finish floor at 1293’ (Previous 1291’) -Building footprint moved 16’ North and 4’ West -Southeast building corner from property line 51’-3” (Previous 39’-9”) -Southeast building corner does not require fill grading (Previously required fill grading) ADU -Finish floor at 1319’ (Previous 1320’) -Building footprint moved 2’-6” North and 0’-8”’ West -Northeast building corner from property line 38’-8” (Previous 37’-5”) -Building footprint 38’-4” x 18’-4” (Previous 36’-0” x 16’-0”) -Building GSF 700 sf (Previous 576 sf) Stable -Finish floor at 1316’ (Previous 1314’) -Building southwest corner 62'4" from the western property line and 207'11" from the north east corner of 17 Crest Road East's nearest building. (Previous southwest building corner 39'8" from the western property line and 185'7" from the north east corner of 17 Crest Road East's nearest building) -Building footprint 58’-10” x 20’-10” (Previous 70’’-0” x 27’-6”) -Building GSF 1,225 sf (Previous 1,295 sf) -Office space, closet space, and full bath are omitted (Previously included) Civil -Total grading 28,725 cy (Previous 28,930 cy) -Total Structure 18,457 sf (Previous 17,184 sf) -Total disturbed area 87,920 sf (Previous 92,460 sf) -Total flatwork 18,715 sf (Previous 20,520 sf) -Primary driveway 13,480 sf (Previous 16,100 sf) -Paved walks, patio areas 2,675 sf (Previous 4,010 sf) -Pool decking 1,120 sf (Previous 410 sf) Site Planning Change Log (From 4/16/24 to 6/18/24) Main House -Building footprint moved 9’-5” North and 3’-5” West. -Southwest building corner from property line 57-9” (Previous 65’-9”) -Southeast building corner from property line 100'-11" (Previous 100'-1") -Building east wing rotated clockwise 5 deg. -Pool deck area 1,100 sf (Previous 1,500 sf) -All basement area under covered porch has been removed. -Basement area 7,428 sf (Previous 7,610 sf) Guest House -Building footprint rotated counterclockwise 12 deg. -Southeast building corner from property line 55’-1” (Previous 51’-3”) Civil -Total grading 28,725 cy (Previous 28,930 cy) -Total Structure 18,457 sf (Previous 17,184 sf) -Total disturbed area 87,920 sf (Previous 92,460 sf) -Total flatwork 18,715 sf (Previous 20,520 sf) -Primary driveway 13,480 sf (Previous 16,100 sf) -Paved walks, patio areas 2,675 sf (Previous 4,010 sf) -Pool decking 1,120 sf (Previous 410 sf) Site -Mound height 1330’ (Previous 1335’)  138 RESOLUTION NO. 1376 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF ZONING CASE NO. 23-070 FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: I. Recitals Section 1. On June 2, 2023, an application was filed by the applicant, Frank Escher of Escher, Gune, Wardena Architecture on behalf of the property owner Yuki Ogasawara, to request approval to construct on the vacant lot at 23 Crest Road East. The proposed Project under Zoning Case (ZC) No. 23-070 includes a new 14,270-square-foot (SF) single-family residence with a 7,428 SF basement, 1,000 SF attached garage, 1,225 SF stable, 5,190 SF corral, 700 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU), 650 SF guest house, 280 SF swimming pool, 155 pool equipment, 480 square feet of attached covered porches, service yard, lightwells, maximum five-foot-high retaining walls, walkways, native landscaping, and other improvements (the “Project”). There is a proposed 13,480-square-foot oval driveway with access to the residence, ADU, and stable. Section 2. The property is zoned RAS-2 and the gross lot area is 7.05 acres or 307,098 SF. The net lot area for development purposes is 6.02 acres or 262,368 SF. The lot is currently undeveloped and vacant. The lot is irregularly shaped and has a depth of approximately 820 feet and a width of approximately 480 feet. The property slopes downward from Crest Road East to the rear of the property. The grade elevation between the proposed main building pad and the street is approximately 42 feet. The lot is located in the southern portion of the City, and has views of the Pacific Ocean. A natural drainage course is located along the western portion of the lot and a blue line stream, which is a part of the Klondike Canyon System, is located approximately 200 feet south of the southern property line of the lot. The lot is also located in proximity to the Geotechnical Hazardous area of the City, known as the Flying Triangle. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at its morning field trip meeting and regular meeting for the first time on January 16, 2024. Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on January 5, 2024. The applicant and owner were notified of the public hearings and were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. The Planning Commission opened the meeting, took public testimony, and continued the public hearing to a later date. The 139 2 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant on revising the plans to address the issues. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at its morning field trip meeting and regular meeting for a second time on April 16, 2024. Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on April 5, 2024. The applicant and owner were notified of the public hearings and were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. The Planning Commission opened the meeting, took public testimony, and continued the public hearing to a later date. The Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant on revising the plans to address the issues. Subsequently, the applicant revised the Project, and it was brought back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at its field trip meeting and regular meeting for a third time on June 18, 2024. Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on June 8, 2024. The applicant was notified of the public hearings and was in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented at the public hearings from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. On June 18, 2024 the Project was approved by the Planning Commission by 3-0 Vote (2 Commissioner were absent) to adopt Resolution No. 2024-06 approving Zoning Case No. 23-070. The action included amending the conditions of approval to address future area drainage, the height of the mound and what can be planted atop, and the orientation of a passageway to the basement. On July 22, 2024, the City Council considered the Planning Commission's action to approve the proposed Project and the Traffic Commission's action to approve the driveway apron. The City Council voted 5-0 to take the matter under its own jurisdiction. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at a morning field trip on August 12, 2024, and regularly scheduled evening meetings on August 12, 2024. The City Council then continued the item and heard it again on October 14 and 28, 2024. Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on August 1, 2024, and October 4, 2024. The applicants and owner were notified of the public hearings and were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. The City Council opened the public hearing, took public testimony, and discussed the Project. Section 4. On February 13, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1202 approving Zoning Case (ZC) No. 902 for construction of an 11,500 SF new single-family residence with an 11,500 SF basement and appurtenances. On December 12, 2018, the Planning Commission granted a two-year time extension for ZC No. 902 to January 23, 2021. Due to COVID-19 entitlements were placed on hold and Assembly Bill 1561 created an automatic time extension. As such, the expiration date for ZC No. 902 was extended to July 22, 2022, but the permit was not used and expired. On November 9, 2021, an application was received for development of a new 8,460- square-foot residence, basement, accessory dwelling unit (ADU), guest house, stable, 140 3 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) swimming pool, spa, and other improvements (ZC No. 21-11). On March 15, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a field trip and evening meeting and continued the item to April 19, 2022. However, before the April 19, 2022 meeting could take place, the applicant requested the item be pulled because the property had been sold and there was no interest in moving forward with the Project as proposed. As such, the item did not return to the Planning Commission and ZC No. 21-11 was closed. Thus, the Project was never approved. Section 5. On December 11, 2023, the Traffic Commission reviewed the proposed driveway and apron located on Crest Road East under the current application (ZC No. 23-070). The Traffic Commission recommended approval of the new driveway and apron to City Council. II. Findings Section 6. CEQA Findings. The City Council finds that the Project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to Section 15303 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (“State CEQA Guidelines”), Class 3 "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures." Class 3 exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project involves the construction of a new single-family residence on a vacant lot within a residential zone, along with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. Accordingly, the Project qualifies for the exemption pursuant to Section 15303. Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. Specifically, the Project: a. Is not located in a particularly sensitive environment. The Project is located in an urbanized area and is not environmentally sensitive. b. There is no possibility of a cumulative impact of the same type of project in the same place over time. The Project entails the construction of a 14,270-square-foot single-family residence with accessory structures and landscaping/hardscaping improvements. Once the residence is built, the likelihood of a successive project on this site is low and probability of a cumulative impact is low. c. Is not marked by unusual circumstances. There is nothing unusual about the construction of a new single-family residence and accessory structures in a residential area. In addition, the Project will implement best management practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and construction pollutants from contacting stormwater. d. Would not damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. e. Is not located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. f. Would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. 141 4 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) The City Council directs staff to prepare, execute, and file a Notice of Exemption with the Los Angeles County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse within five (5) working days of the Project’s approval and the adoption of this Resolution. Section 7. Site Plan Review Findings. Site Plan Review is required for construction of any new building or structure pursuant to Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) Section 17.46.020(A). The Project requires a Site Plan Review (SPR) in order to develop a vacant lot including non-exempt grading, for the construction of a new single-family residence, basement, attached garage, retaining walls that exceed a height of 3 feet (up to a maximum of 5 feet), oval driveway with portions that exceed a width of 20 feet, and other improvements. With respect to the Site Plan Review for the development, the City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. The Project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan and Zoning ordinance – sans the requested variances. The proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low-density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The Project maintains the maximum possible distances from adjacent neighbors. The main residence has been integrated into the existing slope to minimize grading and land disturbance by constructing a long and narrow V-shaped floor plan that closely follows the existing topography, which will reduce the visual impact from neighboring properties. The Project complies with all of the City of Rolling Hills Development standards with the exception of requiring Variances for the structures to encroach into the front yard as discussed below in this Resolution. The Project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements. The net lot area of the lot is 262,368 square feet (6.02 acres) per RHMC Section 17.16.060(A). The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 18,205 square feet or 6.94% (20% max. permitted) excluding exempt structures; and the total lot coverage proposed, including flatwork, would be 36,590 square feet or 13.95% (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area is 87,770 square feet or 33.45% (40% max permitted). B. The Project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot. The topography and the configuration of the lot have been considered, and the Project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures; the Project will be built on new building pads which enables Project elements to be the least intrusive to surrounding properties. Further, the Project will be a sufficient distance from nearby residences so views and privacy of surrounding neighbors will not be impacted. The main house is sited to minimize grading and minimize impact on the site below the 1293-foot contour line that defines both the Finished Floor level and the precise orientation of the wings of the house. The landscape below this line will not experience any site disturbance and will be utilized to seed and reestablish a pallet of native species back into the landscape above the house. The Project 142 5 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) includes three new building pads: Pad #1 is for the main residence for a total of 32,610 SF; Pad #2 is for the ADU for a total of 1,610 SF; and Pad #3 is for the stable for a total of 2,900 SF. C. The Project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, and is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to new residences in the vicinity of said lot. The proposed site plan is harmonious with the site conditions of the existing lot and neighboring lots. The integration of the into the slope following the topography enables the residence to be largely hidden from view from the street and neighboring residences, maximizing the distance between the main house and the street. The slopes being created have been rounded and it was attempted to mimic the existing natural slopes in the area. D. The Project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). There will be no significant changes to the overall drainage features on the lot. There will be minimal impact to site design, vegetation, and mature trees. The property will be landscaped in accordance with the approved landscape plan. E. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area. The total proposed grading for the Project is 28,389 cubic yards (19,052 CY of cut and 9,337 CY of fill). The excavation for the basement (3,026 CY) and pool (105 CY) are exempt from the Site Plan Review. The non-exempt grading totaling 25,258 CY is subject to Site Plan Review. The grading will be balanced on site with exception to 6,584 CY of non-exempt export. Rather than retaining the dirt on the property, export is needed to maintain the existing topography as much as possible. The Project has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and minimize grading to the extent feasible. F. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course. Grading will be balanced on site with exception to 9,715 CY of export (3,131 CY exempt and 6,584 CY non-exempt). Grading has been minimized by integrating the main residence into the natural slope. The width of the main residence is limited to 25 feet, and the result is a long and narrow ranch house rambling along the 1293-foot contour line. The main residence is centered on its site so that runoff is not increased within existing drainage courses on either side of the lot. Control of water collected by impervious surfaces will utilize large cisterns to collect and redistribute storm-water in a controlled manner that does not alter drainage courses or runoff loads from the undeveloped state of the lot. These cisterns are designed to retain runoff in the event of a 100-year storm event. 143 6 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) G. The Project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought-tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas. Surrounding native vegetation and mature trees will not be affected or will be replaced. New vegetation will be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. The development will be considerate of the environment and will enhance the rural character of the community. As such, the rural character of the community is maintained and privacy is maintained with neighbors. The new landscape will utilize this plant community as the framework for all new plantings in the landscape that will enhance the existing habitat and ecological community already present on site. These native plants are well suited to the existing site without the need for irrigation beyond their establishment period of 1 to 2 years. The trees will provide visual buffers and habitat creation between neighboring properties while preserving and protecting natural drainage patterns on the site. The new landscape adjacent to Crest Road focuses largely on the reestablishment of the coastal sage scrub planting community and providing habit for the local fauna while seamlessly blending the house into the surrounding native hillside without obstructing views H. The Project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed site plan is not detrimental to convenience and safety of pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed continuous driveway allows for the simplest path between all structures, with an attached garage in the main residence accommodating four vehicles, suitable per Rolling Hills guidelines for the main house, guest house and ADU parking requirements. The open agricultural room in the stable will also facilitate storage of maintenance vehicles and equipment, as well as animal transportation equipment. I. The Project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). Class 3 exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project includes development on a vacant lot of a new single-family residence in a residential zone, with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. Accordingly, the Project qualifies for the exemption pursuant to Section 15303. Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in State CEQA Guidelines, section 15300.2, apply. Section 8. Conditional Use Permit Findings. RHMC Section 17.16.040 and 17.16.200 require a Conditional Use Permit per RHMC Section 17.16.040(A)(3) for a guest house, per RHMC Section 17.16.040(A)(6) for a stable over 200 square feet, per RHMC Section 17.16.040(A)(7) for corral over 550 square feet, and per 17.16.200(H) for a 400 SF detached trellis, respectively. The Applicant is proposing a 650 SF guesthouse located at the eastern 144 7 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) portion of the main building pad. The Applicant is also proposing a 1,225 SF stable with two stalls and a tack room, and a 5,190 SF corral. Given the foregoing, in accordance with RHMC Section 17.42.050, the City Council makes the following findings: A. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a guesthouse, stable, corral, and trellis is consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and meets all the applicable code development standards for such use. The Project is compatible with existing land uses as other properties in the same zone have a guest house and stable. B. That the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, building or structures. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the Project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed guest house, stable, corral, and trellis will be located on the property with sufficient proximity to neighboring buildings and structures. C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the uses and buildings proposed. The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards in the RAS-2 Zone. The net lot area is 262,368 SF (6.02 acres) and is adequate to support the proposed uses. The area of the site considered the "front yard", between the proposed main residence and the street, is the widest and most level part of the site. The exception to this is the location of the stable in the front yard, and the corral in the front yard setback, both are subject to variances. The property will be developed and adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses and buildings. D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district. The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards of the RAS-2 Zone, with exception to the variances requested herein. E. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Granting the proposed conditional use for the Project will be consistent with the applicable portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The Project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. The proposed Project would not constitute a hazardous waste facility. 145 8 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) F. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title. The proposed Project allows the Applicant the ability to enjoy rights enjoyed by other residents in the City – the development and construction of a single-family home. The proposed uses are consistent with the residential character of the City. Section 9. Variance Findings. Section 17.38.050 sets forth the required findings for granting Variances to allow: 1. Stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard (RHMC Section 17.16.200); 2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback (RHMC Section 17.16.110 and 17.16.200); 3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet (RHMC Section 17.16.190(F)); 4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence (RHMC Section 17.12.020); and 5. Grading export (RHMC Section 17.16.230). With respect to this request for Variances, the City Council finds as follows: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone. There are extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property. The location of stable and corral between the main house and the street is a design adopted by many neighbors on Crest Road East and would be consistent with other nearby properties. However, this design does require a variance to allow the stable, corral, swimming pool and retaining wall in the front yard and the corral to encroach into the required 50-foot setback. The area of the site considered the "front yard", between the proposed main residence and the street, is the widest and most level part of the site. Allowing the proposed pool and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard will be consistent with the natural slope of the existing property and reduce the need for additional grading. The construction of retaining walls to exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet, and the light well/tunnel portion of the basement extending beyond the building walls of the residence, will minimize grading and support the development. As a result of the shape of the lot, the grading of the Project requires a variance to export non- exempt grading of 3,131 CY of soil to keep the peak of the knoll below the height of the street and out of the view of neighbors. B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question. Developments similar to the proposed Project, with stables and corrals in the front yard, are enjoyed by many neighbors on Crest Road East who similarly position main residences 146 9 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) away from the street to create privacy and maximize views from their residences, all while making the equestrian uses of the neighborhood visible along the street. The variance requests are necessary for preservation and enjoyment of property rights consistent with other properties in the same vicinity and zone with the same types of structures and improvements in similar areas of the project. The variance request pertaining to the basement extending beyond the walls of the residence is solely for a light well type area that allows ingress and egress to the basement area as required by the building code. This subterranean tunnel type design minimizes grading and allows access to the basement area as depicted on the project plans. C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Granting a variance for the Project will not be detrimental to the public welfare and will not be injurious to properties in the vicinity because it is consistent with the encroachments by the existing residences and structures and contributes to a consistent and equitable treatment of development in the surrounding area. The requested variances are designed to make the development less intensive in terms of grading, maximize privacy and reduce other impacts to the neighborhood to ensure the protection of the public welfare. D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed. The granting of the variance will allow for a development that is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the proposed Project is visually harmonious with adjacent properties and in scale with adjacent residential development. E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant. The variance does not grant special privileges for the Applicant; the proposed Project is similar to other properties on Crest Road East that have stables and corrals in the front yard and setbacks. The Project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, and general land uses specified in the General Plan. F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Granting a variance for the Project will be consistent with the applicable portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The Project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. The proposed Project would not constitute a hazardous waste facility. G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills. 147 10 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) Approvals granting the variance to allow encroachments into the front yard setback will be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills, which encourages residential and equestrian uses. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves Zoning Case No. 23-070 subject to the following conditions: A. Approval for the Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits, and Variances shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in RHMC Section 17.38.070 of the Zoning Ordinance unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section. B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee’s determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted; the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant’s request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise a variance to such requirement has been approved. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file at City Hall and approved by the City Council on August 12, 2024, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits, and Variance approvals shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the building department. 148 11 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto a separate sheet and included in the building plans submitted to the Building Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times. Any proposed modifications and/or changes to the approved Project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed with staff so that staff can determine whether the modification is minor or major in nature. Minor modifications are subject to approval by the City Manager or his or her designee. Major modifications are subject to approval by the City Council after a public hearing. Applicant shall not implement modifications or changes to the approved Project without the appropriate approval from the City Manager or designee or the City Council, as required. E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to Building and Safety Department for issuance of building and grading permits, the plans for the Project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the City Council. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this Project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this Project and all of the conditions set forth herein and the City’s Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the Project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 18,205 square feet or 6.94% of the net lot area (20% maximum). The flatwork coverage is 18,385 square feet or 7.01%. The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork, shall not exceed 36,590 square feet or 13.95% (35% maximum). H. The total disturbed area will be 87,770 square feet or 33.45% (maximum 40%). Grading for this Project shall not exceed 19,052 cubic yards of cut and 9,337 cubic yards of fill for a total of 28,389 cubic yards. Total export of 9,715 cubic yards, Variance granted for non- exempt 6,584 cubic yards, and export of exempt 3,131 cubic yards for the basement and swimming pool. I. The total proposed building pad coverage for the residential main pad 1 (32,610 square foot area) is 17,799 square feet or 54.58% which is above the 30% maximum guideline. The total proposed building pad coverage for the ADU pad 2 (1,610 square foot area) will be 700 square feet or 43.48%, which exceeds the maximum 30% guideline. The total proposed for stable pad 3 (2,900 square foot area) is 1,340 square feet or 46.21% which exceeds the maximum 30% guideline. J. A driveway access shall be provided per the Fire Department requirements and the driveway shall be roughened and the first 20 feet of the driveway shall not exceed 7% in slope. 149 12 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) K. Access to the stable and to the corral shall be decomposed granite or 100% pervious roughened material; it shall not be wider than 12 feet. L. A minimum of five-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of all of the proposed structures, including the detached garage and stable, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department. M. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Low Impact Development requirements for storm water management on site (RHMC Chapter 8.32). N. Hydrology, soils, geology and other reports, as required by the Building and Public Works Departments, and as may be required by the Building Official, shall be prepared. O. Prior to issuance of a final construction approval of the Project, all graded slopes shall be landscaped. Prior to issuance of building permit, the landscaping plan shall meet the requirements of the City, shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements, and shall be approved by the City’s landscape consultant. P. The Project shall be landscaped, and continually maintained in substantial conformance with the landscaping plan on file approved by the City’s landscape consultant. A detailed landscaping plan shall provide that any trees and shrubs used in the landscaping scheme for this Project shall be planted in a way that screens the Project development from adjacent streets and neighbors, such that shrubs and trees as they mature do not grow into a hedge or impede any neighbors’ views and the plan shall provide that all landscaping be maintained at a height no higher than the roof line of the nearest Project structure. In addition, the landscaping plan shall provide for screening of development with vegetation not to exceed 10 feet in height, and that the vegetation used for screening shall be planted in an off-set manner, so as to prevent it, as it grows from forming a solid hedge. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area, are water-wise and are consistent with the rural character of the community. Plants listed as high hazardous plants under RHMC Section 8.30.015 are prohibited. Q. The applicant shall submit a landscaping performance bond or other financial obligation, to be kept on deposit by the City, in the amount of the planting plus irrigation plus 15%. The bond shall be released no sooner than two years after completion of all plantings, subject to a City staff determination that the plantings required for the Project are in substantial conformance with approved plans and are in good condition. A Certificate of Completion shall be submitted by the Project designer or contractor prior to final landscape installation inspection. R. The landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, (Chapter 13.18 of the RHMC). S. Pursuant to Chapter 8.30 of the RHMC, the property shall at all times be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation. 150 13 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) T. The setback lines and roadway easement lines in the vicinity of the construction for this Project shall remain staked throughout the construction. A construction fence may be required. U. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements to advance equestrian use and emergency preparedness for evacuation within the City. Where RHCA has demonstrated authority over the easement, the City’s Planning Director may grant relief from this condition upon satisfactory proof of permission from RHCA and a legitimate showing that there is no need for the condition to advance equestrian uses and emergency preparedness. V. Minimum of 65% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City’s Construction and Demolition permits for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City. W. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. X. During construction, to the extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the Project site, on the new driveway and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within the unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. To the extent feasible, a minimum of 4’ wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment at all times. Y. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and relate traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. Z. Prior to demolition of the existing structures, an investigation shall be conducted for the presence of hazardous chemicals, lead-based paints or products, mercury and asbestos- containing materials (ACMs). If hazardous chemicals, lead-based paints or products, mercury or ACMs are identified, remediation shall be undertaken in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. AA. The property owner and/or his/her contractor/applicant shall be responsible for compliance with the no-smoking provisions in the Municipal Code. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIRE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. 151 14 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) AB. Development shall drain in accordance with the approved grading and drainage plan. Drainage dissipaters shall be constructed outside of any easements. The drainage system shall be approved by the Department of Building and Safety. If an above ground swale and/or dissipater is required, it shall be designed in such a manner as not to cross over any equestrian trails or discharge water onto a trail, shall be stained in an earth tone color, and shall be screened from any trail, road and neighbors’ view to the maximum extent practicable, without impairing the function of the drainage system. In the event a storm drain pipe is installed to divert water flows through Klondike Canyon, the property owner shall use reasonable efforts to investigate the viability of creating a connection between the water overflow from the two cisterns on the property and the installed storm drain pipe. AC. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices. AD. During construction, an Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 2022 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution. AE. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of storm water drainage facilities and septic tank. AF. The applicant shall pay all of the applicable Building and Safety and Public Works Department fees and Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District fees, if any. AG. Prior to final inspection of the Project, “as graded” and “as constructed” plans and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed Project is in compliance with the City Council approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the Project during construction, shall be depicted on the “as built/as graded” plan. AH. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of the Variance approval, or the approval shall not be effective. AI. All conditions of this Resolution, when applicable, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit from the Building and Safety Department. AJ. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. AK. To the extent permitted by law, applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Rolling Hills, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party 152 15 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void any permit or approval for this Project authorized by the City, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorney’s fees and costs in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice. The applicant shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the City may be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City because of this permit. Although the applicant is the real party in interest in an action, the City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of the action, but such participation shall not relieve the permittee of any obligation under this condition. AL. The stable and corral shall comply with all requirements in Sections 17.18.060 and 17.18.090, unless otherwise approved herein. AM. Future expansion of the driveway or motor court is prohibited unless previously approved by the City. Connection to the stable and corral shall be decomposed granite or 100% pervious roughened material; it shall not be less than 6 feet wide and no wider than 12 feet. AN. New landscaping in the Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) easement is prohibited unless previously approved by RHCA. Landscaping not approved by RHCA in the easement shall be removed from the final landscape plan. AO. The ADU will require Evergreen landscape screening that must be planted and maintained between the ADU and adjacent parcels. The plant specimens for screening must not exceed the maximum roofline height of the ADU. All landscaping must be drought-tolerant. All landscaping must be from the City's approved plant list. AP. The mound shall have a maximum elevation of 1330 feet. Landscaping on the mound shall be planted in accordance with the approved landscape plan on file at City Hall. Three-foot-high shrubs shall be allowed atop the mound. Landscaping shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s landscape consultant prior to issuance of a grading permit. AQ. The passageway on the western side of the basement shall be angled or zigzagged. The passageway shall be redesigned on the plans and reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to submittal to building plan check. AR. The applicant, irrespective of any approval, direction or other information from the County of Los Angeles or other relevant permitting agency, shall not modify any part or portion of the Project that impacts, deals with or is related to the drainage on the Property, including the size and scope of the proposed cisterns on the Property, without prior City approval. Section 11. Custodian of Records: The documents and materials associated with this Resolution that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California 90274. The Director of Planning and Community Services is the custodian of records for the record of proceedings. 153 16 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) Section 12. Protest of Fees, Dedications, Reservations or Other Exactions: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020, the applicant may protest the imposition of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on this development project by taking the necessary steps and following the procedures established by Sections 66020 through 66022 of the California Government Code. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF OCTOBER 2024. LEAH MIRSCH, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 154 17 Resolution No. 1376 23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 1376 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF ZONING CASE NO. 23-070 FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA) was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on October 28, 2024, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. __________________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 23 Crest Road East (Zoning Case No. 23-070) June 18, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting Photos Photo #1: Taken on June 13, 2024 from top of Crest Road East looking west. 172 Photo 2 taken on June 13, 2024 from standing at the top of Crest Road East looking west. 173 Photo 3: Taken on June 13, 2024 from standing at the top of Crest Road East looking west. 174 From: Youkun Nie <youkunnie@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 4:04 PM To: John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net>; Stephanie Grant <sgrant@cityofrh.net> Cc: TAO SPACES <taospaces.ca@gmail.com>; zhe song <zhesong0303@gmail.com> Subject: 23 Crest Rd East---My client's concerns Hi John, Stephanie, Hope yo u are doi ng well! Af ter pa rticipa ting the fiel d tri p and public hea ring yesterday o n the devel opmen t plan at 2 3 Crest R oad East ( Subject Project), my client has a few conce External (youkunnie@yahoo.com) Report This Email FAQ Protection by INKY Hi John, Stephanie, Hope you are doing well! After participating the field trip and public hearing yesterday on the development plan at 23 Crest Road East ( Subject Project), my client has a few concerns about the Subject Project: 1. The potential impact of the Subject Project's WEST WING on my client's privacy The Subject Project is located at a higher grade than my client's house at 17 Crest Rd East, and its site layout will enable the people in its west wing to see my client's house from high above. To better understand how the Subject Project might impact his privacy, my client would like to request a site section from the Owner of the Subject Project. The site section shall include both the Subject project and my client's house and demonstrate what measures the Subject project will take to protect my client's privacy. 2. The Potential impact of the Subject Project's STABLE on my client's privacy My client is not comfortable with the location of the Subject Projects Stable either. The Stable's adjacency to my client's property will potentially impact my client's privacy, and the Stable's odor will potentially bring unpleasant feeling to my client. It might be more desirable if the Owner of the Subject Project could consider switching the Stable location with ADU's, My client understands that he was supposed to raise his concerns before the Public Hearing. He will greatly appreciate it if you can kindly advise what he can do with his above concerns. Any way, it doesn't mean my client opposes to the Subject Project. While he is raising his concerns, he wants to be a good neighbor of the Subject Project's Owner. Thanks for your time. Look forward to hearing from you. 175 Best, Youkun Nie 176 177 From:Kathleen Hughes To:City Clerk Subject:Opposition and Request for Geologist at the Next Meeting Date:Monday, October 7, 2024 1:00:47 PM EXTERNAL EMAIL - This email was sent by a person from outside your organization. Exercise caution when clicking links, opening attachments or taking further action, before validating its authenticity. Dear City Council, My name is Kathleen Hughes and my husband, Dan Bethencourt, and I live at Caballeros Road, less than a mile from the proposed construction at 23 Crest Road East. I have already voiced my opposition to any construction at 23 Crest Road East given the land movement we are seeing directly below it. The owner has tried to quell fears about this by designing tanks to capture water. But I am also concerned about the impact of the construction itself. I would like to request the opinion of an independent geologist. I would also like to hear from any engineers and geologists the owner hired and I think that team should be available to answer questions from the public. They were supposed to be at the last meeting but were unfortunately out of town. RPV has banned new construction believing that it will exacerbate the current devastating slide. Many of our residents are now devastated by the loss of their utilities. Why on earth would we take the risk of making the slide even worse when we know that the slide in 1956 was triggered by construction? I'm amazed you are even considering this project! Why not, at a minimum, wait until we have time to collect more data about the rate of land movement within our city? The Fire Station, less than a quarter mile away, has cracks in its foundation. The Fykman's home, on the same street, has had its power cut off. Please delay this project! Thank you, Kathleen Hughes Rolling Hills 178 James and Ann Bellis Quail Ridge Rd. South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 1 October 14, 2024 City of Rolling Hills City Council 2 Portuguese Bend Rd. Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Cc Rolling Hills Community Association 1 Portuguese Bend Rd. Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear City of Rolling Hills: Again, this letter requests that the City of Rolling Hills agendize and enact a moratorium on development of land and on removal large trees (greater than 3” diameter) until the City can adequately address geotechnical and hydrologic conditions and risks for land in Rolling Hills above the Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex. For the purposes of this letter, “development” is considered demolition, grading, excavating, earthworks, and non-emergency construction of new structures. This letter opposes the development of 23 Crest Rd. Pursuant to Government Code section 66300, subdivision (b)(1)(B)(ii), a city cannot enforce a moratorium that would limit housing development until it has submitted the ordinance to and received approval from HCD. Conditions for imposing a moratorium, or similar restrictions on housing development, must demonstrate “an imminent threat to the health and safety of persons residing in, or within the immediate vicinity of, the area subject to the moratorium” (Gov. Code, § 66300, subd. (b)(1)(B)(i)). The City and its elected and appointed officials can demonstrate and know that there is an imminent threat to the Rolling Hills residents living in the vicinity of the Greater Portuguese Landslide Complex. I continue to submit this same letter. I am now the squeaky wheel that is being ignored. I ask the City Council and City Manager, “Why is this moratorium item not getting agendized?” If the City agendizes this moratorium item and votes “no,” then that is the final decision, and the residents will confidently know where the City stands on the landslide issue. If the City votes “yes” to enact a moratorium, the residents will see that the City is being prudent and not trying to add to an already existing problem. It is beyond my mental capacity how a City Council can confidently approve the development of new structures in an active land slide area with no utilities or in areas under the threat of utility abandonment. City approval of these development projects is not only hazardous for the construction workers of the development, but hazardous to the families who eventually live in the structures, and hazardous to those who own property and structures around 179 James and Ann Bellis Quail Ridge Rd. South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 2 the new development. Until the City can prove that development is safe and not adding to a continuing landslide issue, should the moratorium be lifted. With regards to 23 Crest Rd: development of a vacant parcel resulting in more impervious surfaces does not “help” keep water from penetrating a landslide slip layer; impervious surfaces just divert water, resulting in more heavily saturated neighboring areas. Trees however, do maintain water in the upper layers of the earth, preventing water from reaching down into landslide slip layers. This is the reason for a moratorium on development and removal of 3+ inch trees. I AGAIN REQUEST, THE CITY AGENDIZE A MOR ATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT AND REMOVAL OF 3+ INCH DIAMETER TREES, PUBLICALLY DISCUSS THE ITEM, AND VOTE ON THE ITEM. Sincerely, James and Ann Bellis Quail Ridge Rd. S., Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Enclosed Table of Figures Figure 1: September 9, 2024 Crack between 3 and 5 Quail Ridge Rd. S. .............................................. 3 Figure 2: September 9, 2024 Crack and movement on Quail Ridge Rd. S. ............................................ 3 Figure 3: September 24th, 2024 Showing Expanding Crack and vertical movement ........................ 4 Figure 4: September 29, 2024 showing crack widening and vertical movement ............................... 5 Figure 5:September 29, 2024 showing crack all the way through property and damaging fence ....... 5 Figure 6: September 30, 2024 Crack running through retaining wall ................................................ 6 Figure 7: Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex Overview Map ........................................... 7 Figure 8: Proposed Rolling Hills Moratorium Area........................................................................... 8 180 James and Ann Bellis Quail Ridge Rd. South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 3 Figure 1: September 9, 2024 Crack between 3 and 5 Quail Ridge Rd. S. Figure 2: September 9, 2024 Crack and movement on Quail Ridge Rd. S. 181 James and Ann Bellis Quail Ridge Rd. South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 4 Figure 3: September 24th, 2024 Showing Expanding Crack and vertical movement 182 James and Ann Bellis Quail Ridge Rd. South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 5 Figure 5:September 29, 2024 showing crack all the way through property and damaging fence Figure 4: September 29, 2024 showing crack widening and vertical movement 183 James and Ann Bellis Quail Ridge Rd. South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 6 Figure 6: September 30, 2024 Crack running through retaining wall 184 James and Ann Bellis Quail Ridge Rd. South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 7 Figure 7: Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex Overview Map 185 James and Ann Bellis Quail Ridge Rd. South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 8 Figure 8: Proposed Rolling Hills Moratorium Area 186 Alfred Visco Statement At Rolling Hills 10-14-24 City Council Meeting Re: 23 Crest Road East Development Project It must be kept in mind that this Project is quite frankly massive in scope both in the structural and flatwork coverage of 36, 590 sq. ft. (.84 acres) and the disturbed area of 87,770 sq. ft. (2.015 acres). Pg. 83. Under the heading of Environmental Determination the following statement is set forth: “ Assertions that this Project will have some different or dispositive impact on land movement issues in the City is not supported by any technical evidence...”