Loading...
City Council Agenda 02-27-2017MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2017 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Dieringer at 7:01 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: Councilmembers Absent: - Others Present: Black, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer. None. Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director. Mike Jenkins, City Attorney. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Roy Itani, Engineer, Los Angeles County Building & Safety. Tavisha Nicholson, Bolton Engineering. Lisa Naslund, Drainage Engineer, Los Angeles County Building & Safety. Charles Powell, Entrepreneur. CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A. Minutes - Regular Meeting of January 23, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. B. Payment of Bills. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. C. Minutes - City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting of November 1, 2016. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. City Clerk Luce noted two typographical errors on the minutes - on item 4A page 2, it should state that Mayor Pro Tem Black took "his" seat at the dais and on item 4C page 5 the last sentence of the third paragraph should be completed as follows: Discussion ensued concerning the importance of maintaining the look and feel of the community. Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council approve the items on the consent calendar as corrected. Mayor Pro Tem Black seconded the motion, which carried without objection. OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME None. COMMISSION ITEMS None. PUBLIC HEARINGS ORDINANCE NO. 350-U: AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 26 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE); TITLE 27 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE); TITLE 28 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE); 11'1LE 29 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE); TITLE 30 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE; TITLE 31 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE); -1- • • ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 15.24 (EXISTING BUILDING CODE) IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 33 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE); AMENDING SECTION 8.08.580 (CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION WASTE) OF CHAPTER 8.08 (SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE MATERIAL COLLECTION) OF TITLE 8 (HEALTH AND SAFETY) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONFORM TO STATE LAW; AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF. THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15061(B)(3). Mayor Dieringer introduced the items and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz stated that before the City Council are two ordinances for public hearing regarding adoption of the Los Angeles County Building Codes. She stated that every three years, the State of California revises its codes; and in turn, counties and cities updated their codes in response to the State changes. She commented that counties and cities may adopt codes that are more strict, but may not adopt less strict provision. She further stated the County of Los Angeles adopted its code recently with some changes relevant to the County's topography, climate and other factors and recommended for adoption by the City are two ordinances which the Los Angeles County codes by reference with no additional changes. She stated that the first ordinance is an urgency ordinance which would allow the provisions to go into effect immediately upon a 4/5ths vote and the second is a regular ordinance that would follow the normal ordinance adoption process with a second reading and adoption at a subsequent meeting and would go into effect 30 days after adoption. She commented that the reason for adoption both ordinances is so that in case the urgency provision is successfully challenged, the regular ordinance would be on course to be effective. She briefly reviewed the changes stating that the ordinance also amends Section 8.08.580 of the City's Municipal Code requiring that 65% of construction and demolition waste be diverted from the landfill. She stated that the County Building Official, Roy Itani is also present to answer any questions. In response to Mayor Dieringer, Planning Director Schwartz stated that if the City does not adopt the County codes, the State codes would be in effect rather than the County codes. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Black, Mr. Itani stated that any single-family home built in California is required to have fire sprinklers. Mayor Dieringer opened the public hearing and called for public comment on both ordinances. Hearing none, she closed the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Black moved that the City Council waive full reading and adopt Ordinance No. 350-U adopting by reference the Los Angeles County Codes and declaring the urgency thereof. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Black, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. ORDINANCE NO. 350: A NON -URGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE SAME PROVISIONS IN THE URGENCY ORDINANCE, ABOVE. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council introduce Ordinance No. 350 and waive full reading of the ordinance adopting by reference the Los Angeles County Codes and schedule second reading of the ordinance for February 27, 2017 City Council meeting. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion which carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Black, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. ZONING CASE NO. 902. Request for a Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permits for the construction of a new 10,400 square foot residence, 10,400 square foot basement, 1,120 square foot garage, 475 square foot entry, a total of 2,869 square feet covered porches, a new pool and spa totaling 864 square feet with a 60 square foot pool equipment area, miscellaneous outdoor amenities, 800 square foot guest house, a two-story stable with 1,300 square feet on the first level Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 -2- • • and a 792 square foot loft, a new driveway and access to the stable, several retaining walls and grading of a total of 48,180 cubic yards of dirt in Zoning Case No. 902, at 23 Crest Road East, (Lot 132A -MS), Rolling Hills, CA (Hynes). The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, GARAGES, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, RETAINING WALLS AND NEW DRIVEWAY; AND REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUESTHOUSE AND STABLE WITH LOFT AND CORRAL AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 902 AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, LOT 132A -MS, (HYNES). THE PROJECT WAS DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz stated that this is a reopened public hearing regarding a proposed development on a vacant lot at 23 Crest Road East which the City Council has been reviewing for several months. She stated that at the January 9th meeting of the City Council staff was directed to prepare a Resolution granting approval of the applicant's request for consideration at the January 23`d meeting; but just prior to that meeting, a correspondence including video footage was provided to the City Council for consideration. She stated that the City Council expressed a desire to review the additional information but because the public hearing was closed, it could not be considered at the meeting of January 23`d and staff was directed to notice a reopened public hearing on the matter. She stated that since that time, the City Council has had an opportunity to review the information and staff forwarded the video to the Los Angeles County Grading and Engineering division for review and they are present to answer any questions. She stated that Lisa Naslund, Grading/Drainage Engineer also provided a written response which is included with the staff report; along with an additional correspondence with photographs submitted by the applicant. She stated that in reviewing all of the additional evidence, staff feels that it is inconclusive and does not establish that the project will not comply with the building code; and as such, the same resolution that was presented at the January 23`d meeting is presented for consideration after this public hearing. Mayor Dieringer called for public comment. Tavisha Nicholson, Bolton Engineering addressed the City Council on behalf of the applicant to further explain the project and the history behind it. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Black, Ms. Naslund stated that the goal of the drainage solution for this project will be to mitigate the drainage prior to it reaching the properties below. In response to Councilmember Mirsch, Ms. Naslund stated that the plan was conceptually presented to the County and there has been general discussion regarding the criteria that need to be meet, but it has not yet been thoroughly reviewed because that process doesn't begin until the plan is submitted along with the drainage calculations and justification specific to what is proposed. Brief discussion ensued concerning County's review of the drainage plan, the process that it goes through during review and making the reports available to the public. In response to Councilmember Wilson, Planning Director Schwartz stated that as previously directed, staff will provide the interested parties notification when the County has reviewed and approved the final soils, geology and hydrology studies submitted by the applicant. Mayor Dieringer opened the public hearing and called for public comment. Hearing none, she closed the public hearing. Councilmember Mirsch commented that while she understands the concerns raised by the neighbors below, she relies on the County's expertise in reviewing the drainage plan for it's compliance with the criteria. Mayor Pro Tem Black concurred with Councilmember Mirsch's comments. Mayor Pro Tem Black moved that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 1202 granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 902 at 23 Crest Road East. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion, which carried with Councilmember Wilson opposed. OLD BUSINESS Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 -3- CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1195 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER, FOLLOWING THE APPEAL FILED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER, WHICH ORDERED THE CONFINEMENT OF AZUL TO THE OSTRIKER PROPERTY. Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. City Manager Cruz presented the staff report, reviewing the history on this matter and stating that presented for consideration is Resolution that revises the previous resolution adopted in this case by specifically requiring that the kennel be constructed as directed within 60 days and retaining jurisdiction over this matter for 90 days. Mayor Dieringer called for public comment. Hearing none, she asked for comments from the City Council. Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 1203 amending Resolution No. 1195 and modifying the decision of the City Manager in the Ostriker aggressive animal complaint. Mayor Pro Tem Black seconded the motion, which carried with Councilmember Wilson opposed. NEW BUSINESS REQUEST FOR A TWO-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 72232 TO SUBDIVIDE ONE EXISTING LOT INTO 2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 852, SUBDIVISION NO. 93, AT 80 SADDLEBACK ROAD (TURPANJIAN) AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUEST. Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz stated that the applicant is requesting a two-year time extension to complete a previously approved subdivision and provide the City Council with a copy of the request letter from the applicant's representative. Following brief discussion, Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 1204 granting a two-year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map No. 72232 to subdivide one existing lot into two single-family residential lots in Zoning Case No. 852, Subdivision No. 93 at 80 Saddleback Road. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion, which carried without objection. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS None. MATTERS FROM STAFF REPORT, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 1, 2016. Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the topics discussed at the Joint Meeting held on November 1, 2016 which included: the frequency of Variance approvals; the size and uses of stables (including access); should the City consider regulating the maximum size of new residential developments; and should the topography of a lot be considered when calculating lot coverage and disturbance; in other words, on a lot with extreme slopes and canyons -where no construction can take place, or a lot that is divided by a road where one side is very steep, should those limiting developable areas not be included in the calculations of the net lot area for development purposes? Thus, limiting the size of developments. She further reviewed the action items that came from the joint meeting, stating regarding the item on stables, that the Planning Commission appointed Commissioners Cardenas and Cooley to an ad hoc committee to meet with members of Caballeros to discuss the requirements for stables to determine if any changes should be recommended; and staff will be scheduling a meeting. In response to Mayor Dieringer regarding constructing basements outside the footprint of the home, Planning Director Schwartz stated that that she is researching that matter and has enlisted the help of engineers for further input. Discussion ensued concerning allowing additional disturbance to create gentler slopes and Planning Director Schwartz explained that the code was changed to allow for greater disturbance in such situations, but according to what she's heard from several engineers, it is difficult to apply based on the topography of the lots in the City without creating very tall walls. Mayor Dieringer suggested having another meeting to discuss the items that were not covered and that staff provide a timeline as to the status of the action items. Mayor Dieringer further expressed concern Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 -4- regarding variances in setbacks and as built situtations. Discussion ensued concerning the issues raised by Mayor Dieringer. Following brief discussion, staff was directed to provide further updates on the action items from the meeting in the Weekly Memo provided to the City Council. No further action was taken. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS None. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Government Code §54957 Title: City Manager CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR Government Code §54957.6 City representative: Personnel Committee (Mirsch and Pieper) Unrepresented employee: City Manager The City Council recessed into closed session at 8:09 p.m. to discuss the matters listed above under Closed Session. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION Mayor Dieringer called the meeting back to order in open session at 8:46 p.m. ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTIONS FROM CLOSED SESSION (ORAL REPORT). City Attorney Jenkins reported that no reportable action was taken. Staff was directed to agendize the matter for the next meeting of the City Council. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Dieringer adjourned the meeting at 8:48 p.m. in memory of Tony Dellovade, son of Fred and Alexia Dellovade, who recently passed away after suffering a tragic accident. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, February 27, 2017 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, qlagucC1 Heidi Luce City Clerk ea Dieringer Mayor Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 -5- CITY OF ROLLING HILLS PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL AND POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES I am a citizen of the United States. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within proceeding; my business address is 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. On the 10t day of February, 2017, I serve the within City Council Meeting - 02/13/2017 Regular Meeting a copy of which is annexed hereto and made a part hereof, and the person, or persons, named below were emailed or mailed the agenda: E -MAILED MAILED Interested RH Web site listSery Parties Interested parties DropBox City Attorney CouncilMembers Dieringer, Pieper, Black, Mirsch and Wilson DELIVERED City Manager City Council Also posted at City Hall, at www.Rolling-Hills.org and PDF's in DropBox. I declare under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on the 10th day of February, 2017 at Rolling Hills, California. Ewa Nikodem Administrative Assistant • • • 0-/Ralicw9 qice6 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2017 7:00 P.M. Next Resolution No. 1202 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL Next Ordinance No. 350 3. OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding the items on the consent calendar or items not listed on this agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will take place on any items not on the agenda. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A. Minutes - Regular Meeting of January 23, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. B. Payment of Bills. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. C. Minutes - City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting of November 1, 2016. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 5. COMMISSION ITEMS NONE. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ORDINANCE NO. 350—U: AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 26 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE); TITLE 27 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE); TITLE 28 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE); TITLE 29 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE); TITLE 30 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE; TITLE 31 Page 1 of 3 • • (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE); ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 15.24 (EXISTING BUILDING CODE) IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 33 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE); AMENDING SECTION 8.08.580 (CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION WASTE) OF CHAPTER 8.08 (SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE MATERIAL COLLECTION) OF TITLE 8 (HEALTH AND SAFETY) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONFORM TO STATE LAW; AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF. THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15061(B)(3). AND ORDINANCE NO. 350: A NON -URGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE SAME PROVISIONS IN THE URGENCY ORDINANCE, ABOVE. RECOMMENDATION: Waive full reading and adopt Ordinance No 350-U; Introduce and waive full reading of Ordinance No. 350. B. ZONING CASE NO. 902. Request for a Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permits for the construction of a new 10,400 square foot residence, 10,400 square foot basement, 1,120 square foot garage, 475 square foot entry, a total of 2,869 square feet covered porches, a new pool and spa totaling 864 square feet with a 60 square foot pool equipment area, miscellaneous outdoor amenities, 800 square foot guest house, a two- story stable with 1,300 square feet on the first level and a 792 square foot loft, a new driveway and access to the stable, several retaining walls and grading of a total of 48,180 cubic yards of dirt in Zoning Case No. 902, at 23 Crest Road East, (Lot 132A -MS), Rolling Hills, CA (Hynes). The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, GARAGES, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, RETAINING WALLS AND NEW DRIVEWAY; AND REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUESTHOUSE AND STABLE WITH LOFT AND CORRAL AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 902 AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, LOT 132A -MS, (HYNES). THE PROJECT WAS DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). 7. OLD BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1195 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER, FOLLOWING THE APPEAL FILED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER, WHICH ORDERED THE CONFINEMENT OF AZUL TO THE OSTRIKER PROPERTY. City Council Agenda 02/13/17 Page 2 of 3 t • 8. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR A TWO-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 72232 TO SUBDIVIDE ONE EXISTING LOT INTO 2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 852, SUBDIVISION NO. 93, AT 80 SADDLEBACK ROAD (TURPANJIAN). AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUEST. 9. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS NONE. 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF A. REPORT, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 1, 2016. 11. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS 12. CLOSED SESSION A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Government Code §54957 Title: City Manager B. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR Government Code §54957.6 City representative: Personnel Committee (Mirsch and Pieper) Unrepresented employee: City Manager 13. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTIONS FROM CLOSED SESSION (ORAL REPORT). 14. ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: Monday, February 27, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. 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. City Council Agenda 02/13/17 Page 3 of 3 DRAFT Agenda Item No. 4-A Meeting Date: 02/13/17 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2017 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Dieringer at 7:05 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: Black*, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer. *Mayor Pro Tem Black arrived at 7:10 p.m. Councilmembers Absent: None. - Others Present: CONSENT CALENDAR Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director. Natalie Karpeles, Assistant City Attorney. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Jim and Lori Hynes, 23 Crest Road East (property owner). Tom Hynes, 23 Crest Road East (property owner). Charlie Raine, 4 Pinto Road. Jeffrey Ostriker, 27 Caballeros Road. Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A. Minutes - Regular Meeting of January 9, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. B. Payment of Bills. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. C. Financial Statement for the Month of November and December 2016. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. D. Republic Services Recycling Tonnage Report for November and December 2016. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. E. Correspondence from Republic Services confirming the following dates for the 2017 bi- annual clean up events in the City of Rolling Hills: April 1 (greenwaste), April 8 (bulky 0 DRAFT items), April 22 (shred/e-waste), September 9 (greenwaste), September. 16 (bulky items) and September 23 (shred/e-waste). RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. Councilmember Pieper asked that item 4D be removed from the consent calendar for individual consideration. Hearing no objection, Mayor Dieringer so ordered. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council approve the remaining items on the consent calendar as presented. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion, which carried without objection. D. Allied Recycling Tonnage Report for November and December 2016. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. Councilmember Pieper commented that because the diversion requirements will be increasing in the future, the City should determine a way to get credit for the greenwaste and chipping that takes place in the City to help meet the new requirements. Following brief discussion, Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council receive and file the Allied Recycling Tonnage Report as presented. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried without objection. Staff was directed to provide the information received to the applicant and their representatives. Mayor Pro Tem Black arrived and took he seat at the dais. OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME None. COMMISSION ITEMS None. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. OLD BUSINESS CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, GARAGES, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, RETAINING WALLS AND NEW DRIVEWAY; AND REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUESTHOUSE AND STABLE WITH LOFT AND CORRAL AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 902 AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, LOT 132A -MS, (HYNES). THE PROJECT WAS DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. Minutes City Council Meeting 01-23-17 DRAFT It was noted that an e-mail with videos and additional information relating to this project was provided to the City Council late today. Assistant City Attorney Karpeles stated that the public hearing on this matter was closed and in order to consider the additional information received, the public hearing would need to be reopened and properly noticed. Following brief discussion, Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council table this matter in light of the fact that additional information was provided to the City Council today and notice a re -opened public hearing to allow the City Council to consider that information. Mayor Pro Tem Black seconded the motion, which carried with Councilmembers Pieper and Dieringer opposed. NEW BUSINESS REVIEW OF FISCAL YEAR 2015/2016 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Finance Director Shea reviewed the 2015/16 audited financial statements stating that Lance, Soll, Lunghard audited the statements in November and issued an unmodified opinion which is the highest level of assurance that can be given. In response to an inquiry from Mayor Dieringer, Mr. Shea explained that the building and permit fee revenue was over what was budgeted but lower than the previous year. He further reviewed the financial statements stating that the General Fund ended the year with a balance of $4.6 million in available fund balance and the Utility Fund ended the year with a balance of $1.2 million. He stated that General Fund revenue was just over $2 million with expenditures at $1.5 million. Discussion ensued concerning the City's pension liability. The City Council concurred that the City should begin discussing a policy for funding the liability as part of the budgeting process going forward. Following brief discussion, Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council receive and file the audited financial statements as presented. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried without objection. City Manager Cruz suggested taking Matters from Staff item 10-A pertaining to the quarterly investment report out of order. Hearing no objection, Mayor Dieringer so ordered. MATTERS FROM STAFF QUARTERLY SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2016. Finance Director Shea presented the investment report for the quarter ending December 31, 2016 stating that investment earnings are up over the previous year. Following brief discussion, Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council receive and file the investment report as presented. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried without objection. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION TO CITY STAFF CONCERNING THE STORM DRAINS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS (ORAL REPORT). Minutes City Council Meeting 01-23-17 DRAFT City Manager Cruz stated that this matter was placed on the agenda at the City Council's request due to concerns expressed regarding storm drains in the City. It was noted that the majority of the storm drains are private storm drains. Discussion ensued concerning the storm drains, specifically those in the vicinity of Portuguese Bend Road and Crest Road. Councilmember Mirsch commented that her concern is determining who is responsible for the drains in the City and what if any assistance could be provided to residents to address the issues related to the drains. Following discussion, staff was directed to research the legality and feasibility of creating an ad hoc committee to confer with residents regarding storm drain related issues and the construction of catch basins. MATTERS FROM STAFF (cont.) STATUS REPORT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION CONCERNING AZUL, THE DOG OWNED BY DR. OSTRIKER AT 27 CABALLEROS ROAD WITH REGARD TO THE CONFINEMENT RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED ON AZUL. Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. City Manager Cruz reported that since the City Council adopted Resolution 1195, there have been no formal complaints made by any members of the community that. Azul has been seen loose or being walked within the City limits: He stated that he contacted the victims of the chicken attacks to determine if they had seen Azul since the resolution was adopted, they all replied they have not; but thet still feel the dog is a threat to the community and should be kept in a kennel when on the Ostriker property. He further stated that he visited Dr. Ostriker's home on January 17th to see if Azul is running loose on the property and if the dog run was constructed and he did not witness either. He further reported that he spoke to Dr. Ostriker and was informed that he has not constructed an enclosed dog kennel/run anywhere on his property, and has no plans to do so in the future because the dog is always in his home and only goes out when driven outside the City's boundaries. Councilmember Mirsch reported that she had a conversation with Dr. Ostriker while -he was walking his dogs outside the City. Mayor Dieringer asked for public comment. Jeffrey Ostriker, 27 Caballeros Road addressed the City Council to express his appreciation that he was allowed to keep the dog. He further commented that he is regularly walking the dog outside the City and it is working well. He asked that the City Council consider modifying its decision to allow him to walk the dog on a leash on Caballeros to help relieve anxiety when he suffers a panic attack in the middle of the night. He also stated that a representative from InvisiFence is present to provide added reassurance about the system and answer any questions about the system. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Black, Dr. Ostriker stated that he has not constructed the dog run and he takes the dog outside the City to relieve itself. Councilmember Wilson commented that he believes it was the City Council's understanding that the dog run would be constructed. The City Council concurred and expressed concern regarding Dr. Ostriker's apparent history and lack of willingness to comply with the City Council's order. Following discussion and a failed motion (lack of second) by Councilmember Mirsch to allow Dr. Minutes City Council Meeting 01-23-17 DRAFT Ostriker to walk the dog on Caballeros in the middle of the night, Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council direct staff to prepare a revised resolution requiring that the dog run referenced in Section 9B of Resolution No. 1195 be constructed within 60 days, that Azul be kept on a leash at all times when not in the house or in the dog run and that the City Council retain jurisdiction over this matter for an additional 90 days. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried with Councilmember Wilson opposed. WILLDAN ENGINEERING ANNUAL UPDATE. (ORAL REPORT) Planning Director Schwartz provided a report on the number of development cases that Willdan Engineering has processed. She stated that since the contract began in 2008, Willdan has reviewed a total of 31 projects, with eight projects under construction currently and 18 projects completed. Discussion ensued concerning Willdan's expedited service and expectation versus reality. No action was taken. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS (cont.) Councilmember Mirsch asked that staff provide an update on enforcement efforts related to the City's fire fuel hazard abatement ordinance. Councilmember Mirsch asked that the fire fuel reduction ad hoc committee provide an update of the status of fire fuel reduction in the City. Mayor Dieringer asked that staff agendize a discussion on the status of ADA compliance at City Hall. CLOSED SESSION None. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Dieringer adjourned the meeting at 8:44 p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, February 13, 2017 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, Minutes City Council Meeting 01-23-17 DRAFT Bea Dieringer Mayor Minutes City Council Meeting 01-23-17 CHECK CHECK NO. DATE 24669 02/01/2017 24670 02/01/2017 • 24671 02/01/2017 * 24672 02/01/2017 * 24673 02/01/2017 24674 02/13/2017 24675 02/13/2017 24676 02/13/2017 24677 02/13/2017 24678 02/13/2017 24679 02/13/2017 24680 02/13/2017 24681 02/13/2017 24682 02/13/2017 24683 02/13/2017 24684 02/13/2017 24685 02/13/2017 24686 02/13/2017 24687 02/13/2017 24688 02/13/2017 24689 02/13/2017 24690 02/13/2017 24691 02/13/2017 24692 02/13/2017 24693 02/13/2017 24694 02/13/2017 24695 02/13/2017 24696 02/13/2017 24697 02/13/2017 • PR LINK 01/20/2017 • PR LINK 01/20/2017 • PR LINK 02/03/2017 • PR LINK 02/03/2017 City °fled/1.y J,111Z Agenda Item No: 4-B Mtg. Date: 02/13/17 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 2/13/2017 - CHECK RUN PAYEE CALPERS CALPERS- DELTA DENTAL STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY VISION SERVICE PLAN - (CA) BEA DIERINGER CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO. CITY OF TORRANCE CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL TREASURERS ASSOC COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES COX COMMUNICATIONS EXECUTIVE -SUITE SERVICES, INC. FOUNTAINHEAD CONSULTING INC. GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFCRS ASSN HASLER KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS MAILFINANCE MCGOWAN CONSULTING OPUS BANK PACIFIC COAST LANDSCAPE PETTY CASH-EWA NIKODEM PROVIDENCE HEALTH & SERVICES ROGERS, ANDERSON, MALODY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON USCM VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS WILLDAN INC. XEROX CORPORATION PR LINK - PAYROLL PROCESSING PR LINK - PAYROLL 2 & PR TAXES PR LINK - PAYROLL PROCESSING PR LINK - PAYROLL 3 & PR TAXES • DESCRIPTION NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 HEALTH INSURANCE FEB 2017 RETIREMENT FEB 2017 DENTAL INSURANCE FEB 2017 LIFE INSURANCE FEB 2017 VISION INSURANCE FEB 2017 LOCC PUBLIC SAFETY MTG 1/19/17 WATER SERVICE 12/28/16-1/26/17 ANNUAL AREA G - FY 16/17 GOV ANNUAL CONE 4/26/17 SHEA COYOTE CONTROL NOV 2016 ANIMAL CONTROL -KENNEL DEC 2016 PHONE/INTERNET 1/26/17-2/25/17 JANITORIAL SERVICES FEB 2017 IT CONSULTING FEB 2017 MEMEBERSHIP T SHEA 3/17-2/18 FEB 2017 POSTAGE MONTHLY MAINT 12/12/16-1/11/17 POSTAGE MACHINE LEASE 01/28/17 STORM WATER MNGMT CONSLT 2 MONTHS OFFICE SUPPLIES/LOCC DEC 2016 LANDSCAPE MAINT. JAN 2017 10/21/16-2/3/17 REIMBURSEMENT PRE -EMPLOYMENT MEDICAL-STEWART ACCOUNTING SERVICES DEC 2016 ELECTRICITY 12/22/16-1/24/17 DEFERRED COMP 2/3/2017 DEFERRED COMP 2/3/2017 INSPECTION SERVICES DEC 2016 COPIER LEASE JAN 2017 PROCESSING FEE PAY PERIOD - JANUARY 4, 2017 THROUGH JANUARY 17, 2017 PROCESSING FEE PAY PERIOD - JANUARY 18, 2017 THROUGH JANUARY 31, 2017 I, Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager of Rolling Hills, California certify that the above demands are accurate and there is available in the General Fund a balance of $77,456.80 for the payment s. Raymon * Previously Disbursed City Manager AMOUNT 7,534.57 5,519.80 681.72 201.49 80.95 127.28 521.53 713.00 454.00 189.82 106.79 397.07 392.00 516.00 160.00 1,500.00 108.63 714.78 5,208.50 1,914.38 565.00 301.67 95.00 6,855.00 748.67 825.00 364.00 1,063.75 37.00 59.95 19,891.41 49.95 19,558.09 S 77,456.80 37,897.40 Printed on Recycled Paper DRAFT - REVISED 2/13/17 Agenda Item No. 4-C Meeting Date: 02-13-17 MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING/STUDY SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS NOVEMBER 1, 2016 CALL MEETING TO ORDER A joint meeting of the City of Rolling Hills Planning Commission and City Council was called to order by Mayor Dieringer at 6:33 p.m. on Tuesday, November 1, 2016 in the City Council Chamber, at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: Councilmembers Absent: Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Others Present: Black*, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer. None. Gray, Kirkpatrick, Seaburn and Chairman Chelf. Cardenas (excused). Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Mike Jenkins, City Attorney. Jill Smith, 10 Georgeff Road. Carole Hoffman, 3 Hillside Lane. Jack Smith, 12 Johns Canyon Road. *arrived at 6:54 p.m. Mayor Dieringer thanked the members of the Planning Commission for their invaluable service to the Community. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. DISCUSSION TOPICS Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 1 DRAFT - REVISED 2/13/17 VARIANCE REQUESTS AND APPROVALS Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staffs comments. Planning Director Schwartz stated that there has been general concern expressed amongst the City Council and Planning Commission concerning the number of variances granted. She reviewed variances in general, stating that a variance is a deviation from the rules and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and are not given lightly; but rather are given when there is a hardship specific to a property. She stated that over the years, the Planning Commission and City Council have had previous discussions on this topic resulting in Zoning Code amendments to adapt to development trends — including the recently adopted Overlay Zone that addressed a common hardship amongst several neighborhoods with similar setback issues; and making an allowance for additional disturbance in specific situations to allow for less steep slopes. Ms. Schwartz further reviewed the table included in the staff report listing the types of variances requested in the context of the development project. She noted that in the last five years, the Planning Commission has reviewed a total of 96 development cases of which 68 included the granting of variance (or variances) and stated that this information is presented as a beginning point for the discussions. Mayor Dieringer asked for the Planning Commission's thoughts on the variances granted to determine if there is a framework from which to assess the information for possible zoning code amendments. Chairman Chelf commented that when he began on the Planning Commission more variances were being granted partly due to the challenges with smaller lots and disturbance issues; but recognizing those challenges, recent zoning code changes were adopted to address these issues including adding the overlay zone, allowing for more disturbance in certain situations; and changing the way major remodel projects are processed. He further commented that there are still a number or challenges facing the smaller lots and because the lots in the City are unique with their own set or characteristics and features, it isn't realistic to eliminate variances completely. He stated that the Planning Commission strives to work with property owners to make sure the project fits in the neighborhood and takes granting variances very seriously. Councilmember Pieper commented that in reviewing the table of variance granted, it doesn't appear that there is anything that could be changed in the code to eliminate the variances requested. The majority, with the exception of disturbance seems to be specific to an individual property. Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that it is difficult to generalize the variances that are being granted and in the current process, the Planning Commission takes consideration of each variance granted very seriously specific to the project. Commissioner Gray expressed concern regarding the variances granted relating to setbacks. He commented that he believes setbacks are being eroded. He further commented that he believes the variances granted relative to disturbance are making for better projects. Commissioner Seaburn commented that although he hasn't been on the Planning Commission that long, he believes it is difficult to be universal because of the uniqueness of the lots and that each variance should be considered individually. Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 -2 • • DRAFT - REVISED 2/13/17 In response to Councilmember Wilson, Ms. Schwartz stated that the table only represents the number of variances granted through the Planning Commission process; and if, during staff's review or the Planning Commission's review of an application a variance request was eliminated by the applicant, it would not be reflected in the table. Chairman Chelf commented that the table does not reflect an accurate picture the variances granted as a percentage of the projects because it does not include those that were eliminated during the Planning Commission's review of a project. Councilmember Pieper commented that the primary driving factor in a development project is pad size with the objective to get the largest pad possible which in some instances is what necessitates some of the variances requests. He further commented that he believes there is balance in the process that keeps the developments reasonable and keeps the process in check. He commented that he believes the Planning Commission is doing a good job. Councilmember Mirsch commented that during its review of development projects the Planning Commission is making good suggestions to the applicant to make the project the best possible outcome and they make the findings necessary for granting a variance very seriously. Mayor Pro Tem Black commented that he believes that his job as a City Councilmember is to maintain the look and feel of the community and he is not as concerned about the number of variances granted as long as things look like they belong and look natural. Brief discussion ensued concerning grading and disturbance. Mayor Dieringer commented that she too is not as concerned about grading as long as it looks natural, but rather her concern lies around "as built" situations and structures constructed in setbacks. Brief discussion ensued about the importance of not setting precedent. Councilmember Pieper suggested that staff talk with engineers to see if there is a better way to address the grading and disturbance issues so that the projects look natural. Mayor Pro Tem Black suggested it may be worthwhile to encourage applicants to include a basement under the garage with a lift rather than asking for very large garages or multiple garages. Councilmember Mirsch suggested that it also may be worthwhile, on the more complicated projects for the City Council to visit the projects after they are complete to see the fmal result. Mayor Dieringer asked for comments from the public. Jill Smith, 10 Georgeff Road stated that it is important to maintain the look and feel of the community and she feels the Planning Commission does a good job looking at each project individually when considering variances. SHOULD THE CITY CONSIDER REGULATING THE SIZE AND USES OF STABLES? WHAT LEVEL OF REVIEW SHOULD BE GIVEN TO SET SIDE AREAS FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL ON A PROPERTY AND SHOULD THE AREA BE REALISTICALLY USABLE Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 - 3 - DRAFT - REVISED 2/13/17 Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz presented the staff report including the review of the recent modifications that were made to the stable ordinance stating that there has been discussion recently amongst the Planning Commission about the overall size of stables given the recent trend toward larger stables. She further stated that there has also been discussion regarding what is appropriate and realistic with regard to the set aside area required for a future stable and corral. • • Mayor Dieringer asked for comments from the public on this topic. Jack Smith, 12 Johns Canyon Road stated on behalf of Caballeros that it is important that stables remain a requirement in the City and that they be usable. Carole Hoffman, 3 Hillside Lane stated that they are here to observe and hear what is discussed with regard to stables and will share any information presented with Caballeros. Chairman Chelf stated that the Planning Commission appreciates the input and comments that the members of Caballeros provide when the Planning Commission is considering stables. He further stated that as Chair of the Commission, he is interested in receiving guidance from the City Council with regard to size of stables given the recent trend toward larger stables. Discussion ensued concerning the size of stables in relation to the size of the corral and the number of horses being kept in the stable. General concern was expressed concerning the general trend toward larger stables; not when they are being used for animal keep but when property ownership changes and they are no longer used for horses. It was noted that the Rolling Hills Community Association is also having discussions on this topic from an architectural perspective. Mr. Smith commented that a 2,000 sq. ft. stable should be able to accommodate most horsekeeping uses. Ms. Hoffman commented that stables should be assessed based on their placement on the lot and the size of the lot rather than setting a specific limit as to size. She further commented that it is important when approving large stables to ensure that there is an appropriate amount of corral space to realistically accommodate the number of animals in the stable. Ms. Smith echoed Ms. Hoffman's comments that rather than placing a limit on the size of stables, the project should be looked at in its totality considering the size of lot, the size of the stable and the size of the corral/turnout. Chairman Chelf suggested setting a guideline for the size of corral based on the number of stalls in a stable and suggested that Caballeros help determine what that number should be. Further discussion ensured concerning the feasibility of set aside area for future stable and corral space with the group expressing a general sentiment that the area should be reviewed for feasibility but no specific changes were recommended. Following further discussion concerning the feasibility of set aside area for future stable and corral space and the size of stables, the City Council asked the Planning Commission to study this issue in consultation with members of the Caballeros group in order to develop guidelines as to what makes a working and functional stable; and what is the appropriate size of a stable and uses within the stable. SHOULD THE CITY CONSIDER REGULATING THE MAXIMUM SIZE OF NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS? Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 -4- • • DRAFT - REVISED 2/13/17 Planning Director Schwartz provided a brief background on this topic and in response to Mayor Dieringer explained that the Site Plan Review process did not begin until 1988 and as such, finding data on the size of the house constructed prior to that is difficult. Chairman Chelf commented that the Planning Commission considers how a house fits on a lot and the design and layout when it reviews project; and considers the overall scale and massing to ensure that the house fits on the lot. Councilmember Pieper commented that the position of the house on the lot; its proximity to the neighboring properties and how much can bee seen from the street or other properties are more important than the size of the house. Chairman Chelf further commented that as discussed earlier, it's not the size of the house that is the issue, its more the amount of grading associated with projects. Mayor Pro Tem Black commented that he applauds the Planning Commission when he looks at the numbers because the projects are including more basement space, which limits the mass at grade and maintains open space. He commented that he would encourage larger basements and even basements that go beyond the footprint of the house where feasible. He further commented that he agrees that the grading is probably the larger issue. Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that it is important to consider not just the size of the house, but how it fits in with the neighbors. Discussion ensued concerning the importance of maintaining the look and feel of the community. Commissioner Gray expressed concern regarding the upward trend in the size of houses and suggested conducting a survey or forum amongst the residents to ascertain their thoughts on the size of the houses. Mayor Dieringer expressed concern regarding basements constructed in an area that may have geologic issues and the fact the City's current Site Plan Review process does not allow for consideration of geologic issues. Mayor Pro Tem Black commented that the County engineers review geologic issues during their review of a project and they are much more qualified to address those issues. Further discussion ensued concerning the size of houses with the general consensus being that the size of the houses isn't as much of a concern as the grading associated with the projects. Following discussion, staff was directed to discuss with an engineer the feasibility of constructing basements that would extend beyond the footprint of the house, such as under driveways. No further action was taken ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council/Planning Commission, Mayor Dieringer adjourned the meeting at 9:16 p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, November 14, 2016 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 beginning at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 5 • • DRAFT - REVISED 2/13/17 Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, Bea Dieringer Mayor Brad Chelf Chairman of the Planning Commission Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 -6- DRAFT Agenda Item No. 4-C Meeting Date: 02-13-17 MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING/STUDY SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS NOVEMBER 1, 2016 CALL MEETING TO ORDER A joint meeting of the City of Rolling Hills Planning Commission and City Council was called to order by Mayor Dieringer at 6:33 p.m. on Tuesday, November 1, 2016 in the City Council Chamber, at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: Councilmembers Absent: Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Others Present: Black*, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer. None. Gray, Kirkpatrick, Seaburn and Chairman Chelf. Cardenas (excused). Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Mike Jenkins, City Attorney. Jill Smith, 10 Georgeff Road. Carole Hoffman, 3 Hillside Lane. Jack Smith, 12 Johns Canyon Road. arrived at 6:54 p.m. Mayor Dieringer thanked the members of the Planning Commission for their invaluable service to the Community. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. DISCUSSION TOPICS Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 DRAFT VARIANCE REQUESTS AND APPROVALS Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz stated that there has been general concern expressed amongst the City Council and Planning Commission concerning the number of variances granted. She reviewed variances in general, stating that a variance is a deviation from the rules and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and are not given lightly; but rather are given when there is a hardship specific to a property. She stated that over the years, the Planning Commission and City Council have had previous discussions on this topic resulting in Zoning Code amendments to adapt to development trends — including the recently adopted Overlay Zone that addressed a common hardship amongst several neighborhoods with similar setback issues; and making an allowance for additional disturbance in specific situations to allow for less steep slopes. Ms. Schwartz further reviewed the table included in the staff report listing the types of variances requested in the context of the development project. She noted that in the last five years, the Planning Commission has reviewed a total of 96 development cases of which 68 included the granting of variance (or variances) and stated that this information is presented as a beginning point for the discussions. Mayor Dieringer asked for the Planning Commission's thoughts on the variances granted to'determine, if there is a framework from which to assess the information for possible zoning code amendments. Chairman Chelf commented that when he began on the Planning Commission more variances were being granted partly due to the challenges with smaller lots and disturbance issues; but recognizing those challenges, recent zoning code changes were adopted to address these issues including adding the overlay zone, allowing for more disturbance in certain situations; and changing the way major remodel projects are processed. He further commented that there are still a number or challenges facing the smaller lots and because the lots in the City are unique with their own set or characteristics and features, it isn't realistic to eliminate variances completely. He stated that the Planning Commission strives to work with property owners to make sure the project fits in the neighborhood and takes granting variances very seriously. Councilmember Pieper commented that in reviewing the table of variance granted, it doesn't appear that there is anything that could be changed in the code to eliminate the variances requested. The majority, with the exception of disturbance seems to be specific to an individual property. Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that it is difficult to generalize the variances that are being granted and in the current process, the Planning Commission takes consideration of each variance granted very seriously specific to the project. Commissioner Gray expressed concern regarding the variances granted relating to setbacks. He commented that he believes setbacks are being eroded. He further commented that that he believes the variances granted relative to disturbance are making for better projects. Commissioner Seaburn commented that although he hasn't been on the Planning Commission that long, he believes it is difficult to be universal because of the uniqueness of the lots and that each variance should be considered individually. Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 0 DRAFT In response to Councilmember Wilson, Ms. Schwartz stated that the table only represents the number of variances granted through the Planning Commission process; and if, during staff's review or the Planning Commission's review of an application a variance request was eliminated by the applicant, it would not be reflected in the table. Chairman Chelf commented that the table does not reflect an accurate picture the variances granted as a percentage of the projects because it does not include those that were eliminated during the Planning Commission's review of a project. Councilmember Pieper commented that the primary driving factor in a development project is pad size with the objective to get the largest pad possible which in some instances is what necessitates some of the variances requests. He further commented that he believes there is balance in the process that keeps the developments reasonable and keeps the process in check. He commented that he believes the Planning Commission is doing a good job. Councilmember Mirsch commented that during its review of development projects the Planning Commission is making good suggestions to the applicant to make the project the best possible outcome and they make the findings necessary for granting a variance very seriously. Mayor Pro Tem Black commented that he believes that his job as a City Councilmember is to maintain the look and feel of the community and he is not as concerned about the number of variances granted as long as things look like they belong and look natural. Brief discussion ensued concerning grading and disturbance. Mayor Dieringer commented that she too is not as concerned about grading as long as it looks natural, but rather her concern lies around "as built" situations and structures constructed in setbacks. Brief discussion ensued about the importance of not setting precedent. Councilmember Pieper suggested that staff talk with engineers to see if there is a better way to address the grading and disturbance issues so that the projects look natural. Mayor Pro Tem Black suggested it may be worthwhile to encourage applicants to include a basement under the garage with a lift rather than asking for very large garages or multiple garages. Councilmember Mirsch suggested that it also may be worthwhile, on the more complicated projects for the City Council to visit the projects after they are complete to see the fmal result. Mayor Dieringer asked for comments from the public. Jill Smith, 10 Georgeff Road stated that it is important to maintain the look and feel of the community and she feels the Planning Commission does a good job looking at each project individually when considering variances. SHOULD THE CITY CONSIDER REGULATING THE SIZE AND USES OF STABLES? WHAT LEVEL OF REVIEW SHOULD BE GIVEN TO SET SIDE AREAS FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND. CORRAL ON A PROPERTY AND SHOULD THE AREA BE REALISTICALLY USABLE Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 O DRAFT Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz presented the staff report including the review of the recent modifications that were made to the stable ordinance stating that there has been discussion recently amongst the Planning Commission about the overall size of stables given the recent trend toward larger stables. She further stated that there has also been discussion regarding what is appropriate and realistic with regard to the set aside area required for a future stable and corral. Mayor Dieringer asked for comments from the public on this topic. Jack Smith, 12 Johns Canyon Road stated on behalf of Caballeros that it is important that stables remain a requirement in the City and that they be usable. Carole Hoffman, 3 Hillside Lane stated that they are here to observe and hear what is discussed with regard to stables and will share any information presented with Caballeros. Chairman Chelf stated that the Planning Commission appreciates the input and comments that the members of Caballeros provide when the Planning Commission is considering stables. He further stated that as Chair of the Commission, he is interested in receiving guidance from the City Council with regard to size of stables given the recent trend toward larger stables. Discussion ensued concerning the size of stables in relation to the size of the corral and the number of horses being kept in the stable. General concern was expressed concerning the general trend toward larger stables; not when they are being used for animal keep but when property ownership changes and they are no longer used for horses. It was noted that the Rolling Hills Community Association is also having discussions on this topic from an architectural perspective. Mr. Smith commented that a 2,000 sq. ft. stable should be able to accommodate most horsekeeping uses. Ms. Hoffman commented that stables should be assessed based on their placement on the lot and the size of the lot rather than setting a specific limit as to size. She further commented that it is important when approving large stables to ensure that there is an appropriate amount of corral space to realistically accommodate the number of animals in the stable. Ms. Smith echoed Ms. Hoffman's comments that rather than placing a limit on the size of stables, the project should be looked at in its totality considering the size of lot, the size of the stable and the size of the corral/turnout. Chairman Chelf suggested setting a guideline for the size of corral based on the number of stalls in a stable and suggested that Caballeros help determine what that number should be. Further discussion ensured concerning the feasibility of set aside area for future stable and corral space with the group expressing a general sentiment that the area should be reviewed for feasibility but no specific changes were recommended. Following further discussion concerning the feasibility of set aside area for future stable and corral space and the size of stables, the City Council asked the Planning Commission to study this issue in consultation with members of the Caballeros group in order to develop guidelines as to what makes a working and functional stable; and what is the appropriate size of a stable and uses within the stable. SHOULD THE CITY CONSIDER REGULATING THE MAXIMUM SIZE OF NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS? Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 DRAFT Planning Director Schwartz provided a brief background on this topic and in response to Mayor Dieringer explained that the Site Plan Review process did not begin until 1988 and as such, finding data on the size of the house constructed prior to that is difficult. Chairman Chelf commented that the Planning Commission considers how a house fits on a lot and the design and layout when it reviews project; and considers the overall scale and massing to ensure that the house fits on the lot. Councilmember Pieper commented that the position of the house on the lot; its proximity to the neighboring properties and how much can bee seen from the street or other properties are more important than the size of the house. Chairman Chelf further commented that as discussed earlier, it's not the size of the house that is the issue, its more the amount of grading associated with projects. Mayor Pro Tem Black commented that he applauds the Planning Commission when he looks at the numbers because the projects are including more basement space which limits the mass at grade and maintains open space. He commented that he would encourage larger basements and even basements that go beyond the footprint of the house where feasible. He further commented that he agrees that the grading is probably the larger issue. Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that it is important to consider not just the size of the house, but how it fits in with the neighbors. Discussion ensued concerning the importance of keeping Commissioner Gray expressed concern regarding the upward trend in the size of houses and suggested conducting a survey or forum amongst the residents to ascertain their thoughts on the size of the houses. Mayor Dieringer expressed concern regarding basements constructed in an area that may have geologic issues and the fact the City's current Site Plan Review process does not allow for consideration of geologic issues. Mayor Pro Tem Black commented that the County engineers review geologic issues during their review of a project and they are much more qualified to address those issues. Further discussion ensued concerning the size of houses with the general consensus being that the size of the houses isn't as much of a concern as the grading associated with the projects. Following discussion, staff was directed to discuss with an engineer the feasibility ofconstructing basements that would extend beyond the footprint of the house, such as under driveways. No further action was taken ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council/Planning Commission, Mayor Dieringer adjourned the meeting at 9:16 p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, November 14, 2016 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 beginning at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, Minutes - City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 DRAFT Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, Bea Dieringer Mayor Brad Chelf Chairman of the Planning Commission Minutes — City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting/Study Session 11-01-16 ge4aJy Rai&to gdea INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No: 6-A Mtg. Date: 02/13/17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES NO. 350 AND 350-U. AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 26 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE); TITLE 27 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE); TITLE 28 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE); TITLE 29 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE); TITLE 30 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE; TITLE 31 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE); ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 15.24 (EXISTING BUILDING CODE) IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 33 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE); AMENDING SECTION 8.08.580 (CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION WASTE) OF CHAPTER 8.08 (SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE MATERIAL COLLECTION) OF TITLE 8 (HEALTH AND SAFETY) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONFORM TO STATE LAW; AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF.. THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15061(B)(3). DATE: February 13, 2017 ATTACHMENTS: I. ORDINANCE NO. 350-U v II. ORDINANCE NO. 350 III. SUMMARY OF LA COUNTY CODE AMENDMENTS IV. CURRENT CITY BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION CODE (TITLE 15) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council waive full reading, conduct a public hearing and (1) adopt the attached Urgency Ordinance No. 350- U, adopting by reference the 2017 Los Angeles County Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Residential, Green Building Standards, and Existing Building Codes; (2) introduce for first reading Ordinance No. 350, adopting by reference the 2017 Los Angeles County Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Residential, Green Building Standards and Existing Building Codes; and (3) conduct public hearing, and direct staff to schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 350 for the February 27, 2017 City Council meeting. DISCUSSION Every three years the California Building Standards Commission updates the International Codes governing construction practices in the State of California, including the Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Residential, and Green Building Standards Codes. On February 10, 2014, the Rolling Hills City Council enacted Urgency Ordinance No. 337-U adopting these Los Angeles County Codes by reference.1 Traditionally, the City of Rolling Hills has adopted the most recent Los Angeles County Codes shortly after their adoption by the County; this year, the County Board of Supervisors adopted the new codes, with amendments, on November 22, 2016. These changes and modifications became effective January 1, 2017. In order for the City of Rolling Hills to adopt the new Los Angeles County Codes with County amendments and have them effective immediately, it is necessary to adopt them by an urgency ordinance. Accordingly, the proposed urgency ordinance includes findings constituting the urgency pursuant to Government Code Section 36937(b). If the City fails to adopt the County ordinances, the Codes published by the State will automatically become law within the City. The City traditionally adopts the amended Los Angeles County Codes, with its own amendments, when necessary; these amendments are typically stricter than the County Codes and/or supplement the County Codes (for instance, the County Codes do not address import or export of dirt, grading areas, etc.). 1 Normally, the Fire Code is adopted by the County Board of Supervisors at the same time as the other County codes. This year the adoption of the Fire Code has been delayed: the Board of Supervisors will hold public hearings in February with an estimated date of adoption in mid -March. Following the LA County Board of Supervisors adoption of the Fire Code, staff will schedule a public hearing for City Council's consideration of the Fire Code. -2- This year, very few changes were made to the County Codes which affect the construction of single-family homes within the City; rather, most of the County amendments relate to the type and method of construction, and the specifications and quality of construction materials. Therefore, the City Council could adopt the new County Codes by reference, while still maintaining the existing amendments thereto codified in the City's Municipal Code. With that said, however, the State now requires that 65% of construction materials be diverted from landfills; prior to this amendment, only a 50% diversion was required. This new requirement has been adopted by the County Codes; therefore the City must amend Section 8.08.580 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code in order to reflect this requirement. Additionally, the International Building Code2 has deleted Chapter 34 (Existing Structures) from its 2016 edition; the State has replaced this Chapter with its own new "California Existing Building Code." Because the County adopts the California State Codes by reference, the County enacted its own new Title 33, the "Existing Building Code." In order to adopt Title 33 by reference, the City of Rolling Hills will have to amend its Municipal Code to create a new Chapter which addresses existing building standards. For this reason, Ordinance Nos. 350 and 350-U propose the addition of Chapter 15.24 ("Existing Building Code") to Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. The City Attorney advises that the City Council consider both the urgency and non - urgency version of Ordinance No. 350. Generally speaking, once an urgency ordinance is enacted (following a four -fifths vote of the City Council), it becomes effective immediately without the necessitating a second reading. State law requires that urgency ordinances contain an "urgency clause" stating valid, constitutional, and persuasive facts to justify such a determination. In the event an urgency clause is successfully challenged in a court of law, the ordinance loses its urgency and would not take effect until 30 days after its passage (i.e., after a second reading). Therefore, an urgency ordinance may be void if it is invalidated by the court and where there is no second reading. For this reason, it is good practice to adopt an identical "back-up" ordinance following the traditional ordinance adopting procedures. That way, if the urgency clause is successfully challenged, the non -urgency version of the ordinance will have already taken effect. State law requires that localities adopt the California Building Standards Code and modifications thereto if any, by January 01, 2017. It is essential that the City have in effect codes that comport with state law and contain those modifications necessitated by unique topographic, geologic and climatic conditions. In the absence of immediate 2 The International Building Code is a model building code developed by the International Code Council and has been adopted and used as a base code standard throughout most of the United States - including California. effectiveness, the provisions of the Building, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Residential, Green Building, and Existing Building Codes unique to the City's special circumstances will not be in place and this will have a detrimental effect on the public, health, safety and welfare. Furthermore, the City may be exposed to potential challenges in applying the City's Municipal Code requirements to City projects as the new County Codes are currently in effect. Copies of the County Codes with the amendments will be shortly available in the Planning Department. They will be available for review by all interested parties during regular working hours. FISCAL IMPACT Building plan check and permit fees are paid to compensate the City for expenditures associated with these activities. As the changes in the Codes are minor, the fees collected will continue to match the expenditures, and there will be no net fiscal impact to the City. NOTIFICATION A notice of this public hearing was published in the Peninsula News on February 2, 2017, in the City's Newsletter and was posted at City Hall. The City Council agenda is also available on the City's website. CONCLUSION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 350-U and Ordinance No. 350, adopting by reference the 2017 Los Angeles County Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Residential, Green Building Standards, and Existing Building Codes; and direct staff to schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 350 for the February 27, 2017 City Council meeting. Alternatively, the City Council may choose not to adopt either ordinance, in which case the Codes published by the State will automatically become law within the City, by default. ORDINANCE NO. 350-U. AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 26 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE); TITLE 27 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE); TITLE 28 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE); TITLE 29 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE); TITLE 30 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE; TITLE 31 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE); ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 15.24 (EXISTING BUILDING CODE) IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 33 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING- CODE); AMENDING SECTION 8.08.580 (CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION WASTE) OF CHAPTER 8.08 (SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE MATERIAL COLLECTION) OF TITLE 8 (HEALTH AND SAFETY) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONFORM TO STATE LAW; AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 15.04.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.04 (Building Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.04.010 — Adoption of Building Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 26, Building Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Building Code, 2016 Edition (Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below and shall be known and may be cited as the Building Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Building Code, 2016 Edition, Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Building Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Building Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 2. Section 15.08.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.08 (Plumbing Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.08.010 Adoption of Plumbing Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 28, Plumbing Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Plumbing Code, 2016 Edition (Part 5 Ordinance No. 350-U of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Plumbing Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Plumbing Code, 2016 Edition, Title 28 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Plumbing Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 28 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Plumbing Code, 2016 Edition, has been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 3. Section 15.12.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.12 (Mechanical Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.12.010 Adoption of Mechanical Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 29, Mechanical Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Mechanical Code, 2016 Edition (Part 4 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Mechanical Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Mechanical Code, 2016 Edition, Title 29 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Mechanical Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 29 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Mechanical Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 4. Section 15.16.