. Pg. 50. Unfortunately this is a prime example of not finding what you are not looking for. The Hamilton and Associations cover letter is dated May 23, 2024 and is entitled Geotechnical and Geological Report Update. Pg. 124. Thus on its face it does not and can not take into consideration the recent land movement in Rolling Hills which commenced in approximately June /July 2024 and of course the GS survey reports published commencing on September 14, 2024. Nor does it take into consideration the recent geological reports and studies set forth in Rancho Palos Verdes city council meetings since May 2024. Delving into the actual HA report it even becomes less supportive of the foregoing environmental determination. For example, all of the geotechnical and geologic engineering investigation on the subject site were performed in 2013 and 2014. Pg. 129. As set forth in the HA report the Flying Triangle landslide is purportedly located within 230 feet west of the west site margin and about 425 feet southwest of the proposed site development. Pg. 137. There is no analysis done, of course, to determine if in fact this statement is currently accurate. The more recent RPV reports bring into question what has been historically viewed as the outer limits of the reactivated landslide areas and waive a red flag as to the accuracy of the Flying Triangle landslide location as reported decades ago, especially when coupled with the new Rolling Hills land movement. The HA report goes on to state that the maximum depth of the Flying Triangle landslide slide mass is enigmatic. Some have indicated it is 76 feet deep while others concluded it could be as much as 450 feet below the ground surface. Pg. 137. Yet the deepest boring conducted on the site was only 59 feet. Pg. 129. The only logical conclusion one can and should draw from all of the foregoing is that the HA report is inadequate and does not support the assertion that the Project will not have an impact on land movement. The City Council should not approve the Project and direct that a new geotechnical and geological report be prepared based on current and adequate geotechnical and geologic engineering investigations. 187 October 24,2024 Hon.Leah Mirsch,Mayor City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Rd Rolling Hills,CA 90274 RE:Zoning Case No.23-070 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills,CA 90274 (Lot 132A-MS) Dear Mayor Mirsch and City Council Members, In preparation for the October 28th City Council Meeting we would like to address comments from neighbors and council.County or County-approved officials,such as plan checkers,are in the best position to verify our team’s expert findings.Should the plan checkers have questions about our experts’findings they will request further investigation from our team. We would ask that the Council not take arbitrary and capricious action and direction from the crowd based on speculative concerns and instead rely on the expertise of County or County-approved staff.There have been requests from at least two neighbors for the City to instate a moratorium on this property.A moratorium is fraught with risk for the City.1 Moreover, a moratorium would not be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record.To date,there have been no expert refutations of the findings from our team;any opposition has relied on anecdotal observation and speculative conclusions.As stated by our geologists,if any scientific evidence is made available that contradicts their findings,they would like to be the first to know.We ask that the council judge the project based on the findings presented by our experts or any other expert testimony.Our client has pledged commitment to contributing to a city-planned regional solution but cannot agree to its full implementation as a prerequisite to building on her property. 1 In neighboring Rancho Palos Verdes,a moratorium on building was struck down by the court and found to be invalid where not supported by evidence and facts,resulting in a takings claim against that city.See Monks v.City of Rancho Palos Verdes (2008)167 Cal.App.4th 263,270. 188 Answers to specific question/comments noted from the City Council Meeting on 10/14/2024: 1.We have brought claims of water infiltrating the western canyon to our experts. Our geologist has surveyed the area in question and found no evidence of fissures or other geologic anomalies that would correspond to water infiltration on our site. 2.Is the boring depth of 59’sufficiently deep? Our Geotechnical and Geological Report is ready for review by plan check officials who can expertly determine the completeness and thoroughness of our report,or request additional investigations. 3.Is bentonite or any other clays determined to be underneath the bedrock at the property’s location? There is no evidence that the geologic formation differs from what has been previously mapped and peer-reviewed and included in our Geotechnical and Geological Report. Our Geotechnical and Geological Report is ready for review by plan check officials who can expertly determine the completeness and thoroughness of our report,or request additional investigations. 4.Are the geologic reports from 2014 to May 2023 accurate and reflective of current conditions reported in the property’s immediate area? There is no evidence that the geologic formation differs from what has been previously mapped and peer-reviewed and included in our Geotechnical and Geological Report. Our Geotechnical and Geological Report is ready for review by plan check officials who can expertly determine the completeness and thoroughness of our report,or request additional investigations. 5.Are the calculations for toilet flushings accurate? The numbers used for the calculations are determined by the California Green Building Standards Code,Chapter 8,WS-1 and are subject to review by plan check officials. Please note that any changes to the WS-1 use table will not change the overall volume 189 dispersed from the cisterns each month;the planting palette is such that its irrigation needs are met in the driest of years but can and do benefit from supplementary irrigation. 6.Has the project received will-serve letters from utility companies? Letters have been sent to respective utility companies for water,electricity,and gas requesting will-serve letters.To date,we have not received any correspondence.There is no reason to believe the property will not be served since the other neighbors in the vicinity on stable ground are being served. 7.Does the plan check by LA County differ in kind or quality from the outsourced method (Wildan)? No it does not.Both plan check entities follow the same building code standards.Many building departments,including LA County,outsource their plan check to experts in private practice. 8.Can the property’s acreage be verified and reflected on all pertinent documents? Yes.The total lot area is 7.05 acres. 9.What are the variances applied for? The six variances included in the project’s resolution are as follows: A.The stable,corral,swimming pool,and retaining walls encroach into the front yard.Variance to RHMC 17.18.040.A.3.d,RHMC 17.16.200.G.1,RHMC 17.16.190.F. The buildable zone established by the steep slopes on the lower half of the property prompted this variance that other sites with similar site plans have applied for.Properties with corral and/or stable within setback to easement line are:12 Crest Rd.E.;17 Crest Rd.E.;8 Crest Rd.E.;63 Crest Rd.E;2 Possum Ridge on Crest Rd.E.;1 &2 South Field Dr.on Crest Road East;and 10 Flying Mane Ln.on Crest Rd.E.Properties with corral/stable in the front yard are:29 Crest Rd.E.;5 Crest Rd.E;10 Crest Rd.W. 190 B.Corral encroaches on front yard setback. Variance to RHMC 17.16.160.H. Precedent in Rolling Hills for variance.See explanation in variance 1. C.Retaining walls exceeding the maximum average height of two-and one-half-feet. Variance to RHMC 17.16.190.F. All retaining walls are limited in height to a maximum of 5’-0”.All retaining walls higher than 2’-6”in height slope down to 0’-0”at one end. D.Basement with portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence. Variance to 17.16.080.B.1 Area extending beyond first floor footprint is limited to only the basement exit corridor (labeled on the architectural plans as Bas.Exit 110). E.Decks/patios contain areas more than one foot above finished grade. Variance to 17.44.020.D. Submitted architecture and civil drawings for the main house,guest house, stable,and ADU do not show any decks or patios with areas more than 1’above finish grade.The sunset pavilion’s finish floor is at 2’6”above grade to minimize grading at this location. F.Non-exempt export Variance to 15.04.110.4 Per submitted calculations,total export equals 9,715 cy including non-exempt export equaling 6,584 cy.The non-exempt export will reduce the height of the central knoll (mound)to a height below street level minimizing visual impact of grading. Thank you for your attention in reviewing our project. Sincerely, Frank Escher and Ravi GuneWardena,FAIA 191 Cc:Yukiko Ogasawara 3 Flying Mane Ln Rolling Hills,CA 90274 Jeff Lewis,Esq. 827 Deep Valley Dr Suite 209 Rolling Hills Estates,CA 90274 Patrick Donegan 2 Portuguese Bend Rd Rolling Hills,CA 90274 192 Environmental Design Associates 14121 Sawston Circle . Westminster, CA 92683 Phone 714.350.6910 1 DATE: January 30, 2024 TO: Stephanie Grant FIRM: City of Rolling Hills FROM: Carrie Mandarino PROJECT: 23 Crest Road E SUBJECT: Conceptual Landscape Plan Review Dear Stephanie, Thank you for the opportunity to review the conceptual landscape plan for 23 Crest Road East located in the City of Rolling Hills. The landscape plans have been reviewed for compliance with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). Landscape plans were reviewed for appropriateness and adaptability of selected plants, water efficient irrigation design, and the use of design elements that enhance the character of the community. Review of hardscape and precise grading and drainage are not included. Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) Compliance Landscape plans have been reviewed for compliance with The City of Rolling Hills Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance No. 361. This is a Conceptual Plan submittal with approximately 83,000 s.f. of landscape. The MAWA and ETWU calculations for the project are not provided. Refer to the City of Rolling Hills Water Efficient Landscape Submittal Package for plan requirements and Water Efficient Landscape Worksheet. Use the Eto of 39.7 for City of Rolling Hills in the calculations. Include the water feature in the ETWU calculation with a 1.0 plant factor and 1.0 irrigation efficiency (1.0 ETAF). Show the fountain as a high hydrozone, and provide a hydrozone map. The proposed plant palette is comprised low water use native plants. Three groups of low water use zones are shown and include a Native Meadow, Native Garden, and Native Chaparral. Photos with plant water use are shown and checked per WUCOLS IV Region 3 South Coastal. The Project Application needs to be submitted. Show a Statement of Compliance with the Landscape Ordinance, and a note requiring a 3-inch layer of mulch on the plan. Planting notes should include soil preparation with amendments for planting. Irrigation Plan An irrigation plan was not submitted. A Conceptual Plan for Water Management was included. Provide an irrigation plan showing equipment location and a legend. 193 Environmental Design Associates 14121 Sawston Circle . Westminster, CA 92683 Phone 714.350.6910 2 Planting Plan The plant palette is comprised of a variety of low water use trees, shrubs, succulents, grasses, and ground cover that are adapted to the local climate and conditions on site. Three plant palette zones of low water use plants are shown including, Native Meadow, Native Garden, and Native Chaparral. Photos of plants are included with the WUCOLS Water Use. Low water use native trees specified include: Quercus agrifolia and Lyonothamnus. Moderate water use Cercis ‘Forest Pansy’ is also specified. Planting details are shown. Planting notes should also be provided with soil preparation and amendments. City Requirements and Notes Per City of Rolling Hills requirements, trees specified shall not grow taller than the roof ridge height. Species of concern that grow taller than this include Quercus agrifolia and Lyonothamnus. Cercis ‘Forest Pansy’ trees are acceptable. Trees should also be located so that neighboring views are not obstructed. Show the mature tree height in legend. No City prohibited tree species are shown on the plan. No planting is allowed in the RHCA easement. In addition, hedges are not allowed in Rolling Hills. The Toyon hedge shown at the edge of the property should be spaced in an uneven pattern approximately 15 feet minimum apart so as not to create a hedge. The following notes should be added to the Plan: No landscaping shall be allowed in the RHCA easement. Trees specified shall not grow higher than the height of the roof ridge. Trees shall be planted in locations that do not hinder views from the adjacent lots. Trees are required to be maintained to a height not to exceed the roof ridge and so that views from adjacent lots are not obstructed. Hedges are not allowed. Required Revisions for MWELO Compliance  Provide Water Efficient Landscape Worksheet project calculations.  Include water feature in calculations as a high hydrozone with a 1.0 ETAF.  Provide required notes on plan: Statement of Compliance with Landscape Ordinance, and 3-inches of mulch required in all planting areas.  Provide irrigation plan with legend, notes/specifications, and details.  Provide planting plan with legend, and notes/specifications.  Specify smaller trees with acceptable mature tree height below roof ridge. Locate trees so that neighboring views are not obstructed. Show mature height in legend.  Space Toyon shrubs so as not to create a hedge.  Add City Required Notes shown above to plan. 194 Environmental Design Associates 14121 Sawston Circle . Westminster, CA 92683 Phone 714.350.6910 3 Installation Note The irrigation and planting plans shall be installed per the approved landscape plan documentation package. Any changes or substitutions to plans shall be subject to approval by the planning department and landscape architect for the City. A Certificate of Completion shall be submitted by the project designer or contractor prior to final landscape installation inspection. I appreciate the opportunity to assist with the review of this landscape plan and would be happy to discuss any questions you may have. Respectfully submitted, Environmental Design Associates Carrie Mandarino, RLA #4769 195 County of Los Angeles - Department of Public Works GMED PLAN CHECK REFERRAL FORM TO BE COMPLETED BY COUNTY PLAN CHECKER ONLY ---- APPLICANT TO UPLOAD THIS SHEET TO GMED ---- Plan Checker Name ________________________ District Office ___________ BSD Permit Case: BLD ________________ GRAD________________________ Valuation: BLD $_______________ GRAD (cubic yards) Linked GMED Plan Case: ESTU _______________________________________ Address: ______________________________________APN_______________  Multiple Plan Checks on subject site (Please Verify in EpicLA/DAPTS) Initial reason for referral:  Seismic Hazard Zone Liquefaction / Seismically Induced Landslide / Fault Zone  Slope Stability Over-Steeped Slopes / Landslide / Debris Flow  Retaining Walls or Structures Basement / Tiered / Soldier Piles / Tie-Back / Geo-Grid  Foundations Recommendations Piles / Caissons / Mat / Settlement / Repairs / Soil-Cement Columns  Temporary Conditions Shoring / Steep excavations / Slot-Cuts / Tie-Backs  Low Impact Development Soil Infiltration Rate / Infiltration Report / LID BMP Location and Depth  Grading Fill and Bearing Recommendations / Soil-Improvements / Geology  Other (Please Specify) ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ Please Note: This initial referral reason may not limit the extent of GMED review. Additional geologic and geotechnical conditions may become apparent after GMED review of the plans, reports, and references. Please verify with your Plan Checker: GMED plan check fees will need to be paid prior to start of plan check. Once invoiced, please pay GMED fees online through EpicLA or at the Building and Safety District Office. 196 County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Geotechnical and Materials Engineering Division GEOLOGY AND SOILS ENGINEERING – DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBMITTALS Requirements Prior to Submittal Plan check applications must be filed with Building and Safety or Land Development Division and an Agency Referral form provided BEFORE any documents can be accepted for review by GMED. For questions regarding the submittal or review process, please contact GMED at GMEDSubmittals@dpw.lacounty.gov, or (626) 458- 4923. GMED Submittals for LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION (LDD) Log in to the same web application used to submit to LDD: https://epicla.lacounty.gov/SelfService/#/home. Once logged in, click “Apply” then under the “Plans” heading click “Geotechnical Study.” GMED Submittals for BUILDING AND SAFETY (BSD) If your BSD application is through EPIC LA/CSS, log in to EpicLA/CSS: https://epicla.lacounty.gov/SelfService/#/home. First-time users of EpicLA/CSS are required to create site login. Please register on-line. Once logged in, click “Apply” then under the “Plan” heading click “Geotechnical Study.” You will receive an ESTU# for your GMED plan check. If your BSD application is through a Contract City system, then submit documents to GMED here: https://dpw.lacounty.gov/apps/esubmissions/gme/default.aspx. First-time users are required to create a site login. PDF file format for GMED Submittal Please include all plan sheets into one PDF file. Please name the file in the following format: For Agency Referral Forms: Name file as: “Agency Referral Form” For Plans: “YYYYMMDD – [Type of Plan]” Submittal Date- example: “20190101 – Grading Plan” For Reports: “YYYYMMDD – [Firm Name]” Submittal Date- example: “20190101 – Best Geotechnical Company” 197 Lomita Agency Referral Rev 05-2024 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION AGENCY REFERRAL VHFHSZ Y / N Waste Sewer / Septic Hwy. Dedication Y / N ______ ft. Geology Fault / Liq / LS Methane Y / N Code Enforce. Y / N # _______________ (N) Address Y / N LOMITA DISTRICT OFFICE 24320 S. Narbonne Avenue Lomita, CA 90717 Telephone: (310) 534-3760, Fax (310) 530-5482 Office Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. M - F Plan Checker Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. Appointments are recommended Prepared By HNM OM Initial Date Applicant’s Signature: Plans for (Grading/ Structure) at __________________________________________________ _____________________________________ (Address)(Locality) Plan Check No. _______________________________________________ was submitted on _______________________________________ Land Use Zone _____________________ Proposed Occupancy _____________________ Type of Construction ____________________ Description of proposed work: __________________________________________________________________________________________ THIS NOTICE IS TO INFORM YOU THAT APPROVAL FROM THE AGENCIES MARKED BELOW, IN ADDITION TO BUILDING PLAN CHECK APPROVAL, MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE.Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65913.3, if review of the permit application is required by a State Agency or Other Agency, as marked below, the applicable time limits for review of the application are tolled until the applicant provides Building and Safety with a copy of the Agency approval. Issuance of this referral sheet shall serve as formal notice of tolling.You may need to submit the pertinent plans, plan check number, calculations, reports, etc., directly to these agencies. To assist you, we have listed below the information which you will need to contact these agencies.Follow-up is your responsibility. Please be aware that some items resulting from these agency plan reviews may affect your building plan check. These should be communicated to your Building Plan Check Engineer as soon as possible to prevent unnecessary delays. Submit all agency approvals 48 hours prior to permit issuance. Notify the Plan Check Engineer when all agency approvals have submitted and request review. ADDITIONAL AGENCY CLEARANCES MAY BE REQUIRED BY YOUR BUILDING PLAN CHECK ENGINEER COUNTY AGENCIES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ____AVIATION DIVISION 1000 S. Fremont Ave., Bldg. A9 East, 1st Flr., Alhambra, CA 91803 (626) 300-4600 Mon-Thurs 7:00 a.m. - 5:45 p.m. ____BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION Headquarters M-Th 6:45 - 5:30 (626) 458-3173 900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 Approval for the following sections is required as noted below: □ ELECTRICAL SECTION 900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (626) 458-3180 Approval is required for: □ Energy Plan Check □ Electrical Code Check □ Emergency Egress Illumination (O.L. ≥ 100) □ Methane Mitigation required in Methane Zone □ MECHANICAL SECTION 900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (626) 458-3182 Approval is required for: □ Energy Plan Check □ Mechanical Code Check □ Plumbing Code Check □ Roof Drainage □ Green Building Check □ Methane Mitigation required in Methane Zone □ Research Section 900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (626) 458-3173 (Alternate Materials, Methods, SMRF…) □ GRADING AND DRAINAGE SECTION Anthony Wong – Regional Drainage and Grading Engineer 24320 S. Narbonne Ave, CA Lomita 90717 (310) 534-3760 Thursday 8:00 -11:00 a.m. □ Grading Plan Check □ “Rough Grade” approval is required prior to issuance of building permit □ Drainage Plan Check (NPDES/LID COMPLIANCE) □ Drainage approval is required ____LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION – PERMIT SECTION Permits are required for road excavations and encroachments within County roads and Flood Control easements. □ PERMIT SECTION 900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Floor, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (626) 458-3129 6:45-5:30 Mon-Thurs □ Westchester Office 5530 W. 83rd St, Westchester, CA 90045 (310) 649-6300 7:30 a.m. – 3:30 p.m. Mon-Fri ____ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS DIVISION Plan approval is required for most commercial and industrial buildings for: □ INDUSTRIAL WASTE / UNDERGROUND TANKS / STORMWATER Lomita Office Headquarters 24320 S. Narbonne Ave 900 S. Fremont Ave., Annex 3rd Fl Lomita, CA 90717 Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (310) 534-4862 (626) 458-3517 8:00-9:30 a.m. Mon-Fri 6:45-5:30 Mon-Thurs iw@pw.lacounty.gov Industrial Waste ust@pw.lacounty.gov Underground Storage Tanks sw@pw.lacounty.gov Stormwater □ NPDES/SUSMP Approval Industrial Waste Unit 900 S. Fremont Ave, Annex 3rd Fl Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (626) 458-3517 7:00am-5:00pm Mon-Thurs □ DUMP AREAS/METHANE MITIGATION/OIL & GAS WELLS/CONTAMINATED SOIL HAZARDS (structure within 1,000 ft from a landfill) 900 S. Fremont Ave., Annex 3rd Fl Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 Methane@pw.lacounty.gov (626) 570-2810 7:00am -5:00pm Mon-Thurs □ SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT (TRASH ENCLOSURES) 900 S. Fremont Ave., Annex 3rd Floor Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 TrashEnc@pw.lacounty.gov (626) 570-2810 7:00am -5:00pm Mon-Thurs □ CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION DEBRIS RECYCLING AND REUSE PLAN 900 S. Fremont Ave., Annex 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (626) 458-3517 www.CleanLA.com 6:45-5:30 Mon-Thurs Instructions on how to apply are available at:www.LACountyCND Email at CND@pw.LACounty.gov (626) 458-3517 7:00am -5:00pm Mon-Thurs _____GEOTECHNICAL AND MATERIALS ENGINEERING DIVISION (GMED) GEOLOGY/SOILS SECTIONS - Plan approval is required for site stability and geologic hazard. (626) 458-4925 M-Th 6:30-5:15 pm Upload plans, reports, GMED fee receipt, this Agency Referral Sheet to: https://epicla.lacounty.gov/SelfService/#/home GMED Referral for: Seismic Hazard Zone Liquefaction / Seismically Induced Landslide / Fault Study Slope Stability Over-Steepened Slopes / Landslide / Debris Flow Retaining Walls or Systems Basement / Tiered / Soldier Piles / Tie-Back / Geo-Grid Foundation Recommendations Piles / Caissons / Mat / Repairs / Soil-Cement Columns Temporary Conditions Shoring / Steep Excavations / Slot-Cuts / Tie-Backs 198 Lomita Agency Referral Rev 05-2024 ____ LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION 900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (626) 458-4921 6:45-5:30 Mon-Thurs □ SUBDIVISION PLAN CHECK SECTION □ LANDSCAPE (Residential or Non-Residential landscaped area > 500 square feet) □ HIGHWAY DEDICATION Form "48-0040-DPW" should be filled out when plan approval for street improvements and/or dedication is required for commercial and multiple residential buildings. "Bridge & Major Thoroughfare (B&T) Fee" is also required for commercial, multiple residential buildings and designated tracts. (626) 458-4915 _____MAPPING AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT □ ADDRESS REQUEST: Manual:Address Request Manual OTHER COUNTY DEPARTMENTS ____DEPT OF PUBLIC HEALTH – Environmental Health Division 5050 Commerce Way, Baldwin Park, CA 91706 (626) 430-5380 Approval is required for: □ Private Sewage Disposal Systems □ Underground Cisterns □ Food Service Establishments 6053 Bristol Parkway 2nd Fl, Culver City 90230 (310) 665-8483 8:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. □ Public Swimming Pool- Recreational Health (626) 430-5360 □ X-Ray Machine Installation Radiation Management 3530 Wilshire Blvd., 9th Fl Los Angeles, CA 90010 (213) 351-7897 ____COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY Payment of Library Facilities Mitigation Fee is required. A Certificate of Payment or a Certificate of Clearance must be obtained from the Public Library. Bring Plan Check Fee Receipt from Building and Safety. 7400 E. Imperial Highway, Downey, CA 90242 (562) 940-8430 M-Th 7:30 am - 5:30 pm ____PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT Approval for building plans is required for construction adjacent to "Designated Trails" Planning Division, Research & Trails Section 510 S. Vermont Ave. 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90020 (213) 351-5098 M-Th 7:00 am – 5:30 pm ____REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT 320 W. Temple St., 13th Floor (Rm. 1360) Los Angeles, CA 90012-3282 Public Counter : 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Mon-Thurs Telephone Hours: 7:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. (213) 974-6411 Mon-Thurs Southwest District Office for General Information: 1320 W. Imperial Hwy, Los Angeles, CA 90044 (323) 820-6500 Mon – Thurs 7:30 a.m.– 11:30 a.m. (must sign in by 11:00 a.m.) ____DEPARTMENT OF ARTS AND CULTURE Compliance of the Public Art in Private Development Ordinance is required. Pat Gomez (Phone or email inquiries only)PAPD@arts.lacounty.gov or 213-315-9972 M-Th 9:00am-5:00pm _____LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Recordation of affordable housing land use covenant is required and must be recorded senior to all existing deeds of trust on the property. Payment of monitoring fee is required at time of covenant recordation. Paulina Safarian (Email inquiries only) paulina.safarian@lacda.org STATE AGENCIES ____CALTRANS Permits are required for outdoor signs, excavation, encroachment (including driveway aprons) and improvements (including grading or structures that affect drainage) on State Highways: 100 S. Main Street 2nd Fl. Los Angeles, CA 90012 (213) 897-3631 ____CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION A Coastal Development permit is required. Prior to application submittal obtain local approval in concept from the Regional Planning Department. 200 Oceangate 10th Fl, Suite 1000, Long Beach, CA 90802 (562) 590-5071 ____STATE DEPT. OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS - CAL/OSHA DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH Permit is required for excavation of trenches which are 5 ft. or more deep into which a person is required to descend or for the construction or demolition of any structure 4 or more stories. Brick-lined seepage pits may require permit. County Area & Contracted Cities: Lawndale Office: 680 Knox St, Ste. 100 320 W. 4th St, Ste. 850 Torrance, CA 90502 Los Angeles, CA (310) 516-3734 (213) 576-7451 ____STATE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS Obtain clearance for the requirements of abandonment of oil wells. 5816 Corporate Ave., Ste. 200, Cypress, CA 90630-4731 (714) 816-6847 ____CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY STORM WATER PERMIT UNIT – Notice of intent required when disturbed area 1 acre. P. O. Box 1977, Sacramento, CA 95812-1977 (916) 341-5536 OTHER AGENCIES ____FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU OF THE CONSOLIDATED FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY -Plan approval is required 4475 W. El Segundo Blvd., Hawthorne, CA 90250 (310) 263-2732 fire-fphawthorne@fire.lacounty.gov □ FIRE STATION DEVELOPER FEE is required 4475 W. El Segundo Blvd., Hawthorne, CA 90250 □ "HAZMAT" form must be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department for non-residential occupancies if hazardous materials are being handled. Obtain form from Building and Safety and submit to: Fire Prevention Bureau Hazardous Materials Section 5825 Rickenbacker Road, Commerce, CA 90040-3027 (323) 890-4000 □ FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS 5823 Rickenbacker Road, Commerce, CA 90040-3027 (323) 890-4125 □ OTHER APPROVALS (Sprinklers<20 Heads, Sprinklers: Residential & Remodel, Pool draft Hydrant, Alarms, Hoods, Restaurants with new cooking, Tanks, and TI<2500 sq. ft.) 4475 W. El Segundo Blvd., Hawthorne, CA 90250 (310) 263-2732 □ FUEL MODIFICATION Brushing Clearance Office, Fire Station 32 605 N. Angeleno Ave., Azusa, CA 91702 (626) 969-5205 Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 p.m. ____COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Payment of sewer connection fee is required 1955 Workman Mill Rd., Whittier 90601 (562) 908-4288 ext. 2727 ____SCHOOL DISTRICT Development fee must be paid to the District for residential and commercial construction. A "Certificate of Payment of Developer Fee" must be submitted to Building and Safety prior to obtaining a building permit. □ Obtain “Certification Form” from B&S District Office. ____SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SCAQMD) Applicants for non-residential buildings must fill out "Air Quality Permit Checklist" furnished by Building & Safety. If "Yes" is marked, a written release will be required before occupancy is allowed. Notification form required for demolition and alteration permits where ASBESTOS is involved. 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182 (909) 396-2000, (800) 288-7664 ____LOCAL WATER COMPANY □ Provide a copy of the Fire Flow Availability letter (Form 195/196) completed by the water company serving the site. (Form available from B&S District Office) □ Provide a “Will Serve” letter from the water company for all new residential and commercial buildings (including additions that will create new units) prior to permit issuance ____CITY APPROVALS □ City of Lomita 24300 S. Narbonne Ave. Lomita, CA 90717 (310) 325-7110 □ City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Rd. Rolling Hills CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 199 Lomita Agency Referral Rev 05-2024 OTHER 200 Page 10 LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) Requirements All development must comply with the County of Los Angeles’ Title 12, Chapter 12.84 (LID). LID standards are intended to distribute stormwater and urban runoff across developed sites to help reduce adverse water qual ity impacts and replenish groundwater supplies. The LID Manual is available at the following link: http://dpw.lacounty.gov/ldd/web/ Under the NPDES permit (LACBC Section 106.4.3) and the County of Los Angeles LID ordinance, priority projects are required to prohibit the discharge of pollutants from property developments. Preventing these pollutants from entering stormwater discharge system will be accomplished by requiring the installation and maintenance of post-construction treatment controls. (Best Management Practices (BMPs) Residential development of 4 units or less: □ New development, hillside development, redevelopment, alterations, or additions which alter 50% or more of impervious surfaces, entire site shall meet LID requirements. 61. Residential development of 4 units or less must implement a minimum of two LID Best Management Practice (BMP) alternatives as indicated in Section 3.2 and Appendix E – Stormwater Quality Control Measure Fact Sheets of the LID Manual. Plans must show complete construction details, ma terials, manufacturer, model number, dimensions, location, structures, slopes, construction notes, specifications, cross sections, elevations, and setbacks from property lines needed to construct proposed LID BMPs. BMPs should be designed so as not to adversely impact building foundations, pavement, slope stability, or an adjacent property. For hillside properties all catch basins and inlets that discharge into an existing or proposed storm drains must be labeled to discourage illegal dumping of pollutants . Stencils are available at your local Building and Safety office. a. Permeable Porous Pavement or other impervious surfaces (at least 50% of pavement on lot shall be porous) • Show detail of placement, base, geotextile, subgrade, and soil preparation pe r manufacturer’s specifications. • The required soils report must address percolation and manufacturer’s recommendations and guidelines. • H-20 loading is required for Fire Department access. • A minimum of 30” deep impervious liner or edge restraint is required within 5’ of public right of way, property lines, and structures unless otherwise recommended by a soils engineer. b. Downspout routing (choosing one of the options below satisfies 1 of 2 required BMPs ) □ Cistern/rain barrel (Option 1) • Show location of cistern/rain barrels. Rain barrels should be designed to store 200 gallons and be located such that roof run-off is equally distributed. Rain gutters & downspouts shall be shown on plans. • Plans shall show hose bibs or pump systems for discharge and watering of landscaping. (Note: A separate electrical permit is required for pump systems). • A plumbing permit is required for backflow prevention devices when the discharge system is tied into a landscaping irrigation system served by a potable water source. • H-20 loading is required for underground cisterns located in an area subject to traffic conditions. • Plans should include manufacturer specifications and notes for rain barrels. See provided guidelines. □ Rain garden/Stormwater Planter (Option 2) • Surface area of flow through type planter box shall be designed and sized to treat 200 gallons. Planter must have a 18” minimum top soil layer and 12” minimum gravel layer. The infiltration type planter box shall be designed to infiltrate 200 gallons over a 48 hour period. c. Divert Runoff/Disconnect Impervious Surfaces (Hillsides > 25% slope must comply with this requirement) • Show driveway, roof, and other impervious surfaces to drain toward pervious landscaped areas. The ratio of impervious to pervious area shall be no less than 2:1. This ratio must be identified on plans for each affected area. A minimum of 90% of the untreated impervious area shall be routed toward vegetated areas or water quality BMPs. d. Dry well • Show details including the following: location, cross section details, liner materials, subbase, and all manufacturer’s specifications and/or recommendations from soils engineer. The required soils report shall address dry well and manufacturer’s specification and requirements. • The system should be designed to store and infiltrate a minimum of 200 gallons of stormwater within a 48 hour period. • Provide calculations to determine the infiltration volume for sizing of well and determine time of infiltration to percolate 200 gallons. • A filter or sediment control is required to filter water entering the dry well. • Drywells that are deeper than their widest dimension are defined by the EPA as Class V injection wells, and are subject to inventory requirements under the Safe Drinking Water Act and must be registered at the following link with the EPA as injection wells. http://www.epa.gov/region09/water/groundwater/injection-wells-register.html. If this type of dry well is proposed, provide copy of registration. e. Landscaping and landscape irrigation • Show a minimum of two 15-gallon trees to be planted and maintained. Trees shall be located near impervious surfaces (10 foot maximum distance). One of the trees may be on the drought -tolerant plant list as required under the County’s Green Building Ordinance (http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/project/green_drought-tolerant- garden.pdf). In Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, applicant should verify compliance with Fire Department’s requirements https://www.fire.lacounty.gov/forestry-division/forestry-fuel-modification/. o Install Smart Irrigation Controllers. (see Comment 86 for requirements) f. Green Roof • Show area of green roof on site plan. • Structural calculations for design of green roof will be required at time of building plan submittal. • Fire Department approval will be required as part of building plan check. 201 Page 11 62. The following is a list of Designated Projects for new development and redevelopment activities that require compliance with LA County’s LID ordinance. (See LID manual for additional information) ❑ All development projects equal to 1 acre or greater of disturbed area and adding more than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface area ❑ Residential new or redeveloped projects that creates, adds, or replaces >10,000 square feet of impervious surface area. ❑ Industrial parks 10,000 square feet or more of surface area ❑ Commercial malls 10,000 square feet or more surface area ❑ Retail gasoline outlets 5,000 square feet or more of surface area ❑ Restaurants (SIC 5812) 5,000 square feet or more of surface area ❑ Parking lots 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area, or with 25 or more parking spaces ❑ Street and road construction of 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area ❑ Automotive service facilities with 5,000 square feet or more of surface area ❑ Projects located in or directly adjacent to, or discharging directly to a Significant Ecological Area (SEA),where the development will discharge storm water runoff that is likely to impact a sensitive biological species or habitat; and Create 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface area ❑ Redevelopment projects identified below*: o Land-disturbing activity that results in the creation or addition or replacement of 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area o Development which alters less than 50% of impervious surfaces. Only proposed re -development needs to meet NPDES requirements. o Development which alters 50% or more of impervious surfaces. Entire site shall meet NPDES requirements. *Impervious surface replacement, such as the reconstruction of parking lots and roadways which does not disturb additional ar ea and maintains the original grade and alignment, is considered a routine maintenance activity. Redevelopment does not incl ude the repaving of existing roads to maintain original line and grade. REQUIREMENTS: A. New Development and Re-Development Projects must control runoff through infiltration, bioretention, and/or rainfall harvest and use. Project must retain onsite the Stormwater Quality Design Volume (SWQDv) as defined by the greater of the following: • The 0.75-inch, 24 hour rain event or • The 85th percentile, 24-hour rain event, as determined from the Los Angeles County 85 th percentile precipitation isohyetal map (www.dpw.lacounty.gov/wrd/hydrologygis) ,. B. Bioretention and biofiltration systems shall meet the design specifications provided in Appendix E of LA County’s LID manual. (available at http://dpw.lacounty.gov/ldd/web/). Biofiltration systems shall be entirely open-bottom. C. When evaluating the potential for onsite retention, each projects must consider the maximum potential for evapotranspiration from green roofs and rainfall harvest and reuse for both indoor and outdoor use. D. To demonstrate technical infeasibility, it must be shown that a project site cannot reliably retain 100 percent of the SWQDv onsite. Technical infeasibility may result from the following: i. The infiltration rate of saturated in-situ soils less than 0.3 inch per hour. ii. Seasonal high ground water is within 5 to 10 feet of the surface. iii. Locations within 100 feet of a ground water well used for drinking water. iv. Brownfield development sites where infiltration poses a risk of pollutant mobilization. v. Locations with potential geotechnical hazards. E. When technical infeasibility has been demonstrated the site must biofiltrate using the following equation for volume required: Bv = 1.5 * [SWQDv – Rv] Where: Bv = Biofiltration volume SWQDv = Stormwater runoff as defined in 88 A Rv = Volume reliably retained onsite (amount infiltrated) Show volumes and flow rates on plans as applicable. Note: For additional alternative compliance measures see Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. R4-2012-0175 section VI.D.7.c.iii (http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/stormwater/municipal/index.shtml ) F. Project sites that outlet to natural drainage systems that are subject to hydromodification shall be in compliance with LA County’s LID manual, Section 8 (available at http://dpw.lacounty.gov/ldd/web/). G. The plans must show complete construction details, materials, manufacturer, model number, dimensions, location, structures, slopes, construction notes, specifications, cross sections, elevations, GPS x-y coordinates for each BMP, and setbacks from property lines needed to construct proposed LID BMPs. BMPs should be designed as not to adversely impact building foundations, pavement, slope stability, or an adjacent property . H. Clearly show driveway/access road drainage and provide BMPs for treatment of driveway flows. Provide elevations, cross sections, or slopes as applicable. I. Submit and obtain approval from Environmental Programs Division, Industrial Waste Unit at 900 S. Fremont, Alhambra, Annex Building, 3rd floor, Alhambra, CA 91803. Please contact EPD by email at IW@pw.lacounty.gov or call (626) 458-3517 for required fees and submittal requirements. An annual operating permit may be required. , . Please note: prior to obtaining approval from EPD the location and the design flows for all BMPs must be shown on plans and approved by Building and Safety (This applies to all non-residential projects). J. Pre-treatment BMPs are required. 202 Page 12 63. Non-Designated Projects. Non-residential development (Commercial, Industrial) or a residential development consisting of 5 or more residential units: □ Development which alters less than 50% of impervious surfaces. Only proposed new impervious areas needs to meet LID requirements. □ Development which alters 50% or more of impervious surfaces. Entire site shall meet LID requirements. A. This project is required to retain the Delta Storm Water Quality Design Volume (∆SWQDv), the difference between the stormwater runoff volume pre- and post-condition. The SWQDv, from which the ∆SWQDv is calculated, is defined in item 85A of this grading review sheet. ∆SWQDv is defined as the difference in the runoff volume between undeveloped (1% impervious surface) and post-developed condition. The ∆SWQDv is calculated according to the following equation: ∆SWQDv = Vd – Vu Where: ∆SWQDv = Increase in stormwater runoff volume from the project [ft3]; Vd = Stormwater runoff volume post-development [ft3]; and Vu = Undeveloped stormwater runoff volume [ft3] (1% impervious). If ∆SWQDv cannot be infiltrated due to geotechnical or technical feasibility as indicated in Section 7 of the County’s LID Manual; onsite storage or other water conservation requirements must be implemented. B. Provide calculations for sizing of the proposed BMP’s. Calculations must consider ∆SWQDv, percolation rate, and geotechnical considerations. C. Plans must show complete construction details, materials, manufacturer, model number, dimensions, location, structures, slopes, construction notes, specifications, cross sections, elevations, GPS x and y coordinates for each BMP, and setbacks from property lines needed to construct proposed LID BMPs. BMPs should be designed as not to adversely impact building foundations, pavement, slope stability, or an adjacent property. D. Hydrology Calculations to determine the increase in volume due to development is required. For smaller sites, the County’s Hydrocalc Program may be used for determining Pre- and Post-construction volumes. See Section 6 of County’s LID Manual. • A drain system is required for all infiltration basins. Drain systems shall discharge to an approved location and must be shown on site drainage or grading plans. Calculations for sizing of the infiltration basins are required. 64. For LID compliance, all catch basins and inlets that discharge into an existing or proposed storm drain must be labeled to discourage illegal dumping of pollutants. Stencils are available at your local Building and Safety office. 65. All infiltration basins, dry wells, or planters must comply with the following setbacks Infiltration Facility Setbacks* Setback from Distance in feet Property lines & Public Right of Way 5’ minimum Any Foundation 15’ or within a 1:1 plane drawn up from the bottom of foundation Face of any slope H/2, 5’ minimum (H is height of slope)* Seasonal high ground water 10’ minimum depth to invert Water wells 100’ minimum Required Infiltration Time (due to vector control) BMP Type Duration Open above ground (includes planting soil or open gravel pit) 48 hours to drain completely Underground retention 96 hours to drain completely *unless otherwise recommended by a Soils Engineer and approved by Geotechnical and Materials Engineering Division. Note: Infiltration is not allowed in areas where pollutant mobilization is a documented concern, or where undisturbed soil infiltration rates are less than 0.3 inches per hour, or where infiltration could cause adverse impacts to biological resources. 66. An Infiltration Report by a Soils Engineer and the grading plans must be reviewed and recommended for approval by the Geology and Soils Section prior to approval of an Infiltration/Retention - Low Impact Development (LID) BMP. Please see attached GMED Plan Check Referral Form for instructions. The Infiltration Report must comply with GMED Geotechnical Memo GS 200.1 and should be presented as its own report. All recommendations and notes as indicated in the soils engineering report and/or GMED review sheets must be incorporated into the grading plans. The GS 200.1 memo can be found at: http://dpw.lacounty.gov/gmed/permits/docs/policies/GS200.1.pdf Gravel Specification for Non-proprietary gravel storage layers must indicate 1.5” to 3” diameter, angular, clean rock compacted to 90% relative compaction or equivalent determined and field verified by a Soils Engineer. 67. Rainwater harvest and reuse systems that are NOT gravity fed require approval from LA County Public Health, Cross Connection & Water Pollution Control Program. The application and further information is found at http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/eh/EP/cross_con/cross_con_main.htm. In addition, approval from LA County, Building and Safety Plumbing Section is required. Rainwater harvest design and plans must comply with County of Los Angeles, Plumbing Code, Chapter 16 – Non-Potable Rainwater Catchment Systems. 68. Different types of infiltration facilities such as dry wells, unlined sumps, seepage pits, and infiltration galleries are som e of the terms used to describe Class V injection wells as defined by the EPA. Register the proposed infiltration facility at the following online registration form: http://www.epa.gov/uic/forms/underground-injection-wells-registration. 203 May 23, 2024 Project No. 23-3282 Ms. Yukiko Ogasawara 3 Flying Main Lane Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Subject: Geotechnical and Geological Report Update, Proposed Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills Estates, California. Dear Ms. Ogasawara: Per your request, presented herewith is Hamilton & Associates, Inc. (H&A) Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Investigation Report for the subject project. H&A’s work was conducted in accordance with the proposal dated September 26, 2023 and your subsequent authorization on December 12, 2023. H&A prepared a comprehensive geotechnical and geological investigation report for the site in 2013. Wildan reviewed and approved the report in 2013/14. An update report was prepared in 2021. This report presents all prior exploration and testing performed by H&A and updates getoechnical / geological analysis and recommendations for the current project scope. This evaluation has concluded that the proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint provided that the recommendations and design guidelines presented in this report are incorporated in the project plans and design, and are implemented during construction. We thank you for the opportunity to provide professional services on this important project and we look forward to assisting you during construction. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Karen Duarte Eirik F. Haenschke, PG, CEG Staff Engineer Engineering Geologist David T. Hamilton, PE, GE President/Geotechnical Engineer 204 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... 1 Project Concept .............................................................................................. 1 Existing Site Conditions .................................................................................. 1 Structural Loading .......................................................................................... 1 REVIEW OF AVAILABLE REPORTS ................................................................... 2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ................................................ 2 FIELD EXPLORATION ......................................................................................... 2 Bucket Auger Borings ..................................................................................... 2 Test Pits ......................................................................................................... 3 LABORATORY TESTING .................................................................................... 3 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITONS ....................................................................... 3 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING ...................................................................... 3 LOCAL GEOLOGIC SETTING ............................................................................. 4 GROUNDWATER AND CAVING ......................................................................... 9 SEISMOLOGICAL AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ................................................. 9 Ground Shaking Analysis ............................................................................... 9 Surface Fault Rupture .................................................................................... 9 Seismic Settlements (Liquefaction) .............................................................. 10 Seismically Induced Landslides .................................................................... 10 Hydro-Consolidation ..................................................................................... 10 Expansive Soils ............................................................................................ 10 SLOPE STABILITY ....................................................................................................... 10 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 12 SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING ............................................................... 12 Existing Construction Debris, Undocumented Fill, Disturbed Soils ............... 12 Remedial Grading ......................................................................................... 13 Hillside Grading ............................................................................................ 13 Temporary Excavations ................................................................................ 15 New Fills ....................................................................................................... 16 Backfilling and Compaction Requirements ................................................... 16 Imported Soils ............................................................................................... 17 Observation and Testing During Construction .............................................. 17 FOUNDATION DESIGN ..................................................................................... 18 Foundation Capacity ..................................................................................... 18 Lateral Resistance ........................................................................................ 19 Active Loads on Piles ................................................................................... 19 Settlements/Displacements .......................................................................... 19 Slope Setback .............................................................................................. 20 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS .................................................................... 20 RETAINING WALLS ........................................................................................... 20 205 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page ii POOL RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 21 SLAB-ON-GRADE .............................................................................................. 23 SOIL CORROSIVITY .......................................................................................... 23 SITE DRAINAGE ................................................................................................ 24 IRRIGATION / VEGETATION............................................................................. 24 UTILITY TRENCHES ......................................................................................... 25 PLAN REVIEW, OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING ............................................ 25 CLOSURE ..................................................................................................................... 25 FIGURES Figure 1 – Site Location Map Figure 2 – Regional Geology Map Figure 3 – Landslide Inventory Map Figure 4 – Regional Fault Map Figure 5 – Seismic Hazard Zones Map Figure 6 – Friction Pile Capacity Figure 7 – Slope Setbacks REFERENCES APPENDIX Appendix A – Field Exploration, Laboratory Results, Geotechnical / Geological Plates Appendix B – Slope Stability Analysis 206 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of H&A’s geotechnical and geological investigation for the Project (described below in Project Concept) conducted at 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, California (Site). Figure 1, “Site Location Map” presents the site’s location. Site exploration was conducted to identify and evaluate select surface and subsurface geological and geotechnical conditions. Geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the Project were developed based on the review of select published and unpublished documents in conjunction with the findings of this field investigation and laboratory analysis. This report summarizes the data collected and presents geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project concept was provided in plans provided by Escher GuneWardena Architecture. Plans as understood by H&A are incorporated into Plate A-1, “Site Plan and Geologic Map”. Project Concept It is understood that the proposed development will consist of a single-family residence, swimming pool, stable and an ADU as presented on Plate A-1, “Site Plan and Geologic Map”. Existing Site Conditions The subject site occupies a part of a small south-trending ridge immediately west of 29 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, California. The site is located at approximately 33.752 degrees north latitude and 118.347 west longitude, and at about elevation 1295 feet above mean sea level. The following information pertaining to site conditions was obtained during the course of performing field, research and laboratory work for this project. The project area consists of approximately 9.8 acres of property, excluding the Crest Road easement that is situated on the south side of Crest Road East. The property is a vacant lot that has not been developed as of this writing. The subject site is adjoined by similarly developed (residential) properties to the south, east and west. Structural Loading In the absence of actual structural loading information, we will assume that the structure will be supported by shallow conventional or cast-in-drilled-hole pile foundations with 207 DATE: May 2024 ADDRESS: 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, California PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence PROJECT NO: 23-3282 FIGURE: 1 SITE LOCATION MAP Site 208 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 2 maximum column load on the order of 30 kips and maximum continuous footing loads on the order of 2.5 kips per linear foot. REVIEW OF AVAILABLE REPORTS Hamilton & Associates, Inc., performed geotechnical and geologic engineering investigations on the subject site in 2013 and 2014, with respect to the proposed site improvement for a prior owner. Those studies of this property have included, in part, the excavation, logging and sampling of eleven (10) test pits and two (2) borings, plus four (4) percolation borings, most of which were downhole logged by the geologist. A thorough discussion of the geotechnical study has been presented in the reports. In addition to the studies on the subject property, the writers have been involved with studies on 29 Crest Road East with Hamilton & Associates, and on 17 and 33 Crest Road East with Coastline Geotechnical Consultants. This office concluded that the site was suitable for the proposed residential developments provided the presented recommendations were implemented during design and construction. The detailed findings, conclusions, and recommendations of this study are presented in the referenced reports. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING The field exploration for this report included surface observations and mapping, advancing exploratory excavations and logging and sampling of Site earth materials. All excavations were logged by or under the direction of a California Professional Geotechnical Engineer or Certified Engineering Geologist. Logs and descriptions were based on visual and tactile field observations. Exploratory excavations were backfilled with the excavated materials. Subsurface exploration locations, as well as the surficial distribution of earth materials were located and recorded based on field mapping techniques. No locations were surveyed. Samples of earth materials were secured and transported to H&A’s certified geotechnical laboratory for further observation and testing. FIELD EXPLORATION Bucket Auger Borings On May 6 and 7, 2013 two (2) 24-inch diameter bucket auger borings were accomplished utilizing a truck mounted drill rig. The bucket auger borings were advanced to 59 feet bgs. The borings were downhole logged by a California Certified Engineering Geologist. 209 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 3 Relatively undisturbed Modified California Ring and bulk samples were retrieved from the exploratory borings for subsequent laboratory testing and analysis. Test Pits On April 4, 2013, a backhoe, subcontracted by Hamilton & Associates, excavated ten (10) exploratory test pits. Test pit depths generally range from 3 to 5 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs). Relatively undisturbed Modified California Ring and bulk samples were retrieved from the exploratory test pits for subsequent laboratory testing and analysis. Exploration locations are presented on Plate A-1 provided in Appendix A. Logs of subsurface observations are presented on Plates B-1 through B-16. LABORATORY TESTING Select field samples were further inspected in Hamilton & Associates’, Inc. geotechnical laboratory for subsequent confirmatory soil classification and engineering property testing. This testing included in-situ moisture content (ASTM D2216), dry unit weight (ASTM D2937), maximum density (ASTM D1557), consolidation (ASTM D2435), direct shear (ASTM D3080) and Expansion Index (ASTM D 4829), as well as corrosion testing per California 422 (Chloride), and California 643 (pH and Resistivity) test procedures on a representative sample of the on-Site soils. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITONS REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING Twenty-three Crest Road East occupies a part of the terraced and dissected southwestern slope of the Palos Verdes Hills, California (Dibblee, 1999; Figure 2, herein) that form the southwest margin of the Los Angeles basin. The hills are composed of an elevated core of metamorphic rock (Catalina Schist) mantled by marine and non-marine Miocene through Quaternary sedimentary rocks. The most widespread bedrock unit – and that which underlies the study site -- is the lower (tuffaceous) section of the Miocene-aged Altamira Shale Member of the Monterey Formation (“Altamira Shale,” herein). Thinly to thickly bedded marine shale, siltstone, siliceous shale, sandstone, tuff and occasional hard siliceous and carbonate hard beds typify the sedimentary rock. Upper Miocene sills and dikes mainly comprised of basalt and diabase intruded the Altamira Shale. Hence, both bedding-parallel and irregular bodies that have disrupted and locally tightly folded the host rock are interspersed within the Altamira Shale. 210 DATE: May 2024 ADDRESS: 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, California PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence PROJECT NO: 23-3282 FIGURE: 2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP From: “Geologic map of the Palos Verdes Peninsula and vicinity, Redondo Beach, Torrance, and San Pedro quadrangles, Los Angeles County, California” by Thomas W. Dibblee, Jr., 1999 N Site 211 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 4 Typically, these locally warped, brecciated and (“contact”) metamorphosed the host sediments during injection. Associated with the Miocene volcanism are aerial- and water- laid beds of tuff (volcanic ash) and tuffaceous sandstone. While not observed on the subject site, in some places the tuff has been weathered and altered into bentonite – a clay mineral that becomes quite weak and malleable when saturated. The major such deposits are of sufficient size as to be mappable, including the Portuguese Bend and Miraleste Tuff units shown on some geologic maps of the Portuguese Bend region, but are not shown onsite. A regional geological feature important to this investigation is the generally seaward inclination of strata within the Altamira Shale caused by the upwarping and folding along the active Palos Verdes fault that is about 3 to 4 miles north of the site. This, along with combinations of such factors as long-term coastal bluff erosion, pluvial episodes, infiltration of anthropic wastewater, and possibly earthquakes, have and are giving rise to generally “bedding-controlled” landslides along parts of the southwest flank of the Palos Verdes Hills. Among these is the well-recognized and at least partly active nearby Portuguese Bend Landside Complex that includes the Klondike Canyon Landslide; and the particularly germane Flying Triangle Landslide. Figure 3 from the California Landslide Inventory Map (2024) illustrates the locations and propensities of these landslides, as well as areas that have are seemingly devoid of landslides owing to a large part the local geological conditions. LOCAL GEOLOGIC SETTING Geomorphology The characteristic topographic aspect of the geomorphically complex southern slope of the Palos Verdes Hills is a flight of 13 wave-cut marine terraces that formed during varying stands of sea level through the last million or so years (for example, Dibblee, 1999; Cleveland, 1976; Woodring, and others, 1946). The youngest being the current shoreline. Tectonic uplift and to a lesser degree episodic sea level changes have elevated the terraces, giving the local slopes their classic “stair-step” profile, except where locally disrupted by past and current landslides and incised seaward draining canyons.The study site lies atop a typical “flat-topped” south-trending ridge bound by steep, V-shaped canyons (Plate A-1; Figures 1 and 2). The ridge slopes descend to canyon bottoms at ratios varying from about 1.5 (vertical):1 (horizontal) to 2:1 with local steeper and flatter elements. Total site relief is about 230 feet (Plate A-1). In turn, imprinted, at least locally, is “landslide” topography (Figure 3) that characterizes the aforementioned landslides. “Deflated”, undulating surfaces that are bound upslope 212 DATE: May 2024 ADDRESS: 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, California PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence PROJECT NO: 23-3282 FIGURE: 3 LANDSLIDE INVENTORY MAP Landslide ActivityLandslide Types Produced from Landslide Inventory Retrieved from- https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/lsi/app/ Date retrieved: May 23, 2024 Information provided by: County of Los Angeles, Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, USGS, METI/NASA, EPA, USDA | California Geological Survey, USGS, Cooper-Clark Associates | California Geological Survey N Site 213 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 5 by lunate scarps typify the topography. These landslides vary from currently active to dormant to inactive. Generally, the dormant and inactive landslides are eroded and incised by streams and thus have subdued topography; whereas the active slides have sharp definition and geomorphic indicators. Among the active landslides is the Flying Triangle Landslide whose crown is about 150 feet west of the study site’s western boundary and about 425 west of the portion of the site to be developed [(California Landslide Inventory Map, 2024, Figure 3; Slosson/County of Los Angeles, 1986/7, Plate A-7). Stratigraphy Artificial Fill: The H&A exploration excavations did not encounter artificial fill, for the site is in essence in its natural state. Small, unmappable deposits of artificial fill likely bound the downslope sides of small paths and possibly along Crest Road East. These were not investigated owing to their likely small dimensions, and likely small impact on proposed development. Surficial Soils: H&A surmises that shallow soils cover much of the site. Where observed in test pits and natural exposures, these soils consist of black to dark gray to brown, silty clay with Altamira siltstone fragments. These soils are slightly moist to moist, generally soft to medium stiff, and commonly contain roots. The test pits exposed up to 3 feet of these soils. It is thus anticipated that the natural soils are likely relatively thin, perhaps ranging from 1- to 5-ft thick, particularly on slopes. Landslides: No landslides are mapped onsite. The site, however, is northwest of the crown of the well-known active “Flying Triangle Landslide (for example, California Landslide Inventory Map, 2024, Slosson/County of Los Angeles, 1986/7), A separate section assessing the landslide relative to the proposed development follows below. Bedrock – Monterey Formation: Natural and anthropic outcrops, as well as the exploration excavations, expose(d) two principal and distinct rock types within the Altamira Shale, siltstone and basalt, as follows: Siltstone: Based on Dibblee (1999), Slosson/County of Los Angeles (1986/7) and Woodring and others (1946), the site and its environs are underlain by the lower (tuffaceous) part of the Altamira Shale Member of the Monterey Formation (“Altamira Shale”) comprised mainly of interbedded diatomaceous, clayey and siliceous siltstone/shale and occasional hard carbonate/siliceous beds. Bedding within this unit is generally thin with well-developed partings, although the carbonate/siliceous beds are roughly one- to three- feet thick. Regionally, the carbonate beds are lightly to intensively 214 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 6 fractured, and thus locally “blocky”. The carbonate/siliceous beds, where present in graded areas, generally yield tabular boulders during difficult excavation, frequently requiring special handling. The bedrock exposed in the Test Pits and Borings, as well as that exposed in pathway cut slopes on the ridge slopes, is consistent with the regional, in that generally thin- bedded siltstone predominates. These are generally clayey, but porcellaneous and siliceous beds are common. Also, rare sandstone stringers are intercalated in the bedrock. Importantly, H&A mapping, Test Pits and Borings did not encounter decomposed tuff or bentonite beds. According to Anderson (1987) weak tuff beds above basalt units have acted as slide planes elsewhere in the Portuguese Bend area. Based on local geological investigations (for example, Marseth, Howe and Lockwood and Associates, 1970; and Steiner, 2004), the study site is likely straigraphically below these tuff beds, including the Portuguese Tuff, a local weak unit of decomposed tuff/bentonite ranging from a few to perhaps 60-feet thick that is amenable to landsliding. The engineering characteristics of the bedrock are given in the Appendix. Basalt: Intrusive and extrusive basalt and diabase lithosomes are intercalated within the lower Altamira Shale. These occur mainly as sills and dikes injected along stratigraphic units within the Altamira. Slosson and County of Los Angeles (1986/72) suggest that two major basaltic zone occur within the lower Altamira. As the sills were injected, they “burned” and contorted (in essence contact metamorphosed) the host sedimentary rocks. Relict localized folds and welded zones are yet mappable. These distortions are to some degree responsible for the “undulatory” bedding plane attitudes measured in the Altamira Shale on and near site. Basalt sills were encountered in both of the H&A Borings. B-1 encountered basalt from 34 to 48 feet below ground surface and B-2 penetrated basalt at 26 to 38 feet and at 55 feet, bottoming in basalt. (Plates A-2, A-3 and B-11 through B-16, herein). The basalt is reported to be massive and fractured. The basalt contacts with the host Altamira are baked (lightly metamorphosed). Slosson/County of Los Angeles (1986/7) mapped two basalt sills near the base of the subject ridge. Note that aforementioned tuff beds noted elsewhere by Anderson are absent at Borings B-1 and B-2. 215 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 7 Geologic Structure The study site lies on a structural high formed by transpressional deformation along the regional, active Palos Verdes fault zone that is about 4-miles to the northeast. Most investigators (Woodring and others, 1946; Cleveland, 1976; Dibblee, 1999) portray the hills as an anticlinorium composed of many smaller folds generally trending northwest, with local variations. [Figure 2 depicts the regional geology as mapped by Dibblee (1999) and Plate A-7 shows the local geology as interpreted by Slosson/County of Los Angeles]. Accordingly, the south flank of the hills is also the south flank of the Palos Verdes Hills anticlinorium; hence, bedding planes generally dip to the south except where they are locally interrupted by small folds or by basaltic sills and dikes. Near the site, a variety of investigators portray different interpretations of the structure, including the placement of folds that are auxiliary to the major northwest-trending anticlinorium (for example, Dibblee, 1999; Woodring and others, 1946; Marseth, Howe, Lockwood, 1970; Slosson/County of Los Angeles, 1986/7). For reference, the former two investigators produced generalized regional geologic maps, whereas the latter two studied the area immediate to the study site. The latter studies therefore added much detail that inevitably led to revision of the work by earlier investigators. In sum, the through-going local fold axes (Figure 2) mapped by Woodring and others and Dibblee probably are not as mapped. Based on the information provided by Slosson/County of Los Angeles (1986/7) and this investigation, the ridge (from Crest Road south) on which the study site lies is underlain by a monocline (Plates A-1 through A-6) that might be part of a larger anticline whose axis is north of the H&A study area. Importantly, based on the foregoing, bedding planes near the top of the ridge in the area of interest are undulatory but generally dip at low angles to the south or are near horizontal (Plates A-1 through A-6). By inspection, the beds steepen to the south, thereby likely providing planes steep enough to induce a proclivity for south-directed landsliding (Figure 3) as typified by the Flying Triangle, Portuguese Bend and other local landslides to the south. Small local folds are evident or inferred by mapping of available local outcrops. These appear to a great degree to be penecontemporaneous folds resultant from Miocene-aged slip or from subsequent injection of basalt, or combinations thereof; although later tectonism cannot be entirely ruled out as causation. No suspected active faults have been mapped in the area applicable to this report (see References). Some investigators have mapped faults in the region but these seem of no practical effect to the study site. For example, Slosson/County of Los Angeles mapped 216 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 8 two faults on- or near-site. One fault is depicted by those investigators as crossing the subject lot in a northeastern manner from the southwestern offsite Flying Triangle scarp. However, later mapping by DeVries (2004) and Environmental Geotechnology Laboratory, Inc. (2010) indicates that the fault does not exist. A second fault is mapped as in essence following the bottom of the canyon that borders the site on the west. Joints in the bedrock are generally high-angle. They vary from wide-spaced to closely spaced. Flying Triangle Landslide Owing to its proximity, the Flying Triangle Landslide bears assessment. The landslide is active and is composed of about 70 acres located downslope of the study site (Figure 3). The crown of the landslide lies about 230 feet west of the west site margin and about 425 feet southwest of proposed site development (Plate A-1). This landslide has been well-studied by, among others: Maurseth, Howe, Lockwood and Associates (1970), Ehlig (1987), (Anderson (1987), Keene (1986), Slosson/County of Los Angeles (1986/7) and Steiner (2004). That large body of work is not repeated but only briefly summarized herein, so the reader is thus referred to those articles. In brief, the Flying Triangle Landslide is an ancient landslide of which a part began to slip in the period of 1978 to 1980, causing the removal of about four houses. According to the literature, little has been done since to mitigate the potential for slip. Investigators agree that the slide mass is to some degree footed by bedding planes within the Altamira Shale that dip seaward at moderate angles; and yet they indicate that part of the sliding has and is occurring across bedding planes. Maximum depth of the slide mass is enigmatic. For example, Maurseth, Howe, Lockwood Associates concluded that the landslide is about 76-feet deep, whereas Ehlig (1987) suggested that a deeper slide plane could be as much as 450-feet below ground surface; thus making it the deepest landslide in the Portuguese Bend area, if true. Based on review of the available literature, both published and proprietary, the slide plane angles dip moderately southerly at angles ranging from about 12- to 15-degrees to about 20 to 25- degrees. Undercutting by streams that removed lateral support and possibly ancient undercutting of the toe area by wave action, combined with the introduction of ground water via rainy cycles and anthropic disposal of water led to the landslide reactivation. The investigators generally agree that the internal structure and hence the movement patterns in this landslide and the adjacent Klondike Canyon Landside (Figure 3) are complex; and that the slide mass consists of several blocks. 217 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 9 The Flying Triangle Landslide has and is moving on planes with moderate to moderately steep inclinations, as opposed to the nearly flat to quite shallow dips of bedding at and near the study site which is on the crest of the aforementioned monocline. This, perhaps aided by disruption of the continuity of the strata by intrusion of basalt, likely accounts for the relative stability of the upper part of the subject ridge. GROUNDWATER AND CAVING Groundwater was not encountered within the maximum depths explored for this project (59 feet below existing grades). Owing to the elevated position of the site with respect to nearby drainage courses, ground water is not expected to be a factor during construction of the proposed project. However, seasonal and long-term fluctuations in the groundwater conditions may occur as a result of variations in irrigation, rainfall, surface run-off and other factors. Caving was not observed during test pit excavation and sampling operations during the course of subsurface exploration at the site. Caving may occur in excavations deeper and/or greater in dimension than our test pits. SEISMOLOGICAL AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Ground Shaking Analysis Neither the location nor magnitude of earthquakes can accurately be predicted at the time of this report. In the past, the site has been periodically subject to moderate to intense earthquake-induced ground shaking from nearby faults. Considerable damage could occur at the site and structural improvements during a strong seismic event. There are several faults in the region, as presented on Figure 4, Regional Fault Map, that were, at the time of this report, considered ‘active’ and that could produce moderate to strong ground shaking at the site. The possibility of ground acceleration or shaking at the site could be considered as approximately similar to the Southern California region as a whole. Based on the USGS Degradation Application (2014 V4.2.0), the peak ground acceleration for Site Class “D” earth materials was reported to be 0.41g, with a 10% probability of being exceeded in 50 years, and 0.72g for a 2% probabilistic of exceedance in 50 years. Surface Fault Rupture The site does not lie within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, Figure 5, Seismic Hazards Map. Therefore, the potential for surface fault rupture at the Site during the design life of onsite structures is considered low. 218 DATE: May 2024 ADDRESS: 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, California PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence PROJECT NO: 23-3282 FIGURE: 4 REGIONAL FAULT MAP From: “Fault Activity Map of California,” compiled by Charles W. Jennings and William A. Bryant, California Geological Survey, Map No. 6, California Geologic Data Map Series, 2010 N Site Vicinity 219 DATE: May 2024 ADDRESS: 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, California PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence PROJECT NO: 23-3282 FIGURE: 5 SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES MAP N Approximate Project Location 220 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 10 Seismic Settlements (Liquefaction) The term “liquefaction” describes a phenomenon in which a saturated cohesionless soil loses strength and acquires a degree of mobility as a result of strong ground shaking during an earthquake. The factors known to influence liquefaction potential include soil type and depth, grain size, relative density, groundwater level, degree of saturation, and both the intensity and duration of ground shaking. Hazard data published by the State of California is shown on Figure 5 “Seismic Hazard Map” and indicates that the subject site is not within an area identified as having a potential for soil liquefaction. Seismically Induced Landslides A landslide is a movement of the ground and is categorized based on the type of material that has failed and the movement type that occurs. A landslide is broadly categorized by its’ failure mode, its’ movement, and the earth materials involved. Predicting where landslides may occur utilizes this information as well as other factors such as slope steepness, slope height, slope orientation, relative density of the earth materials, groundwater level, degree of saturation, as well as location, intensity, and duration of ground shaking. As shown on Figure 5 the portions of the site lie within an area identified by CGS as having a potential for earthquake induced landslides. According to Figures 2 and 3, no known or inferred landslides are on or project into the site. Hydro-Consolidation Hydro-consolidation settlement potential is considered to be low to moderate, as evidenced by subsurface soil properties, and laboratory engineering and index test results. Expansive Soils Laboratory testing on a sample of near surface soils indicated a ‘Medium’ soil expansion potential (EI=60) as defined in the latest edition of ASTM D4829. It is H&A’s opinion that a ‘Medium’ soil expansion should be used in project design. The degree of soil expansion should be confirmed by additional tests during or after rough grading operations. SLOPE STABILITY Slope stability analysis was performed for Sections A-A’, B-B’, C-C’, D-D’ and E-E’, Plates A-2 through A-6, marked through the site. Analyses were based on laboratory strength properties under saturated conditions, and engineering judgment for the proposed slope configurations. The below table presents strength data for the soil parameters used for the slope stability analysis: 221 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 11 Design Soil Parameters for Slope Stability Analyses Soil or Bedrock Type Cohesion,c (psf) Friction,phi (degrees) Bulk Density (pcf) Fill / Colluvium 290 20 115 Bedrock (fbc), < 25 ft 400 25 125 Bedrock (fbc), > 25 ft 500 34 125 Bedrock (abc) 200 21 125 Groundwater was not encountered during the field investigation. Based on field investigation and SHZR Historic High Groundwater data, groundwater was not incorporated into the slope model and is not anticipated to be a factor in the project’s development. The SLIDE computer program, using the Bishop Method of Analyses for circular and wedge failure surfaces, was utilized to search for the most critical failure surfaces. The seismic coefficient was based on the County of Los Angeles guidelines utilizing the Special Publication 117A methods. The seismic coefficient procedure assumes a value of k=0.15g with a minimum FS=1.1 required to achieve acceptable results. Results of the analyses are summarized below. Summary of Slope Stability Analysis Description Static Factor of Safety (FS) Seismic Factor of Safety (FS) Shear Pin Reinforcement A-A’ Global Circular/Wedge 1.78 / 1.94 1.20 / 1.18 - A-A’ Upper Circular/Wedge 1.77 / 2.05 1.26 / 1.35 - B-B’ Global Circular/Wedge 1.57 / 1.55 1.11 / 1.10 200 kips shear min 10’ OC, 60 ft bgs C-C’ Global Circular/Wedge 1.66 / 1.52 1.28 / 1.11 200 kips shear min 10’ OC, 35 ft bgs D-D’ Global Circular/Wedge 1.69 / 1.77 1.17 / 1.27 - E-E’ Global Circular/Wedge 1.74 / 1.80 1.35 / 1.40 - E-E’ Upper Circular/Wedge 2.04 / 2.34 1.49 / 1.70 - Stability Analyses indicate that the proposed development has a calculated global static factor-of-safety (FS) greater than 1.5 and a calculated global seismic FS greater than 1.1. Sections B-B’, C-C’ require that the outer row of piles also be designed as shear pins. Plots of slope stability output files, including critical failure surfaces, are attached in Appendix B for reference. 222 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 12 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of H&A’s field exploration and laboratory testing, combined with engineering analysis, experience and judgment, it is this firm’s opinion that the project may be developed as planned, provided the site grading and foundation criteria discussed herein are incorporated into the project plans and specifications and implemented during construction. Based on the findings in this report, and provided the recommendations of this report are followed, and the designs, grading and construction are properly and adequately executed, it is our finding that the proposed construction will not be subject to geotechnical hazards from landslides, slippage, or settlement, within the standard limits of geotechnical practice. Further, it is our finding that the proposed construction will not adversely affect the stability of the adjacent properties, with the same provisos listed above. The major geotechnical considerations that affect the design and construction of the planned construction included the following: • Soil disturbance as a result of site excavation and preparation operations. • Hillside Grading with keyways, benching, subdrains, and compacted fill. • Cast-in-Drilled-Hole (CIDH) construction into bedrock. • The outer row of piles are to be designed as stabilization shear pins at various locations. • Expansive soils that are subject to heave and shrinkage with wetting and drying. • Improvements adjacent to slopes will require maintenance and/or periodic replacement due to slope creep and other movement, unless supported by piles. • Foundation depths to achieve building code setbacks. It is this firm’s opinion that the proposed residence development may be supported by conventional foundations and/or cast-in-drilled hole (CIDH) pile foundation system embedded into competent bedrock. Building slabs shall be structural, supported by perimeter foundations. The following recommendations are provided. SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING Existing Construction Debris, Undocumented Fill, Disturbed Soils Prior to grading operations, it will be necessary to remove designated existing construction, including any remaining buried obstructions, which may be in the areas of proposed construction. Concrete flatwork should also be removed from areas of proposed construction. Concrete fragments from site demolition operations should be disposed of 223 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 13 off-Site. Any undocumented fill or disturbed soils in areas of proposed foundations and slab on grade construction should be excavated to full depth. Remedial Grading The proposed buildings shall be supported by foundations into bedrock. Grading to support ancillary improvements located away from slopes should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction above optimum moisture content for clayey soils and near optimum moisture content for granular soils. A six-inch scarification and recompaction of in-place soils to 90 percent relative compaction above optimum moisture contents may be taken equivalent to six-inches of approved compacted fill, when computing total excavation requirements. Expansive clay subgrade shall be pre-soaked prior to slab construction. The depth of over excavation should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Consultant during construction. Any subsurface obstruction, buried structural elements, and unsuitable material encountered during grading, should be immediately brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Consultant for proper exposure, removal and processing, as recommended. Exposed excavation bottoms should be observed by the Geotechnical consultant or his representative. Hillside Grading Hillside Grading Recommendations are provided below. • All Grading shall be performed according to County and City grading codes, approved plans and specifications, and the below recommendations, whichever is more restrictive. • Prior to commencement of work, a pre-grading meeting shall be held between the contractor, the owner or their representative, and the geotechnical engineer for the purpose of adhering to report recommendations. • A surveyor shall be retained to layout the proposed grading including but not limited to locating all keys, top of cuts, toe of fills, stability fills, setbacks, easements and areas requiring over excavation of the cut portions of the building pads. • Hillside fills shall have a key placed at the toe of the proposed fill slope. The key should be cut (3) feet into competent bedrock. The base of the key shall be sloped back into the hill. The key should be a minimum of (10) feet wide, except where slope stability analyses results in a wider key. Where slopes are steeper than 5:1 (H:V), horizontal benches shall be cut into competent bedrock in order to provide both lateral and vertical stability. • All areas to receive compacted fill, including all removal areas, keys and benches, shall be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to placing compacted fill. 224 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 14 • Materials excavated uphill from where fills are to be placed, shall not be cast over the slope into the fill area. Materials shall be channeled down a ramp to the area to receive compacted fill and the spread in horizontal layers. As compacted fills are placed, this ramp will be trimmed out to expose the dense, tight materials approved by the geotechnical engineer. The minimum vertical height of bench in approved materials shall be (3) feet. This will maintain the proper benching, as fill is placed up the slope. The ramp will be shifted periodically during the grading operations to allow for complete removal of the loose fill material and for the proper benching. • The fill soils shall consist of select materials approved by the geotechnical engineer. These materials may be obtained from the excavation areas and any other approved sources, and by blending soils from one or more sources. The material used shall be free from organic vegetable matter and other deleterious material and shall not contain rocks greater than (4) inches. • On-site and import materials approved for use should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8-inches in loose thickness, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture contents, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the latest edition of ASTM Test Method D1557. The grade that is determined to be satisfactory for the support of the filled ground shall be scarified to a depth of at least six inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to the above standard. • Review of the fill placement should be provided by the geotechnical engineer during grading. In general, density tests will be made at intervals not exceeding (2) feet of fill height or every 500 cubic yards of fill placed. • The contractor shall be required to obtain a minimum compaction of 90 percent out to the finish face of 2:1 fill slopes. Compaction on slopes may be achieved by overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the compacted core or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment. Direct compaction on the slope faces shall be accomplished by back-rolling the slopes in (3) foot to (4) foot increments of elevation gain. • During the inclement part of the year, or during periods when rain is threatening, all fill that has been spread and awaits compaction shall be compacted before stopping work for the day or before stopping because of inclement weather. These fills, once compacted, shall have the surfaces sloped to drain to an area where water can be removed. • Work may start again, after the rainy period, once the site has been reviewed by the geotechnical engineer and authorization is given to resume. Loose materials not compacted prior to the rain shall be removed and aerated so that the moisture content of these fills will be within (3) percent above the optimum moisture content. 225 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 15 • Surface materials previously compacted before the rain shall be scarified, brought to the proper moisture content and recompacted prior to placing additional fill, if deemed necessary by the geotechnical engineer. • Hillside fill shall have back drains installed at the compacted fill/competent bedrock contact to dissipate potential subsurface porewater pressure buildup. Backdrains shall consist of (4) inch perforated pipes; placed with perforations down. The pipe should be encased with at least (1) foot of gravel around the pipe. The minimum cover on the pipe should be (1) foot. The gravel should consist of (3/4) to (1) inch crushed rock. The first drain shall be placed no higher than (3) feet above the front cut of the key excavation. Additional back drains shall be placed at intervals roughly equivalent to (10) feet of vertical rise in elevation or where deemed necessary by the project soils engineer. For slopes where less than (20) feet of compacted fill is placed the drains shall be placed in the base of the keyway and at mid-slope. Each drain shall be placed into a trench excavated along the back of a horizontal bench at the compacted fill/competent bedrock contact. The trench bottom shall slope downward to each exit drain with a minimum gradient of (2) percent. The exit pipe shall consist of a (4) inch diameter non-perforated pipe. This pipe need not be encased in gravel. It shall exit at a minimum gradient of (2) percent to the finish face of the fill slope. Exist drains shall be placed at intervals not exceeding (50) feet. A cutoff wall consisting of concrete or soil cement shall be placed at the junction of the perforated pipe and the exit drains to stop seepage and force the water being removed into the perforated pipe. Temporary Excavations Excavations of site soils 4 feet or deeper should be temporarily shored or sloped in accordance with Cal OSHA requirements. For the purpose of Cal OSHA soil classification and shoring design, site soils should be considered as Type B. A. Temporary Slopes: In areas where excavations deeper than 4 feet are not adjacent to existing structures or public right-of-ways, sloping procedures may be utilized for temporary excavations. It is recommended that temporary slopes in native soils be graded no steeper than 1:1 (H:V) for excavations up to 15 feet in depth. The above temporary slope criteria is based on level soil conditions behind temporary slopes with no surcharge loading (structures, traffic) within a lateral distance behind the top of slope equivalent to the slope height. It is recommended that excavated soils be placed a minimum lateral distance from top of slope equal to the height of slope. A minimum setback distance equivalent to the slope height should be maintained between the top of slope and heavy excavating/grading equipment. 226 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 16 Should adverse conditions be experienced during excavation operations, flattening of cut slope faces, or other special procedures, may be required to achieve stable, temporary slopes. Soil conditions should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Consultant as excavation progresses to verify acceptability of temporary slopes. Final temporary cut slope design will be dependent upon the soil conditions encountered, construction procedures and schedule. B. Shoring: Temporary shoring will be required for those excavations where temporary slope cuts as specified above are not feasible. Temporary cantilever shoring, if used, should be designed to resist active earth pressures of 35 pounds per cubic foot equivalent fluid pressure for level conditions behind shoring. The design of shoring should also include surcharge loading effects of existing structures and anticipated traffic, including delivery and construction equipment, when loading is within a distance from the shoring equal to the depth of excavation. In addition to the above, a minimum uniform lateral pressure of 100 pounds per square foot in the upper ten feet of shoring should be incorporated in the design when normal traffic is permitted within ten feet of the shoring. New Fills The upper one foot of site soils should be excavated and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction near optimum moisture content prior to placement of any new fills, where required, to achieve finish grade elevations. Exposed excavation bottoms should be scarified a minimum 6-inches and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction at near optimum moisture content. Excavation bottoms should be firm and unyielding prior to backfilling. Backfilling and Compaction Requirements On-site and import materials approved for use should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8-inches in loose thickness, moisture conditioned to above optimum moisture content for clayey soils and near optimum moisture content for granular soil, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the latest edition of ASTM Test Method D1557. Existing site soils, unless indicated otherwise, are considered suitable for re-use during Site grading and backfilling, provided they are free of debris, particles greater than 4 inches in maximum dimension, organic matter or 227 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 17 other deleterious materials, and are to a suitable moisture condition to permit achieving the required compaction. Imported Soils Any imported soil required to complete grading operations should consist of predominantly granular material which exhibits an Expansion Index (“EI”) of less than 20 when tested in accordance ASTM Expansion Test Procedures and should be free of debris and particles greater than 4 inches in maximum dimension, organic matter or other deleterious materials, and should be approved by the Geotechnical Consultant or his representative. Potential import material should be identified, sampled and provided to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 72 hours prior to importation to the site. Final acceptance of any imported soil will be based upon review and testing of the soil actually delivered to the Site. Observation and Testing During Construction All foundation, grading, compaction, and backfill operations should be performed under the observation of and testing by the Geotechnical Consultant’s designated representative. The consultant should be notified at least two days in advance of the start of construction. A joint meeting between the contractor and geotechnical consultant is required prior to the start of construction to discuss specific procedures and scheduling. A. Grading Observation and Testing: Prior to placing any fill the exposed excavation bottoms should be observed by the Project Geotechnical Consultant or their representative. If it is determined during grading that site soils require overexcavation to greater depths for obtaining proper support for the proposed structure, this additional work should be performed in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. Any subsurface obstruction, buried structural elements, and unsuitable material (such as undocumented fill, natural topsoil, etc…) encountered during grading, should be immediately brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Consultant for proper exposure, removal and processing, as recommended. Field moisture and density tests should be taken during grading in accordance with this report and local ordinances. All foundation excavations should be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant's representative to verify minimum embedment depths and competency of bearing soils. Such observations should be made prior to placement of any reinforcing steel or concrete. B. CIDH Pile Observation and Testing: General guidelines for pile installation are summarized below: • Pile excavation will require equipment suitable to penetrate bedrock and/or soil typical to the area. 228 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 18 • Pile excavations should be drilled with suitable equipment and should not be out-of- plumb by more than 0.5 percent of the pier length. The center-to-center distance of constructed piers at the base of pile cap should not vary by more than three inches from the design spacing, or as directed by the Structural Consultant, whichever is more restrictive. • Methods are the responsibility of the contractor. Casing should be used during drilling of any piles in the event caving conditions are experienced. If casing is used, concrete placement and casing removal should be done in stages such that the casing bottom is always as a minimum 3 feet below the top of concrete. Where applicable, bentonite slurry displacement (with steel casing to avoid caving) should be used for placement of concrete during drilled pier installation. All pile excavations shall be cleaned of loose soils and cuttings. • A representative of this office should be present during all pile-drilling operations to verify pile embedment depths and acceptability of strata. • The placement of reinforcement and concrete should conform to ACI and other applicable code requirements. • Pile installation specifications should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Consultant. FOUNDATION DESIGN It is this firm’s opinion that the proposed residence development may be supported by conventional foundations and/or cast-in-drilled hole (CIDH) pile foundation system embedded into competent bedrock. Building slabs shall be structural, supported by perimeter foundations. Foundation design details such as concrete strength, reinforcements, etc. should be established by the Project Structural Engineer. Foundation Capacity A. Conventional Foundation Capacity A dead plus live load allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot may be used in the design of both continuous and spread footings, when supported in competent bedrock. Recommended minimum footing embedment is 24 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade and 12 inches into competent bedrock, whichever is deeper. The above bearing pressures may be increased by one-third when considering short term loading from wind or seismic forces. B. Cast-in-Drilled-Hole (CIDH) Friction Piles Piles shall be at least 24-inch diameter and deepened into bedrock with no support from fill or colluvium. Recommended bearing and uplift capacities for drilled cast-in-place piles are provided on Figure 6. It is recommended that the minimum depth of penetration into 229 FRICTION PILE DESIGN Project No. 23-3282 Figure 6 HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Design values given are for 12 inch diameter,cast-in-placefrictionpiles.For piles of different sizes,the allowable capacitywillbedirectlyproportionaltothecomparativepilediameter.Uplift capacity will be one half the downward value given. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 Embedment intoAllowable Capacity (Kips) Minimum Embedment 7 Feet Bedrock(Ft.)Geotechnical Engineering Investigation 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, California 230 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 19 bedrock be 7 feet. The weight of the concrete in the piles may be neglected in considering bearing pressure. Lateral Resistance A. Conventional Foundations Resistance to lateral loads can be assumed to be provided by pressure acting on structural components in contact with bedrock. Lateral resistance on the sides of footings may be computed using a passive pressure of 200 pounds per square foot per foot embedment into bedrock, subject to a maximum of 2,000 pounds per square foot. Friction between the base of the footings, and/or floor slabs, and the underlying material may be assumed as 0.30. Friction and lateral pressure may be combined, provided either is limited to two-thirds of the allowable. B. Cast-in-Drilled-Hole (CIDH) Friction Piles Resistance to lateral loads can be assumed to be provided by passive earth pressure and by friction acting on structural components in permanent contact with the bedrock. Lateral resistance on the sides of piles may be computed using a passive pressure of 400 pounds per square foot per foot embedment into bedrock, subject to a maximum of 4,000 pounds per square foot. Piles shall be tied by gradebeams and in two directions where possible. Active Loads on Piles Piles shall be designed for a lateral load of 1,000 pounds per linear foot of shaft exposed to fill and colluvium soils located above bedrock. Depths should be confirmed by the Geotechnical Consultant during construction. Settlements/Displacements Total settlements for foundations designed and constructed in accordance with the above criteria and supporting maximum assumed column and wall loads of 30 kips and 2.5 kips per linear foot, respectively, are not anticipated to exceed 1 inch. A differential settlement on the order of 1/2 inch is anticipated between similarly loaded pad footings and for continuous wall footings over a distance of approximately 30 feet. Settlement of single piles, or groups of up to three (3) piles, may be estimated to be less than 1/2 inch. Lateral displacement at the top of piers is not expected to exceed 1/2 inch. Most of the estimated settlement will take place rapidly with the first application of load. This office should be contacted for further evaluation and recommendations, as necessary, should final design structural loads exceed the maximum loads used in our analysis by more than 10 percent. 231 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 20 Slope Setback The foundation setbacks, required by the Building Department is for the placement of buildings and structures on, or adjacent to, slopes steeper than 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) to provide protection from water, mudflow, loose slope debris and shallow slope failures. These setbacks, shown on Figure 7 are for the horizontal clearance from the face of the foundations to the slope face. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS The Site-specific seismic design parameters were determined as a part of this study in accordance with the 2022 California Building Code, which is based on the 2019 International Building Code (IBC). Additionally, seismic design parameters were determined using the Structural Engineering Association (SEA) website which uses the USGS Seismic Design Web Services for the hazard loads. The 2022 CBC seismic design parameters that apply to the Site are as follows: 2022 CBC Seismic Parameters CBC Seismic Parameter Value or Classification Site Classification (per Table ASCE/SEI 7-10 Table 20.3-1) D Mapped Spectral Response at 0.2 Sec Acceleration, Ss 1.559 Mapped Spectral Response at 1.0 Sec Acceleration, S1 0.564 Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Acceleration, SMS 1.871 Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Acceleration, SM1 *null 5-Percent Damped Design Spectral Acceleration, SDS 1.247 5-Percent Damped Design Spectral Acceleration, SD1 *null *See ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.8 The Structural Consultant should review the above parameters and the 2022 CBC to evaluate the seismic design. Final selection of design coefficients should be made by the structural consultant based on the local laws and ordinances, expected structure response, and the desired level of conservatism. RETAINING WALLS Retaining walls planned should be adequately designed to resist the lateral soil pressures and the anticipated construction loadings and service conditions. The earth pressure acting on retaining walls depends primarily on the allowable wall movement, type of backfill materials, backfill slopes, wall inclination, surcharges, and any hydrostatic pressure. The following equivalent fluid pressures are recommended for vertical walls with no hydrostatic pressure and no surcharge loading: 232 DATE: May 2024 ADDRESS: 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, California PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence PROJECT NO: 23-3282 FIGURE: 7 SLOPE SETBACK – Section 1808.7 233 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 21 Soil Type Backfill Slope Behind Walls EARTH PRESSURE Equivalent Fluid Pressure (pcf) Active(Cantilever) At-Rest (Rigid) Granular Non-Expansive Level 40 60 Site Soil Expansive Level 60 100 Site Soil Expansive 2:1 (H:V) 80 120 These values are applicable for granular non-expansive fill soils placed between the wall sides and an imaginary plane rising at 45 degrees from below the edges (heel) of wall bottoms. The surcharge effect of anticipated loads on the wall backfill (e.g., traffic, construction equipment, footings) should be included in the wall design. Depending on whether the wall is free to deflect or restrained, 33 or 50 percent, respectively, of a maximum surcharge load located within a distance equal to the retained height of the wall should be used in design. If it is determined that retaining walls require an additional seismic design pressure in accordance with the CBC, the following is provided for lateral earth pressures of site retaining walls. A resultant lateral force acting on proposed retaining walls as a result of seismic forces may be computed as 25 pcf-equivalent fluid pressure. This seismic resultant force may be applied to the retaining wall at a point located at (2/3)*H, measured from the bottom of the wall. Positive drainage measures should be incorporated in design. Retaining wall subdrains should be located below the basement slab elevation and consist of a minimum four-inch diameter perforated ABS-SDR-35 or PVC SCH-40, or equivalent, connected to similar non-perforated outlet pipe. The perforated portion of the pipe should be embedded in at least three cubic feet per lineal foot of 3/4 inch crushed rock or equivalent material which has been wrapped in fabric, consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent, and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. The filter fabric should overlap at least 12 inches at the ends of the fabric. Other subdrainage alternatives may be considered but should first be reviewed and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to implementation. POOL RECOMMENDATIONS It is H&A’s opinion that the proposed pool shall be supported by conventional foundations or piles into competent bedrock, depending on slope setbacks. The shell shall be designed for full loss of soil support on the downhill side. No pipes shall enter the pool or spa from the slope side. 234 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 22 Excavations of site soils should be performed in accordance with Cal OSHA requirements and in a manner to protect adjacent structures and property. The following minimum recommendations apply to pool design and construction: Pool Shell Expansive testing generally indicates ‘Medium’ expansion potential of the on-site soils and should be considered for pool design. Swimming pool walls should be designed to resist an at-rest equivalent fluid pressure of 100 psf both ways. Additionally, the pool shell should be designed as a self-standing structure for total loss of soil support. Additional loads should be added to the shell design for structures laterally located within the depth of the shell. Consideration should be given to deepening existing or proposed adjacent structure’s footings, so they have no influence on the shell nor derive support from the pool shell. As the weight of the soil removed for the pool shell exceeds the weight of the pool and water, neither bearing nor settlement due to new loads is an issue. Decks and Flatwork Pool decks adjacent to slopes shall be pile supported. Incidental pool decks and flatwork away from slopes, regardless of areas of cut or fill, shall be underlain by a minimum of 2 feet of approved compacted fill beneath existing grade or finish grade, whichever is lower, and extend a minimum of two (2) feet beyond the footprint of the deck/flatwork, where possible. Approved fill materials in these areas should consist of on-site or import suitable material recompacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction above optimum moisture contents for fine-grained soils and near optimum moisture contents for coarse- grained soils in accordance with the slab recommendations in this report. From a geotechnical standpoint, concrete slabs should be a minimum five (5) inches thick and reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced at least 24 inches on center. Exterior slabs should be scored or saw cut, 1/2” to 3/8” deep, often enough so that no section is greater than ten feet by ten feet. The slabs should be separated from the foundations and sidewalks with expansion joint material. Other Pool Considerations Hydrostatic relief valves should be incorporated into the pool design. All fittings and pipe joints should be heavy duty and should be properly sealed to prevent water from leaking into the underlying soils. A poorly designed, installed, or maintained waterproofing system could lead to excessive soil movement upon occurrence of the leakage. An elastic waterproof expansion joint should be installed to prevent water from seeping into the soil at all deck joints. 235 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 23 SLAB-ON-GRADE Building slabs shall be structural, fully supported by the foundation system. Incidental concrete slabs should be supported on properly compacted soils in accordance with the site preparation and grading section of this report. Slab subgrade soils should not be allowed to dry out and should be maintained at the placement moisture condition until concreting. From a geotechnical standpoint, as a minimum, slabs should be 5-inches thick and reinforced with #4 reinforcing bars spaced at 12-inches on center each way. Expansive structural slab and slab-on-grade subgrade should be pre-saturated just prior to construction. Any interior slab to receive a moisture-sensitive floor covering should include a moisture membrane system. The vapor barrier shall consist of Stego Wrap Vapor Barrier 15 mil extruded poloylefin plastic, or equivalent. No recycled content or woven materials are permitted. Permeance as tested before and after mandatory conditioning (ASTM E 1745 section 7.1 and sub-paragraphs 7.1.1 – 7.1.5): less than 0.01 perms [grains/(ft2 · hr · inhg)] and comply with the ASTM E 1745-11 class a requirements. Install vapor barrier according to ASTM E 1643-11 and the manufactures recommendations, unless directed otherwise by the project structural engineer. Slabs should be properly designed and reinforced for the construction and service loading conditions. The structural details, such as slab thickness, concrete strength, amount, and type of reinforcements, joint spacing, etc., should be established by the Project Structural Engineer. SOIL CORROSIVITY Limited soil constituent tests were performed on a select sample of site soils to give a general idea as to the corrosive nature of on-site soils to proposed concrete foundations, rebar, and any underground metal conduit. A corrosion engineer/specialist should be consulted for any advanced analysis or recommendations relating to corrosion at the site. Constituent test results are presented in Appendix A. Concrete Corrosion Disintegration of concrete may be attributed to the chemical reaction of soil sulfates and hydrated lime and calcium aluminate within the cement. The severity of the reaction resulting in expansion and disruption of the cement is primarily a function of the soluble sulfates and the water-cement ratio of the concrete. A soluble sulfate content of 0.0050% by weight has been recorded from corrosivity testing conducted on on-Site soils, as indicated in the test results provided in Appendix A. In accordance with Table 19.3.1.1 of 236 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 24 ACI 318-19, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, soils exhibiting soluble sulfate content less than 0.1% by weight are classified as ‘S0’. ‘S0’ sulfate class has no type restriction on concrete and a minimum requirement of fc’ of 2500 psi. Metal Corrosion In the evaluation of soil corrosivity to metal, the hydrogen ion concentrate (pH) and the electrical resistivity of the site and backfill soils are the principal variables in determining the service life of ferrous metal conduit. The pH of soil and water is a measure of acidity or alkalinity, while the resistivity is a measure of the soil’s resistance to the flow of electrical current. Currently available design charts indicate that corrosion rates decrease with increasing resistivity and increasing alkalinity. It can also be noted that for alkaline soils, the corrosion rate is more influenced by resistivity than by pH. The resistivity value of 730 ohm-cm, as well as a pH-value of 7.81 classifies the on-site soils tested to be ‘Severely’ to buried ferrous metals. Based on California Test 643, the year to perforation for 18-gauge steel in contact with soils of similar resistivity and pH- value is approximately 22 years. In lieu of additional testing, alternative piping materials, i.e. coatings, plastic piping, may be used instead of metal if longer service life is desired or required. Where more detailed corrosion evaluation is required, we recommend that a qualified corrosion consultant be engaged to provide further evaluation and recommendations. A soluble chloride content of 113 ppm was recorded and is considered low to the threshold values of 500 ppm per Caltrans Corrosion Guidelines 2018. Therefore, no special measure in terms of rebar protection against chloride corrosion is recommended herein as a result of the low soluble chloride content tested. SITE DRAINAGE In accordance with the CBC, unless exceptions apply, the ground immediately adjacent to buildings should be sloped away from the building not less than 5% for a minimum distance of 10 feet. If physical obstructions or lot lines prohibit 10 feet of horizontal distance, the 5% slope should be provided to an alternate method of diverting water from the foundation system, such as swales (sloped at 2%). Impervious surfaces within 10 feet of the building foundation shall be sloped a minimum of 2% away from the building. IRRIGATION / VEGETATION As with all properties on, adjacent to, or with slopes, the application of water should be minimized. Plant materials such as ice plants or succulents should not be planted on 237 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 25 slopes. If and whenever possible, drought tolerant, deep rooted plant materials should be utilized on slopes, with California native vegetation being considered first. UTILITY TRENCHES All trenches should be backfilled with approved fill material, compacted to relative compaction of not less than 90 percent of maximum density. Care should be taken during backfilling to prevent utility line damage. The on-site soils may be used for backfilling utility trenches from one foot above the top of pipe to the surface, provided the material is free of organic matter and deleterious substances. Any soft and/or loose materials or fill encountered at a pipe invert should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill or adequate bedding material. Imported soils for pipe bedding should consist of non- expansive granular soils. The walls of temporary construction trenches may not be stable when excavated nearly vertically due to the potential for caving. Shoring of excavation walls or flattening of slopes will be required for temporary excavations deeper than 4 feet. All work associated with trenches, excavations and shoring must conform to the State of California Safety Code. PLAN REVIEW, OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING As foundation and earthwork plans are completed, Hamilton & Associates should be retained to provide plan review for intent of our recommendations. The review will enable us to modify our recommendations should the final design conditions not be as we understand them. During construction, we should provide field observation and testing to check that site preparation, grading, and foundation installation conform to the intent of our recommendations and to the project plans and specifications. As needed, during construction, we should be retained to consult on geotechnical questions, construction problems, and unanticipated conditions. This would allow us to develop supplemental recommendations as appropriate for the actual subsurface conditions encountered and the specific construction techniques. Furthermore, we would prepare a construction observation and testing report for the building department. CLOSURE This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Ms. Yukiko Ogasawara for the proposed project at the subject site. The report has not been prepared for use by other parties and may not contain sufficient information for the purposes of other parties. The Owner or their representatives are responsible for ensuring the information and recommendations contained in this report are brought to the attention of the project engineers and architects, incorporated into the project plans, and implemented by project contractors. This report should be named on project grading plans as a part of the project specifications. 238 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 26 We request and recommend notification should any of the following occur: 1. Final plans for site development indicate utilization of areas not originally proposed for construction. 2. Structural loading conditions vary from those utilized for evaluation and preparation of this report. 3. The site is not developed within 12 months following the date of this report. 4. Change of ownership of property occurs. If changes or delays do occur, this office should be notified and provided with finalized plans of site development for our review to enable us to provide the necessary recommendations for additional work and/or updating of the report. Any charges for such review and necessary recommendations would be at the prevailing rate at the time of performing review work. The findings contained in this report are based upon our evaluation and interpretation of the information obtained from the subsurface exploration performed and the results of laboratory testing and engineering analysis. As part of the engineering analysis, it had been assumed, and is expected, that the geotechnical conditions which exist across the area of study are similar to those encountered in the subsurface exploration. However, no warranty is expressed or implied as to the conditions at locations or depths other than those excavated. Should any conditions encountered during construction differ from those described herein, this office should be contacted immediately for recommendations prior to continuation of work. Our findings and recommendations were obtained in accordance with generally accepted current professional principles and local practice in geotechnical engineering and reflect our best professional judgment. We make no other warranty, either express or implied. These recommendations are, however, dependent on the above assumption of uniformity and upon proper quality control of construction. Geotechnical observations and testing should be provided on a continuous basis during temporary and foundation construction at the site to confirm design assumptions and to verify conformance with the intent of our recommendations. If parties other than Hamilton & Associates, Inc., are engaged to provide geotechnical services during construction they must be informed that they will be required to assume complete responsibility for the geotechnical phase of the project by concurring with the recommendations in this report or providing alternative recommendations. 239 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Page 27 This concludes our scope of services as described during our proposal dated September 26, 2023, however, this report is subject to review by the controlling authorities for the project. Any further geotechnical services that may be required of our office to respond to questions/comments of the controlling authorities after their review of the report will be performed on a time and expense basis as per our current fee schedule. We would not proceed with any response to report review comments/questions without authorization from your office. We appreciate your business and hope that we can assist you during construction related services. 240 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 References REFERENCES Prior Site Reports Hamilton and Associates, Inc. (2013), Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation, Proposed Residential Development, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, California, Project No. 13-1672, dated July 19, 2023. Hamilton & Associates, Inc. (2014), Report of Deep Seepage Pit Percolation Testing, Tentative Parcel Map 72775 Lots 1 & 2, APN 7567-011-020, Tentatively 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, California, Project No. 13-1672, dated May 29, 2014. Wildan (2013/14), Approval Letter of Geotechnical / Geological Reports and OWTS Report, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, California, dated October 23, 2013 (14). Hamilton and Associates, Inc. (2021), Updated Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation, Proposed Residential Development 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, California, Project No. 13-1675, dated November 8, 2021. General and Local References Anderson, J.L., 1987, The Flying Triangle landslide: Geologic, geomorphologic, and tectonic factors, in, Peter J. Fischer, editor, Geology of the Palos Verdes Peninsula and San Pedro Bay: Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol., Field Trip Guidebook, Los Angeles, CA, June 7, 1987. Coastline Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., August 9, 1995, Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed Residential Improvements, 33 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA, Project No. 1027C-075. Coastline Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. 2004, Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed Residential Additions, APN 7567-011-018, 17 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, California: Consultant’s Technical Report, dated November 10, 2004, Project No.2071C-024. California Geological Survey, 2002/2011, Interactive probabilistic seismic hazards map: http://conservation.ca.gov/cgs/rregional/pshamap//html. *Cleveland, G.B., 1976, Geology of the northeast part of the Palos Verdes Hills, Los Angeles County, California: Calif. Div. Mines and Geol. Map Sheet 2.*Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones Special Map, San Pedro 7.5 Minute Quadrangle. DeVries, G., 2004, Preliminary Engineering Investigation, Proposed Residential Addition, 17 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA: Consultant’s Technical Report, dated October 29, 2004, Project No. 1281-024. Dibblee, T.W., Jr., 1999, Geologic map of the Palos Verdes Peninsula and vicinity: Dibblee Foundation Map DF-70. Ehlert, Keith W., Consulting Engineering Geologist, August 2, 1995, Geologic Investigation for Proposed Residential Improvements, 33 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA, Project No. 1027C-075 241 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 References Ehlig, P.L., 1986, The Portuguese Bend Landslide: Its mechanism and a plan for its stabilization, in, P.L. Ehlig, compiler, Landslides and landslide mitigation in Southern California: Geol. Soc. Amer., Cordilleran Section, 82nd Annual Meeting. Environmental Geotechnology Laboratory, Inc., 2010, Response to the Department of Public Works, County of Los Angeles, Geologic and Soils Engineering Review Sheets Dated August 6, 2008 and August 8, 2008, Grading Plan Check No. 0806110003; Proposed Residential Development, APZ: 7567-011-018, 17 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, California: Consultant’s Technical Report, dated August 26, 2010, Project No.: 09-AA-003EGR. Hart, E.W. and Bryant, W.A., Revised 2007, Fault-rupture hazard zones in California, Alquist-Priolo earthquakes fault zoning act with index to earthquake fault zones map; California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Hamilton & Associates, Inc., Geotechnical and geologic investigation report, proposed swimming pool, garage, retaining walls, propane tank and cabana. 29 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, California: Consultant’s Technical Report, dated March 11. 2013, Project No. 12-1644. Haydon, W.D., 2007, Landslide Inventory Map of the Palos Verdes Peninsula, Los Angeles County, California: Calif. Geol. Surv. Jennings, Charles, 2010, “Fault Activity Map of California”: Online Keene, A.G, 1986, Flying Triangle Landslide, City of Rolling Hills, California, in, P.L. Ehlig, compiler, Landslides and Landslide Mitigation in Southern California: Geol. Soc. Amer., Cordilleran Section, 82nd Annual Meeting. Maurseth, Howe, Lockwood and Associates, 1970, Geology and Soils Investigation, Flying Triangle area, City of Rolling Hills, California: Consultants’ Technical Report, dated June 11, 1970, Project No. 4477-FG.Slosson/County of Los Angeles, 1986/7, Geologic Map of the Flying Triangle Landslide: Unpublished geologic map on file at County of Los Angeles Public Works: Scale 1”=100’. Note: This map is detailed in Flying Triangle area, but the investigator and date are not known with certainty. Steiner, E., 2004, The Portuguese Bend Landslide, in, Palos Verdes Peninsula: Fabulous geology in a beautiful setting, A.R. Brown, editor: Los Angeles Basin Geol. Soc., Field Trip. June 26, 2004. Treiman, J.J., and Lundberg, M.M., 1998b, Fault number 128b, Palos Verdes Fault Zone, Palos Verdes Hills section, in Quaternary fault and fold database of the United States: U.S. Geol. Survey. Website, http//earthquakes.usgs.gov/regional/faults. United States Geological Survey, Java ground motion parameter calculator website: Version 5.1.0., Work Order 02-3401. Woodring, W.P., Bramlette, M.N., and Kew, W.S.W., 1946, Geology and Paleontology of the Palos Verdes Hills, California: U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 207. Woods, M. C., and Seiple, W. R., ed., 1995, “The Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994”, California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 116. Ziony, J. I. ed., 1985, Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles region – an earth science perspective: U.S. Geol. Surv. Professional Paper 1360. 242 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 References Aerial Photographs Date Flight/Frames 2-24-99 C134-37/206, 207 10-15-97 C117-36/135, 136 1-29-95 C102-36/4,5 6-9-93 C93-12/208,209 1-29-92 C85-8/35,36 1-7-88 19279,17980 1-27-86 E/363,364 5-12-79 FCLA-12/139, 140 3-17-78 78047/193,194 1-31-70 61-9/184,185 1-18-68 #4/55, 56 2-20-58 CAA-9/34, 35 8-31-54 19K/18, 19 243 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Appendix A APPENDIX A Plate A-1 Site Plan & Geologic Map Plate A-2 Cross Section A-A’ Plate A-3 Cross Section B-B’ Plate A-4 Cross Section C-C’ Plate A-5 Cross Section D-D’ Plate A-6 Cross Section E-E’ Plate A-7 Los Angeles County Geologic Map Plates B-1 through B-16 Logs of Test Pits & Borings Plates C-1 and C-2 Consolidation Test Results Plates D-1 through D-8 Direct Shear Test Results LABORATORY TESTS After samples were visually classified in the laboratory, a testing program that would provide data for our evaluation was established. The results are presented in the following sections. MOISTURE CONTENT AND DENSITY TESTS The undisturbed soil retained within the sampler rings was tested in the laboratory to determine in-place dry density and moisture content. The results are presented below: Test Pit No. Depth (feet bgs) Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) TP-1 3.0 DS 14.4 TP-2 0.5 93.5 10.8 TP-2 2.0 69.5 12.7 TP-2 3.0 63.3 10.3 TP-3 1.0 83.3 13.5 TP-3 2.0 74.5 21.7 TP-4 1.0 84.9 12.5 TP-5 3.0 D.S. 9.0 TP-5 4.0 73.8 12.4 TP-6 3.0 82.4 8.8 TP-7 3.0 83.9 11.6 TP-8 4.5 80.9 13.8 TP-9 4.0 68.9 3.8 TP-10 3.0 46.0 14.5 244 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Appendix A B-1 5.0 DS 12.9 B-1 10.0 107 13.0 B-1 15.0 105.5 15.7 B-1 20.0 98.4 15.9 B-1 30.0 98.3 15.2 B-1 40.0 94.2 21.6 B-1 50.0 105.1 21.4 B-1 59.0 92.8 22.6 B-2 5.0 98.8 20.3 B-2 10.0 104.1 11.1 B-2 20.0 103.7 16.8 B-2 30.0 79.3 41.1 B-2 40.0 105.2 17.6 B-2 50.0 96.6 25.3 B-2 59 83.4 11.2 DS = Disturbed Sample CONSOLIDATION TESTS One dimensional consolidation test were performed on selected samples of the bedrock to determine the settlement characteristics and effects when placed in contact with water. The results of these tests are shown graphically on the appended “C” Plate. DIRECT SHEAR TESTS Direct shear and repeated shear tests were performed on selected relatively undisturbed and remolded samples to determine the shear strength parameters of bedrock soil samples. The results of these tests are shown graphically on the appended “D” Plates. MAXIMUM DENSITY TEST The following maximum density test was conducted in accordance with ASTM D1557, Method A, using 5 equal layers, 25 blows each layer, 10-pound hammer, 18 inch drop in a 1/30 cubic foot mold. The results are as follows: Test Pit No. Depth (feet) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) Material Classification TP-1 0’-2’ 103.5 17.3 Clayey Silt EXPANSION TEST An expansion test was performed on a soil samples to determine the swell characteristics. The expansion test was conducted in accordance with ASTM D4829, Expansion Index 245 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Appendix A Test. The expansion sample was remolded to approximately 50 percent of saturation, subjected to 144 pounds per square foot surcharge load and submerged in water. Location Molded Dry Density (pcf) Molded Moist. Content (%) Saturation (%) Expansion Index Expansion Classification TP-1 (0’-2’) 84.4 17.7 48.3 60 Moderate CORROSIVITY TESTING Laboratory testing was performed by Cal Land Engineering per guidelines of California 417 (Sulfate), California 422 (Chloride), and California 532 (pH and Resistivity test procedures on a representative sample of the on-Site soils. This test was intended to provide data for a preliminary assessment relative to the potential for concrete deterioration due to soil sulfate and metal deterioration due to pH, resistivity of the soil and chloride content. The test results are shown below: SAMPLE SULFATE CONTENT (% weight, dry soil) CHLORIDE (ppm) pH RESISTIVITY (ohms) TP-6 (0-3’) 0.0050 113 7.81 730 246 LEGEND Geologic Units Qls – Lanslide Debris Tmb – Basaltic Sills Tma – Altamira Shale Symbols Strike and Dip of Bedding; @40’ Indicates Depth Measured in Boring 5 Plunging Anticline / Syncline Geologic Cross-Section Location of Exploratory Boring and Test Pit B B’ Site plan based on plan prepared Bolton Engineering Corp., dated December 18, 2023 TP-10 B-6 Tma TP-6 23 7 14 18 12 A Tma Tma TP-3 TP-2 TP-5 TP-7 TP-8 TP-9 TP-1 B-1 15 15 2018 15 5 B-2 12 512 TP-10 5 TP-4 20 8 3 486 8 14 9 8 78 6 5 12 14 A’ B’ B Tma Tma TmaQls ?? Estimated Limits of Landslide Scarp Approximate Limit of Flying Triangle Landside ? ? @54’ @42’ @42’ @40’ @25’ @20’ @13’ @9’ @6’ @5’15 13 17 10 14 8 14 12 8 40 10 4 5 13 10 10 6 12 @52’ @27’ @25’ @19’ @16’ @13’ @8’ @3’ E’ D D’ Inferred Fault Mapped By Slosson ? ? B-4 B-3 B-5 B-6 1170 1200 1300 C C’ E E’ Ogasawara Residence – 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills Estates, California 23-3282 A-1 May 2024 0 100’200’ Scale in Feet (approx.) Conceptual Fill Keyway Limits Shear Pin Stabilization Piles 247 Ogasawara Residence – 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills Estates, California 23-3282 A-2 May 2024 N 22° E A 1180’ 1120’ 1060’ A’ 1240’ Crest Rd 1300’ 1360’ 1180’ 1120’ 1060’ 1240’ 1300’ 1360’ GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A-A’ Test Pit TP-2 (Projected 25’) Test Pit TP-9 (proj'd) Test Pit TP-1 Test Pit TP-5 Boring B-1 Dirt Road Tma Tmb Tmb TmbExisting Grade ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Tma Proposed Grade Proposed Residence PL PL ? Proposed Keyway/Benching Colluvium Colluvium Proposed Grade (Fill) Boring B-5 Boring B-2 0 60’120’ Scale in Feet (approx.) Buttress Fill 248 A-3 GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION B-B’ N 70° EB 1180’ 1120’ 1060’ B’ 1240’ Crest Rd 1300’ 1360’ 1180’ 1120’ 1060’ 1240’ 1300’ 1360’ Test Pit TP-2 (proj'd) Dirt Road Tmb Existing Grade Test Pit TP-3 (proj'd) Test Pit TP-6 (proj'd) Test Pit TP-7 (proj'd) Tma ? ? ? PL PL Tmb B-4 (proj'd) 23-3282 May 2024 Existing Grade Colluvium Proposed Grade Proposed Residence with Basement Ogasawara Residence – 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills Estates, California Tma 0 60’120’ Scale in Feet (approx.) Shear Pin Stabilization Piles Retaining Wall 249 A-4 C C’ 1260’ 1280’ 1300’ 1320’ GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION C-C’ 1260’ 1280’ 1300’ 1320’ Proposed ADU (Projected) Existing Grade Setbacks Tma Tma PL ? ? ? 23-3282 May 2024 Proposed Guest House 1340’1340’ 1240’1240’ Colluvium ? ? Ogasawara Residence – 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills Estates, California Proposed Grade Buttress Fill 0 20’40’ Scale in Feet (approx.) 250 A-5 GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION D-D’ D D’ 1200’ 1220’ 1240’ 1260’ Proposed Grade Existing Grade PL 1280’ 1300’ 1320’ 1180’ Tma Tma Tma ? ? ? ? Tma 1200’ 1220’ 1240’ 1260’ 1280’ 1300’ 1320’ 1180’ 23-3282 May 2024 Colluvium Proposed Residence W/ Basement Ogasawara Residence – 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills Estates, California Pile-Supported Retaining Wall to support any proposed infrastructure adjacent to slopes 0 20’40’ Scale in Feet (approx.) 251 A-6 GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION E-E’ E E’ 1180’ 1220’ 1260’ 1180’ 1220’ 1260’ Proposed Grade Existing Grade1300’1300’ TmaTma 23-3282 May 2024 Proposed Stable Proposed Pool PL Ogasawara Residence – 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills Estates, California Tma ? ? 1340’ Bend in Section Colluvium Crest Road PL Proposed Grade Buttress Fill 1340’ 0 40’80’ Scale in Feet (approx.) 252 Schematic Local Geologic Map Scale: 1”~200’ N ? Flying Triangle Landslide Landslide Scarp per Slosson/County of Los Angeles (1986/7 Project: Ogasawara Residence Project No. 23-3282 May 2024 Plate A-7 East Klondike Canyon SYMBOLS OF MAJOR GEOLOGICAL UNITS Qols – Older Landslide (Surmised) Tmsh – Altamira Shale Tmb -- Basalt Revised from Slosson/County of Los Angeles (1986/7) 29 Crest Road East 17 Crest Road East 23 Crest Road East C 253 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-1 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-1’.5”:SOIL: Clayey Silt, slightly sandy, dark brown, bedrock fragments, loose, dry. No. TP-1 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 3’ Bedrock -0’ 1’.5”- 3’: BEDROCK: Siltstone, diatomaceous, tan to gray, thinly bedded, well indurated, dry to slightly moist. Bedding: N45W, 7 SW 254 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-2 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-1’.5: SOIL: Clayey Silt, slightly sandy, dark brown, bedrock fragments, loose, dry. No. TP-2 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 4’ Bedrock -0’ 1’.5- 4’: BEDROCK: Siltstone and Shale, diatomaceous, tan/brown to light gray, thinly bedded, locally hard-cemented, well indurated, slightly moist. Bedding: E-W, 12 South 255 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-3 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-2’.9”:SOIL: Silty Clay, dark brown, few scattered bedrock fragments, slight moist (upper) to very moist (lower), firm to stiff. No. TP-3 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 4’ Bedrock -0’ 2’.9”- 4’: BEDROCK: Siltstone and Shale, diatomaceous, tan/brown to light gray, thinly bedded, locally hard-cemented, well indurated, slightly moist. Bedding: N80W, 5 SW 256 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-4 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-1’.9”: SOIL: Silty Clay, slightly sandy, dark brown, few small bedrock fragments, slightly moist, stiff. No. TP-4 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 3’ Bedrock -0’ 1’.9”- 3’: BEDROCK: Siltstone, diatomaceous, tan to light gray, thinly bedded, well indurated, slightly moist. Bedding: N50W, 12 SW 257 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-5 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-3’.5”: SOIL: Silty Clay, slightly sandy, dark brown, few small bedrock fragments, slightly moist, stiff. No. TP-5 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 5’ Bedrock -0’ 3’.5”- 5’: BEDROCK: Siltstone, tan, thinly bedded, well indurated, slightly moist. Bedding: N37W, 20 SW 258 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-6 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-1’: SOIL: Silty Clay, dark brown, few scattered bedrock fragments, dry to moist, firm. No. TP-6 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 3’ Bedrock -0’ 1’- 3’: BEDROCK: Siltstone, diatomaceous, tan to light gray, thinly bedded, well indurated, slightly moist. Bedding: N30W, 23 SW 259 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-7 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-1’.6”:SOIL: Silty Clay, dark brown, few small scattered bedrock fragments, dry to moist, firm to stiff. No. TP-7 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 3’ Bedrock -0’ 1’.6”- 3’: BEDROCK: Siltstone, diatomaceous, tan, thinly bedded, well indurated, slightly moist. Bedding: N30E, 15 SE 1 N55E, 16 SE 2 2 1 260 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-8 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-3’: SOIL: Silty Clay, dark brown, few small scattered bedrock fragments, dry to moist, firm to stiff. No. TP-8 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 4’.6” Bedrock -0’ 3’- 4’: BEDROCK: Siltstone, diatomaceous, tan, thinly bedded, well indurated, few hard cemented layers, slightly moist. Bedding: N-S, 20W 1 N30W, 18SW 2 2 1 261 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-9 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-2’.6: SOIL: Silty Clay, dark brown, few small scattered bedrock fragments, dry to moist, firm to stiff. No. TP-9 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 4’ Bedrock -0’ 2’.6”- 4’: BEDROCK: Siltstone, diatomaceous, tan/brown to beige, thinly bedded, well indurated, slightly moist. Bedding: N60W, 15 SW 262 North EQUIPMENT: Track Mounted Excavator PLATE B-10 LOGGED BY: AM/RK/EH PROJECT: Ogasawara Residence, 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, CA PROJECT NO: 23-3282 TEST PIT LOG Hamilton & Associates, Inc. 0-2’.6”: SOIL: Silty Clay, dark brown, scattered small bedrock fragments, slightly moist to moist, firm to stiff. No. TP-10 DATE: 4/5/13 DESCRIPTION: SKETCH: -10’ -5’ Test Pit Outline Soil Total Depth: 3’.6” Bedrock -0’ 2’.6”- 3’.6”: BEDROCK: Siltstone, diatomaceous, tan/brown to beige, thinly bedded, well indurated, slightly moist. Bedding: N55W, 5 SW 263 SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 1 Depth (Ft.)Description 0-1': Soil (Colluvium): Silty Clay, dark brown, bedrock fragments, loose, dry. 1'-60': Bedrock: Siltstone, thinly bedded, beige/gray to tan/brown, diatomaceous, moist, well indurated. BEDDING: @ 3' N45W, 12SW 3.2 5 @ 8' E-W, 10S 3.5 10 @ 13' E-W, 6S 3.9 15 @ 15' N70W, 10SW *@ 15'-17' Very Fractured, Tight and Intact @ 19' N40W, 13NE 1.8 20 (Continued) Project No. 23-3282 Plate B-11 Hamilton & Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Geologic Engineering Investigation 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CaliforniaSamplesBUDrive (Kip-Ft.)264 SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 1 (cont.)Depth (Ft.)Description 1.8 20 Bedrock: Siltstone, thinly bedded, beige/gray to tan/brown, diatomaceous, moist, well indurated. BEDDING: @ 22' E-W, 4S 25 @ 27' N45E, 5SE 4.2 30 @ N-S, 3W @ 31'-34' sandy siltstone, brown, "baked" apperance, blocky fracture. @ 34'-48' Basalt: dark gray to reddish brown, massive, fractured. 35 10.5 40 (Continued) Project No. 23-3282 Plate B-12 Hamilton & Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Geologic Engineering Investigation 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CaliforniaSamplesBUDrive Energy(Kip-Ft.)265 SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 1 (cont.)Depth (Ft.)Description 10.5 40 Bedrock: Basalt, dark gray to reddish brown, massive, fractured. BEDDING: 45 @ 48'-52' Siltstone: sandy, brown, "baked" apperance. 17.5 50 @ 52'-56' Siltstone:@ 52' N70E, 10SE light gray to brown, thinly bedded. 55 @ 56'-60' Siltstone: sandy, "baked" apperance, blocky fracture. 17.9 60 End of Boring @ 60 Feet Project No. 23-3282 Plate B-13 Hamilton & Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Geologic Engineering Investigation 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CaliforniaSamplesBUDrive Energy(Kip-Ft.)266 SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 2 Depth (Ft.)Description 0-4': Soil (Colluvium): Silty Clay, dark brown, few bedrock fragments, loose, dry. 4'-60': Bedrock: Siltstone, thinly bedded, light gray/tan/brown, diatomaceous, moist, well 3.5 5 indurated. BEDDING: @ 5' E-W, 15S @ 6' N85E, 17SE @ 9' N45W, 14SW 1.8 10 @ 14' N50W, 13SW 15 3.2 20 @ 20' N45W, 10SW (Continued) Project No. 23-3282 Plate B-14 Hamilton & Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Geologic Engineering Investigation 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CaliforniaSamplesBUDrive (Kip-Ft.)267 SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 2 (cont.)Depth (Ft.)Description 3.2 20 Bedrock: Siltstone, thinly bedded, light gray/tan/brown, diatomaceous, moist, well indurated. BEDDING: @ 20' N45W, 10SW 25 @ 25' N30W, 8SW @ 29'-38' Basalt: dark gray to reddish brown, massive, fractured 4.6 30 35 38'-42' Siltstone: sandy, brown, "baked" apperance. 8.8 40 @ N30W, 14SW (Continued) Project No. 23-3282 Plate B-15 Hamilton & Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Geologic Engineering Investigation 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CaliforniaSamplesBUDrive Energy(Kip-Ft.)268 SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 2 (cont.)Depth (Ft.)Description 10.5 40 Bedrock: Siltstone, sandy, brown, "baked" apperance. BEDDING: @ 42' N-S, 12W @ 42'-55' Siltstone beige/gray to tan/brown. 45 @ 47' N40E, 8NW 17.5 50 @ 54' N60W, 40SW 55 @ 55'-59' Basalt: dark gray to reddish brown, massive, fractured. 8.8 60 End of Boring @ 60 Feet Project No. 23-3282 Plate B-16 Hamilton & Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Geologic Engineering Investigation 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CaliforniaSamplesBUDrive Energy(Kip-Ft.)269 Test Specimen at In-Situ Moisture Test Specimen Submerged 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 0.1 1 10 Consolidation(Percent)Pressure (Kips Per Square Foot) HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical and GeologicEngineering Investigation 23 Crest Road East Roliing Hills, California Plate Project No. C-1 23-3282 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TP-2 @ 0.5' 270 Test Specimen at In-Situ Moisture Test Specimen Submerged 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 0.1 1 10 Consolidation(Percent)Pressure (Kips Per Square Foot) HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical and Geologic Engineering Investigation 23 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, California Plate Project No. C-2 23-3282 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TP-7 @ 3' 271 SHEAR TEST RESULTS Siltstone samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 64.5 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 40 % Cohesion = 400 psf Friction Angle = 25 degrees Based on Ultimate Strength Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-1 HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) TP-2 @ 2 Feet 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 272 SHEAR TEST RESULTS Clayey Silt samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 79.9 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 32.6 % Cohesion = 175 psf Friction Angle = 25 degrees Based on Ultimate Strength Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-2 HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) TP-4 @ 1 Foot 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 273 SHEAR TEST RESULTS Siltstone samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 65 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 41 % Cohesion = 350 psf Friction Angle = 31 degrees Based on 80% Peak Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-3 HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) TP-5 @ 5 Feet 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 274 SHEAR TEST RESULTS Siltstone samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 76.7 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 39.1 % Cohesion = 300 psf Friction Angle = 27 degrees Based on Ultimate Strength Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-4 HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) TP-8 @ 4.5 Feet 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 275 SHEAR TEST RESULTS Bedrock samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 90 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 38.1 % Cohesion = 450 psf Friction Angle = 26 degrees Based on Ultimate Strength Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-5 HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) Boring No. 1 @ 10 Feet 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 276 REPEATED SHEAR TEST RESULTS Bedrock samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 92 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 38.5 % Cohesion = 200 psf Friction Angle = 21 degrees Based on Ultimate Strength Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-5a HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) Boring No. 1 @ 10 Feet 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 277 SHEAR TEST RESULTS Bedrock samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 85.9 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 36.3 % Cohesion = 300 psf Friction Angle = 26 degrees Based on Ultimate Strength Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-6 HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) Boring No. 2 @ 5 Feet 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 278 SHEAR TEST RESULTS Bedrock samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 92 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 38.3 % Cohesion = 300 psf Friction Angle = 27 degrees Based on Ultimate Strength Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-7 HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) Boring No. 2 @ 10 Feet 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 279 REPEATED SHEAR TEST RESULTS Bedrock samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 90 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 36.7 % Cohesion = 300 psf Friction Angle = 25 degrees Based on Ultimate Strength Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-7a HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) Boring No. 2 @ 10 Feet 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 280 SHEAR TEST RESULTS Bedrock samples were submerged for at least 24 hours. The samples had a density of 93 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 38.3 % Cohesion = 350 psf Friction Angle = 28 degrees Based on Ultimate Strength Project No. 23-3282 Plate D-8 HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Rolling Hills, California 23 Crest Road East 0 1 2 3 4 01234Stress (kips/sq. ft.)Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) Boring No. 2 @ 20 Feet 0 1 2 3 4 012345Stress (kips/sq. ft)Horizontal Displacement (X 1/10 inch) Stress - Displacement Diagram 0.5 Kip 1 Kips 2 Kips… 281 Ogasawara Residence May 23, 2024 23-3282 Appendix B APPENDIX B SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS 282 1.7821.782 160.00 lbs/ft2 1.7821.782800 6004002000-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Scenario Circular- Global StaticGroupCross Section A Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 283 1.2091.209 160.00 lbs/ft2 1.2091.209 0.15800 6004002000-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Scenario Circular- Global SeismicGroupCross Section A Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 284 1.9401.940 160.00 lbs/ft2 1.9401.940800 6004002000-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Scenario Wedge- Global StaticGroupCross Section A Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 285 1.1831.183 160.00 lbs/ft2 1.1831.183 0.15800 6004002000-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Scenario Wedge- Global SeismicGroupCross Section A Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 286 1.7751.775 160.00 lbs/ft2 1.7751.775400 3002001000-1000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Scenario Circular- Upper StaticGroupCross Section A Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 287 1.2581.258 160.00 lbs/ft2 1.2581.258 0.15 40030020010000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Scenario Circular- Upper SeismicGroupCross Section A Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 288 2.0542.054 160.00 lbs/ft2 2.0542.054400 30020010000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Scenario Wedge- Upper StaticGroupCross Section A Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 289 1.3511.351 160.00 lbs/ft2 1.3511.351 0.15 40030020010000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Scenario Wedge- Upper SeismicGroupCross Section A Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 290 Slide Analysis Information Ogasawara Slope Stability Project Summary File Name: Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmd Slide Modeler Version: 9.008 Project Title: Ogaswara Residence Analysis: Slope Stability Author: KD Company: Hamilton & Associates Date Created: May 2024 Currently Open Scenarios Group Name Scenario Name Global Minimum Compute Time Cross Section A Circular- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.782070 00h:00m:01.56s Circular- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.209410 00h:00m:01.114s Wedge- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.940020 00h:00m:00.510s Wedge- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.183430 00h:00m:00.544s Circular- Upper Static Bishop Simplified: 1.774880 00h:00m:01.80s Circular- Upper Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.257560 00h:00m:01.145s Wedge- Upper Static Bishop Simplified: 2.054370 00h:00m:00.539s Wedge- Upper Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.351110 00h:00m:00.513s General Settings Units of Measurement: Imperial Units Time Units: days Permeability Units: feet/second Data Output: Standard Failure Direction: Right to Left Analysis Options 291 All Open Scenarios Slices Type: Vertical Analysis Methods Used Bishop simplified Number of slices: 50 Tolerance: 0.005 Maximum number of iterations: 75 Check malpha < 0.2: Yes Create Interslice boundaries at intersections with water tables and piezos: Yes Initial trial value of FS:1 Steffensen Iteration: Yes Random Numbers All Open Scenarios Pseudo-random Seed: 10116 Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3 Surface Options Cross Section A - Circular- Global Static Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Composite Surfaces: Disabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined Cross Section A - Circular- Global Seismic Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Composite Surfaces: Disabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined 2/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 292 Cross Section A - Wedge- Global Static Surface Type: Non-Circular Block Search Number of Surfaces: 5000 Multiple Groups: Disabled Pseudo-Random Surfaces: Enabled Convex Surfaces Only: Disabled Left Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 135 Left Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 135 Right Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 45 Right Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 45 Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined Cross Section A - Wedge- Global Seismic Surface Type: Non-Circular Block Search Number of Surfaces: 5000 Multiple Groups: Disabled Pseudo-Random Surfaces: Enabled Convex Surfaces Only: Disabled Left Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 135 Left Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 135 Right Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 45 Right Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 45 Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined Cross Section A - Circular- Upper Static Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Composite Surfaces: Disabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined Cross Section A - Circular- Upper Seismic 3/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 293 Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Composite Surfaces: Disabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined Cross Section A - Wedge- Upper Static Surface Type: Non-Circular Block Search Number of Surfaces: 5000 Multiple Groups: Disabled Pseudo-Random Surfaces: Enabled Convex Surfaces Only: Disabled Left Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 135 Left Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 135 Right Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 45 Right Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 45 Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined Cross Section A - Wedge- Upper Seismic Surface Type: Non-Circular Block Search Number of Surfaces: 5000 Multiple Groups: Disabled Pseudo-Random Surfaces: Enabled Convex Surfaces Only: Disabled Left Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 135 Left Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 135 Right Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 45 Right Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 45 Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined Seismic Loading Cross Section A - Circular- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section A - Circular- Global Seismic 4/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 294 Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Cross Section A - Wedge- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section A - Wedge- Global Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Cross Section A - Circular- Upper Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section A - Circular- Upper Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Cross Section A - Wedge- Upper Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section A - Wedge- Upper Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Loading All Open Scenarios &nbsp; Distribution: Constant Magnitude [psf]: 160 Orientation: Normal to boundary Materials 5/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 295 Fill/Nat Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 115 Cohesion [psf]290 Friction Angle [deg] 20 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]400 Friction Angle [deg] 25 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Berock (fbc) >25ft Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]550 Friction Angle [deg] 34 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock abc Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]200 Friction Angle [deg] 21 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Generalized Anisotropic Functions 6/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 296 Name: User Defined 1 Angle From Angle To Material 6 -90 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft 12 6 Bedrock abc 90 12 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Name: User Defined 2 Angle From Angle To Material 6 -90 Berock (fbc) >25ft 12 6 Bedrock abc 90 12 Berock (fbc) >25ft Materials In Use Material Circular- Global Static Circular- Global Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Circular- Upper Static Circular- Upper Seismic Wedge- Upper Static Wedge- Upper Seismic Fill/Nat Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Berock (fbc) >25ft Bedrock (Aniso) <25 ft Bedrock (Aniso) >25 ft Bedrock abc Global Minimums Cross Section A - Circular- Global Static Method: bishop simplified FS 1.782070 Center: 112.478, 718.495 Radius: 597.737 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 167.881, 123.331 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 442.787, 220.313 Left Slope Intercept: 167.881 123.331 Right Slope Intercept: 442.787 227.671 Resisting Moment: 2.24428e+08 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.25937e+08 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 5181.06 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 274.906 ft Surface Average Height: 18.8466 ft Cross Section A - Circular- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified 7/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 297 FS 1.209410 Center: 110.553, 720.732 Radius: 600.576 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 166.858, 122.802 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 442.787, 220.421 Left Slope Intercept: 166.858 122.802 Right Slope Intercept: 442.787 227.671 Resisting Moment: 2.18338e+08 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.80532e+08 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 5215.13 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 275.929 ft Surface Average Height: 18.9002 ft Cross Section A - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified FS 1.940020 Axis Location: 309.399, 735.567 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 178.130, 128.633 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 716.185, 266.391 Resisting Moment: 6.33393e+08 lb-ft Driving Moment: 3.26488e+08 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 19698 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 538.055 ft Surface Average Height: 36.6097 ft Cross Section A - Wedge- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified FS 1.183430 Axis Location: 309.399, 735.567 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 178.130, 128.633 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 716.185, 266.391 Resisting Moment: 6.15423e+08 lb-ft Driving Moment: 5.20035e+08 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 19698 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 538.055 ft Surface Average Height: 36.6097 ft Cross Section A - Circular- Upper Static Method: bishop simplified 8/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 298 FS 1.774880 Center: 605.827, 323.269 Radius: 96.219 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 600.745, 227.184 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 679.676, 261.588 Left Slope Intercept: 600.745 231.336 Right Slope Intercept: 679.676 261.588 Resisting Moment: 5.91793e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 3.33427e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 850.774 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 78.9306 ft Surface Average Height: 10.7788 ft Cross Section A - Circular- Upper Seismic Method: bishop simplified FS 1.257560 Center: 596.239, 366.044 Radius: 138.927 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 600.745, 227.190 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 690.091, 263.611 Left Slope Intercept: 600.745 231.336 Right Slope Intercept: 690.091 263.611 Resisting Moment: 8.87438e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 7.05684e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 919.34 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 89.346 ft Surface Average Height: 10.2897 ft Cross Section A - Wedge- Upper Static Method: bishop simplified FS 2.054370 Axis Location: 621.888, 373.512 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 597.303, 227.184 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 724.199, 266.047 Resisting Moment: 2.35422e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.14595e+07 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 2575.34 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 126.896 ft Surface Average Height: 20.2948 ft Cross Section A - Wedge- Upper Seismic Method: bishop simplified 9/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 299 FS 1.351110 Axis Location: 624.132, 375.399 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 598.438, 227.184 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 727.287, 265.915 Resisting Moment: 1.88186e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.39283e+07 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 2169.28 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 128.849 ft Surface Average Height: 16.8358 ft Global Minimum Coordinates Cross Section A - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified X Y 178.13 128.633 191.209 115.554 662.497 212.703 716.185 266.391 Cross Section A - Wedge- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified X Y 178.13 128.633 191.209 115.554 662.497 212.703 716.185 266.391 Cross Section A - Wedge- Upper Static Method: bishop simplified X Y 597.303 227.184 605.805 218.682 694.931 236.78 724.199 266.047 Cross Section A - Wedge- Upper Seismic Method: bishop simplified X Y 598.438 227.184 602.181 223.441 704.681 243.309 727.287 265.915 Entity Information 10/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 300 Cross Section A Shared Entities Type Coordinates (x,y) External Boundary -0.05, -1.066 851.434, -1.066 851.434, 238.33 851.434, 266.41 851.434, 271.884 806.421, 270.259 758.35, 266.005 736.127, 265.536 711.656, 266.585 691.904, 263.963 673.901, 260.467 640.768, 249.348 603.184, 231.336 600.745, 231.336 600.745, 227.184 570.57, 227.184 570.57, 217.813 487.741, 217.813 457.468, 217.813 442.787, 217.813 442.787, 227.671 434.962, 227.671 434.962, 221.2 426.083, 218.527 405.564, 214.058 361.026, 199.951 333.062, 188.851 308.563, 174.926 293.85, 174.926 276.677, 167.685 249.857, 159.38 223.556, 150.555 186.7, 133.066 128.484, 102.951 79.066, 72.034 61.935, 62.425 47.245, 56.833 29.413, 52.743 17.346, 52.743 -0.05, 58.405 -0.05, 33.377 11/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 301 Material Boundary -0.05, 33.377 14.663, 33.377 55.937, 33.61 78.928, 46.79 136.717, 84.312 186.643, 108.516 222.976, 126.571 301.398, 149.92 343.968, 167.351 378.987, 182.381 468.712, 199.759 543.985, 209.361 576.41, 214.739 585.937, 218.12 591.627, 221.789 598.532, 225.392 600.745, 227.184 600.745, 225.038 620.7, 225.038 620.7, 229.641 636.966, 229.641 636.966, 234.369 651.998, 234.369 651.998, 238.799 667.486, 238.799 667.486, 243.376 682.64, 243.376 682.64, 248.039 698.289, 248.039 698.289, 252.021 718.486, 252.021 718.486, 256.877 736.499, 256.877 736.499, 260.259 755.712, 260.259 755.712, 263.655 772.809, 263.655 772.809, 266.41 802.093, 266.41 851.434, 266.41 Material Boundary -0.05, 58.405 12.36, 52.568 20.534, 49.299 31.875, 49.299 53.865, 49.892 71.429, 58.2 107.033, 83.122 153.456, 110.303 185.262, 128.105 240.097, 151.434 300.133, 170.158 347.133, 190.184 397.856, 209.275 417.961, 215.21 442.787, 217.813 12/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 302 Material Boundary 543.985, 209.361 586.652, 210.357 613.826, 210.357 658.317, 214.086 706.271, 225.009 745.434, 238.063 769.678, 241.04 798.033, 241.04 851.434, 238.33 Scenario-based Entities 13/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 303 Type Coordin ates (x,y) Circular - Global Static Circular - Global Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Circular - Upper Static Circular - Upper Seismic Wedge- Upper Static Wedge- Upper Seismic Distribut ed Load 570.57, 217.813 487.741, 217.813 457.468, 217.813 442.787, 217.813 Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Normal to boundar yMagnit ude: 160 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Normal to boundar yMagnit ude: 160 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Normal to boundar yMagnit ude: 160 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Normal to boundar yMagnit ude: 160 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Normal to boundar yMagnit ude: 160 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Normal to boundar yMagnit ude: 160 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Normal to boundar yMagnit ude: 160 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Normal to boundar yMagnit ude: 160 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Block Search Window 578.481, 184.198 739.895, 206.856 739.895, 262.963 578.265, 218.941 Block Search Window 185.959, 86.266 406.873, 136.755 406.873, 201.367 185.959, 130.863 Block Search Window 694.146, 220.218 833.398, 220.218 833.398, 268.966 693.512, 257.411 Block Search Window 582.917, 203.855 648.302, 203.855 648.302, 247.013 582.485, 220.039 14/14 Thursday, May 23, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 304 1.5771.5771.5771.577600 5004003002001000-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Scenario Circular- Global StaticGroupCross Section B Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 305 1.1181.1181.1181.118 0.15600 5004003002001000-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Scenario Circular- Global SeismicGroupCross Section B Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 306 1.5561.5561.5561.556400 3002001000-1000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Scenario Wedge- Global StaticGroupCross Section B Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 307 1.1021.1021.1021.102 0.15 40030020010000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Scenario Wedge- Global SeismicGroupCross Section B Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 308 Slide Analysis Information Ogasawara Slope Stability Project Summary File Name: Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmd Slide Modeler Version: 9.008 Project Title: Ogaswara Residence Analysis: Slope Stability Author: KD Company: Hamilton & Associates Date Created: May 2024 Currently Open Scenarios Group Name Scenario Name Global Minimum Compute Time Cross Section B Circular- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.577180 00h:00m:01.36s Circular- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.118300 00h:00m:01.240s Wedge- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.555610 00h:00m:00.568s Wedge- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.101530 00h:00m:00.589s General Settings Units of Measurement: Imperial Units Time Units: days Permeability Units: feet/second Data Output: Standard Failure Direction: Right to Left Analysis Options All Open Scenarios 309 Slices Type: Vertical Analysis Methods Used Bishop simplified Number of slices: 50 Tolerance: 0.005 Maximum number of iterations: 75 Check malpha < 0.2: Yes Create Interslice boundaries at intersections with water tables and piezos: Yes Initial trial value of FS:1 Steffensen Iteration: Yes Random Numbers All Open Scenarios Pseudo-random Seed: 10116 Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3 Surface Options Cross Section B - Wedge- Global Static Surface Type: Non-Circular Block Search Number of Surfaces: 5000 Multiple Groups: Disabled Pseudo-Random Surfaces: Enabled Convex Surfaces Only: Disabled Left Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 135 Left Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 135 Right Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 45 Right Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 45 Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined All other Scenarios Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Composite Surfaces: Disabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined 2/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 310 Seismic Loading Cross Section B - Circular- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section B - Circular- Global Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Cross Section B - Wedge- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section B - Wedge- Global Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Materials Fill/Nat Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 115 Cohesion [psf]290 Friction Angle [deg] 20 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]400 Friction Angle [deg] 25 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Berock (fbc) >25ft Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]550 Friction Angle [deg] 34 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 3/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 311 Bedrock (Aniso A) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso A) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock abc Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]200 Friction Angle [deg] 21 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso D) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso D) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso B) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso B) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Generalized Anisotropic Functions 4/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 312 Name: Aniso B <25ft Angle From Angle To Material 9 -90 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft 13 9 Bedrock abc 90 13 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Name: Aniso B >25ft Angle From Angle To Material 9 -90 Berock (fbc) >25ft 13 9 Bedrock abc 90 13 Berock (fbc) >25ft Materials In Use Material Circular- Global Static Circular- Global Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Fill/Nat Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Berock (fbc) >25ft Bedrock abc Bedrock (Aniso B) <25 ft Bedrock (Aniso B) >25 ft Support Shear Pin 1 Color Support Type Pile/Micro Pile Force Application Active Out-of-Plane Spacing [ft]10 Failure Mode Shear Pile Shear Strength [lb]200000 Force Direction Perpendicular to pile Global Minimums Cross Section B - Circular- Global Static Method: bishop simplified 5/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 313 FS 1.577180 Center: 52.357, 563.379 Radius: 429.130 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 148.390, 145.133 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 320.205, 228.103 Resisting Moment: 1.14611e+08 lb-ft Driving Moment: 7.26686e+07 lb-ft Active Support Moment: -7.05645e+06 lb-ft Maximum Single Support Force: 20000 lb Total Support Force: 20000 lb Total Slice Area: 3618.57 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 171.815 ft Surface Average Height: 21.0609 ft Cross Section B - Circular- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified FS 1.118300 Center: 53.146, 564.668 Radius: 430.209 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 148.420, 145.141 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 321.133, 228.122 Resisting Moment: 1.10755e+08 lb-ft Driving Moment: 9.90388e+07 lb-ft Active Support Moment: -7.09356e+06 lb-ft Maximum Single Support Force: 20000 lb Total Support Force: 20000 lb Total Slice Area: 3670.13 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 172.713 ft Surface Average Height: 21.2499 ft Cross Section B - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified FS 1.555610 Axis Location: 152.871, 356.489 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 149.724, 146.662 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 318.845, 228.075 Resisting Moment: 5.40327e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 3.47341e+07 lb-ft Active Support Moment: -2.89707e+06 lb-ft Maximum Single Support Force: 20000 lb Total Support Force: 20000 lb Total Slice Area: 3666.54 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 169.12 ft Surface Average Height: 21.6801 ft Cross Section B - Wedge- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified 6/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 314 FS 1.101530 Axis Location: 167.210, 397.239 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 146.257, 144.531 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 356.805, 228.852 Resisting Moment: 1.18209e+08 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.07314e+08 lb-ft Active Support Moment: -4.57135e+06 lb-ft Maximum Single Support Force: 20000 lb Total Support Force: 20000 lb Total Slice Area: 8105.54 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 210.548 ft Surface Average Height: 38.4973 ft Global Minimum Coordinates Cross Section B - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified X Y 149.724 146.662 159.472 136.914 309.322 218.552 318.845 228.075 Cross Section B - Wedge- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified X Y 146.257 144.531 153.39 137.398 296.485 168.532 356.805 228.852 Entity Information Cross Section B Shared Entities Type Coordinates (x,y) 7/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 315 External Boundary 0.86, -2.37 850.54, -2.305 850.382, 250.993 850.54, 275.581 850.54, 283.704 771.479, 279.913 737.093, 279.913 703.52, 275.581 668.592, 268.541 628.265, 261.485 479.623, 238.486 479.623, 231.364 296.625, 227.621 296.625, 229.479 252.053, 209.522 225.375, 199.033 199.087, 187.896 185.859, 180.413 172.046, 171.06 164.707, 164.585 148.463, 145.153 144.663, 144.081 138.545, 144.081 134.951, 145.61 127.837, 153.196 87.143, 168.548 32.314, 181.22 0.86, 189.505 0.86, 182.783 1.165, 162.605 Material Boundary 162.064, 152.67 187.034, 174.33 200.572, 183.055 221.33, 191.779 244.795, 201.105 269.464, 211.334 296.625, 223.905 296.625, 227.621 Material Boundary 703.52, 275.581 750.597, 275.581 811.367, 275.581 850.54, 275.581 Material Boundary 0.86, 182.783 34.916, 174.093 81.38, 162.059 116.143, 151.028 126.506, 144.343 134.862, 136.32 143.553, 134.315 152.913, 136.655 162.064, 152.67 8/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 316 Material Boundary 1.165, 162.605 66.216, 136.669 105.926, 118.919 142.629, 110.195 159.476, 113.805 174.701, 130.609 188.38, 147.307 206.407, 157.427 241.605, 176.38 284.574, 189.417 307.729, 198.954 345.43, 204.049 411.712, 204.714 462.789, 210.886 553.781, 226.844 617.96, 236.872 679.131, 243.557 753.626, 248.582 808.274, 250.115 850.382, 250.993 Scenario-based Entities Type Coordinates (x,y) Circular- Global Static Circular- Global Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Block Search Window 126.595, 98.475 239.253, 98.475 239.253, 187.829 126.595, 131.065 Block Search Window 287.338, 126.949 619.831, 126.949 619.831, 228.224 287.338, 223.192 9/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 317 1.6661.666 120.00 lbs/ft2 120.00 lbs/ft2 1.6661.66612510075 50250-250 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 Scenario Circular- Global StaticGroupCross Section C Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 318 1.2881.288 120.00 lbs/ft2 120.00 lbs/ft2 1.2881.288 0.15250 200150100500-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Circular- Global SeismicGroupCross Section C Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 319 1.5241.524 120.00 lbs/ft2 120.00 lbs/ft2 1.5241.524 200150100500-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Wedge- Global StaticGroupCross Section C Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 320 1.1091.109 120.00 lbs/ft2 120.00 lbs/ft2 1.1091.109 0.15250 200150100500-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Wedge- Global SeismicGroupCross Section C Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 321 Slide Analysis Information Ogasawara Slope Stability Project Summary File Name: Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmd Slide Modeler Version: 9.008 Project Title: Ogaswara Residence Analysis: Slope Stability Author: KD Company: Hamilton & Associates Date Created: May 2024 Currently Open Scenarios Group Name Scenario Name Global Minimum Compute Time Cross Section C Circular- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.666370 00h:00m:01.631s Circular- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.287760 00h:00m:02.0s Wedge- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.524060 00h:00m:00.659s Wedge- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.109170 00h:00m:00.541s General Settings Units of Measurement: Imperial Units Time Units: days Permeability Units: feet/second Data Output: Standard Failure Direction: Left to Right Analysis Options All Open Scenarios 322 Slices Type: Vertical Analysis Methods Used Bishop simplified Number of slices: 50 Tolerance: 0.005 Maximum number of iterations: 75 Check malpha < 0.2: Yes Create Interslice boundaries at intersections with water tables and piezos: Yes Initial trial value of FS:1 Steffensen Iteration: Yes Random Numbers All Open Scenarios Pseudo-random Seed: 10116 Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3 Surface Options Cross Section C - Wedge- Global Static Surface Type: Non-Circular Block Search Number of Surfaces: 5000 Multiple Groups: Disabled Pseudo-Random Surfaces: Enabled Convex Surfaces Only: Disabled Left Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 135 Left Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 135 Right Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 45 Right Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 45 Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined All other Scenarios Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Composite Surfaces: Disabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined 2/10 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 323 Seismic Loading Cross Section C - Circular- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section C - Circular- Global Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Cross Section C - Wedge- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section C - Wedge- Global Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Loading All Open Scenarios &nbsp; Distribution: Constant Magnitude [psf]: 120 Orientation: Vertical &nbsp; Distribution: Constant Magnitude [psf]: 120 Orientation: Vertical Materials Fill/Nat Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 115 Cohesion [psf]290 Friction Angle [deg] 20 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft 3/10 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 324 Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]400 Friction Angle [deg] 25 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Berock (fbc) >25ft Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]550 Friction Angle [deg] 34 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso A) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso A) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock abc Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]200 Friction Angle [deg] 21 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso D) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso D) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso B) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic 4/10 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 325 Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso B) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso C)<25 Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso C) >25ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Generalized Anisotropic Functions Name: Aniso A <25 ft Angle From Angle To Material 6 -90 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft 12 6 Bedrock abc 90 12 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Name: Aniso C <25ft Angle From Angle To Material -15 -90 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft 0 -15 Bedrock abc 90 0 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Name: Aniso C> 25ft Angle From Angle To Material -15 -90 Berock (fbc) >25ft 0 -15 Bedrock abc 90 0 Berock (fbc) >25ft Materials In Use 5/10 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 326 Material Circular- Global Static Circular- Global Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Fill/Nat Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Berock (fbc) >25ft Bedrock (Aniso A) <25 ft Bedrock abc Bedrock (Aniso C)<25 Bedrock (Aniso C) >25ft Support Shear Pin 1 Color Support Type Pile/Micro Pile Force Application Active Out-of-Plane Spacing [ft]10 Failure Mode Shear Pile Shear Strength [lb]200000 Force Direction Perpendicular to pile Global Minimums Cross Section C - Circular- Global Static Method: bishop simplified FS 1.666370 Center: 225.809, 59.559 Radius: 47.328 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 179.408, 50.243 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 235.783, 13.294 Resisting Moment: 2.67653e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.6062e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 598.178 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 56.3755 ft Surface Average Height: 10.6106 ft Cross Section C - Circular- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified 6/10 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 327 FS 1.287760 Center: 258.916, 253.580 Radius: 241.416 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 89.783, 81.314 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 235.979, 13.257 Resisting Moment: 4.08282e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 3.17048e+07 lb-ft Active Support Moment: -4.55319e+06 lb-ft Maximum Single Support Force: 20000 lb Total Support Force: 20000 lb Total Slice Area: 2258.14 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 146.196 ft Surface Average Height: 15.446 ft Cross Section C - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified FS 1.524060 Axis Location: 224.297, 207.783 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 75.786, 81.516 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 236.204, 13.214 Resisting Moment: 5.70623e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 3.74409e+07 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 4318.58 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 160.418 ft Surface Average Height: 26.9208 ft Cross Section C - Wedge- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified FS 1.109170 Axis Location: 225.612, 218.694 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 68.809, 84.424 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 238.946, 12.689 Resisting Moment: 6.07811e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 5.47988e+07 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 4579.35 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 170.137 ft Surface Average Height: 26.9157 ft Global Minimum Coordinates Cross Section C - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified X Y 75.7857 81.5163 129.88 27.422 226.056 3.06597 236.204 13.2136 7/10 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 328 Cross Section C - Wedge- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified X Y 68.809 84.4243 125.735 27.4982 229.427 3.1705 238.946 12.6894 Entity Information Cross Section C Shared Entities Type Coordinates (x,y) External Boundary 0.423, 0.306 223.699, 0.0298297 245.088, 0.00337281 265.451, -0.0218143 280.154, -0.04 280.154, 21.9205 280.154, 26.083 269.263, 21.845 260.488, 17.137 252.622, 14.086 247.199, 13.104 239.685, 12.548 234.387, 13.561 228.036, 16.906 219.888, 23.026 215.86, 25.241 198.375, 36.31 178.602, 50.835 175.631, 50.835 165.511, 50.835 165.511, 53.94 163.441, 53.94 160.973, 53.94 154.599, 56.675 146.683, 61.17 142.989, 62.967 130.105, 69.634 124.572, 72.968 105.501, 76.581 98.557, 81.314 76.132, 81.314 71.665, 83.923 43.992, 88.78 0.423, 99.52 0.423, 96.667 0.423, 75.575 8/10 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 329 Material Boundary 0.423, 96.667 35.453, 87.777 77.654, 80.25 77.654, 78.548 86.208, 78.548 86.208, 76.418 95.923, 76.418 95.923, 73.198 105.253, 73.198 105.253, 75.469 115.866, 73.544 115.866, 71.726 118.848, 71.726 118.848, 69.186 121.869, 69.186 121.869, 67.114 125.89, 67.114 125.89, 64.092 129.652, 64.092 129.652, 61.137 134.75, 61.137 134.75, 58.262 140.374, 58.262 140.374, 55.267 145.63, 55.267 145.63, 52.259 160.973, 52.259 160.973, 53.94 Material Boundary 175.631, 50.835 187.807, 41.765 200.393, 31.999 217.409, 22.534 222.724, 18.09 228.166, 14.237 232.356, 12.359 235.872, 11.54 239.483, 11.396 247.911, 11.974 253.328, 13.079 258.399, 14.552 265.551, 17.153 276.039, 21.227 278.033, 21.877 280.154, 21.9205 Material Boundary 0.423, 75.575 7.22521, 73.8106 35.555, 66.462 77.404, 58.451 116.178, 49.205 132.715, 45.043 146.459, 39.7691 162.398, 31.6914 185.859, 19.802 196.869, 13.799 223.699, 0.0298297 236.99, 0.0298297 245.088, 0.00337281 9/10 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 330 Material Boundary 77.404, 58.451 132.715, 45.043 Material Boundary 185.859, 19.802 223.699, 0.0298297 Scenario-based Entities Type Coordinates (x,y) Circular- Global Static Circular- Global Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Distributed Load 78.9579, 80.7551 94.2687, 80.3105 Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Distributed Load 165.511, 50.835 175.631, 50.835 178.602, 50.835 Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Block Search Window 96.933, 21.553 131.324, 21.553 131.324, 66.76 96.933, 79.023 Block Search Window 208.011, 28.541 208.011, 3.013 234.951, 3.013 234.951, 12.347 10/10 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 331 1.6931.693 240.00 lbs/ft2 1.6931.693 5004003002001000-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Scenario Circular- Global StaticGroupCross Section D Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 332 1.1731.173 240.00 lbs/ft2 1.1731.173 0.15 5004003002001000-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Scenario Circular- Global SeismicGroupCross Section D Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 333 1.7761.776 240.00 lbs/ft2 1.7761.776300 250200150100500-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Scenario Wedge- Global StaticGroupCross Section D Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 334 1.2751.275 240.00 lbs/ft2 1.2751.275 0.15300 250200150100500-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Scenario Wedge- Global SeismicGroupCross Section D Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 335 Slide Analysis Information Ogasawara Slope Stability Project Summary File Name: Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmd Slide Modeler Version: 9.008 Project Title: Ogaswara Residence Analysis: Slope Stability Author: KD Company: Hamilton & Associates Date Created: May 2024 Currently Open Scenarios Group Name Scenario Name Global Minimum Compute Time Cross Section D Circular- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.692550 00h:00m:01.143s Circular- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.173100 00h:00m:01.530s Wedge- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.775510 00h:00m:00.494s Wedge- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.274910 00h:00m:00.431s General Settings Units of Measurement: Imperial Units Time Units: days Permeability Units: feet/second Data Output: Standard Failure Direction: Left to Right Analysis Options All Open Scenarios 336 Slices Type: Vertical Analysis Methods Used Bishop simplified Number of slices: 50 Tolerance: 0.005 Maximum number of iterations: 75 Check malpha < 0.2: Yes Create Interslice boundaries at intersections with water tables and piezos: Yes Initial trial value of FS:1 Steffensen Iteration: Yes Random Numbers All Open Scenarios Pseudo-random Seed: 10116 Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3 Surface Options Cross Section D - Wedge- Global Static Surface Type: Non-Circular Block Search Number of Surfaces: 5000 Multiple Groups: Disabled Pseudo-Random Surfaces: Enabled Convex Surfaces Only: Disabled Left Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 135 Left Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 135 Right Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 45 Right Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 45 Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined All other Scenarios Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Composite Surfaces: Disabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined 2/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 337 Seismic Loading Cross Section D - Circular- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section D - Circular- Global Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Cross Section D - Wedge- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section D - Wedge- Global Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Loading All Open Scenarios &nbsp; Distribution: Constant Magnitude [psf]: 240 Orientation: Vertical Materials Fill/Nat Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 115 Cohesion [psf]290 Friction Angle [deg] 20 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]400 3/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 338 Friction Angle [deg] 25 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Berock (fbc) >25ft Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]550 Friction Angle [deg] 34 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso A) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso A) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock abc Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]200 Friction Angle [deg] 21 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso D) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso D) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso B) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso B) >25 ft 4/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 339 Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso C)<25 Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso C) >25ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso E) <25ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso E) >25ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Generalized Anisotropic Functions Name: Aniso D <25ft Angle From Angle To Material -13 -90 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft -6 -13 Bedrock abc 90 -6 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Name: Aniso D >25ft Angle From Angle To Material -13 -90 Berock (fbc) >25ft -6 -13 Bedrock abc 90 -6 Berock (fbc) >25ft Materials In Use 5/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 340 Material Circular- Global Static Circular- Global Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Fill/Nat Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Berock (fbc) >25ft Bedrock abc Bedrock (Aniso D) <25 ft Bedrock (Aniso D) >25 ft Global Minimums Cross Section D - Circular- Global Static Method: bishop simplified FS 1.692550 Center: 324.838, 549.569 Radius: 533.299 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 22.716, 110.104 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 262.050, 19.980 Resisting Moment: 1.72676e+08 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.02021e+08 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 4377.28 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 239.334 ft Surface Average Height: 18.2894 ft Cross Section D - Circular- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified FS 1.173100 Center: 326.793, 552.889 Radius: 537.123 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 22.748, 110.104 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 263.996, 19.449 Resisting Moment: 1.67679e+08 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.42937e+08 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 4394.47 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 241.247 ft Surface Average Height: 18.2156 ft Cross Section D - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified 6/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 341 FS 1.775510 Axis Location: 245.909, 289.524 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 41.968, 110.104 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 267.080, 18.719 Resisting Moment: 9.14979e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 5.15332e+07 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 4502.6 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 225.112 ft Surface Average Height: 20.0015 ft Cross Section D - Wedge- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified FS 1.274910 Axis Location: 245.909, 289.524 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 41.968, 110.104 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 267.080, 18.719 Resisting Moment: 8.85262e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 6.9437e+07 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 4502.6 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 225.112 ft Surface Average Height: 20.0015 ft Global Minimum Coordinates Cross Section D - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified X Y 41.9679 110.104 77.4063 74.6656 255.921 7.55893 267.08 18.7188 Cross Section D - Wedge- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified X Y 41.9679 110.104 77.4063 74.6656 255.921 7.55893 267.08 18.7188 Entity Information Cross Section D Shared Entities 7/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 342 Type Coordinates (x,y) External Boundary 0.673, 84.5458 0.673, -0.465 273.642, -0.465 289.286, -0.465 289.301, 14.7489 289.301, 20.671 285.159, 19.895 281.073, 19.275 276.124, 18.731 271.795, 18.592 266.628, 18.731 262.019, 19.988 254.851, 23.929 247.61, 28.481 240.387, 32.542 219.765, 43.675 206.945, 49.079 193.616, 54.11 108.904, 84.797 86.338, 94.112 67.697, 103.336 58.583, 106.688 58.583, 110.104 0.673, 110.104 0.673, 109.111 Material Boundary 0.673, 84.5458 32.219, 84.5458 68.259, 74.676 97.256, 67.067 139.082, 48.665 208.805, 25.05 242.041, 6.985 273.642, -0.465 Material Boundary 0.673, 109.111 39.047, 109.111 44.296, 109.111 44.296, 106.354 49.187, 106.354 49.187, 104.099 54.838, 104.099 54.838, 102.098 58.726, 102.098 72.946, 96.642 87.036, 89.342 145.203, 68.265 184.332, 54.649 225.293, 37.077 251.148, 21.789 258.523, 19.1952 267.948, 15.88 277.865, 14.7489 285.995, 14.7489 289.301, 14.7489 Scenario-based Entities 8/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 343 Type Coordinates (x,y) Circular- Global Static Circular- Global Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Distributed Load 16.8367, 110.104 41.8874, 110.104 Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 240 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 240 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 240 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Constant DistributionOri entation: VerticalMagnitu de: 240 lbs/ft2Creates Excess Pore Pressure: No Block Search Window 51.053, 69.893 88.417, 65.628 86.868, 92.146 51.053, 107.53 Block Search Window 252.546, 0.838 280.721, 0.838 280.721, 17.834 252.546, 17.834 9/9 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 344 1.7411.741 120.00 lbs/ft2 1.7411.741200150 1005000 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Circular- Global StaticGroupCross Section E Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 345 1.3561.356 120.00 lbs/ft2 1.3561.356 0.15200 1501005000 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Circular- Global SeismicGroupCross Section E Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 346 2.0442.044 120.00 lbs/ft2 2.0442.044200 1501005000 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Circular- Upper StaticGroupCross Section E Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 347 1.4911.491 120.00 lbs/ft2 1.4911.491 0.15 2001501005000 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Circular- Upper SeismicGroupCross Section E Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 348 2.3452.345 120.00 lbs/ft2 2.3452.345200 1501005000 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Wedge- Upper StaticGroupCross Section E Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 349 1.7061.706 120.00 lbs/ft2 1.7061.706 0.15200 1501005000 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Wedge- Upper SeismicGroupCross Section E Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 350 1.8081.808 120.00 lbs/ft21.8081.808200 1501005000 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Wedge- Global StaticGroupCross Section E Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 351 1.4011.401 120.00 lbs/ft21.4011.401 0.15200 1501005000 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Scenario Wedge- Global SeismicGroupCross Section E Company Hamilton & AssociatesDrawn By KD File Name Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmdDateMay 2024 Project Ogaswara Residence SLIDEINTERPRET 9.008 352 Slide Analysis Information Ogasawara Slope Stability Project Summary File Name: Ogasawara Slope Stability.slmd Slide Modeler Version: 9.008 Project Title: Ogaswara Residence Analysis: Slope Stability Author: KD Company: Hamilton & Associates Date Created: May 2024 Currently Open Scenarios Group Name Scenario Name Global Minimum Compute Time Cross Section E Circular- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.740960 00h:00m:01.241s Circular- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.356050 00h:00m:01.646s Circular- Upper Static Bishop Simplified: 2.044040 00h:00m:01.387s Circular- Upper Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.490620 00h:00m:01.465s Wedge- Upper Static Bishop Simplified: 2.345000 00h:00m:00.577s Wedge- Upper Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.705630 00h:00m:00.733s Wedge- Global Static Bishop Simplified: 1.808180 00h:00m:00.956s Wedge- Global Seismic Bishop Simplified: 1.401250 