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.16 (Electrical Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.16.010 Adoption of Electrical Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 27, Electrical Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Electrical Code, 2016 Edition (Part 3 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Electrical Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Electrical Code, 2016 Edition, Title 27 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Electrical Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 27 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Electrical Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public Section 5. Section 15.18.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.18 (Residential Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Ordinance No. 350-U 2 0 15.18.010 Adoption of Residential Code. Except as herein provided, Title 30, Residential Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting Sections 102 through 119 of Chapter 1, Section 1207 of Chapter 12, Chapter 34, 67, 69, 98, 99 and Appendix J of Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code and Chapters 2 through 10, Chapter 44, and Appendix H of that certain code known as and designated as the 2016 California Residential Code is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known the Residential Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Residential Code, 2016 Edition, Title 30 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Residential Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 30 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Residential Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 6. Section 15.22.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.22 (Green Building Standards Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Section 15.22.010 Adoption of Green Building Standards Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 31, Green Building Standards Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Green Building Standards Code, 2016 Edition (Part 11 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Green Building Standards Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Green Building Standards Code, 2016 Edition, Title 31 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Green Building Standards Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 31 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Green Building Standards Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 7. Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new chapter, Chapter 15.24 (Existing Building Code), to read as follows: Chapter 15.24 — EXISTING BUILDING CODE Sections: 15.24.010 Adoption of Existing Building Code 15.24.020 Short Title 15.24.030 Definitions Ordinance No. 350-U 3 15.24.040 Amendment — Fees 15.24.050 Reserved 15.24.060 Violations and penalty 15.24.010 Adoption of Existing Building Code. Except as herein provided, Title 33, Existing Building Code of the Los Angeles. County Code, in effect on January 1, 2017 is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known as the Existing Building Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of Title 33, Existing Building Code of the Los Angeles County Code, 2017 Edition, or any amendment to the Existing Building Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 33 of the Existing Building Code, has been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. 15.24.020 Short title. This chapter shall be known as the "Existing Building Code of the City of Rolling Hills" and will be referred to herein as "this code." 15.24.030 Definitions. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.24.010, names or terms that are used in this code shall be deemed and construed to have the meaning ascribed to it in Section 15.04.040 of Title 15 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. 15.24.040 Amendment —Fees. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.24.010, the fees set forth for this code shall be the same as the fess prescribed for the Building Code in Section 15.04.050 of Title 15 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. 15.24.050 Reserved. 15.24.060 Violations and penalty. A. It is unlawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or perform any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the provisions of this code. B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this code or any permit issued thereunder shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this code is committed, continued or permitted, and upon conviction of any Ordinance No. 350-U 4 such violation such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Section 8_ Subsection (A) of Section 8.08.580 (Construction or demolition waste) of Article VII (Exclusions) of Chapter 8.08 (Solid Waste and Recyclable Material) of Title 8 (Health and Safety) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Minimum Construction or Demolition Waste Diversion Requirements. Every covered project shall divert at least sixty-five (65) percent, measured by weight, of all construction or demolition waste generated by the covered project. Section 9. All inconsistencies between the Building Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code, Plumbing Code, Residential Code, Green Building Standards Code and Existing Building Code as adopted by this ordinance and Parts 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 11 of the California Code of Regulations are changes, modifications, amendments, additions or deletions thereto authorized by California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958 and 18941.5. Section 10. Justification for Modification. The Council hereby finds that the changes and modifications to the California Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Electrical Code, Residential Code, Green Building Standards Code and Existing Building Code that have been enacted by this ordinance are reasonably necessary because of the City's local climate, characterized by hot, dry summers, often resulting in drought conditions, followed by strong Santa Ana winds, often resulting in hazardous fire conditions, and heavy winter rains, often resulting in expansive soil conditions; the City's geological characteristics in that the area is characterized by geological instability; location in Southern California; and the relatively hilly topography of the City. The City Council hereby finds that the modifications to the State Building Code in Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code are reasonably necessary because of the local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions indicated above. The City Council hereby finds that the modifications to the California Building Code in Title 26, Title 27, Title 28, Title 29, Title 30, Title 31 and the addition of Title 33 of the Los Angeles County Codes are administrative in nature and are necessary to allow the uniform application of the codes by procedures suited to the size and nature of the City's staff and administrative agencies by means suited to the City's experience with local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions and to provide sufficient staff support for the time-consuming inspections and analysis required by the City's fire and geological hazards. These factors require specific and greater protection than what is afforded by the County Building Code. Accordingly, the City Council fmds the modifications in this Ordinance to the City's Title 15 Buildings and Construction to be necessary for the protection of the of the public health, safety, and welfare. Section 11. Statement of Urgency. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its adoption, pursuant to Government Code section 36967. The City Council declares that it is necessary to the public peace, safety and welfare that this ordinance be adopted as an urgency measure. It is essential that the City have in effect on that date codes that comport with state law and contain those modifications necessitated by unique topographic, geologic and climatic conditions. In the absence of Ordinance No. 350-U 5 I U! I immediate effectiveness, the provisions of the Building, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Residential, Green Building and Existing Building Codes unique to the City's special circumstances will not be in place and this will have a detrimental effect on the public, health, safety and welfare. Section 12. To the extent the provisions of this ordinance are substantially the same as previous provisions of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, these provisions shall be construed as continuations of those provisions and not as new enactments. Section 13. The provisions of the Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Residential and Green Building Standards Codes in effect prior to the effective date of this Ordinance shall continue to govern construction for projects for which plans were submitted for plan check prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, and for which the initial permit is issued not later than thirty (30) days after said effective date. Section 14. This Ordinance has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3) because it is not a project that has the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, Section 15. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption and shall become operative as of January 01, 2017. Section 16. Notice. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this ordinance and post a certified copy of this ordinance, including the vote for and against the same, in the office of the City Clerk, in accordance with Government Code Section 36993 and shall file a certified copy of this Ordinance with the California Building Standards Commission. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13" day of February 2017. BEA DIERINGER, MAYOR ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE CITY CLERK Ordinance No. 350-U 6 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 350-U entitled: AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 26 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE); TITLE 27 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE); TITLE 28 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE); TITLE 29 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE); TITLE 30 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE; TITLE 31 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE); ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 15.24 (EXISTING BUILDING CODE) IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 33 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE); AMENDING SECTION 8.08.580 (CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION WASTE) OF CHAPTER 8.08 (SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE MATERIAL COLLECTION) OF TITLE 8 (HEALTH AND SAFETY) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONFORM TO STATE LAW; AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on February 13, 2017 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. HEIDI LUCE CITY CLERK Ordinance No. 350-U 7 911 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ORDINANCE NO. 350 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 26 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE); TITLE 27 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE); TITLE 28 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE); TITLE 29 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE); TITLE 30 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE; TITLE 31 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE); ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 15.24 (EXISTING BUILDING CODE) IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 33 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE); AMENDING SECTION 8.08.580 (CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION WASTE) OF CHAPTER 8.08 (SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE MATERIAL COLLECTION) OF TITLE 8 (HEALTH AND SAFETY) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONFORM TO STATE LAW. Section 1. Section 15.04.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.04 (Building Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.04.010 — Adoption of Building Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 26, Building Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Building Code, 2016 Edition (Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below and shall be known and may be cited as the Building Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Building Code, 2016 Edition, Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Building Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Building Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 2. Section 15.08.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.08 (Plumbing Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.08.010 Adoption of Plumbing Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 28, Plumbing Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Plumbing Code, 2016 Edition (Part 5 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Plumbing Code of the City of Rolling Hills. Ordinance No. 350 In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Plumbing Code, 2016 Edition, Title 28 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Plumbing Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 28 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Plumbing Code, 2016 Edition, has been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 3. Section 15.12.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.12 (Mechanical Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.12.010 Adoption of Mechanical Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 29, Mechanical Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Mechanical Code, 2016 Edition (Part 4 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Mechanical Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Mechanical Code, 2016 Edition, Title 29 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Mechanical Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 29 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Mechanical Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 4. Section 15.16.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.16 (Electrical Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.16.010 Adoption of Electrical Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 27, Electrical Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Electrical Code, 2016 Edition (Part 3 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Electrical Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Electrical Code, 2016 Edition, Title 27 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Electrical Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 27 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Electrical Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public Section 5. Section 15.18.