00h:00m:00.638s General Settings Units of Measurement: Imperial Units Time Units: days Permeability Units: feet/second Data Output: Standard Failure Direction: Right to Left Analysis Options 353 All Open Scenarios Slices Type: Vertical Analysis Methods Used Bishop simplified Number of slices: 50 Tolerance: 0.005 Maximum number of iterations: 75 Check malpha < 0.2: Yes Create Interslice boundaries at intersections with water tables and piezos: Yes Initial trial value of FS:1 Steffensen Iteration: Yes Random Numbers All Open Scenarios Pseudo-random Seed: 10116 Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3 Surface Options Cross Section E - Wedge- Upper Static Surface Type: Non-Circular Block Search Number of Surfaces: 5000 Multiple Groups: Disabled Pseudo-Random Surfaces: Enabled Convex Surfaces Only: Disabled Left Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 135 Left Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 135 Right Projection Angle (Start Angle) [deg]: 45 Right Projection Angle (End Angle) [deg]: 45 Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined All other Scenarios 2/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 354 Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Composite Surfaces: Disabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined Seismic Loading Cross Section E - Circular- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section E - Circular- Global Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Cross Section E - Circular- Upper Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section E - Circular- Upper Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Cross Section E - Wedge- Upper Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section E - Wedge- Upper Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Cross Section E - Wedge- Global Static Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Cross Section E - Wedge- Global Seismic 3/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 355 Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15 Loading All Open Scenarios &nbsp; Distribution: Constant Magnitude [psf]: 120 Orientation: Vertical Materials Fill/Nat Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 115 Cohesion [psf]290 Friction Angle [deg] 20 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]400 Friction Angle [deg] 25 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Berock (fbc) >25ft Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]550 Friction Angle [deg] 34 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso A) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso A) >25 ft Color 4/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 356 Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock abc Color Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Cohesion [psf]200 Friction Angle [deg] 21 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso D) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso D) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso B) <25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso B) >25 ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso C)<25 Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso C) >25ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso E) <25ft Color 5/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 357 Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Bedrock (Aniso E) >25ft Color Strength Type Generalized Anisotropic Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 125 Water Surface Assigned per scenario Ru Value 0 Generalized Anisotropic Functions Name: Aniso E <25ft Angle From Angle To Material 5 -90 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft 11 5 Berock (fbc) >25ft 90 11 Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Name: Aniso E >25ft Angle From Angle To Material 5 -90 Berock (fbc) >25ft 11 5 Bedrock abc 90 11 Berock (fbc) >25ft Materials In Use Material Circular- Global Static Circular- Global Seismic Circular- Upper Static Circular- Upper Seismic Wedge- Upper Static Wedge- Upper Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Fill/Nat Bedrock (fbc) <25ft Berock (fbc) >25ft Bedrock abc Bedrock (Aniso E) <25ft Bedrock (Aniso E) >25ft Global Minimums Cross Section E - Circular- Global Static Method: bishop simplified 6/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 358 FS 1.740960 Center: 48.558, 128.260 Radius: 50.451 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 42.923, 78.125 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 95.611, 110.059 Resisting Moment: 2.89199e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.66115e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 569.777 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 52.6884 ft Surface Average Height: 10.8141 ft Cross Section E - Circular- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified FS 1.356050 Center: 44.719, 143.180 Radius: 65.150 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 42.822, 78.058 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 100.821, 110.059 Resisting Moment: 3.85405e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 2.84212e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 617.797 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 57.9994 ft Surface Average Height: 10.6518 ft Cross Section E - Circular- Upper Static Method: bishop simplified FS 2.044040 Center: 129.899, 167.880 Radius: 57.826 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 129.089, 110.059 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 174.892, 131.555 Resisting Moment: 1.64348e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 804037 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 322.076 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 45.8027 ft Surface Average Height: 7.03183 ft Cross Section E - Circular- Upper Seismic Method: bishop simplified 7/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 359 FS 1.490620 Center: 125.366, 190.760 Radius: 80.775 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 129.104, 110.071 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 180.316, 131.555 Left Slope Intercept: 129.104 113.478 Right Slope Intercept: 180.316 131.555 Resisting Moment: 2.49492e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.67375e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 365.009 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 51.2118 ft Surface Average Height: 7.12745 ft Cross Section E - Wedge- Upper Static Method: bishop simplified FS 2.345000 Axis Location: 134.434, 178.268 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 127.199, 110.059 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 184.660, 131.555 Resisting Moment: 2.4086e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.02712e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 404.199 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 57.4613 ft Surface Average Height: 7.03429 ft Cross Section E - Wedge- Upper Seismic Method: bishop simplified FS 1.705630 Axis Location: 134.434, 178.268 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 127.199, 110.059 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 184.660, 131.555 Resisting Moment: 2.37027e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.38968e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 404.199 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 57.4613 ft Surface Average Height: 7.03429 ft Cross Section E - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified FS 1.808180 Axis Location: 41.973, 158.009 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 41.999, 78.058 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 105.950, 110.059 Resisting Moment: 5.47568e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 3.02829e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 723.638 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 63.9507 ft Surface Average Height: 11.3156 ft Cross Section E - Wedge- Global Seismic 8/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 360 Method: bishop simplified FS 1.401250 Axis Location: 41.973, 158.009 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 41.999, 78.058 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 105.950, 110.059 Resisting Moment: 5.30989e+06 lb-ft Driving Moment: 3.7894e+06 lb-ft Total Slice Area: 723.638 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 63.9507 ft Surface Average Height: 11.3156 ft Global Minimum Coordinates Cross Section E - Wedge- Upper Static Method: bishop simplified X Y 127.199 110.059 130.596 106.662 180.418 127.313 184.66 131.555 Cross Section E - Wedge- Upper Seismic Method: bishop simplified X Y 127.199 110.059 130.596 106.662 180.418 127.313 184.66 131.555 Cross Section E - Wedge- Global Static Method: bishop simplified X Y 41.9989 78.058 46.8675 73.1894 87.1654 91.2748 105.95 110.059 Cross Section E - Wedge- Global Seismic Method: bishop simplified X Y 41.9989 78.058 46.8675 73.1894 87.1654 91.2748 105.95 110.059 9/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 361 Entity Information Cross Section E Shared Entities 10/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 362 Type Coordinates (x,y) External Boundary 0.591, 89.234 0.59323, 86.9802 0.613, 67 0.68, -0.712 369.342, -0.712 369.342, 125.422 369.342, 150.831 369.342, 153.223 329.277, 153.223 233.816, 140.471 217.983, 131.555 169.867, 131.555 129.104, 113.478 129.104, 110.059 98.6282, 110.059 87.53, 110.059 42.829, 78.058 41.334, 78.058 38.547, 78.058 22.732, 84.806 Material Boundary 0.59323, 86.9802 22.404, 82.845 39.449, 75.28 42.273, 75.28 45.5, 76.793 87.937, 106.851 98.6282, 110.059 Material Boundary 129.104, 110.059 129.104, 107.441 142.926, 107.441 142.926, 111.541 155.907, 111.541 155.907, 117.519 166.838, 117.519 166.838, 121.447 176.745, 121.447 176.745, 127.218 228.117, 127.218 228.117, 130.685 236.142, 130.685 236.142, 135.389 244.436, 135.389 244.436, 139.131 288.883, 144.796 330.041, 150.831 369.342, 150.831 Material Boundary 0.613, 67 16.19, 58 36.169, 51.236 50.973, 54.141 65.638, 63.272 93.031, 74.34 114.337, 80.428 207.898, 103.627 261.416, 117.709 369.342, 125.422 11/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 363 Scenario-based Entities Type Coordin ates (x,y) Circular - Global Static Circular - Global Seismic Circular - Upper Static Circular - Upper Seismic Wedge- Upper Static Wedge- Upper Seismic Wedge- Global Static Wedge- Global Seismic Distribut ed Load 178.258, 131.555 210.591, 131.555 Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Vertical Magnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Vertical Magnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Vertical Magnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Vertical Magnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Vertical Magnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Vertical Magnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Vertical Magnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Constant Distributi onOrient ation: Vertical Magnitu de: 120 lbs/ft2Cr eates Excess Pore Pressure : No Block Search Window 112.114, 75.608 159.989, 79.201 159.989, 122.156 112.088, 102.891 Block Search Window 177.347, 89.997 222.311, 100.33 222.311, 130.304 177.347, 130.304 12/12 Friday, May 24, 2024Ogasawara Slope Stability 364 Drawn: TMA Job: 22323 C l i e n t : Sheet OF 7 Date: October 2, 2024T i t l e :Bolton Engineering Corp. Scale: AS SHOWN SUMMARY OF HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS 23 CREST ROAD EAST Prepared For: Rolling Hills City Council Prepared By: Bolton Engineering Corp DATE: October 2, 2024 365 Drawn: TMA Job: 22323 C l i e n t : Sheet OF 7 Date: October 2, 2024T i t l e :Bolton Engineering Corp. Scale: AS SHOWN Table of Contents: 1. Existing Conditions 2 2. Proposed Conditions 2 3. Design Considerations 2 4. Design 2 Plate 1 Schematic Diagram Plate 2 Hydrology Exhibit Plate 3 Cistern Detail Plate 4 Hydrologic Map Plate 5 Hydrologic Map Plate 6 Runoff Coefficient Curve Appendix Hydrocalc Computations 1 366 Drawn: TMA Job: 22323 C l i e n t : Sheet OF 7 Date: October 2, 2024T i t l e :Bolton Engineering Corp. Scale: AS SHOWN 1. Existing Conditions: The site is 7.8 acres, and is undeveloped. It is bounded by Crest Road to the north and existing single family residences to the west, east and south. The easterly and westerly properties are separated by water courses, which drain to Klondike Canyon. Regionally, the site sits above, and drains toward, the Flying Triangle landslide. 2. Proposed Conditions: The project proposes to develop approximately 2.4 acres of the upper portion of the site with a new residence, driveway, guest house and ADU, stable and corral, and pool and other ancillary elements. The proposed imperviously coverage is approximately 31% and is shown on Plate 2. 3. Design Considerations: The City has directed the project to consider measures to mitigate the runoff from the property. Typically development projects, where mitigation of runoff due to the development is required, are designed to mitigate peak runoff due to priority given to not impacting flood control facilities downstream. However, in this case, it is our understanding that the principal concern is the volume of runoff due to concerns regarding that volume being directed to the landslide mass through fissures downstream. The evaluation of the landslide and its causes are outside of the scope of our work; based on direction from the City the project proposes to mitigate its runoff through storage onsite of the difference in volume due to the development. Previously, this property has had projects approved with mitigation of the 25 year storm; the City has asked, based on recent movement, that the project store the 50 year storm difference. We have prepared Hydrocalc computations and have found the following volumes, in cubic feet, for the 25, 50 and 100 year storms: 4. Design: On the basis of these calculations, the project proposes storage of 10,000 cubic feet. The project proposes to provide this in two, 10' diameter pipes as tanks (per manufacturer, these tanks allow for 76.05 cubic feet per linear foot of storage): L required = 10,076cf/76.05 cf/lf = 132.5' L provided = 140' V provided = 10,647 cf As shown above, the provided tanks as designed will store the excess runoff from the 100 year storm. 2 367 Drawn: TMNJob: 22311C l i e n t : Sheet OF 11 Date: Aug 14, 2024T i t l e :Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Avenue Ste. 210Lomita, Ca. 90717Phone: (310) 325-5580Fax: (310) 325-5581Scale: AS SHOWNYUKI OGASAWARA452 S LORING AVENUE23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274LOS ANGELES CA 90024J:\22324_Ogasawara\Hydrology Plans_ Report.dwg 10/2/2024 12:58:07 PMSTORMWATER RUNOFFSCHEMATIC DIAGRAM3PLATE 1368 LEGENDDrawn: TMNJob: 22311C l i e n t : Sheet OF 11 Date: Aug 14, 2024T i t l e :Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Avenue Ste. 210Lomita, Ca. 90717Phone: (310) 325-5580Fax: (310) 325-5581Scale: AS SHOWNYUKI OGASAWARA452 S LORING AVENUE23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274LOS ANGELES CA 90024J:\22324_Ogasawara\Hydrology Plans_ Report.dwg 10/2/2024 12:58:27 PMSTORMWATER RUNOFFHYDROLOGY EXHIBIT1 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE0808016080·············4PLATE 2369 MAIN PAD: 70' (2)Drawn: TMNJob: 22311C l i e n t : Sheet OF 11 Date: Aug 14, 2024T i t l e :Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Avenue Ste. 210Lomita, Ca. 90717Phone: (310) 325-5580Fax: (310) 325-5581Scale: AS SHOWNYUKI OGASAWARA452 S LORING AVENUE23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274LOS ANGELES CA 90024J:\22324_Ogasawara\Hydrology Plans_ Report.dwg 10/2/2024 12:58:28 PMSTORMWATER RUNOFFCISTERN DETAILING5PLATE 3370 Drawn: TMA Job: 22323 C l i e n t : Sheet OF 7 Date: October 2, 2024T i t l e :Bolton Engineering Corp. Scale: AS SHOWN 6 PLATE 4 371 Drawn: TMA Job: 22323 C l i e n t : Sheet OF 7 Date: October 2, 2024T i t l e :Bolton Engineering Corp. Scale: AS SHOWN 6 PLATE 5 372 Drawn: TMA Job: 22323 C l i e n t : Sheet OF 7 Date: October 2, 2024T i t l e :Bolton Engineering Corp. Scale: AS SHOWN 7 PLATE 6 373 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - East LID.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID East Area (ac)1.26 Flow Path Length (ft)400.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in)0.9 Percent Impervious 0.39 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm Fire Factor 0 LID True Output Results Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.9 Peak Intensity (in/hr)0.2867 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.4188 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.6064 Time of Concentration (min)19.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)0.2191 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)0.2191 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.0404 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)1758.2916 374 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - West LID.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID West Area (ac)1.47 Flow Path Length (ft)420.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in)0.9 Percent Impervious 0.38 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm Fire Factor 0 LID True Output Results Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in)0.9 Peak Intensity (in/hr)0.2799 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.4124 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.5977 Time of Concentration (min)20.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)0.2459 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)0.2459 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.0462 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)2013.9997 375 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - East_Existing 25 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID East Watershed Area (ac)1.26 Flow Path Length (ft)400.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.01 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 25-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)4.39 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.6192 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8668 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8672 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)2.8618 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)2.8618 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.148 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)6448.5248 376 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - West_Existing 25 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID West Watershed Area (ac)1.47 Flow Path Length (ft)420.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.01 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 25-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)4.39 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.6192 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8668 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8672 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.3388 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.3388 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.1727 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)7523.279 377 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - East_Proposed 25 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID East Watershed Area (ac)1.26 Flow Path Length (ft)400.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.39 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 25-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)4.39 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.6192 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8668 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8798 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)2.9034 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)2.9034 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.2491 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)10852.3858 378 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - West_Proposed 25 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID West Watershed Area (ac)1.47 Flow Path Length (ft)420.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.38 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 25-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)4.39 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.6192 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8668 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8794 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.386 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.386 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.2876 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)12525.9105 379 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - East_Existing 50 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID East Watershed Area (ac)1.26 Flow Path Length (ft)400.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.01 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 50-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.9831 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8829 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8831 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.3193 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.3193 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.1865 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)8122.4359 380 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - West_Existing 50 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID West Watershed Area (ac)1.47 Flow Path Length (ft)420.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.01 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 50-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.9831 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8829 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8831 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.8726 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.8726 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.2175 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)9476.1752 381 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - East_Proposed 50 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID East Watershed Area (ac)1.26 Flow Path Length (ft)400.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.39 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 50-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.9831 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8829 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8896 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.3437 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.3437 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.2948 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)12839.6448 382 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - West_Proposed 50 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID West Watershed Area (ac)1.47 Flow Path Length (ft)420.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.38 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 50-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.9831 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8829 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8894 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.9003 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.9003 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.3406 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)14834.759 383 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - East_Existing 100 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID East Watershed Area (ac)1.26 Flow Path Length (ft)400.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.01 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 100-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (100-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.61 Peak Intensity (in/hr)3.3471 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8921 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8921 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.7624 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.7624 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.2294 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)9993.6221 384 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - West_Existing 100 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID West Watershed Area (ac)1.47 Flow Path Length (ft)420.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.01 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 100-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (100-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.61 Peak Intensity (in/hr)3.3471 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8921 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8921 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)4.3895 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)4.3895 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.2677 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)11659.2258 385 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - East_Proposed 100 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID East Watershed Area (ac)1.26 Flow Path Length (ft)400.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.39 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 100-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (100-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.61 Peak Intensity (in/hr)3.3471 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8921 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8952 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.7751 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.7751 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.3432 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)14948.4571 386 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: J:/22324_Ogasawara/Hydrology/Ogasawara - West_Proposed 100 year.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3 Input Parameters Project Name Ogasawara Subarea ID West Watershed Area (ac)1.47 Flow Path Length (ft)420.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.1 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.0 Percent Impervious 0.38 Soil Type 2 Design Storm Frequency 100-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (100-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.61 Peak Intensity (in/hr)3.3471 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.8921 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.8951 Time of Concentration (min)5.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)4.4039 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)4.4039 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.3969 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)17287.7445 387 23 Crest Road East - ZC 23-070 - Page 1 of 1 2615 Pacific Coast Highway #329 Hermosa Beach, California 90254 (310) 543-6635 pfernandez@scng.com City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Account Number:5007827 Ad Order Number:0011695897 Customer's Reference/PO Number: Publication:Daily Breeze Publication Dates:10/04/2024 Total Amount:$618.01 Payment Amount:$0.00 Amount Due:$618.01 Notice ID:v7e27EKscLtYj0JJcWiB Invoice Text:NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills will conduct a public hearing to be held on Monday, October 14, 2024, beginning at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall, located at 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills CA 90274 , for the purpose of discussing the following project: 23 CREST ROAD EAST, ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (LOT 132A-MS) ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 14,680-SQUARE-FOOT RESIDENCE WITH A BASEMENT, RETAINING WALLS EXCEEDING A HEIGHT OF 3 FEET (UP TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 5 FEET), DRIVEWAY WITH PORTIONS THAT EXCEED A WIDTH OF 20 FEET, AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS; CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE, CORRAL, AND A GUEST HOUSE; AND VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE STABLE, CORRAL, SWIMMING POOL, AND RETAINING WALLS IN THE FRONT YARD, ALLOW A PORTION OF THE CORRAL TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM AVERAGE HEIGHT OF TWO-AND-ONE- HALF FEET, CONSTRUCT DECKS/PATIOS MORE THAN ONE FOOT ABOVE GRADE, AND ALLOW GRADING EXPORT (OGASAWARA) The project has been determined to be categorically exempt (Class 3) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303. This project was originally discussed at the August 12, 2024 City Council meeting and continued. Members of the public are invited to provide comments in-person during the public 388 23 Crest Road East - ZC 23-070 - Page 1 of 1 Daily Breeze 2615 Pacific Coast Highway #329 Hermosa Beach, California 90254 (310) 543-6635 0011695897 City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Los Angeles I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not party to or interested in the above- entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of Daily Breeze, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Torrance*, County of Los Angeles, and which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of County of Los Angeles, State of California, under the date of June 15, 1945, Decree No. Pomo C-606. The notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to wit: 10/04/2024 I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Hermosa Beach, California On this 4th day of October, 2024. ______________________________ Signature *Daily Breeze circulation includes the following cities: Carson, Compton, Culver City, El Segundo, Gardena, Harbor City, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Peninsula, Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes Estates, Redondo Beach, San Pedro, Santa Monica, Torrance and Wilmington 389 CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_F - Page 1 of 1 2615 Pacific Coast Highway #329 Torrance, California 90254 (310) 543-6635 pfernandez@scng.com City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Account Number:5007827 Ad Order Number:0011684273 Customer's Reference/PO Number: Publication:Daily Breeze Publication Dates:08/01/2024 Total Amount:$644.37 Payment Amount:$0.00 Amount Due:$644.37 Notice ID:tuuJtQ4GSEgJwUciiWwR Invoice Text:NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills will conduct a public hearing field trip visit starting at 7:30 AM on Monday, August 12, 2024, at the following property for the purpose of receiving public input regarding the following: 23 CREST ROAD EAST, ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (LOT 132A-MS) ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 14,680-SQUARE-FOOT RESIDENCE WITH A BASEMENT, RETAINING WALLS EXCEEDING A HEIGHT OF 3 FEET (UP TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 5 FEET), DRIVEWAY WITH PORTIONS THAT EXCEED A WIDTH OF 20 FEET, AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS; CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE, CORRAL, AND A GUEST HOUSE; AND VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE STABLE, CORRAL, SWIMMING POOL, AND RETAINING WALLS IN THE FRONT YARD, ALLOW A PORTION OF THE CORRAL TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM AVERAGE HEIGHT OF TWO-AND-ONE- HALF FEET, CONSTRUCT DECKS/PATIOS MORE THAN ONE FOOT ABOVE GRADE, AND ALLOW GRADING EXPORT (OGASAWARA) The project has been determined to be categorically exempt (Class 3) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303. The purpose of this field trip is to hold a public hearing on the site of the project to familiarize members of the City Council and interested parties with the location, topography, size, and scope of the project. Following the field trip, the City Council will reconvene to discuss the 390 CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_F - Page 1 of 1 Daily Breeze 2615 Pacific Coast Highway #329 Torrance, California 90254 (310) 543-6635 0011684273 City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Los Angeles I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not party to or interested in the above- entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of Daily Breeze, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Torrance*, County of Los Angeles, and which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of County of Los Angeles, State of California, under the date of June 15, 1945, Decree No. Pomo C-606. The notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to wit: 08/01/2024 I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Torrance, California On this 1st day of August, 2024. ______________________________ Signature *Daily Breeze circulation includes the following cities: Carson, Compton, Culver City, El Segundo, Gardena, Harbor City, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Peninsula, Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes Estates, Redondo Beach, San Pedro, Santa Monica, Torrance and Wilmington 391 191196121373421415161721223123323938302936343533282726242518108513720LEGENDABBREVIATIONSBolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C1 23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274SHEET INDEXSCALE: 1" = 40'OVERALL SITE PLANSCALE: 1" = 300'VICINITY MAP123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839TYPICAL SECTIONCRESTROADEAST392 Bolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C2 23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274SCALE: 1" = 40'EXISTING CONDITIONSCRESTROADEAST393 LEGENDABBREVIATIONSBolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C3 23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274CRESTROADEASTSCALE: 1" = 20'PRELIMINARY CIVIL PLAN394 Bolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C4SCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION A-ASCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION B-BSCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION C-CSCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION D-DSCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION E-ESCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION B1-B1395 TYPE A2-8 (Modified)MOW CURBTYPE A1-6 (Modified)Bolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C5 396 70 0 00 0 70 CRORUDHSWKAUHD RI )LOOAUHD RI CXW LEGENDBolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C3 23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274CRESTROADEASTSCALE: 1" = 20'EARTHWORK COLOR EXHIBIT397 13 6 0 1355136013401335134513501330134013351340134513351350133013551350134513601365135513401335 135013401345136013551355134513501360136513601355135013651365135013701 3 7 0 134513401335133013401335131013201315132513201325133013351330128512901295130012901 2 9 012851 2 8 012701265 1295129012851280131013051300129513151320132513201330131013051300131513001290129512801285 1290128512 80 1 2 7 5 1 2 7 0 1 2 6 5 1 2 6 0 1 2 5 5 126 0 125 5 1265 1275126512701265125512501245124012351220122512301215120512101200120512001195119011851230 1225 1220 121 0 11 8 5 118 0 121 5 120 5 120 0 119 5 119 0 1 1 7 5 11 7 0 1 1 6 5 1 1 6 0 11 5 5 11 5 0 1 1 8 5 11 8 0 11 9 5 11 9 0 1250 1245 1240 123 5 123 0 1225 1220 1210 1215 1205 1200 1270 1260 1255 1265 1250 1245 1240 1235 1230 1225 12 2 0 1275127012601255 12651250124512951290128512801300127512701265121512401235123012251 22 0 12601255125012451285128012751265127012501245123512401260125512301225122012151185118011951190117511701165116011551205120012101 2 1 0 1 1 8 5 1 1 9 5 1 1 9 0 1 2 0 5 1 2 0 011451140113511301125 121012151220122511501185118011951190117511701165116011551205127012801275126512501245126012551240123512301310131513051320132512901 2 9 5 1 3 0 0 1 2 8 0 128512901305130013101295124 5 12 5 0 12 5 5 12 6 0 12 6 5 12 7 0 1 2 7 5 1285128012901265127012751295130012551 2 6 0 12 5 0 12 4 5 12 4 0 1 2 3 5 12 3 0 122 5 1200 1210 121 5 12 2 0 1205 1280128512901275 1 2 6 5 1 2 7 0112011351125113012151220122512301235114511401150118511801195119011751170116511601155120012101205 114 5 114 0 115 0 1185 1180 1195 1190 117 5 11 7 0 116 5 116 0 115 5 1260125512501245 12701265 1280 xxxxxx xx x x x x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E 1310130513001295xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x x x xx xxx x NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTAS1023/32"=1'-0"DRWCHK2024/01/01Proposed Site PlanTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274Site Planning Hearing04/16/24NORTH1/32"=1'-0"Site Plan1Main HouseGuest HouseADUMotor CourtPoolStableCorralTrellisBasementOutlet207'-11"62'-4"38'-8"51'-3"68'-2"172'-8"65'-9"1 1 8 ' - 3 " 15 1 ' - 8 " 156'- 1 1 " 80'-1 "101'-4"132'-1"141'-11"96'-7"134'-3"202' - 1 "35'SIDE YARDSETBACK35'SIDE YARDSETBACK35'100'SIDE YARDSETBACKFRO N T Y A R D SET B A C K SIDE YARDSETBACK35'25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT50' FRO N T Y A R D EAS E M E N T25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT26'62'15'15'93'-2"67'-3"7% S l o p e First 2 0 'WaterFeature193'-5"GarageSite Planning ChangelogMain House-Finish floor at 1293’ (Previous 1291’)-Apex at 1288’ (Previous 1286’)-Building footprint moved 12’-5” North and 4’-6” East-Pool footprint angled perpendicular to west property line (previously parallelwith main house west wing)-Building GSF incl. Basement 21,920 sf (Previous 20,940 sf)Guest House-Finish floor at 1293’ (Previous 1291’)-Building footprint moved 16’ North and 4’ West-Southeast building corner from property line 51’-3” (Previous 39’-9”)-Southeast building corner does not require fill grading (Previously requiredfill grading)ADU-Finish floor at 1319’ (Previous 1320’)-Building footprint moved 2’-6” North and 0’-8”’ West-Northeast building corner from property line 38’-8” (Previous 37’-5”)-Building footprint 38’-4” x 18’-4” (Previous 36’-0” x 16’-0”)-Building GSF 700 sf (Previous 576 sf)Stable-Finish floor at 1316’ (Previous 1314’)-Building southwest corner 62'4" from the western property line and 207'11"from the north east corner of 17 Crest Road East's nearest building.(Previous southwest building corner 39'8" from the western property line and185'7" from the north east corner of 17 Crest Road East's nearest building)-Building footprint 58’-10” x 20’-10” (Previous 70’’-0” x 27’-6”)-Building GSF 1,225 sf (Previous 1,295 sf)-Office space, closet space, and full bath are omitted (Previously included)Civil-Total grading 28,725 cy (Previous 28,930 cy)-Total Structure 18,457 sf (Previous 17,184 sf)-Total disturbed area 87,920 sf (Previous 92,460 sf)-Total flatwork 18,715 sf (Previous 20,520 sf)-Primary driveway 13,480 sf (Previous 16,100 sf)-Paved walks, patio areas 2,675 sf (Previous 4,010 sf)-Pool decking 1,120 sf (Previous 410 sf)398 13 6 0 1355136013401335134513501330134013351340134513351350133013551350134513601365135513401335 135013401345136013551355134513501360136513601355135013651365135013701 3 7 0 134513401335133013401335131013201315132513201325133013351330128512901295130012901 2 9 012851 2 8 012701265 1295129012851280131013051300129513151320132513201330131013051300131513001290129512801285 1290128512 80 1 2 7 5 1 2 7 0 1 2 6 5 1 2 6 0 1 2 5 5 126 0 125 5 1265 1275126512701265125512501245124012351220122512301215120512101200120512001195119011851230 1225 1220 121 0 11 8 5 118 0 121 5 120 5 120 0 119 5 119 0 1 1 7 5 11 7 0 1 1 6 5 1 1 6 0 11 5 5 11 5 0 1 1 8 5 11 8 0 11 9 5 11 9 0 1250 1245 1240 123 5 123 0 1225 1220 1210 1215 1205 1200 1270 1260 1255 1265 1250 1245 1240 1235 1230 1225 12 2 0 1275127012601255 12651250124512951290128512801300127512701265121512401235123012251 22 0 12601255125012451285128012751265127012501245123512401260125512301225122012151185118011951190117511701165116011551205120012101 2 1 0 1 1 8 5 1 1 9 5 1 1 9 0 1 2 0 5 1 2 0 011451140113511301125 121012151220122511501185118011951190117511701165116011551205127012801275126512501245126012551240123512301310131513051320132512901 2 9 5 1 3 0 0 1 2 8 0 128512901305130013101295124 5 12 5 0 12 5 5 12 6 0 12 6 5 12 7 0 1 2 7 5 1285128012901265127012751295130012551 2 6 0 12 5 0 12 4 5 12 4 0 1 2 3 5 12 3 0 122 5 1200 1210 121 5 12 2 0 1205 1280128512901275 1 2 6 5 1 2 7 0112011351125113012151220122512301235114511401150118511801195119011751170116511601155120012101205 114 5 114 0 115 0 1185 1180 1195 1190 117 5 11 7 0 116 5 116 0 115 5 1260125512501245 12701265 1280 xxxxxx xx x x x x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E 1310130513001295xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x x x xx xxx x NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTAS1023/32"=1'-0"DRWCHK2024/01/01Proposed Site PlanTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274Site Planning Hearing04/16/24NORTH1/32"=1'-0"Site Plan1Main HouseGuest HouseADUMotor CourtPoolStableCorralTrellisBasementOutlet207'-11"62'-4"38'-8"51'-3"68'-2"172'-8"65'-9"1 1 8 ' - 3 " 15 1 ' - 8 " 156'- 1 1 " 80'-1 "101'-4"132'-1"141'-11"96'-7"134'-3"202' - 1 "35'SIDE YARDSETBACK35'SIDE YARDSETBACK35'100'SIDE YARDSETBACKFRO N T Y A R D SET B A C K SIDE YARDSETBACK35'25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT50' FRO N T Y A R D EAS E M E N T25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT26'62'15'15'93'-2"67'-3"7% S l o p e First 2 0 'WaterFeature193'-5"GarageSite Planning ChangelogMain House-Finish floor at 1293’ (Previous 1291’)-Apex at 1288’ (Previous 1286’)-Building footprint moved 12’-5” North and 4’-6” East-Pool footprint angled perpendicular to west property line (previously parallelwith main house west wing)-Building GSF incl. Basement 21,920 sf (Previous 20,940 sf)Guest House-Finish floor at 1293’ (Previous 1291’)-Building footprint moved 16’ North and 4’ West-Southeast building corner from property line 51’-3” (Previous 39’-9”)-Southeast building corner does not require fill grading (Previously requiredfill grading)ADU-Finish floor at 1319’ (Previous 1320’)-Building footprint moved 2’-6” North and 0’-8”’ West-Northeast building corner from property line 38’-8” (Previous 37’-5”)-Building footprint 38’-4” x 18’-4” (Previous 36’-0” x 16’-0”)-Building GSF 700 sf (Previous 576 sf)Stable-Finish floor at 1316’ (Previous 1314’)-Building southwest corner 62'4" from the western property line and 207'11"from the north east corner of 17 Crest Road East's nearest building.(Previous southwest building corner 39'8" from the western property line and185'7" from the north east corner of 17 Crest Road East's nearest building)-Building footprint 58’-10” x 20’-10” (Previous 70’’-0” x 27’-6”)-Building GSF 1,225 sf (Previous 1,295 sf)-Office space, closet space, and full bath are omitted (Previously included)Civil-Total grading 28,725 cy (Previous 28,930 cy)-Total Structure 18,457 sf (Previous 17,184 sf)-Total disturbed area 87,920 sf (Previous 92,460 sf)-Total flatwork 18,715 sf (Previous 20,520 sf)-Primary driveway 13,480 sf (Previous 16,100 sf)-Paved walks, patio areas 2,675 sf (Previous 4,010 sf)-Pool decking 1,120 sf (Previous 410 sf)399 13 6 0 1355136013401335134513501330134013351340134513351350133013551350134513601365135513401335 135013401345136013551355134513501360136513601355135013651365135013701 3 7 0 134513401335133013401335131013201315132513201325133013351330128512901295130012901 2 9 0 12851 2 8 012701265 1295129012851280131013051300129513151320132513201330131013051300131513001290129512801285 1290128512 80 1 2 7 5 1 2 7 0 1 2 6 5 1 2 6 0 1 2 5 5 126 0 125 5 1265 1275126512701265125512501245124012351220122512301215120512101200120512001195119011851230 1225 1220 121 0 11 8 5 118 0 121 5 120 5 120 0 119 5 119 0 1 1 7 5 11 7 0 1 1 6 5 1 1 6 0 11 5 5 11 5 0 1 1 8 5 11 8 0 11 9 5 11 9 0 1250 1245 1240 123 5 123 0 1225 1220 1210 1215 1205 1200 1270 1260 1255 1265 1250 1245 1240 1235 1230 1225 12 2 0 1275127012601255 12651250124512951290128512801300127512701265121512401235123012251 22 0 12601255125012451285128012751265127012501245123512401260125512301225122012151185118011951190117511701165116011551205120012101 2 1 0 1 1 8 5 1 1 9 5 1 1 9 0 1 2 0 5 1 2 0 011451140113511301125 121012151220122511501185118011951190117511701165116011551205127012801275126512501245126012551240123512301310131513051320132512901 2 9 5 1 3 0 0 1 2 8 0 128512901305130013101295124 5 12 5 0 12 5 5 12 6 0 12 6 5 12 7 0 1 2 7 5 1285128012901265127012751295130012551 2 6 0 12 5 0 12 4 5 12 4 0 1 2 3 5 12 3 0 122 5 1200 1210 121 5 12 2 0 1205 128012851290 1 2 7 5 1 2 6 5 1 2 7 0112011351125113012151220122512301235114511401150118511801195119011751170116511601155120012101205 114 5 114 0 115 0 1185 1180 1195 1190 117 5 11 7 0 116 5 116 0 115 5 1260125512501245 12701265 1280 xxxxxx xx x x x x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E 1293'1310130513001295xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x xx x x x x x x x x x x x x NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTAS1023/32"=1'-0"DRWCHK2024/01/01Proposed Site PlanTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274Site Planning Hearing04/16/24NORTH1/32"=1'-0"Site Plan1Main HouseGuest HouseADUMotor CourtPoolStableCorralTrellisBasementOutlet207'-11"62'-4"38'-8"54'-9"68'-2"172'-8"65'-9"1 1 8 ' - 3 " 15 1 ' - 8 " 156'- 1 1 " 80'-1 "101'-4"132'-1"141'-11"96'-7"134'-3"202' - 1 "35'SIDE YARDSETBACK35'SIDE YARDSETBACK35'100'SIDE YARDSETBACKFRO N T Y A R D SET B A C K SIDE YARDSETBACK35'25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT50' FRO N T Y A R D EAS E M E N T25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT26'62'15'15'93'-2"67'-3"7% S l o p e First 2 0 'WaterFeature193'-5"GarageSite Planning ChangelogMain House-Building footprint moved 9’-5” North and 3’-5” West.-Southwest building corner from property line 57-9” (Previous 65’-9”)-Southeast building corner from property line 100'-11" (Previous 100'-1")-Building east wing rotated clockwise 5 deg.-Pool deck area 1,100 sf (Previous 1,500 sf)-All basement area under covered porch has been removed.-Basement area 7,428 sf (Previous 7,610 sf)Guest House-Building footprint rotated counterclockwise 12 deg.-Southeast building corner from property line 55’-1” (Previous 51’-3”)Civil-Total grading 28,725 cy (Previous 28,930 cy)-Total Structure 18,457 sf (Previous 17,184 sf)-Total disturbed area 87,920 sf (Previous 92,460 sf)-Total flatwork 18,715 sf (Previous 20,520 sf)-Primary driveway 13,480 sf (Previous 16,100 sf)-Paved walks, patio areas 2,675 sf (Previous 4,010 sf)-Pool decking 1,120 sf (Previous 410 sf)Site-Mound height 1330’ (Previous 1335’)57'-9"51'-3"100'-11"100'-1"400 127(6'DWH6FDOH'UDZQ&KHFNHG&23<5,*+7‹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ƐĐŚĞƌ'ƵŶĞtĂƌĚĞŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞϴϭϱ^ŝůǀĞƌ>ĂŬĞŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ>ŽƐŶŐĞůĞƐ͕ϵϬϬϮϲĂĚŵŝŶΛĞŐĂƌĐŚ͘ŶĞƚKĨĨŝĐĞ͗ϯϮϯͲϲϲϱͲϵϭϬϬ&Ădž͗ϯϮϯͲϲϲϱͲϵϭϬϯ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‹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‹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‹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ate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo. Issuance815 Silver Lake BoulevardLos Angeles, CA 90026Tel: 323 665 9100Fax: 323 665 9103NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscherGuneWardenaArchitectureSTAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTG105As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14Site PlanningDiagramsTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24405 NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTG106As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14View CorridorDiagramsTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NTSProposed Site Section2NTS2017 Approved Site Section1406 13 6 0 1355136013401335134513501330134013351340134513351350133013551350134513601365135513401335 135013401345136013551355134513501360136513601355135013651365135013701 3 7 0 134513401335133013401335131013201315132513201325133013351330128512901295130012901 2 9 0 12851 2 8 012701265 1295129012851280131013051300129513151320132513201330131013051300131513001290129512801285 1290128512 80 1 2 7 5 1 2 7 0 1 2 6 5 1 2 6 0 1 2 5 5 126 0 125 5 1265 1275126512701265125512501245124012351220122512301215120512101200120512001195119011851230 1225 1220 121 0 11 8 5 118 0 121 5 120 5 120 0 119 5 119 0 1 1 7 5 11 7 0 1 1 6 5 1 1 6 0 11 5 5 11 5 0 1 1 8 5 11 8 0 11 9 5 11 9 0 1250 1245 1240 123 5 123 0 1225 1220 1210 1215 1205 1200 1270 1260 1255 1265 1250 1245 1240 1235 1230 1225 12 2 0 1275127012601255 12651250124512951290128512801300127512701265121512401235123012251 22 0 12601255125012451285128012751265127012501245123512401260125512301225122012151185118011951190117511701165116011551205120012101 2 1 0 1 1 8 5 1 1 9 5 1 1 9 0 1 2 0 5 1 2 0 011451140113511301125 121012151220122511501185118011951190117511701165116011551205127012801275126512501245126012551240123512301310131513051320132512901 2 9 5 1 3 0 0 1 2 8 0 128512901305130013101295124 5 12 5 0 12 5 5 12 6 0 12 6 5 12 7 0 1 2 7 5 1285128012901265127012751295130012551 2 6 0 12 5 0 12 4 5 12 4 0 1 2 3 5 12 3 0 122 5 1200 1210 121 5 12 2 0 1205 128012851290 1 2 7 5 1 2 6 5 1 2 7 0112011351125113012151220122512301235114511401150118511801195119011751170116511601155120012101205 114 5 114 0 115 0 1185 1180 1195 1190 117 5 11 7 0 116 5 116 0 115 5 1260125512501245 12701265 1280 xxxxxxxx x x x x x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/ E C/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/EC/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E C/E 1293'1310130513001295xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x xx x x x x x x x x x x x x99.16127.68374.90 330 . 3 7 50 233.57221.36S. 71° 40' 40" E.216.1 0 S. 1 8 ° 1 9 ' 2 0 " W . 6 5 0 . 1 6 S. 4 2 ° 4 1 ' 4 0 " W .CREST ROAD EASTNOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTAS101As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14Proposed Site PlanTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH1/32"=1'-0"Site Plan1Main HouseGuest HouseADUMotor CourtPoolStableCorralTrellisBasementOutlet207'-11"62'-4"38'-8"54'-9"68'-2"172'-8"1 1 8 ' - 3 " 15 1 ' - 8 " 156'- 1 1 " 80'-1 "101'-4"132'-1"141'-11"96'-7"134'-3"202' - 1 "35'SIDE YARDSETBACK35'SIDE YARDSETBACK35'100'SIDE YARDSETBACKFRO N T Y A R D SET B A C K SIDE YARDSETBACK35'25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT50' FRO N T Y A R D EAS E M E N T25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT25'SIDE YARDEASEMENT26'62'15'15'93'-2"67'-3"7% S l o p e First 2 0 'WaterFeature193'-5"Garage57'-9"100'-1"407 UPUPStorage1161390 sfStorage115203 sfStorage1041091 sfAtrium106Den105Theater107Bar109Wine111Elev.114Vest.112Pwd113Mechanical108Meditation10122'-51 2"24'-2"36'-4"14'10'-3"68'-712"55'-778"3'-312"Vestibule102Music102Bas. Exit11053'-1112"51 ' - 8 1 2" 9'- 8 "27'-3"17'-10"21 ' - 3 3 8"33'-178"85'-3"7'7'-8"6'-11"NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA101As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14Basement PlanTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH3/32"=1'-0"Basement Plan Overall1A1041408 DNDNToilet206Bath204Shower205Shower202Bath201Hall208Toilet203Closet211Atrium209Bedroom212Atrium213Study214Storage217264Closet263Bath261Bedroom259Closet260Hall255Closet254Bath257Bedroom256Mech.251Service242Atrium240Sitting246Laundry244Toilet243Entry241Catering239Storage238Entry235Pantry237Elevator234Kitchen229Atrium232Sitting233Dining228Garage230Living231Bar221Vestibule222Entry224Storage225Vest.226Pwd.227Toilet220Walled Entry219Coat216Storage218Atrium215LibraryUPUP236Toilet##############11'13'-6"15'-6"11'-8"11'-9"15'##15'10'##118'-5"Closet210Hall207258Bath262Bath266Gym267Pool265Bedroom##15'##18'-3"################################################################245Bedroom247Toilet248Closet250Shower249Bath253AtriumNOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA102As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14Overall First FloorPlanTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH3/32"=1'-0"Overall First Floor Plan1A1041A1051A1061A1062A1086A1085A1087A1081A108244'-2"A1083A1084409 NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA103As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14Roof PlanTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH3/32"=1'-0"Roof Plan1A2026A2025A2027A2014A2011A2012A2013209'-1112"44'-2"134'-10"9 8 ' - 2 1 1 1 6"242'44'-2"131'-8"15'-512"8'8'8'12'-312"8' 28'-2"3'6'-10"18'-3"8'3:12 Slope Typ.3:12 Slope Typ.8'8' 410 UPUPStorage115203 sfStorage1041091 sfAtrium106Den105Theater107Bar109Wine111Elev.114Vest.112Pwd113Mechanical108Meditation10122'-51 2"24'-2"36'-4"14'10'-3"68'-712"3'-312"Vestibule102Music102Bas. Exit11053'-1112"51 ' - 8 1 2" 9' - 8 "27'-3"17'-10"21 ' - 3 3 8"85'-3"7'7'-8"6'-11"NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA104As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14Basement PlanCentral AreaTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH1/4"Basement Enlarged Plan118'-318"411 Toilet206Bath204Shower205Shower202Bath201Hall208Toilet203Closet211Atrium209Bedroom212Atrium213Study214Storage217219Coat216Storage218Atrium215LibraryUP############11'13'-6"15'-6"11'-8"11'-9"15'##15'10'##118'-5"Closet210Hall207##15'18'-3"########NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA105As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14First Floor PlanEast WingTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH1/4"First Floor - East Wing18'-31 2"662'14'-7"7'-6"A2026A2025A2027stackedwasherdryer20'-4"16'-5"5'-3"26'-5"44'-4"14'-11"3'412 DNDNStorage217242Atrium240Sitting241Catering239Storage238Entry235Pantry237Elevator234Kitchen229Atrium232Sitting233Dining228Garage230Living231Bar221Vestibule222Entry224Storage225Vest.226Pwd.227Toilet220Walled Entry219Coat216Storage218Atrium215LibraryUP236Toilet11'######################################NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA106As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14First Floor PlanCentral AreaTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH1/4"First Floor - Central Area1A2025A2014A201118'-3" 413 DN264Closet263Bath261Bedroom259Closet260Hall255Closet254Bath257Bedroom 256Mech.251Service242Atrium240Sitting246Laundry244Toilet243Entry241Catering239Storage238Entry235Pantry237Elevator234Kitchen229Atrium228GarageUP 236Toilet258Bath262Bath266Gym265Bedroom245Bedroom247Toilet248Closet250Shower249Bath253Atrium264Closet262Bath266Gym267Pool265BedroomNOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA107As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14First Floor PlanWest Wing & PoolTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH1/4"=1'-0"First Floor - West Wing1NORTH1/4"=1'-0"First Floor - Pool2A2011A2012A2013414 NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA108As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14Main ResidenceBuilding ElevationsTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/241/8"=1'-0"Southwest Building Elevation11/8"=1'-0"Northwest Building Elevation21/8"=1'-0"South Building Elevation61/8"=1'-0"East Building Elevation71/8"=1'-0"North Building Elevation53. Slate, grey2. Natural stone2. Natural stone3. Slate, grey3. Slate, grey2. Natural stone3. Slate, grey2. Natural stone3. Slate, grey2. Natural stoneAdjustable louver(for sun shading)..\..\PlanningSubmittal_R4\Architecture\Models\MaterialKey\Original_Image-Kinney_RandomAshlar_Swatch_EcoOutdoor.jpgMaterial KeyDouglas Fir1Natural Stone2Slate, Grey3Paint, White41/8"=1'-0"Northeast Building Elevation31/8"=1'-0"Southeast Building Elevation4415 12345ABC70'-10"12'-612"12'-612"12'-11"20'10'10'12'12'12'12'19'-312"19'-2"5'8'24'-3"6'-11"6'-712"Stall101Stall102Tack Room103Storage106Corriddor104Powder105Storage107Storage108Covered Walk1096'-5"6'-5"8'-5"8'-5" 36'-10"70'-10"36'-10"12345ABBottom of Eave+8'-0"Ridge+14'-2"Top of Plate+10'-0"Finish Floor+0'-0"12345Top of Finish Floor+0'-0"ABBottom of Eave+8'-0"Ridge+14'-2"Top of Plate+10'-0"NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA109As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14Stable Plans andElevationsTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH1/4"=1'-0"First Floor Plan1NORTH1/4"=1'-0"Roof Plan21/4"=1'-0"North Building Elevation31/4"=1'-0"West Building Elevation41/4"=1'-0"South Building Elevation51/4"=1'-0"East Building Elevation65A1093A1096A1094A109416 134BA11'-10"11'-10"13'-10"17'-6"2Finish Floor+0'-0"1234Bottom of Eave+8'-0"Top of Retaining Wall+3'-0"Ridge Line+13'-4"Top of Plate+9'-6"Finish Floor+0'-0"ABTop of Retaining Wall+3'-0"Bottom of Eave+8'-0"Ridge Line+13'-4"Top of Plate+9'-6"Finish Floor+0'-0"4321Top of Retaining Wall+3'-0"Bottom of Eave+8'-0"Ridge Line+13'-4"Top of Plate+9'-6"BAFinish Floor+0'-0"Top of Retaining Wall+3'-0"Bottom of Eave+8'-0"Ridge Line+13'-4"Top of Plate+9'-6"NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA110As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14ADU Plans andElevationsTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH1/4"=1'-0"First Floor Plan1NORTH1/4"=1'-0"Roof Plan21/4"=1'-0"North Building Elevation31/4"=1'-0"West Building Elevation41/4"=1'-0"South Building Elevation51/4"=1'-0"East Building Elevation63A1105A1106A1104A110417 1234CB9'-5"6'-8"9'18'-5"102Kitchenette103Powder104Closet101Main Room5'A1234CBA9'-5"6'-8"5'18'-5"9'8'-5"8'-4"6'-5"6'-5"Finish Floor+0'-0"Bottom of Eave+8'-0"Ridge+15'-0"Top of Plate+10'-0"Finish Floor+0'-0"Bottom of Eave+8'-0"Top of Plate+10'-0"Ridge+15'-0"Finish Floor+0'-0"Bottom of Eave+8'-0"Top of Plate+10'-0"Ridge+15'-0"Finish Floor+0'-0"Bottom of Eave+8'-0"Top of Plate+10'-0"Ridge+15'-0"NOTESDate:Scale:Drawn:Checked:COPYRIGHT © ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.OWNERTHESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.DateNo.Issuance815 Silver Lake Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90026 Tel: 323 665 9100 Fax: 323 665 9103 NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE COPIED OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY WORK OTHER THAN THE SPECIFIED PROJECT WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PREAPRED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF ESCHER GUNEWARDENA ARCHITECTURE, INC.GENERAL CONTRACTOREscher GuneWardena Architecture STAMPSARCHITECT OF RECORDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERCIVIL ENGINEERMEP ENGINEERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTA111As ShownDRWCHK2024/10/14Guest House andTrellis Plans andElevationsTerremoto3401 Glendale BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90039PAE6060 Center Dr, 10th FlrLos Angeles, CA 90045Bolton Engineering Corp.25834 Narbonne Ave, Ste 210Lomita, CA 90717Nous Engineering5050 Eagle Rock BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90041TBD### Streetname St.Los Angeles, CA #####Yukiko Ogasawara3 Flying Mane LnRolling Hills, CA 90274OgasawaraResidence23 Crest RoadRolling Hills, CA 90274City Council10/14/24NORTH1/4"=1'-0"First Floor Plan1NORTH1/4"=1'-0"Roof Plan21/4"=1'-0"North Building Elevation31/4"=1'-0"West Building Elevation41/4"=1'-0"South Building Elevation51/4"=1'-0"East Building Elevation65A1113A1116A1114A1111/4"=1'-0"Trellis Roof Plan71/4"=1'-0"Trellis Floor Plan81/4"=1'-0"Trellis South Elevation91/4"=1'-0"Trellis Section A-A109A111A11110Finish Floor+00'-0"B/ Retaining Wall-02'-6"T/ Retaining Wall+02'-6"B/ Trellis Structure+08'-0"Finish Floor+00'-0"B/ Retaining Wall-02'-6"T/ Retaining Wall+02'-6"B/ Trellis Structure+08'-0"T/ Trellis Structure+09'-0"T/ Trellis Structure+09'-0"10'-014"26'-5"10'-014"Lattice trellice roofPartial height retaining wallTrellis support columns3:12 Slope Typ.3:12 Slope Typ.Ridge Height+115'-0 14"+1208'-0 14"Top of Eave+109'-4"+1202'-4"Top of Roofat Building+111'-5 1/4"+1204'-5 1/4"418 191196121373421415161721223123323938302936343533282726242518108513720LEGENDABBREVIATIONSBolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C1 23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274SHEET INDEXSCALE: 1" = 40'OVERALL SITE PLANSCALE: 1" = 300'VICINITY MAP123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839TYPICAL SECTIONCRESTROADEAST10/14/24419 Bolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C2 23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274SCALE: 1" = 40'EXISTING CONDITIONSCRESTROADEAST10/14/24420 LEGENDABBREVIATIONSBolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C3 23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274CRESTROADEASTSCALE: 1" = 20'PRELIMINARY CIVIL PLAN100 YEAR STORM100 YEAR STORM10/14/24421 Bolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C4SCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION A-ASCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION B-BSCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION C-CSCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION D-DSCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION E-ESCALE: 1" = 20'SECTION B1-B110/14/24422 TYPE A2-8 (Modified)MOW CURBTYPE A1-6 (Modified)Bolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C570' LONG10/14/24423 70 0 00 0 70 CRORUDHSWKAUHD RI )LOOAUHD RI CXW LEGENDBolton Engineering Corp. Civil Engineering and Surveying 25834 Narbonne Avenue Suite 210 Lomita, Ca. 90717 Ph: 310-325-5580 Fax: 310-325-5581C3 23 CREST ROAD EASTROLLING HILLS, CA 90274CRESTROADEASTSCALE: 1" = 20'EARTHWORK COLOR EXHIBIT10/14/246424 STABLEADUGUESTHOUSEMAIN HOUSE=ʇ̜ʆʆcXXJ&\tXCJcJCITY COUNCIL10/14/24425 STABLEADUGUESTHOUSEMAIN HOUSE=ʇ̜ʆʇcXXJ&\tXCJcJCCITY COUNCIL110/14/24426 L1.50TERREOGASAWARAMOTO1SITE SECTION ABOVE HOUSE2SITE SECTION BELOW HOUSEMATCHLINESEE 2/L1.50SEE 1/L1.50MATCHLINECITY COUNCIL10/14/24427 =ʈ̜ʆʆcXXJ&\tXCJcJ1CONCRETE DRIVEWAY2COBBLESTONE DRIVEWAY3DRY STACK STONE RETAINING WALL5PT TIMBER STEPS SECTION6PT TIMBER STEPS CLOSE-UP4STONE VENEERED RETAINING WALL8HANDRAIL AT RAMPS9CONCRETE STEPS7PT TIMBER TRAIL SECTIONCCITY COUNCIL110/14/24428 =ʈ̜ʆʇcXXJ&\tXCJcJ2TREE PLANTING3HILLSIDE TREE PLANTING4BIOSWALE DETAIL5SHRUB PLANTING6PERENNIAL PLANTING1WATER FEATURECCITY COUNCIL110/14/24429 STABLEADUGUESTHOUSEMAIN HOUSE=ʉ̜ʆʆcXXJ&\tXCJcJMATRIX 1: NATIVE MEADOW24,000 SQ FT = 2,780 PLANTS(200) ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM (L) (600) BACCHARIS PILULARIS (L) (200) BOUTELOUA GRACILIS (L)(100) CEANOTHUS 'SKYLARK' (M)(600) CEANOTHUS 'YANKEE POINT' (L) (400) FESTUCA CALIFORNICA (L) (30) HETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA (L)(250) LAVANDULA DENTATA (L) (200) LUPINUS SUCCULENTUS (L)(200) SALVIA SPATHACEA (L)MATRIX 2: NATIVE GARDEN20,000 SQ FT = 2,480 PLANTS(150) AGAVE VILMORINIANA (VL)(300) DUDLEYA LANCEOLATA (VL)(25) OPUNTIA FICUS-INDICA (VL) (150) ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM (L) (250) BACCHARIS PILULARIS (L)(25) CEANOTHUS 'RAY HARTMAN’ (L)(300) CEANOTHUS 'YANKEE POINT' (L) (150) DICHELOSTEMMA CAPITATUM (VL) (150) ESCHSCHOLZIA CALIFORNICA (VL) (200) FESTUCA CALIFORNICA (L) (30) HETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA (L)(150) LAVANDULA DENTATA (L)(150) LUPINUS SUCCULENTUS (L)(300) OLEA EUROPAEA 'LITTLE OLLIE' (L) (150) SALVIA SPATHACEA (L) MATRIX 3: NATIVE CHAPARRAL21,000 SQ FT = 2,500 PLANTS(200) ARTEMISIA CALIFORNICA (VL) (150) ASCLEPIAS FASCICULARIS (VL) (150) CALOCHORTUS CATALINAE (VL) (150) ENCELIA CALIFORNICA (VL) (200) ERIOGONUM FASICULATUM (VL)(200) ERIOGONUM PARVIFOLIUM (VL)(30) HETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA (L)(150) ISOMERIS ARBOREA (VL)(150) LOTUS SCOPARIUS (VL)(200) MIMULUS AURANTIACUS (VL)(300) RHUS INTEGRIFOLIA (VL)(200) SALVIA APIANA (VL)(200) SALVIA LEUCOPHYLLA (VL)(200) SALVIA MELLIFERA (VL)(50) SAMBUCUS MEXICANA (VL)(5) LYONOTHAMNUS FLORIBUNDUSMax Height - 20'Max Width - 12'(6) QUERCUS AGRIFOLIAMax Height - 30'Max Width - 30'(4) CERCIS CANADENSIS 'FOREST PANSY'Max Height - 12'Max Width - 12'EXISTING TREECCITY COUNCIL110/14/24430 =ʉ̜ʆʇcXXJ&\tXCJcJMAX HEIGHT: 20'MAX WIDTH: 12'MAX HEIGHT: 30'MAX WIDTH: 30'MAX HEIGHT: 12'MAX WIDTH: 12'CITY COUNCIL10/14/24431 =ʉ̜ʆʈcXXJ&\tXCJcJMAX HEIGHT: 2'CITY COUNCIL10/14/24432 Agenda Item No.: 12.A Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:UPDATE ON THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING'S INC. (PAE) REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL BUDGET TO COMPLETE RESPONSES TO PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS; ADOPT BY RESOLUTION NO. 1379 AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $4,000.00 IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FUNDED FROM A TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES AND APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH PAE COVERING ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: On May 31, 2023, the City Hall ADA Improvement project plans were re-submitted to Los Angeles County Building & Safety (LACBS) after addressing initial plan review comments. The expectation was that reviews and approvals by LACBS would be completed in July 2023 and ready to solicit construction bids in late summer. On June 26, 2023, staff presented an update on the status of the City Hall ADA Improvement project to the City Council. Due to a backlog at LACBS, as well as coordination with other County departments requiring project review, the plan check continued through November 2023. On November 9, 2023, the City received notification from Pacific Architecture and Engineering (PAE) that LACBS had returned plan review comments requesting ADA upgrades/grading in the parking lot and path of travel to the sidewalk at Palos Verdes Drive North, additional structural details, and some other minor comments. PAE also informed staff that the Los Angeles County Health and Fire Departments required payment of fees for their portion of the plan check before documents could be finalized. While LACBS can waive review fees for public projects, the other departments cannot. 433 PAE notified the City that the plan review comments required additional design work outside the existing project scope; therefore, additional budget is required to complete the improvement plans for this project. Staff requested and received a comprehensive itemized cost to complete the additional service requests covering plan completion through LACBS approval. This additional service request is attached. On January 9, 2024, City Staff met with PAE to discuss the additional costs addressing LACBS comments. The City also contacted LACBS to discuss several plan review comments and determine if any of the requested ADA improvements would be required for the City Hall Improvement project or could be waived/deferred. At the January 22, 2024, City Council meeting, City Staff updated the Council on the project and presented a list of eight additions to the scope from PAE. Based on internal discussion as well as information provided by LACBS staff, the recommendation included removing three of the proposed scope changes. Two of these were specific to the preparation of the ADA Parking layout ($3,000) and preparation of the path of travel ($4,000) per plan check comments. The City Council voted 4/1, with Councilmember Black dissenting, to approve five additions to the scope of work at a not-to-exceed amount of $11,500. At the February 12, 2024, City Council meeting, the Council voted 4/1, with Councilmember Black dissenting, to approve Resolution No. 1356 authorizing a budget modification for the $11,500. DISCUSSION: On July 29, 2024, LACBS Senior Civil Engineer Mike Dorta visited the City Hall campus to inspect plan check comments that conflicted with previous communications made to City Staff. The previous miscommunication had led to a finding that the City could enact changes to the ADA parking and path of travel at a later time. This, in turn, led to the January 22 staff recommendation not to include those line items in the proposed scope of work. During the visit and a subsequent email on July 31, 2024 to PAE, Mr. Dorta stated, "...Originally I believed the City Hall scope of work was solely for the purpose of adding ADA restrooms. In that case there is an exception in the code for removing ADA barriers. But since the scope of work includes further tenant improvements to other areas/items in the City Hall, and the valuation is well over $200k, there is no exception to providing a fully compliant ADA parking space and path of travel to the entrance..." During the month of August, staff discussed resolving this issue with PAE and LACBS. As originally presented on January 22, 2024, the proposed cost to complete both requirements totaled $7,000. On August 27, 2024, PAE sent an Additional Services proposal for the scope of work necessary to complete these final two requirements at a discounted rate of $4,000. The Scope of work includes: Examine survey for existing grade for compliance Include in the scope of work correction of Cross Slope at one square foot of area from root upheaval Addition of Van-accessible parking striping on drawing detail 434 Addition of Van-accessible parking striping on the site plan Addition of (1) Signage detail showing graphics of the required sign Addition of (1) Footing detail for the new signpost Striping for the path of travel area Revision showing the compliant path of travel on-site plan Specifications revision for sign, post, grading, paint Revision of Scope of Work Description Revision of Sheet Index Additional plan check time The City Hall ADA Improvement Project plans are nearly complete but require these final modifications to gain approval from LACBS. Staff is requesting approval of the additional scope and adoption of the budget amendment in Resolution No.1379. At the September 9, 2024 City Council meeting, the City Council present voted to continue this item to the next meeting with a full council present. FISCAL IMPACT: Council action is required to amend the budget and increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund by $4,000 through a transfer from available General Fund Reserves. The use of General Fund Reserves is consistent with City policy. Total Cost for PAE through the 5th Amendment would be a not-to-exceed amount of $211,723.01. NOTE: This not-to-exceed total includes services outside the design scope of the City Hall ADA Improvement Project. The not-to-exceed total includes: $4,096.43 (part of Amendment No. 1) was for the evaluation of the existing emergency generator and providing recommendations $58,897.01 (Amendment No. 2) was for a Solar Power System, of which only $28,286.63 of this budget was used before the project was put on hold as the City evaluated other options $20,293 of the $96,485 budget (Amendment No. 3) remains unused/allocated for bid phase support and Construction Administration support. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: ResolutionNo1379_CityHallADA_PAE_BudgetAmendment_F.pdf CA_AGR_240909_PAE_5thAmendment_F.pdf CA_AGR_240827_PAE_5A_ScopeChange_Proposal.pdf CL_AGN_240909_CC_Item12A_PublicComment01.pdf 435 RESOLUTION NO. 1379 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $4,000.00 IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FUNDED BY A TRANSFER FROM AVAILABLE GENERAL FUND RESERVES FOR ADDITIONAL DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FROM PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING, INC. FOR ADA IMPROVEMENT DESIGN AT CITY HALL CAMPUS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. A. On February 24, 2020, the CITY entered into a Professional Services Agreement with CONSULTANT (“Agreement”) for architectural and engineering design services to prepare ADA improvement plans for the CITY. B. On February 22, 2021, the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a First Amendment to expand the scope of work in the Agreement, clarify the term, and increase the cost for the CONSULTANT to provide engineering services for the replacement of the generator at City Hall (the “First Amendment”). C. On June 28, 2021, the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Second Amendment to expand the scope of work and increase the cost for CONSULTANT to provide engineering services for (1) the installation of a photovoltaic system per the General Assessment Report dated April 18, 2019 and (2) upgrades needed for existing structure which houses the generator (the “Second Amendment”). D. On May 9, 2022 the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Third Amendment to expand the scope of work and increase the cost for CONSULTANT to provide further architectural and engineering design services and to prepare ADA improvement plans for the City. E. On February 12, 2024 the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Fourth Amendment to clarify the scope of work and increase the cost for CONSULTANT to provide further architectural and engineering design services and to prepare ADA improvement plans for the City. 436 F. To meet additional requirements from the Los Angeles County Building and Safety plan check process, the CITY must provide a path of travel to the building before any final approvals. G. The City desires to appropriate $4,000.00 in the Capital Projects Fund funded from a transfer of General Fund reserves to additionally fund the Fifth Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. attached as Exhibit “A.” Section 2. The sum of four thousand dollars ($4,000.00) is hereby appropriated in the Capital Projects Fund to further fund the Fifth Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book or original resolutions. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 9th day of September, 2024 ______________________________ LEAH MIRSCH MAYOR ATTEST: ___________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH CITY CLERK 437 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) The foregoing Resolution No. 1379 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $4,000.00 IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FUNDED BY A TRANSFER FROM AVAILABLE GENERAL FUND RESERVES FOR ADDITIONAL DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FROM PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING, INC. FOR ADA IMPROVEMENT DESIGN AT CITY HALL CAMPUS was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 9th day of September 2024, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ___________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH CITY CLERK 438 Exhibit A 439 FIFTH AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS FIFTH AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Fourth Amendment”) is made and entered into this 9th day of September 2024 in the City of Rolling Hills, County of Los Angeles, State of California, by and between the CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, a California municipal corporation (hereinafter the “CITY”), and Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc., a California corporation (hereinafter the “CONSULTANT”). RECITALS: A. On February 24, 2020, the CITY entered into a Professional Services Agreement with CONSULTANT (“Agreement”) for architectural and engineering design services to prepare ADA improvement plans for the CITY; and B. On February 22, 2021, the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a First Amendment to expand the scope of work in the Agreement, clarify the term, and increase the cost for the CONSULTANT to provide engineering services for the replacement of the generator at City Hall (the “First Amendment”); and C. On June 28, 2021, the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Second Amendment to expand the scope of work and increase the cost for CONSULTANT to provide engineering services for (1) the installation of a photovoltaic system per the General Assessment Report dated April 18, 2019 and (2) upgrades needed for existing structure which houses the generator (the “Second Amendment”); and D. On May 9, 2022 the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Third Amendment to expand the scope of work and increase the cost for CONSULTANT to provide further architectural and engineering design services and to prepare ADA improvement plans for the City; and E. On February 12, 2024 the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Fourth Amendment to expand the scope of work and increase the cost for CONSULTANT to provide further architectural and engineering design services and to prepare ADA improvement plans for the City; and D. CITY and CONSULTANT now desire to amend the Agreement a fifth time (the “Fifth Amendment”) to clarify the remaining scope of work and increase the cost by $4,000.00 so that CONSULTANT may provide services for the CITY; and E. CONSULTANT is well qualified by reason of education, training, and experience to perform such services; and 440 F. CONSULTANT is willing to render such professional services as hereinafter defined. Now, therefore, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions herein contained, CITY hereby engages CONSULTANT and CONSULTANT agrees to perform the services set forth in this Fourth Amendment. 1. CITY and CONSULTANT agree to supplement Exhibit A (Scope of Work) that was attached to the First Amendment, Exhibit A (Scope of Work – Supplemental) that was attached to the Second Amendment, Exhibit A (Scope of Work - Supplemental) that was attached to the Third Amendment and Exhibit A (Scope of Work - Supplemental) that was attached to the Fourth Amendment with Exhibit A (Scope of Work – Supplemental) attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference to this Fifth Amendment. 2. Paragraph 3 (COST) of the Agreement is amended to read as follows: 3. COST The CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT for the services required by this Agreement on a Time and Materials basis in an amount not to exceed $4,000 for the scope of services identified by this Fifth Amendment, $11,500 for the scope of services identified by the Fourth Amendment, $96,485.00 for the scope of services identified by the Third Amendment, $58,897.42 for the scope of services identified by the Second Amendment, and $40,840.59 for the scope of services identified by the First Amendment. Now, the current amended and increased not to exceed amount is $211,723.01. This not to exceed amount includes all expenses, consisting of all incidental blueprinting, photography, travel, attendance at meetings, and miscellaneous costs, estimated to be accrued during that period. It also includes any escalation or inflation factors anticipated. Any increase in Agreement cost or scope of work shall be by express written amendment approved by the CITY and CONSULTANT. 3. All terms and conditions of the Agreement not amended by the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Third Amendment, the Fourth Amendment or this Fifth Amendment shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Third Amendment on the date and year first above written. 441 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING, INC. CITY MANAGER: PRINCIPAL PROJECT MANAGER __________________________ __________________________ KARINA BAÑALES JUN FUJITA HALL ATTEST: __________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ PATRICK DONEGAN CITY ATTORNEY 442 EXHIBIT A Scope of Work - Supplemental 443 Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. 1137 Second St, Suite 214 Santa Monica, CA 90403 (310)424-9658 August 27, 2024 Subject: Proposal for for Rolling Hills ADA Improvement_ Additional Services 2 Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc., is pleased to submit this proposal for engineering services for improvements for the ADA improvements at City Hall. Our understanding of the scope of work is described below. Scope of Work: Examine survey for existing grade for compliance Include in scope of work correction of Cross Slope at one square foot of area from root upheaval Addition of Van accessible parking striping on drawing detail Addition of Van accessible parking striping on site plan Addition of (1) Signage detail showing graphics of required sign Addition of (1) Footing detail for new sign post Striping for path of travel area Revision showing compliant path of travel on site plan Specifications revision for sign, post, grading, paint Revision of Scope of Work Description Revision of Sheet Index Additional plan check time Amendment Fee $4,000 We appreciate the opportunity to offer this proposal. If you have any questions please contact me for any further information you may need at (310)405-3878 or jun@pacific-ae.com Sincerely, Jun Fujita Hall, AIA, LEED AP BD & C, Lic#C 30954 Principal Project Manager, Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. 310-405-3878 jun@pacific-ae.com Required note: Architects are licensed and regulated by the California Architects Board located at 2420 Del Paso Road, Suite 105, Sacramento, CA 95834 444 September 9, 2024 Rolling Hills City Council 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear Esteemed Members of the Rolling Hills City Council, As the Women’s Community Club of Rolling Hills, we are thrilled to see the ongoing improvements at City Hall. The progress is a testament to the care and dedication that our city officials put into enhancing our community spaces. We understand that our suggestions come very late in your project. But with our recent success at our events, we have realized the need is great for a larger area for the City and Clubs to host resident gatherings and meetings, such as holiday parties, Block Captain meetings, neighborhood meetings, etc. Towards this end, we respectfully submit the following minor modifications to the existing plan, which would provide an improved functional space for meetings and events: 1. Flip the locations of the kitchen and the smaller meeting room adjacent to it, for better connectivity to council chambers. 2. Install bi-fold door panels between the council chambers and the small meeting room to create a flexible and adaptable space. 3. Add a separate entrance at the front of the large meeting room to ensure that the movement of attendees does not disturb the City’s daily activities. 4. Create an accessible outdoor deck with bi-fold windows, allowing for an indoor-outdoor flow and providing additional event space. The Women’s Club fully supports the City’s efforts to educate residents and host events throughout the year. These minor improvements would make it easier for the City and Clubs to continuously achieve these goals. The Women’s Club greatly appreciates all that you do for Rolling Hills, and we would be happy to assist in any way possible to make these changes a reality. Thank you for your continued commitment to our beautiful city. Warm regards, Melissa McNabb President, Women’s Community Club of Rolling Hills 445 Agenda Item No.: 13.A Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN ENGINEERING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY ON AN ON- CALL BASIS DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: The Planning and Community Services Department of the City of Rolling Hills is staffed by two employees and plays a critical role in the City's operations. The department oversees daily planning activities in accordance with the City’s zoning, subdivision, and General Plan provisions. It is also responsible for issuing permits for construction and development, as well as supporting the Planning Commission and Traffic Commission – to name a few. The Planning and Community Services Department is currently staffed to meet the City's ongoing needs. However, as with any organization, staff members may occasionally take leave due to personal or medical reasons. Given the critical nature of planning activities and the need for timely processing of permits, applications, and other planning services, it is prudent to have augmentation plans in place. This evening, staff seeks City Council authorization for the City Manager to engage Willdan for planning staff augmentation services on an on-call basis. This will ensure continuity of planning services during periods of staff leave, absences, or unexpected needs. DISCUSSION: The City of Rolling Hills and Willdan have maintained a strong professional relationship since January 14, 2008, when the City first entered into an agreement with Willdan Engineering for civil engineering, city engineering, traffic engineering, building official, and geotechnical services. This agreement was amended in 2010, 2012, 2015, and 2024, reflecting the ongoing trust and collaboration between both parties (Attachments B-F). Willdan’s familiarity with the City's codes, processes, and community standards makes them an ideal partner for planning and public works projects. 446 To avoid disruption to City services, staff recommends utilizing Willdan on an as-needed basis during periods of absence in the Planning Department. Willdan’s experienced planners are capable of seamlessly integrating with City operations to maintain services such as permit reviews, development applications, and resident inquiries without delay. By amending the current agreement with Willdan, the City will have the flexibility to engage their services quickly, if needed, ensuring continuity in planning functions. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposal and prepared the attached amendment (Attachment A - To be supplied via Blue Folder Items at Monday's meeting) for the City Council’s consideration. Below are the fully burdened* rates for potential staff augmentation: Position Hourly Rate* Assistant Planner $140 Principal Planner $180 Fully burdened rate means the complete cost of labor, factoring in all direct and indirect costs associated with contracting someone, beyond just their base pay. These additional assignments/duties may include, and are not limited to, the following: Public Counter Assistance Design Review CEQA/NEPA Documentation Special Planning Studies Report Writing/Research/Analysis/Presentations Planning Commission and City Council Meeting attendance, as needed Assisting in the day-to-day operations of the Planning Department, as well as any other additional related planning assignments and duties as needed. It is important to note that Willdan understands the City’s commitment to fiscal responsibility and conservation. As a result, they have worked closely with the City Manager to ensure that their fully burdened rates align with these priorities. CONCLUSION To ensure the City of Rolling Hills continues to provide uninterrupted planning services, staff recommends entering into an on-call agreement with Willdan for planning staff augmentation. This proactive measure will allow Staff to address potential staffing shortages while maintaining the high level of service expected by the community. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff will return at a future date with any budget amendments that may be needed. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment B - CA_AGR_080114_Willdan_E.pdf Attachment C - CA_AGR_100114_Willdan_Amendment01_E.pdf Attachment D - CA_AGR_120629_Willdan_Amendment02_E.pdf Attachment E - CA_AGR_150114_Willdan_Amendment03_E.pdf 447 Attachment F - CA_AGR_240325_WIlldan_Amendment04_F_A_E.pdf 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 Agenda Item No.: 13.B Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 1382 AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024- 2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS BY $23,485.40 IN THE GENERAL FUND REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ACCOUNT FUNDED FROM AVAILABLE GENERAL FUND RESERVES FOR EMERGENCY PLUMBING REPAIRS RELATED TO EXTERIOR WATER MAIN LEAKS ON THE CITY HALL CAMPUS DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: On September 30, 2024, Cal Water Service notified city staff during their monthly water meter checks that the City's meter was spinning more rapidly than it should under normal usage conditions. Staff called the approved vendor, Stephen's Plumbing, to evaluate. On October 1, 2024, Stephen's Plumbing and their leak detection subcontractor evaluated the situation and determined there was a leak near the water main's entrance into the city hall structure. Stephens spent the two days unearthing an approximately 8' by 3' area and found a pinhole leak in the original 2" copper riser at a depth of about 6 feet. They installed a temporary clamp in order to restore water service to the building and ordered parts for repairs to the leak and degraded piping at the entrance to the structure. On the evening of October 3, 2024, staff noticed water leaking into another unrelated area and informed Stephen's personnel upon their arrival the following morning. Leak detection was brought out again, and with a quieter ambient environment, was able to locate another potential leak source under the asphalt in the same general area about 10-12 feet from the first leak. Between Monday, October 7, 2024, and October 12, 2024, work continued, including asphalt removal and excavating. The second leak was unearthed about 6 feet below grade and adjacent to the main gas lines. Final repairs were made in both areas, mud and asphalt were hauled away, and the pavement area was backfilled, compacted, and repaved. 491 DISCUSSION: City staff seeks approval to amend the budget due to the emergency repairs, which were not considered part of the FY 24/25 adopted budget. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost to repair the water main leaks totaled $23,485.40, which exceeds the FY 24/25 budgeted amount of $19,100 for general repairs and maintenance. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: ResolutionNo1382_WaterMainRepair_BudgetAmendment_F.pdf 492 RESOLUTION NO. 1382 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $23,485.40 IN THE GENERAL FUND REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ACCOUNT FROM AVAILABLE GENERAL FUND RESERVES FOR EMERGENCY PLUMBING REPAIRS RELATED TO EXTERIOR WATER MAIN LEAKS ON THE CITY HALL CAMPUS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. A. On September 30, 2024 City staff were notified by Cal Water Service that the City’s water meter was running in an abnormal way, inconsistent with normal usage conditions. B. On October 1, 2024, the City’s approved plumbing vendor (Stephen’s Plumbing) and its subcontractor evaluated the situations and determined there was a leak and took some temporary remedial measures. C. On the evening of October 3, 2024, City staff noticed water leaking into another unrelated area and again reached out to the plumbing vendor. D. Between October 7, 2024 and October 12, 2024 work continued to remedy the issues and impacts from the leak. E. The complete cost to repair the water main leaks totaled $23,485.40 – in excess of the fiscal year 24/25 budgeted amount of $19,100. F. The City desires to appropriate $23,485.40 in the General Fund Repairs and Maintenance Account from available General Fund Reserves for emergency plumbing repairs related to exterior water main leaks on the City Hall Campus. Section 2. The sum of twenty-three thousand, four hundred and eighty five dollars and forty cents ($23,485.40) is hereby appropriated in the General Fund Repairs and Maintenance Account to fund the emergency plumbing repairs related to exterior water main leaks on the City Hall Campus. 493 Section 3. The City Council finds this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty, as in this case, that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. This resolution is just a funding and budgeting action to accurately reflect previous City action already taken to make emergency repairs. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book or original resolutions. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28th day of October, 2024 ______________________________ LEAH MIRSCH MAYOR ATTEST: ___________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH CITY CLERK 494 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) The foregoing Resolution No. 1382 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $23,485.40 IN THE GENERAL FUND REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ACCOUNT FROM AVAILABLE GENERAL FUND RESERVES FOR EMERGENCY PLUMBING REPAIRS RELATED TO EXTERIOR WATER MAIN LEAKS ON THE CITY HALL CAMPUS was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 28th day of October 2024, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ___________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH CITY CLERK 495 Agenda Item No.: 15.A Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:RECEIVE AND FILE FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT AND CODE ENFORCEMENT QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE THIRD QUARTER OF 2024 (JULY 1 TO SEPTEMBER 30) DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: Quarterly Fire Fuel Abatement Meeting On October 10, 2024, a quarterly fire fuel meeting was held to discuss fire fuel issues in Rolling Hills. Representatives participated from the Los Angeles County Department of Agricultural Commissioner/Weights and Measures (LACWM) and Southern California Edison (SCE). Each agency is responsible for reducing fire-fuel hazards in the city. LACWM inspects vacant properties to ensure proper fire fuel reduction. SCE monitors vegetation growth around its powerlines and sends crews to trim vegetation when necessary. Code Enforcement Cases The Code Enforcement Division provides quarterly updates. Cases include dead vegetation and other code violations for the second quarter of 2024. The attachments demonstrate cases that have been opened and closed during the quarter. Also included is a list of cumulative open cases (See Attachments 1, 2, and 3). DISCUSSION: During the third quarter of 2024, a total of seven cases were closed, including six dealing with vegetation or dead trees; 10 cases were opened, including four involving overgrown vegetation or dead trees. All but 5 of the 10 cases opened this quarter were closed, including all four vegetation cases. Currently, code enforcement is working on 13 open cases, of which three deal with overgrown vegetation or dead trees. Each case is unique, and some require more time than others to resolve. In certain cases, in which the owner is nonresponsive and remains out of compliance, cases have been referred to the City Attorney's office. FISCAL IMPACT: Code enforcement services is provided contractually, and payment is made from the General Fund. 496 RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: CE_QRP_2024_Q3_241022_CC_CE_OpenedCases.pdf Attachment 2: CE_QRP_2024_Q3_241010_CC_CE_ClosedCases.pdf Attachment 3: CE_QRP_2024_Q3_241022_CC_CE_AllOpenCases.pdf 497 Page: 1 of 1 Case Report – OPENED CASES THIRD QUARTER 2024 7/1/2024 - 9/30/2024 Case Date Address of Violation Description Comments Follow Up Date Main Status 9/19/2024 10 Saddleback Road Unpermitted loft Follow-up needed 10/31/2024 Open 8/27/2024 7 Portuguese Bend Rd Unpermitted storage container Follow-up needed 10/31/2024 Open 8/27/2024 12 Crest Rd E Dead palm fronds -- -- Closed 8/27/2024 7 Crest Rd W Dead and overgrown palm fronds -- -- Closed 8/22/2024 25 Portuguese Bend Rd Dead/ damaged tree -- -- Closed 8/20/2024 74 Portuguese Bend Rd Unpermitted storage container Affected area -- Open 8/20/2024 56 Portuguese Bend Rd Unpermitted storage container Affected area -- Open 8/20/2024 11 Buggy Whip Dr Unpermitted Container -- -- Closed 8/20/2024 21 Buggy Whip Dr Dead Palm Fronds -- -- Closed 7/24/2024 6 Upper Blackwater Cyn Rd Illegal structure Confirmation needed 10/31/2024 Pending Total Records: 10 10/22/2024 498 Page: 1 of 1 Case Report – CLOSED CASES THIRD QUARTER 2024 07/01/2024 - 09/30/2024 Case Date Address of Violation Description Main Status Case Closed 3/6/2024 28983 Palos Verdes Dr E Stormwater drainage Closed 8/6/2024 5/7/2024 1 Roundup Rd Overgrown Vegetation, decayed property, and vermin Closed 8/6/2024 6/4/2024 49 Saddleback Rd Overgrown weeds and vegetation Closed 7/16/2024 6/11/2024 7 Ranchero Rd Overgrown Vegetation and Trash/Debris Closed 7/16/2024 6/11/2024 9 Buggy Whip Dr Overgrown Vegetation (Yellow mustard) Closed 7/16/2024 6/11/2024 4 Buggy Whip Dr Dead vegetation on fence Closed 7/2/2024 6/18/2024 2 Chestnut Ln Dead Vegetation on the back side of property (Visible on Morgan Lane) Closed 7/2/2024 Total Records: 7 10/10/2024 499 Page: 1 of 1 Case Report – ALL OPEN CASES Case Date Address of Violation Description Comments Follow Up Date Main Status 10/22/2024 2720 Palos Verdes Dr N Dried and overgrown vegetation Follow-up needed 11/1/2024 Open 10/10/2024 38 Crest Rd E Dead tree on slope Follow-up needed 10/31/2024 Open 9/19/2024 10 Saddleback Rd Unpermitted loft Follow-up needed 10/31/2024 Open 8/27/2024 7 Portuguese Bend Rd Unpermitted storage container Follow-up needed 10/31/2024 Open 8/20/2024 74 Portuguese Bend Rd Unpermitted storage container Affected area -- Open 8/20/2024 56 Portuguese Bend Rd Unpermitted storage container Affected area -- Open 5/28/2024 10 Flying Mane Rd Illegal grading and retaining walls Message left; follow- up needed 10/31/2024 Open 4/9/2024 8 Quail Ridge Rd N Unpermitted Building Owner working with staff to obtain proper permits 10/31/2024 Open 11/7/2023 16 Buggy Whip Dr 2nd Violation of Trees in Violation of Conditions of Approval Letter sent 10/22/24; Follow-up needed 11/5/2024 Open 11/2/2023 17 Eastfield Dr Unpermitted construction Property listed for sale; owner still responsible for correction 10/31/2024 Open 6/22/2023 4 Possum Ridge Rd Unpermitted work/grading Planning application required 10/31/2024 Open 9/22/2022 29 Middleridge Ln S Extensive grading and importing of soil. Dead shrubs/trees/vegetation visible from road Approved by PC; Follow-up on grading permit Ongoing Open 7/6/2021 1 Chestnut Ln Unpermitted structure (gazebo) Approved by PC; Follow-up with building permit Ongoing Open Total Records: 13 10/22/2024 500 Agenda Item No.: 15.B Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:SAMANTHA CREW, MANAGEMENT ANALYST THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE A PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS UPDATE DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: On September 9, 2024, staff presented a status update on Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to the City Council (Attachment A). The report outlined recent utility shut offs in Rancho Palos Verdes and detailed the actions taken by the City of Rolling Hills and the Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) to proactively address similar land movement issues in Rolling Hills. During that meeting, Mayor Mirsch requested that staff provide regular updates on any new developments to the City Council. The following day, September 10, the City was unexpectedly informed that potential utility shut offs were also imminent in Rolling Hills. Southern California Edison (SCE) notified staff that 28 households could potentially experience eventual electrical shut offs, a number that eventually increased to 51. On Thursday, September 12, staff received notice from SoCal Gas (SCG) that they would shut off service to 35 homes in Rolling Hills due to ongoing land movement in the Palos Verdes Peninsula area. It is important to note that both Mayor Leah Mirsch and Councilmember Patrick Wilson attended an emergency meeting with SCE and SCG, where they strongly advocated against shutting off gas services without further investigation. Despite this, on Monday, September 16—five days after receiving notice—SCG indefinitely shut off services to 37 homes, with gas restored to one household on September 24. 