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.18 (Residential Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 15.18.010 Adoption of Residential Code. Ordinance No. 350 2 ® Except as herein provided, Title 30, Residential Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting Sections 102 through 119 of Chapter 1, Section 1207 of Chapter 12, Chapter 34, 67, 69, 98, 99 and Appendix J of Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code and Chapters 2 through 10, Chapter 44, and Appendix H of that certain code known as and designated as the 2016 California Residential Code is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known the Residential Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Residential Code, 2016 Edition, Title 30 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Residential Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 30 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Residential Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 6. Section 15.22.010 of Title 15, Chapter 15.22 (Green Building Standards Code) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Section 15.22.010 Adoption of Green Building Standards Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 31, Green Building Standards Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2017, adopting the California Green Building Standards Code, 2016 Edition (Part 11 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Green Building Standards Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Green Building Standards Code, 2016 Edition, Title 31 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Green Building Standards Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 31 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Green Building Standards Code, 2016 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Section 7. Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new chapter, Chapter 15.24 (Existing Building Code), to read as follows: Chapter 15.24 — EXISTING BUILDING CODE Sections: 15.24.010 Adoption of Existing Building Code 15.24.020 Short Title 15.24.030 Definitions 15.24.040 Amendment — Fees 15.24.050 Reserved Ordinance No. 350 3 15.24.060 Violations and penalty 15.24.010 Adoption of Existing Building Code. Except as herein provided, Title 33, Existing Building Code of the Los Angeles County Code, in effect on January 1, 2017 is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known as the Existing Building Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of Title 33, Existing Building Code of the Los Angeles County Code, 2017 Edition, or any amendment to the Existing Building Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 33 of the Existing Building Code, has been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. 15.24.020 Short title. This chapter shall be known as the "Existing Building Code of the City of Rolling Hills" and will be referred to herein as "this code." 15.24.030 Definitions. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.24.010, names or terms that are used in this code shall be deemed and construed to have the meaning ascribed to it in Section 15.04.040 of Title 15 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. 15.24.040 Amendment —Fees. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.24.010, the fees set forth for this code shall be the same as the fess prescribed for the Building Code in Section 15.04.050 of Title 15 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. 15.24.050 Reserved. 15.24.060 Violations and penalty. A. It is unlawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or perform any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the provisions of this code. B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this code or any permit issued thereunder shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this code is committed, continued or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Ordinance No. 350 4 Section 8. Subsection (A) of Section 8.08.580 (Construction or demolition waste) of Article VII (Exclusions) of Chapter 8.08 (Solid Waste and Recyclable Material) of Title 8 (Health and Safety) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Minimum Construction or Demolition Waste Diversion Requirements. Every covered project shall divert at least sixty-five (65) percent, measured by weight, of all construction or demolition waste generated by the covered project. Section 9. All inconsistencies between the Building Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code, Plumbing Code, Residential Code, Green Building Standards Code and Existing Building Code as adopted by this ordinance and Parts 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 11 of the California Code of Regulations are changes, modifications, amendments, additions or deletions thereto authorized by California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958 and 18941.5. Section 10. Justification for Modification. The Council hereby finds that the changes and modifications to the California Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Electrical Code, Residential Code, Green Building Standards Code and Existing Building Code that have been enacted by this ordinance are reasonably necessary because of the City's local climate, characterized by hot, dry summers, often resulting in drought conditions, followed by strong Santa Ana winds, often resulting in hazardous fire conditions, and heavy winter rains, often resulting in expansive soil conditions; the City's geological characteristics in that the area is characterized by geological instability; location in Southern California; and the relatively hilly topography of the City. The City Council hereby finds that the modifications to the State Building Code in Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code are reasonably necessary because of the local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions indicated above. The City Council hereby fmds that the modifications to the California Building Code in Title 26, Title 27, Title 28, Title 29, Title 30, Title 31 and the addition of Title 33 of the Los Angeles County Codes are administrative in nature and are necessary to allow the uniform application of the codes by procedures suited to the size and nature of the City's staff and administrative agencies by means suited to the City's experience with local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions and to provide sufficient staff support for the time-consuming inspections and analysis required by the City's fire and geological hazards. These factors require specific and greater protection than what is afforded by the County Building Code. Accordingly, the City Council fmds the modifications in this Ordinance to the City's Title 15 Buildings and Construction to be necessary for the protection of the of the public health, safety, and welfare. Section 11. To the extent the provisions of this ordinance are substantially the same as previous provisions of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, these provisions shall be construed as continuations of those provisions and not as new enactments. Section 12. The provisions of the Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Residential and Green Building Standards Codes in effect prior to the effective date of this Ordinance shall continue to govern construction for projects for which plans were submitted for plan check prior to the effective date Ordinance No. 350 5 0 of this Ordinance, and for which the initial permit is issued not later than thirty (30) days after said effective date. Section 13. This Ordinance has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3) because it is not a project that has the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, Section 14. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption and shall become operative as of January 01, 2017. Section 15. Notice. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this ordinance and post a certified copy of this ordinance, including the vote for and against the same, in the office of the City Clerk, in accordance with Government Code Section 36993 and shall file a certified copy of this Ordinance with the California Building Standards Commission. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1 day of February 2017. BEA DIERINGER, MAYOR ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE CITY CLERK Ordinance No. 350 6 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 350 entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 26 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE); TITLE 27 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE); TITLE 28 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE); TITLE 29 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE); TITLE 30 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE; TITLE 31 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE); ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 15.24 (EXISTING BUILDING CODE) IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE 2017 EDITION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 33 (INCORPORATING THE 2016 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE); AMENDING SECTION 8.08.580 (CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION WASTE) OF CHAPTER 8.08 (SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE MATERIAL COLLECTION) OF TITLE 8 (HEALTH AND SAFETY) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONFORM TO STATE LAW. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on February , 2017 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. Ordinance No. 350 HEIDI LUCE CITY CLERK 7 01 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CHANGES TO THE BUILDING CODE 2017, LA COUNTY BUILDING & RESIDENTIAL CODES: • Require new single-family dwellings, duplexes and townhouses with attached garages to be wired and ready for future electric vehicle charger installations. • Increase the amount of material that is to be recycled from construction projects from 50 percent to 65 percent. The increase to 65 percent is consistent with revisions in the California Green Building Standards Code. • A prescriptive design for the construction of wood decks has been added to the code. • An automatic sprinkler system is now required to be installed in a building when the roof is used for an assembly occupancy. In addition, for A 2 occupancies, such as restaurants and bars, the requirement is triggered when the occupant load exceeds 100, and for other assembly areas when the occupant load exceeds 300. • The requirement for installation of carbon monoxide detectors has been expanded to include educational occupancies including schools and day care facilities. • Allow plastic composites to be used in various locations, including exterior deck boards, stair treads, handrails and guard rails, provided these materials meet applicable test standards. • A number of changes to both the Building and Residential Codes to make structural and foundation requirements be based on more detailed expected conditions. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES 2016 CALIFORNIA CODES SPECIALTY CODES ELECTRICAL CODE: • Threshold for requiring panic hardware for electrical rooms lowered to 800 Amps (from 1200 Amps). • AFCI Protection expanded to more areas within dwelling units. • New Article: Low Voltage Suspended Ceiling Power Distribution Systems. Conventional marking for Controlled Receptacles. • Requirement for Rapid Shutdown of PV Systems. MECHANICAL CODE: • Allow electric shutoff of air conditioning systems in lieu of secondary drains. • Change outdoor ventilation provisions to require mechanical ventilation (even for residential) when the window opening distance to any part of the room exceeds twice the height of the room (typically 16' instead of the current 25'). This will substantially affect condominiums and apartments. • Substantially change the exhaust requirements for grease hood systems in restaurants. PLUMBING CODE: • Substantially reduce allowable plumbing fixture flows. • Require that ALL hot water piping to be insulated. (Current energy code has no such requirement.) • Clean -outs are now required for all urinals, regardless of their location. (Currently, clean -outs are not required for urinals located above the first floor.) • New "horizontal" wet venting and circuit venting provisions. ENERGY CODE: • More stringent efficiency requirements for equipment. • Increase wall and attic insulation requirements. • Require all lighting In residential units to be high efficacy (fluorescent), or LED. • Require insulation for air-conditioning ducts, even in conditioned spaces. • New requirements for elevators and escalators and moving walkways. Sent from my iPad (ROY ITANI) 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code and 2016 CALGreen Summary The 2016 State of Califomia Green Building Standards Code (2016 CALGreen) becomes effective January 1, 2017. This Code continues to regulate the construction of residential and non-residential buildings for the purpose of improving public health, safety and general welfare. This is accomplished by enhancing the design and construction of buildings to reduce their negative impact on the environment and encouraging sustainable construction practices in the following categories: 1. Planning and Design 2. Energy Efficiency 3. Water Efficiency 4. Material Conservation 5. Environmental Quality The 2016 CALGreen is divided into two main parts: mandatory requirements and voluntary measures. The mandatory requirements as adopted by the State represent the minimum code requirements to be enforced as building standards. The voluntary measures were created to both provide a guide for designers to construct in a more sustainable manner, and to provide measures for local jurisdictions to adopt as mandatory at their discretion. The voluntary measures are guidelines to construct "CALGreen Tier 1" or "CALGreen Tier 2" buildings. On January 1, 2017 the County of Los Angeles will be adopting amendments which will enact more stringent requirements than those required by the State. Included is a comparison of the 2016 CALGreen requirements and the 2017 County of Los Angeles amendments. SCOPE BUILDING TYPES COVERED 2016 CALGreen 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code All newly constructed residential buildings, and additions and alterations to residential buildings that increase the building's conditioned area, volume, or size, shall comply with Chapter 4. All newly constructed residential buildings 6 stories or less, and all additions and alterations to residential buildings, shall comply with Chapter 4. All newly constructed residential buildings 7 stories or greater shall comply with Chapters 5 and A5, where applicable. All newly constructed non-residential buildings and additions/alterations to non- residential buildings (>$200,000 or >1000 SF) shall comply with Chapter 5. All newly constructed non-residential buildings and additions/alterations to non-residential buildings (>$200,000/ >1000 SF) shall comply with Chapter 5. No amendments proposed. Chapters A4 and A5 remain voluntary. Newly constructed non-residential buildings that are 25,000 square feet or more shall comply with the CALGreen Tier 1 requirements in Chapter A5.