501 On Friday, September 13, the City learned that SCE planned to indefinitely shut off power to 51 households by no later than Wednesday, September 18, at 6:00 p.m. Residents affected by the SCG shutoff were contacted via email, text, and home visits. SCE sent notifications by email and text to affected households, but unfortunately, some residents were notified as late as within the hour of the scheduled shut-off. On Wednesday, September 18, COX Communications notified 44 households that they would discontinue service on Saturday, September 21. This evening, staff will present an update on the events since the last report and outline the actions the City has taken to address these unprecedented utility shut offs. DISCUSSION: The City immediately began coordination efforts on September 11, 2024. Key tasks included: Seeking legal counsel to stop the utility shut offs Hosting a community meeting for residents affected by the shut offs on Thursday, September 19, to provide updates and address concerns Organizing an Information Center on Saturday, September 28, which included resources from the County and communication partners Assisting residents with the permitting process for solar, generators, and propane installations Establishing expedited permitting processes at both the City and County levels Reaching out to elected officials to bolster opposition to the shut offs and request financial support Developing a communication plan with Tripepi Smith and updating the City’s website with emergency alerts Collaborating with the RHCA to send additional messaging via Dwelling Live and coordinate efforts Meeting with first responders to discuss response plans, additional monitoring, and security measures Partnering with the Rotary Club to establish a relief fund for impacted residents Enlisting Block Captain support for neighborhood communication and assistance Securing financial donations from SCE, SCG, and COX for the Rotary Relief Fund Coordinating with COX to set up a public charging station at City Hall for residents needing power and a workspace Coordinating with Verizon to establish a second charging station at the RHCA building City Correspondence to Local, State, Federal Partners 502 City Request to SCG Regarding Delay of Planned Gas Shut-Off: On September 13, the City Attorney formally requested that SCG delay the planned natural gas shut-off (Attachment B). The letter argued that the timing of the shut-off did not provide sufficient notice for residents to adequately plan or prepare. The letter concluded that if a delay was not granted, the City would pursue formal legal action with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) or through the courts. On September 14, SCG responded, expressing regret over the need for the gas shut-off and stating they were continuing to monitor land movement in the community with the intention of restoring gas service when it could be done safely (Attachment C). Filing a Formal Complaint with the CPUC: On September 22, the City Council met in closed session and unanimously voted to direct the City Attorney to file complaints with the CPUC against SCG and SCE. This filing has been completed and the City is awaiting a hearing date. Letter to Supervisor Janice Hahn Requesting Support: On September 23, the City Council voted to send a letter to LA County Supervisor Janice Hahn requesting County assistance to cover the cost of additional law enforcement patrols during the utility shut offs (Attachment D). The letter also sought the Supervisor's support in urging the LA County Fire and Public Works departments to waive permitting fees for alternative power solutions during the emergency. The LA County Sheriff’s Department has been conducting active patrols in the affected areas, with Lomita Station deputies visiting homes impacted by the shut offs. On September 8, the Board of Supervisors approved and authorized the Fire Chief to waive inspection and permitting fees for propane, solar, and energy storage system installations until December 31, 2025, as well as reimburse residents who had already paid these fees. Councilmember Bea Dieringer spoke in favor of this request during public comment. Willdan Engineering graciously waived up to $5,000 in permitting fees. The City has supported residents through the permitting process and worked with the LA County Public Works Department to expedite applications and issue refunds to impacted residents. They will work with residents in the affected areas to ensure required permitting is submitted. Proclaiming a Local Emergency: On September 23, the City Council voted against declaring a local emergency. City staff will continue to monitor the situation and keep the Council up to date on any other developments related to this issue. Federal Legislators Urge Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Support: On October 21, 2024, Representative Ted Lieu, along with Senator Alex Padilla, Senator 503 Laphonza Butler, and Representative Adam Schiff, sent a joint letter urging FEMA to provide assistance and funding for residents affected by land movement on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. The letter called on FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell to explore ways the agency could support mitigation efforts and provide relief to impacted homeowners (Attachment E). City Officials’ Meetings with Local, State, and Federal Elected Officials Over the past month, City staff and Council members have held multiple meetings with elected officials. The key themes discussed included: the re-energization of power data demonstrating significant land movement that prompted the shut offs collaboration with LA County Public Works on stormwater management and infrastructure financial assistance for residents impacted by the shut offs, and preventative programs or measures to mitigate future land movement. September 20: Mayor Leah Mirsch and City Manager Karina Bañales met with Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi and his staff to discuss recent shut offs and toured the impacted areas. Later that day, Councilmember Brea Dieringer and City Manager Bañales held a conference call with Senator Ben Allen and his staff. October 7: Mayor Leah Mirsch, Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Pieper, and City Manager Bañales met with CPUC Commissioner Darcie L. Houck and her staff, along with local officials, including Rancho Palos Verdes Mayor John Cruikshank, Councilmember Dave Bradley, City Manager Ara Mihranian, LA County Public Works Director Mark Pestrella, and Assistant Director Art Vander. The group toured affected areas in Rolling Hills and Rancho Palos Verdes. Following the tour, a meeting was held with key individuals, including LA County Supervisor Janice Hahn, SCG President Maryam Brown, SCG Chief Operating Officer Jimmie Cho, SCE President and CEO Steven Powell, and Cal Water President and CEO Martin A. Kropelnicki. October 11: City Manager Karina Bañales met with staff members from local, state, and federal representatives to brief them on the City’s current situation in preparation for the October 22 tour. October 18: Councilmember Patrick Wilson and City Manager Karina Bañales met with Senator Ben Allen and staff to discuss RH and toured the impacted areas. October 22: 504 Mayor Pro Tem Pieper, Councilmember Patrick Wilson, and City Manager Karina Bañales led a tour of the City's impacted areas. The group included Representative Ted Lieu, Representative Adam Schiff, State Senator Ben Allen, Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, representatives from the office of Senator Laphonza Butler, LA County Supervisor Janice Hahn, Councilmember Dave Bradley, Councilmember Paul Seo, and Rancho Palos Verdes City Manager Ara Mihranian. Staff will report out information as a result of these meetings. Coordination Meetings City staff have been holding coordination meetings with the California Office of Emergency Services Southern Region, Los Angeles County Disaster Management Area G, and other local partners to discuss status updates on impacted areas. Representatives from RPV and the RHCA have been in attendance. Donations and Relief Efforts The City Manager ’s Office secured donations for winterization supplies from Republic Services, Thompson Building Materials, and COX Communications. Sandbags and rolls of plastic sheeting were procured at a reduced cost from Thompson. Educational resources on winterization were provided on the City’s website with assistance from LA County Public Works and Tripepi Smith. The Palos Verdes Peninsula Rotary Club hosted three community meals at City Hall, with food donated by local restaurants. Volunteers from the Block Captain program assisted with serving and setup. Additionally, Robert Half Staffing Services provided support to assist City staff during this time. On October 22, 2024, the Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit provided a 22-passenger shuttle for a tour of impacted areas. New Developments 505 City FAQ Email: The City has created an email address (faqs@cityofrh.net) for residents to submit questions regarding the recent power and gas shut offs. This resource is intended to help residents get answers from SCE, SCG, Cal Water, or COX. Rolling Hills Community Association: The RHCA has contracted McGee Survey Consulting to monitor land movement, with reports presented at RHCA board meetings. The RHCA also continues to maintain roads to ensure they remain open and accessible for residents. However, vehicle weight and size limits are in place in the affected areas. Any vehicles larger than passenger cars or pickups visiting homes in these areas require authorization from the RHCA, though mail and Amazon deliveries are exempt from this restriction. Permitting for solar panels and generators has been streamlined, allowing applications to be approved in person and over the counter during normal business hours. Permit fees have been waived. Additionally, the RHCA board has approved waiving late fees for the December 10 Association assessment for properties that have had their utilities shut off. This waiver applies only to occupied homes with functional utilities that had gas or electricity turned off in September due to the land movement. SCE: On October 21 SCE notified the City that power would be restored to 12 households on October 25. As of this report, the total number of households slated for restoration has not been confirmed. City staff met with SCE on October 24 to address gaps in communication, the timing of notifications to residents, and setting realistic expectations for power restoration. Staff has requested that SCE improve communication and clarify restoration timelines for any future outages. Cal Water: Staff and Cal Water representatives are coordinating a presentation to the City Council to provide updates on their above-ground infrastructure. SCG: As a preventative measure, SCG has been installing valves throughout the City. Winterization The City is actively promoting proactive winterization to residents to help safeguard their property from groundwater infiltration during the winter months with information such as: Begin filling any ground fissures Planning and installing flood, debris, and erosion control measures prior to the storm season, as it may be too late once the conditions arise While these protective installations may not always be aesthetically pleasing, their 506 effectiveness should take priority over appearance Be prepared to personally monitor and maintain these installations during storm periods, as even minor adjustments can prevent significant failures. The City has partnered with Thompson Building and Materials to procure plastic sheeting and 100 filled sandbags for impacted residents. Local partners, including COX and Republic Services, are partially covering the cost of these materials. Frontier Communications has also donated 60 sandbags and 50 12x16’ tarps. The City is providing information regarding winterization through its website, under the Resident Resources tab and RHCA e-newsletter. Additional Information The City continues to remind residents that if they See Something, Say Something. This pertains to utility concerns, fire, and public safety. Residents should call 911 in an emergency. Reporting Water Leaks to Cal Water: Cal Water has seen an increase in pipe leaks with customer private water lines and other utility lines. Residents should report water leaks to 310-257-1400 Palos Verdes Peninsula Emergency Readiness Alert SouthBay: Staff continues to promote Alert South Bay and having residents sign up for Alerts by texting “alertrh” to 888-777 or registering at AlertSouthBay.com Know Your Zone: The Know Your Zone maps are utilized by local public safety agencies (Sheriff and Fire departments), as well as the Peninsula cities, to prepare residents in the event of an evacuation. In urgent situations, when an evacuation need arises, residents and visitors are provided with timely critical information for impacted zones. Knowing your zone is critical to the evacuation process. If there is a wildfire or emergency, navigating the 507 Know Your Zone map can help determine residents next steps in emergency incidents affecting where they live, work, and play. More information is available at: PVPReady.gov. Planning for Evacuation: Residents are asked to consider the items in their homes and determine which of them are important. If residents had twenty minutes to evacuate, what would they grab first? Residents should consider their vehicle size and write a list of belongings that would take priority. If an emergency were to occur being prepared could save time when time is critical. Emergency Siren Test: On Wednesday, October 16, the City performed its first emergency Siren test after three poles were installed at separate locations within Rolling Hills. The purpose of the test was to examine the tone and volume of the siren as part of the installation process. Following the alert a survey was sent to residents, via Dwelling Live, to gather information on the effectiveness of the sound. Many residents reported that they did not hear the siren. Staff will help identify potential deficiencies and compile a list of locations to provide HQE ahead of any full testing and going live. Additionally, HQE have produced a draft standard operating procedure (SOP) for review. Staff will begin to draft red-line versions / comments, gain feedback and input from our Public Safety partners, and then present a draft version to the Siren subcommittee for review and input prior to bringing to City Council. Prepared Peninsula Expo: On Sunday, October 27, 2024, from 10am –1pm, the peninsula cities hosted a free event at the Palos Verdes Farmers Market at the Peninsula High School on how to be disaster ready. There were demonstrations, instructions on building emergency bags, emergency preparedness tips for family and pets, School District preparedness plans. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - CL_AGN_240909_CC_Item15B.pdf Attachment B - CL_AGN_240909_CC_Item15B_Letter_SCG_09-13-24.pdf Attachment C - CL_AGN_240914_CC_Item15B_SCG_ ResponseLetter.pdf Attachment D - CL_AGN_240926_CC_Item15B_Letter_SupevisorHahn.pdf Attachment E - CL_AGN_240926_CC_Item15B_CongressionalFEMA_Letter.pdf 508 Agenda Item No.: 15.B Mtg. Date: 09/09/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:SAMANTHA CREW, MANAGEMENT ANALYST THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE A PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS REPORT DATE:September 09, 2024 BACKGROUND: On July 29, 2024, Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas) notified approximately 135 Portuguese Bend Community of Rancho Palos Verdes (RPV) households that their service would be discontinued. On August 31, 2024, Southern California Edison (SCE) gave a similar notice. Power was de-energized, and an evacuation notice was put into effect. On September 2, 2024, Edison also discontinued service to 105 Seaview homes for varying lengths of time. There is currently no evacuation warning for Seaview. As of writing this report, gas services to additional homes in the Portuguese Bend Beach Club community have been discontinued until SoCal Gas determines it is safe to resume service. This evening, staff will provide an update on recent events in the City of Rolling Hills and how the City, in partnership with the Rolling Hills Community Association and local partners, is working proactively to stay vigilant, informed, and prepared. Our shared commitment to keeping the community safe remains our top priority. DISCUSSION: The City of Rolling Hills is directly above the RPV communities impacted by gas and electric shutoffs. What has transpired in RPV has alerted our community and local partners. It is important to note that some incidents have occurred in our community that were surprising and unexpected. As a result, a proactive approach on utility infrastructure has been taken. Cal Water There have been two significant water line breaks on Cinchring Road, both of which were promptly addressed by Cal Water. After the first break, City staff and RHCA were able to resolve the issue the same day. Cal Water representatives then met with both agencies to discuss the next steps and reaffirm their commitment to staying proactive and vigilant. 1509 Additionally, Cal Water hired a geologist to closely monitor these areas and ensure their infrastructure meets community needs. A separate rupture was found on Quail Ridge Road South, caused by a tree root, and repairs were made with minimal disruption. Southern California Gas SoCal Gas began daily monitoring of its natural gas lines in this area, including the Flying Triangle. RHCA and City staff joined SoCal Gas representatives on a tour to ensure that key areas of concern were being addressed. Their monitoring efforts have included both drive- throughs and walk-throughs. SoCal Gas has also hired a geologist to gather data and ensure the integrity of their infrastructure. Recently, they informed RHCA and the City of their plans to install isolation valves, which will allow them to safely section off the gas for repairs with minimal service disruptions, if necessary. As they continue monitoring, they are keeping City staff and RHCA updated with any developments. Southern California Edison SCE is also proactively inspecting its infrastructure. Residents may have received notices informing them that drones will inspect their power lines. In addition, helicopter activity throughout Rolling Hills has increased to ensure sound infrastructure. SCE aims to identify any damaged or hazardous poles that may need repair. This work is also in conjunction with SCE's wildfire prevention and mitigation program. Los Angeles County Fire Department The RHCA and City staff have held ongoing meetings and walk-throughs with LA County Fire Acting Assistant Fire Chief Brian Kane and Community Services Liaison Rosemary Viveros. These meetings, which include frequent monitoring of the Flying Triangle and recently affected areas by Station 52, are aimed at ensuring community safety. Of particular note, we discussed recent developments at Station 56. The LA County Fire Department’s maintenance team inspected the reported damage to the firehouse garage door frame at Station 56. The necessary repairs were addressed, and Chief Kane assured the City there would be no interruptions to their daily operations. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department Similarly, City staff informed LASD Captain Kimberly Guerrero of new developments within Rolling Hills. Los Angeles Public Works – Flood Control District The City Council Storm Drain Ad Hoc Committee, comprised of Mayor Leah Mirsch and Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Pieper, recently met with executives from the LA County Flood Control District to discuss the feasibility of capturing stormwater from the Flying Triangle. The meeting was productive as LA County provided insight into how a project of this magnitude can be approached, such as meeting with additional state and federal agencies. An additional meeting is being scheduled for an on-site visit/tour of the Flying Triangle. Rolling Hills Community Association The Rolling Hills Community Association is conducting GPS monitoring to assess movement 2510 on Cinchring Road, Quailridge Road South, and the Flying Triangle. Ten monitoring points have been established, and the collected data will be shared with homeowners and other stakeholders once it becomes available. Additionally, the City’s Storm Drain Ad Hoc Committee has met with the RHCA’s Ad Hoc Committee, which includes President Fred Lorig and Director Anne Smith, to address related issues. The City of Rolling Hills is actively collaborating with its utility partners, public safety officials, and the Rolling Hills Community Association to ensure the safety of its community. Communication City staff understands the importance of keeping the community informed about developments within the City of Rolling Hills and neighboring areas. To achieve this, staff will continue to use the Blue Newsletter and enhance the City website for information dissemination. Additionally, the RHCA has offered to use Dwelling Live for further information sharing and messaging. PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS City staff and RHCA recognize that emergency preparedness is a collective effort, not just an individual concern. Below are a few helpful tips on getting started now: Prepared Peninsula Expo On Sunday, October 27, 2024, from 10 am to 1 pm, the peninsula cities are hosting a free event at the Palos Verdes Farmers Market at the Peninsula High School on how to be disaster ready. There will be demonstrations, instructions on building your own emergency bag, emergency preparedness tips for your family and pets, School District preparedness plans, trick or treating for the youth (wear costumes!) and free market food vouchers. This family fun event will be held at 27118 Silver Spur Road, Rolling Hills Estates. We are partners in keeping our community safe. If you see something, say something. In an emergency, call 911. So Cal Gas - Look, Listen And Smell Look – If you see a damaged connection to a natural gas appliance, dirt/water blowing into the air, a dry patch of grass, fire, or an explosion near a pipeline. Listen – If you hear unusual sounds like hissing or whistling. Smell – If you smell the distinctive odor of natural gas*. *Please note that odors do fade so it’s important to not solely reply on just your nose. Report leaks to SoCal Gas at 1.800.427.2200 3511 SoCal Edison: Look Up, Look Out, And Live When doing yard work or outdoor chores, remember to look up and look out for power lines. Any contact with a power line can seriously hurt you, or even kill you. Be extra careful with ladders, tree trimming equipment, fruit-harvesting poles, pool skimmers, or any tool that you use above your head. Whether overhead or on the ground, consider all power lines energized and dangerous. Downed Lines? Stay 100 Ft. away and call 911 Report Water Leaks to Cal Water Cal Water has seen an increase in pipe leaks with customer private water lines and other utility lines. Please report water leaks to 310.257.1400. Alert Southbay Please make sure you are signed up for Alerts by texting “alertrh” to 888-777 or registering at AlertSouthBay.com Know Your Zone The Know Your Zone maps will be utilized by local public safety agencies (sheriff and fire departments), as well as your Peninsula cities, to prepare you in the event of an evacuation. In urgent situations, when an evacuation need arises, residents and visitors will be provided with timely critical information for impacted zones. Knowing your zone is critical to the evacuation process. If there is a wildfire or emergency situation, navigating the Know Your Zone map can help determine your next steps in emergency incidents affecting where you live, work, and play. It’s also essential to sign-up for important emergency notifications through the Alert Southbay system. To find your zone, go to PVPReady.gov All Rolling Hills Zones begin with the letters ROL CONCLUSION Based on the information provided, City staff welcomes feedback from the City Council on increasing communication or collaboration with local partners. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable 4512 RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ATTACHMENTS: 5513 Patrick T. Donegan Of Counsel (310) 220-2172 Patrick.Donegan@bbklaw.com Best Best & Krieger LLP | 18101 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1000, Irvine, California 92612 Phone: (949) 263-2600 | Fax: (949) 260-0972 | bbklaw.com September 13, 2024 VIA E-MAIL The Southern California Gas Company Attn: Gabriela Medina 1851 N. Gaffey Street San Pedro, CA 90731 GMedina1@socalgas.com Dear Ms. Medina: The purpose of this letter is to formally request that Southern California Gas Company (“SoCalGas”) delay the planned natural gas turn off in the City of Rolling Hills (“City”) as stated in SoCalGas’ September 12, 2024 Community Update (“Service Turn-Off”). As you are likely aware, the City and its residents were provided notice Thursday morning that natural gas service would be turned off the following Monday. In other words, roughly 1.5 business days to prepare for this catastrophic event. The timing of this notice and Service Turn- Off are unacceptable and do not give the City and its residents sufficient time to make plans and prepare for what appears to be an indefinite turn-off of natural gas service. In short, SoCalGas’ Community Update relies upon a “recent geological hazard survey” and “an incident with the water system” to justify its decision. These tenuous reasons create more questions than they answer. Among others, what did this “recent geological hazard survey” show that would justify this drastic step? What is new and different today than say 1 week, 1 month or 1 year ago? Are there any other remedial measures that can be taken to address the issues raised by this “recent geological hazard survey” short of the Service Turn-Off? What does the water system and that entirely different utility system have to do with SoCalGas’ infrastructure and service in the City? While SoCalGas does have the authority to take action to ameliorate public safety issues, this ability is not unlimited The California Public Utilities Commission has promulgated a comprehensive set of tariffs and rules (see Rule 23, Schedule No. GR – Residential Service Special Condition 6., etc.) governing the turn off of services. As such, an indeterminate Service Turn-Off is a drastic step and must be supported by the facts. It is the City’s position that SoCalGas’ Service Turn-Off, as currently constituted, is not supported and would be a draconian overreach that would place numerous City residents in an extremely precarious position with limited time to prepare and make other living arrangements that contemplates no natural gas service to their homes. Further, to the City’s understanding, SoCalGas has not undertaken an less impactful remedial measures as it has done in other neighboring jurisdictions. The City is unclear as to why these other jurisdictions were afforded different treatment than the City and its residents. 514 The Southern California Gas Company September 13, 2024 Page 2 Best Best & Krieger LLP Please be advised, that if a delay is not granted, the City will have no other choice but pursue other formal legal action with the California Public Utilities Commission or the courts. Due to the impending Monday Service Turn-Off, please respond by Saturday, September 13, 2024 by 3:00p.m. Sincerely, Patrick T. Donegan for BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP PTD:wh 65277.00001\42678410.2 515 Morgan B. Van Buren, Esq. Senior Counsel - Litigation Office of the General Counsel 555 W. Fifth Street, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, CA 90013-1034 Tel: (213) 244-2937 Fax: (213) 629-9620 Email: mvanbure@socalgas.com September 14, 2024 Patrick T. Donegan BEST BEST & KRIEGER Patrick.Donegan&bbklaw.com Dear Mr. Donegan: Please allow this correspondence to serve as Southern California Gas Company’s (“SoCalGas”) response to your September 13, 2024 letter, in which you request that SoCalGas delay the shutoff of gas service to the City of Rolling Hills (the “City”) scheduled to occur September 16, 2024, at approximately 3:00 p.m. As discussed below, the dynamic and ongoing land movement in the affected area requires that SoCalGas take immediate action to promote the safety of the community. Therefore, SoCalGas unfortunately cannot delay the scheduled shutoff. Longstanding and Accelerated Land Movement in the Palos Verdes Peninsula Has Caused Damage to City and Utility Infrastructure, and is Presently Exerting a High Degree of Stress on Gas Lines in the Affected Area of Rolling Hills As you are aware, the City sits on top of a geologically active zone, which consists of four active landslides impacting the Palos Verdes Peninsula. Although Rolling Hills and Rancho Palos Verdes (“RPV”) are separate and distinct municipalities with different geographical locations, the two cities are similarly impacted by the four active landslides. SoCalGas technical and operational personnel, as well as third-party experts, have been closely monitoring land movement in the Palos Verdes Peninsula. Beginning in approximately November of 2023 and through the Winter season, heavy precipitation in the area resulted in increasingly active land movement which has been continuing1. Recently, the City of RPV provided an update from its engineers on the land movement, who determined, “movement on the north and west ends of the landslide complex is slowing down, while movement at the south end continues to accelerate.” RPV’s engineers estimate that the land may be moving up to 4.5 feet per month at its current rate, “about 88 times faster than it was in October 2022.” 1 See Portuguese Bend Land Movement Monitoring Survey October 10, 2023 through May 28, 2024 Survey Report for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes prepared by McGee Surveying Consulting and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Proclamation of a State of Emergency dated September 3, 2024. 516 September 14, 2024 Page 2 Land movement has been accelerating over the past several months, with visible signs of movement observed in the Rolling Hills community. Notably, a water main line on Cinchring Road ruptured on September 8, 2024. Visible signs of land movement consisting of road cracks that run east-west were also observed across the street from the location of the ruptured water main. The Rolling Hills Community Association (“RHCA”), which has been monitoring areas of concern in the City, has also observed visible signs of land movement in the area, including a recent drop in soil surface of approximately 4 to 5 inches near the location of the ruptured water main. Additionally, an approximately 300-foot-long landslide scarp trending northwest- southeast was observed by SoCalGas’s engineers at the intersection of Portuguese Bend Road and Ranchero Road. The vertical offset of the roadway at the scarp was approximately 6 to 8 inches high. The visible signs of significant land movement in the affected area, including the ruptured water main, are indicative of a high degree of stress on SoCalGas’s infrastructure. Further, based on geotechnical data recently obtained by SoCalGas, multiple sections of underground gas pipeline within the affected area of the City of Rolling Hills, including in the location of the recent water main break, are within an active landslide area that is exhibiting a high degree of ground movement from differential land movement. This data indicates that SoCalGas’s infrastructure in the area is presently under significant stress caused by a high degree of land movement. Moreover, large portions of the three landslide areas located directly below the City have been moving at an estimated rate of approximately 5 inches per week, resulting in multiple instances of infrastructure breakage. This includes a gas main line that broke in the Seaview community of RPV on August 30, 2024, which necessitated shutting off gas service to 23 homes using a shutoff valve that SoCalGas installed due to land movement in the area. This main break, which was caused by sudden tensile overload, resulted in approximately 5 inches of separation between the broken ends of the line. Of note, SoCalGas was performing daily leak surveys in this area. However, there were no gas leaks detected prior to the sudden main break, so leaks do not seem to be predictive of larger main breaks. Similarly, SoCalGas determined it was unsafe to continue providing natural gas service to 28 homes in the western Seaview area and 24 homes in the Portuguese Bend Beach Club of RPV because the gas line serving these communities is located in an area where land is moving at an estimated rate of approximately 5 inches per week. As such, on September 6, 2024, SoCalGas shut off service to these communities in order to promote public safety. / / / / / / / / / / / / 517 September 14, 2024 Page 3 SoCalGas Has Exercised Reasonable Diligence and Care to Safely Provide Gas Service to the Areas Impacted by the Accelerated Land Movement Throughout the Palos Verdes Peninsula Despite challenges posed by the accelerated land movement throughout the Palos Verdes Peninsula, SoCalGas has taken reasonable steps in its efforts to continue safely serving the areas impacted by the active landslides. These efforts have included: • Acceleration of leak inspection intervals throughout the Palos Verdes Peninsula, including in the City of Rolling Hills. • Close coordination with first responders, city officials and third-party experts to keep the public informed and to support infrastructure enhancements. The dynamic and fast-changing land movement on the Palos Verdes Peninsula has since entered a new phase, prompting several decisive actions to protect affected residents and business owners: • Southern California Edison has shut off electric service to hundreds of homes in the Portuguese Bend and Seaview communities of RPV, some indefinitely; • The City of RPV issued an evacuation warning for the Portuguese Bend Community Association, advising residents that they should, “prepare to evacuate and seek alternative housing;” • Governor Gavin Newsom declared a State of Emergency for the City of RPV due to increasing land movement and utilities’ increasing inability to safely serve portions of the community. Conditions Beyond SoCalGas’s Reasonable Control Have Made the Provision of Gas Service to the Affected Area of Rolling Hills Unsafe SoCalGas operates under the laws of the State of California and is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”). SoCalGas’s activities are guided by the Rules and Tariffs that are approved by the CPUC. Safety of its customers and its facilities are paramount to SoCalGas. CPUC Tariff Rule No. 23, sets forth the rules regarding continuity of service and interruption of delivery: The Utility will exercise reasonable diligence and care to furnish and deliver service to its customers, and to avoid any interruption of same. The Utility shall not be liable for damages or otherwise for any failure to deliver gas or provide service to its customers, which failure in any way or manner results from breakage of its facilities, however caused, war, riots, acts of God, strikes, failure 518 September 14, 2024 Page 4 of or interruption in service, operating limitations or other conditions beyond its reasonable control. Further, California Public Utilities Code section 451 provides in relevant part that, “[e]very public utility shall furnish and maintain such adequate, efficient, just, and reasonable service, instrumentalities, equipment, and facilities,…as are necessary to promote the safety, health, comfort, and convenience of its patrons, employees and the public.” Notwithstanding SoCalGas’s reasonable efforts, the ongoing land movement – a natural condition beyond SoCalGas’s reasonable control – has made the provision of gas service to the affected area of the City unsafe at this time. The water main breakage on September 8, 2024, as well as the visible signs of land movement in the area, including road cracks, fissures, and an approximately 4 to 5 inch drop in soil surface, are consistent with the land movement observed in connection with the gas main rupture that occurred in the Seaview community on August 30, 2024: approximately 5 inches of land movement that was sufficient to cause a sudden line break of approximately 5 inches due to tensile overload. As discussed above, given the rate at which the land has moved within the geographically active areas, gas lines can suddenly break in the absence of a preceding gas leak, as demonstrated by the gas main break in the Seaview community. As such, a line break cannot be predicted even when performing daily leak surveys and monitoring the area on a 24-hour basis. A broken gas line could pose significant safety risks to the community, including the risk of fire and gas migration to nearby structures. This risk is heightened when, as here, a sudden gas line break cannot be predicted due to the dynamic and accelerated nature of the land movement. Indeed, SoCalGas is not the only utility that has identified the significant safety risks created by the accelerated land movement. Today, Southern California Edison (“SCE”) notified customers that, “[d]ue to critical safety issues,” SCE will turn off power to approximately 51 properties located within and/or near the affected area of Rolling Hills no later than September 18, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. Based on the foregoing, SoCalGas unfortunately cannot delay the scheduled 9/16/24 shut off of gas service to the affected area of the City. Doing so would subject the community to significant safety risks. SoCalGas will therefore carry out a process for a safe shut down of gas service to the community on September 16, 2024, at 3:00 p.m. in compliance with Federal safety regulations and standards. The CPUC is aware of this unfortunate situation. / / / / / / / / / 519 September 14, 2024 Page 5 SoCalGas Continues to Actively Monitor the Land Movement SoCalGas regrets the need to shut off service at this time and is continuing to monitor the ongoing land movement in the community with the intent of restoring gas service if and when it may be reasonably safe to do so. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Morgan B. Van Buren, Esq. 520 City of Rolling Hills INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 September 26, 2024 The Honorable Supervisor Janice Hahn Los Angeles County 4th District Office 302 W. 5th Street, #200 San Pedro, CA 90731 RE: City of Rolling Hills Seeking Assistance with Additional Law Enforcement Services and Waiving or Reducing Costs Associated with Permits Honorable Supervisor Hahn: I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing on behalf of the City of Rolling Hills to request your support in securing additional funding for law enforcement services from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for those areas in our City impacted by recent natural gas and electricity shut-offs. We also seek your assistance in waiving or reducing the permit fees imposed by the Los Angeles County Public Works and the Los Angeles County Fire Department for the installation of propane tanks, generators, and solar panels for these same residents. You have been a key advocate for connecting cities with the essential services they need. Such as your efforts in securing supplemental law enforcement for our neighbor Rancho Palos Verdes ensured the communities of Sea View and Portuguese Bend remained safe. We deeply appreciate your leadership and swift action, and we know you understand the importance of these services for your constituents impacted but utility service shut-offs. The recent natural gas and electricity shutdowns have created new challenges for our community. The current state of the City has underscored our reliance on the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, but these circumstances are straining our existing resources. Securing additional funding would help us maintain the safety our residents depend on by increasing patrols and improving response times during this challenging time. Additionally, due to these disruptions, the need for alternative utility sources like propane tanks, generators, and solar systems has become urgent. However, the current County permit fees present an unnecessary financial burden for our residents that are faced with securing these alternative sources. Thus, on behalf of the City, I am kindly asking for your assistance in getting these fees waived or reduced. Doing so will help expedite installations and provide much-needed relief. 521 City of Rolling Hills Letter to Honorable Supervisor Hahn September 26, 2024 Page 2 of 2 To highlight our specific asks, the City is requesting funding for immediate needs such as: Law Enforcement services • The City is seeking one (1) deputy for each of the three (3) shifts for seven days a week for up to twelve months; Permitting Fees: • Waiving or reducing the fees associated with LA County Public Works and LA County Fire permitting fees for residents impacted by the utility shut-offs. We are committed to continue working closely with your office and relevant departments to address these issues. With your continued support, we can enhance the safety and well-being of our community during this difficult time in our City. Thank you for your ongoing dedication to the City of Rolling Hills and the communities you serve. We look forward to collaborating with you further and appreciate your consideration of this request. Please feel free to reach out to me at any time with any questions or concerns regarding the above. Sincerely, Karina Bañales City Manager Encl: Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department: City of Rolling Hills Landslide Detail cc: Rolling Hills City Council 522 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RH Landslide Detail COST ESTIMATE SHEET 0500-1300 1 Deputy @ 8 Hours X 119.41 = $955.28 1300-2100 1 Deputy @ 8 Hours X 119.41 = $955.28 2100-0500 1 Deputy @ 8 Hours X 119.41= $955.28 TOTAL (1 Day): $2,865.84 TOTAL (7 Days): $20,060.88 This is only an estimate of expenses, based on an average of Deputies’ salaries. The actual cost may vary, based on rank of the Deputies working these events. Sergeant Tina McCoy may be contacted at (310) 891-3227. 523 October 21, 2024 The Honorable Deanne Criswell Administrator Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street, SW, 8th Floor Washington, D.C. 20472 Dear Administrator Criswell, Thank you for your commitment to protecting all communities before, during, and after disaster strikes. We write to you regarding the urgent landslide on the Palos Verdes Peninsula and its devastating consequences for the residents of the communities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills, and Rolling Hills Estates. The Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide complex is located on the Palos Verdes Peninsula in western Los Angeles County. As a result of the 2022 and 2023 winter storms, all three cities have experienced land movement at an unprecedented pace. In the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, the amount of land movement that the city was previously experiencing over the course of an entire year is now occurring on a weekly basis. With this accelerated movement, utility infrastructure has been significantly impacted, and many residents are now without access to basic utilities. The de-energization of the region also poses a significant threat to critical public infrastructure such as sewage service and the dewatering wells that are needed to mitigate the landslide. Your leadership has been key in addressing this land movement. Through FEMA’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) grant, the City of Racho Palos Verdes will be able to mitigate this crisis by eliminating excess moisture and reducing future ground movement. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes has also been working closely with FEMA and the California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) in updating their scope of work for this project. This close partnership has allowed the City to maintain eligibility for the BRIC grant while conducting immediate work that is critical in addressing the ongoing movement. We are thankful that federal resources are being utilized in the area. After a recent visit from Regional Administrator Bob Fenton, FEMA has requested the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Geological Survey to provide technical assistance to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes as they work to stabilize the land. We urge any assistance be extended to the City of Rolling Hills and City of Rolling Hills Estates, so they too can work to mitigate the land movement and restore a sense of safety for their residents. It is our understanding that the region faces challenges in accessing both state and federal aid because the land movement has persisted over time. We ask that FEMA work to identify any 524 assistance and funding, that can be made available, to the residents impacted by land movement on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. We know you share our deep concern about the impact that this land movement is having on the residents and businesses in these communities. Like you, several of us have visited the landslide area and witnessed firsthand the devastating impact this issue has had on the community. Following the increased land movement, we have held several meetings with experts from FEMA and our state and county representatives to better understand the impacts of this movement and what resources could be deployed in response. Additionally, we are continuing to advocate for projects submitted by the Geologic Hazard Abatement Districts through the federal appropriations process. We urge you to consider all pathways to provide support to residents impacted by land movement on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. We will continue to work with federal, state, and local officials to support these communities and their residents to ensure that any resources that can be offered to support them are available. We ask that you continue to keep our offices apprised of your work in the region and maintain communication as we work together to support impacted residents. Thank you again for your attention to this emergency. We look forward to your response and cooperation in tackling this challenge. Sincerely, ___________________________ Ted W. Lieu Member of Congress ___________________________ Alex Padilla U.S. Senator, California ___________________________ Adam Schiff Member of Congress ___________________________ Laphonza Butler U.S. Senator, California 525 Agenda Item No.: 15.C Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TRAFFIC COMMISSION TERMS EXPIRING ON JANUARY 1, 2025 DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: The appointment process for filling expiring Commission terms calls for the incumbents and the public to be informed of the openings before the expiration of the current terms. As noted in the appointment schedule Attachment A), staff will provide approximately four weeks of public notification by: 1. Posting the notices at City Hall per the Maddy Act (Attachments B & C) 2. Sending letters to each incumbent advising them of the process to be considered for re- appointment 3. Advertising the openings in the City Blue Newsletter during the remainder of October and early November 2024 Incumbents or interested individuals must submit Letters of Interest to the City Clerk by 12pm on Thursday, November 21, 2024. Once received, staff will schedule interviews with the candidates and the City Council Personnel Committee during the week of December 2, 2024, ahead of the publication and posting of the December 10, 2024, City Council agenda. Current terms expiring are as follows: Name Commission Original Appointment Date Current Term Expires Jana Cooley Planning 11/14/16 1/1/25 Charlie Raine Traffic 5/9/16 1/1/25 DISCUSSION: None. 526 FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - CL_AGN_241028_CC_TentativeCommissionerAppointment_Timeline.pdf Attachment B - CL_AGN_241028_CC_PC-Appt_Posting.pdf Attachment C - CL_AGN_241028_CC_TC-Appt_Posting.pdf 527 Attachment 1 Tentative Planning & Traffic Commission Appointment Schedule Oct. 28, 2024 City Council Reviews Appointment Timeline and directs changes as necessary Oct. 28, 2024 Local Appointment List Posted at City Hall Oct. 29, 2024 Letters mailed to incumbents advising of Commission reappointment process Oct. 30, 2024 (Special) Nov . 6, 2024 Notice of Planning Commission Member recruitment in City Blue Newsletter and City Website Nov. 21, 2024 at 12pm Due date for Letters of Interest in serving on the Planning Commission Week of Dec. 2, 2024 City Council Personnel Committee interviews Commission candidates (Councilmember Pieper and Mayor Dieringer) Dec. 10, 2024 City Council appoints Commission Members for terms beginning in January 2025 Week of Jan. 2, 2025 Staff conducts orientation for any new Commission members 528 City of Rolling Hills INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 PLEASE POST CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Local Appointments List of Positions on City Commissions for Calendar Year 2024 This list is prepared pursuant to Government Code § 54972 to inform residents of the City of Rolling Hills regarding opportunities that exist for appointment to City Planning Commission in calendar year 2025. A. Appointive Terms. The following is a list of all positions on the City’s Planning Commission for which the terms of office expire on January 1, 2025 and for which the City Council will be appointing or reappointing persons to fill those positions: PLANNING COMMISSION (4-year term) Position/Name of Incumbent Last Appt. Date Term Exp. Jana Cooley 1/1/20 1/1/2025 The necessary qualification to be a member of the Planning Commission is to be a resident of the City of Rolling Hills at least 18 years of age (Rolling Hills Municipal Code § 2.20.025). B. List of Board, Commissions and Committees. The Planning Commission is one of two permanent Commissions or Committees of the City of Rolling Hills. All members of these bodies are appointed by the City Council and all serve at the pleasure of the City Council. The qualifications for the Planning Commission are listed in part A of the List. Prepared this 28th day of October 20 24. By: Christian Horvath City Clerk 529 City of Rolling Hills INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 PLEASE POST CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Local Appointments List of Positions on City Commissions for Calendar Year 2024 This list is prepared pursuant to Government Code § 54972 to inform residents of the City of Rolling Hills regarding opportunities that exist for appointment to City Traffic Commission in calendar year 2025. A. Appointive Terms. The following is a list of all positions on the City’s Traffic Commission for which the terms of office expire on January 1, 2025 and for which the City Council will be appointing or reappointing persons to fill those positions: TRAFFIC COMMISSION (4 -year term) Position/Name of Incumbent Last Appt. Date Term Exp. Charlie Raine 1/1/20 1/1/2025 The necessary qualification to be a member of the Traffic Commission is to be a resident of the City of Rolling Hills at least 18 years of age (Rolling Hills Municipal Code § 2.20.025). B. List of Board, Commissions and Committees. The Traffic Commission is one of two permanent Commissions or Committees of the City of Rolling Hills. All members of these bodies are appointed by the City Council and all serve at the pleasure of the City Council. The qualifications for the Traffic Commission are listed in part A of the List. Prepared this 28th day of October 2024. By: Christian Horvath City Clerk 530 Agenda Item No.: 16.A Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:EXISTING LITIGATION - GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(D)(1) THE CITY FINDS, BASED ON ADVICE FROM LEGAL COUNSEL, THAT DISCUSSION IN OPEN SESSION WILL PREJUDICE THE POSITION OF THE CITY IN THE LITIGATION. (1 CASE) a. NAME OF CASE: CONNIE ANDERSEN, ET AL. V. CALIFORNIA WATER COMPANY, ET AL. (SEAVIEW CASE) CASE NO.: 24STCV20953 DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: None. ATTACHMENTS: 531 Agenda Item No.: 16.B Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (TWO CASES) CPUC COMPLAINTS AGAINST SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AND SOCAL GAS DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: None. ATTACHMENTS: 532 Agenda Item No.: 16.C Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957 (B)(1) TITLE: CITY MANAGER DATE:October 28, 2024 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: None. ATTACHMENTS: 533