* Newly constructed residential buildings 7 stories or more and greater than 25,000 square feet shall comply with CALGreen Tier 1 requirements in Chapter A5.* LA County is not adopting more restrictive building • energy efficiency standards than the 2016 California Energy Code Standards. ter 7 requirements are outlined below. RESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES PLANNING AND DESIGN 2016 CALGreen 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code Storm water drainage and retention during construction shall be managed to prevent flooding and erosion. LA County will continue to enforce its BMP requirements regarding storm water drainage, retention and management. Post development grading and paving shall manage surface waters. Require compliance with Title 12 of the County Code of Regulations Low Impact Development (LID) and the County's updated MS4 permit. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure shall be provided for new residential construction. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure shall be provided for new residential construction. No amendments proposed. ENERGY EFFICIENCY 2016 CALGreen 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code Compliance with the newly adopted 2016 Energy Efficiency Standards. • Compliance with the newly adopted 2016 Energy Efficiency Standards. No amendments proposed. WATER EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION 2016 CALGreen 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code Water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings shall be installed. Landscape area greater than 500 square feet shall comply with the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). Water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings shall be installed. No amendments proposed. Landscape area greater than 500 square feet shall comply with the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). No amendments proposed. MATERIAL CONSERVATION 2016 CALGreen Divert 65 percent of construction and demolition debris from landfills. 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code Divert 65 percent of construction and demolition debris from landfills. No amendments proposed. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 2016 CALGreen 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code No significant changes to existing requirements. No amendments proposed. NON-RESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES PLANNING AND DESIGN 2016 CALGreen 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Budding Standards Code Storm water drainage and retention during construction shall be managed to prevent flooding and erosion. LA County will continue to enforce its BMP requirements regarding storm water drainage, retention and management. Post development grading and paving shall manage surface waters. Require compliance with Title 12 of the County Code of Regulations Low Impact Development (LID) and the County's updated MS4 permit. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure shall be provided for new construction. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure shall be provided for new construction. No amendments proposed. ENERGY EFFICIENCY 2016 CALGreen 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code Compliance with the newly adopted 2016 Energy Efficiency Standards. Compliance with the newly adopted 2016 Energy Efficiency Standards. No amendments proposed. WATER EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION 2016 CALGreen 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building . Standards Code Water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings shall be installed. Water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings shall be installed. No amendments proposed. Landscape area greater than 500 square feet shall comply with the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). Landscapes above the State threshold shall comply with MWELO. No amendments proposed. 2016 CALGreen MATERIAL CONSERVATION 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code Divert 65 percent of construction and demolition debris from landfills. Divert 65 percent of construction and demolition debris from landfills. No amendments proposed 2016 CALGreen ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code No significant changes to existing No amendments proposed. requirements. TIER 1 REQUIREMENTS BUILDING TYPES COVERED 2016 CALGreen 2017 County of Los Angeles Green Building Standards Code Division A5.1 Division A5.1 Remains voluntary. 10 percent of the parking to be designated as fuel efficient. Comply with one additional measure from Division A5.1. Division A5.2 Division A5.2 • Remains voluntary. Remains voluntary. Division A5.3 Division A5.3 Remains voluntary. Indoor potable water usage to be reduced by 12 percent. Comply with one additional measure from Division A5.3. Division A5.4 Division A5.4 Remains voluntary. Materials shall have a 10 percent recycled content based on the value of all installed materials. - Comply with one additional measure from Division A5.4. Division A5.5 Division A5.5 Remains voluntary. 90 percent of resilient flooring to be low-VOC. All thermal insulation shall be low-VOC Comply with one additional measure from Division A5.5. Division A5.6 Division A5.6 Remains voluntary. Comply with one additional measure from any Division. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION Chapters: Chapter 15.04 - BUILDING CODE* Chapter 15.08 - PLUMBING CODE* Chapter 15.12 - MECHANICAL CODE* Chapter 15.16 - ELECTRICAL CODE* Chapter 15.18 - RESIDENTIAL CODE Chapter 15.20 - FIRE CODE* Chapter 15.22 - GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE Chapter 15.32 - UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICTS Chapter 15.36 - HOURS OF CONSTRUCTION Chapter 15.40 - GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS AND REPORTS REQUIRED Chapter 15.44 - SECOND UNITS ON SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS Chapter 15.04 BUILDING CODE* Sections: 15.04.010 Adoption of Building Code. 15.04.020 Short title. 15.04.030 Section 105 amended. 15.04.040 Definitions. 15.04.050 Amendment —Fees. 15.04.070 Section 502.1 amended. 15.04.080 Section 202 amended. 15.04.090 Section 9906 amended. 15.04.100 Reserved. 15.04.110 Reserved. 15.04.120 Amending Appendix J Grading, Section J103 Permit Exemptions. 15.04.130 Amending Section J106.1 Maximum cut slopes. 15.04.140 Section J106.3 added. 15.04.150 Section J106.4 added. 15.04.160 Amending Section J107.6 Maximum Fill Slopes. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 1 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.04.170 Section J107.10 added. 15.04.180 Section J103.6 amended. 15.04.185 Compliance with floodplain management regulations. 15.04.190 Violations and penalties. 15.04.010 Adoption of Building Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 26, Building Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2014, adopting the California Building Code, 2013 Edition (Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) and as further amended and in effect September 30, 2015, adopting Chapter 68 of Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Building Code to provide for expedited, streamlined process for small residential rooftop energy systems is incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below and shall be known and may be cited as the Building Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Building Code, 2013 Edition, Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Building Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Building Code, 2013 Edition, as amended have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. (Ord. 311 § 1, 2008: Ord. 290-U § 1(part), 2002: Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 322-U, § 1, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 337-U, § 1, 2-10-2014; Ord. No. 344, § 4A, 10-12- 2015) 15.04.020 Short title. This chapter shall be known as the "Building Code of the City of Rolling Hills" and will be referred to herein as "this code." (Ord. 290-U § 1(part), 2002: Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). 15.04.030 Section 105 amended. Section 105 of the Building Code is amended to add a new subsection 105.7 to read: 105.7 Review Hearing. The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills may conduct a public hearing to review any decision or order of the Board of Appeals upon an affirmative vote of three members of the City Council within thirty (30) calendar days of the decision or order. The City Council may, upon conclusion of the public hearing, sustain or reverse in whole or in part any action or order of the Board of Appeals. Notice of the City Council public hearing shall be given by the City Clerk not less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing by first class mail to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the subject property and all owners of record of the subject property at the time of mailing said notice. (Ord. 290-U § 1 (part), 2002: Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 2 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.04.040 Definitions. Whenever any of the following names or terms are used in the California Building Code or the County of Los Angeles Building Code, each such name or term shall be deemed and construed to have the meaning ascribed to it in this section, as follows: "Board of Appeals" means the Board of Appeals established by Section 105 of said Los Angeles County Building Code. "Building department" means the entities charged by resolution of the City Council with the responsibility of administering the building code for the City. "Building official" means the persons charged by resolution of the City Council with the responsibility of administering the building code for the City. "City" means the City of Rolling Hills, except in Section 103 of said Building Code. "City Engineer" means the persons charged by resolution of the City Council with the responsibility of performing the functions of city engineer for the City. "County," "County of Los Angeles" or "unincorporated territory of the County of Los Angeles" means the City of Rolling Hills. "Electrical Code" means Chapter 15.16 of this code. "Fire Code" means Chapter 15.20 of this code. "Fire zone" means the fire zone adopted by an ordinance creating and establishing fire zones or where no such fire zones have been adopted by the City of Rolling Hills, shall mean very high fire hazard severity zone (VHFHSZ). "General fund" means the City Treasury of the City of Rolling Hills. "Green Building Standards Code" means Chapter 15.22 of this code. "Health Code" or "Los Angeles County Health Code" means Chapter 8.04 of this code. "Health Officer" means the Health Officer of the City of Rolling Hills. "Mechanical Code" means Chapter 15.12 of this code. "Plumbing Code" means Chapter 15.08 of this code. "Residential Code" means Chapter 15.18 of this code. (Ord. 311 § 2, 2008; Ord. 307 § 1, 2007; Ord. 290-U § 2, 2002; Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 322-U, § 2, 1-10-2011) 15.04.050 Amendment —Fees. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.04.010, the Building Code is amended by increasing the amount of each and every fee set forth in the Building Code, to a sum set by resolution of the City Council, including a park and recreation fee. (Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). 15.04.070 Section 502.1 amended. Section 502.1 of the Building Code is amended by amending the definition of basement to read: Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 3 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION BASEMENT is any floor level below the first story of the primary residence, except that a floor level in a building having only one floor level shall be classified as a basement unless such floor level qualifies as a first story as defined in Section 15.04.080. Except for walls within light wells, basement walls across any elevation may not exceed a height of five (5) feet above finished grade at any point immediately adjacent to the basement exterior, and shall have no greater than an average of two and one-half (2%) feet exterior height. Basement well(s) shall be incorporated into the overall design of the building so that it does not give an appearance of a separate story. (Ord. 311 § 4, 2008: Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). 15.04.080 Section 202 amended. Section 202 regarding the definition of a story of the Building Code is amended to read: STORY is that portion of a building included between the upper surface of any floor and the ceiling or roof above it. There shall be no story on top of another, except as permitted in Section 17.16.080 of the Zoning Ordinance. (Ord. 311 § 5, 2008: Ord. 295 § 7 (Exh. B (part)), 2004; Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 327, § 4, 6-11-2012) 15.04.090 Section 9906 amended. Section 9906 of the Building Code is amended to read: Section 9906: Building Rehabilitation Appeals Board. In order to hear appeals provided for in Chapter 98 and in this Chapter, there shall be and is hereby created a Building Rehabilitation Appeals Board. In the City of Rolling Hills the City Council shall serve as the Building Rehabilitation Appeals Board. (Ord. 311 § 6, 2008: Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). 15.04.100 Reserved. Editor's note— Section 2 of Ord. No. 337-U, adopted Feb. 10, 2014, repealed § 15.04.100 which pertained to the amendment to Section 1505.1, and derived from Ord. No. 311, § 7, adopted in 2008, and Ord. No. 277-U, § 1, adopted in 1999. 15.04.110 Reserved. Editor's note— Section 3 of Ord. No. 337-U, adopted Feb. 10, 2014, repealed § 15.04.110 which pertained to the amendment to Section 3403.1, and derived from Ord. No. 311, § 8, adopted in 2008, and Ord. No. 277-U, § 1, adopted in 1999. 15.04.120 Amending Appendix J Grading, Section J103 Permit Exemptions. Section J103.2 Excavation Exemption 8 is amended to read as follows: Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 4 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 8. An excavation that does not exceed 50 cubic yards and complies with one of the following conditions and as shown in Figure J103.2: (a) Is less than 2 feet (0.6 m) in depth. (b) Does not create a cut slope greater than 3 feet (0.9 m) measured vertically upward from the cut surface to the surface of the natural grade and is not steeper than 2 units horizontal to 1 unit vertical (50 percent slope). (c) A drainage plan identifying the existing drainage and any revised drainage for the proposed grading shall be approved by the City for any grading work performed under this grading permit exemption prior to start of grading. Section J103.2 Fill, Exemption 9 is amended to read as follows: 9. A fill not intended to support a structure that does not obstruct a drainage course and complies with one of the following conditions and as shown in Figure J103.2: (a) Is less than 1 foot (0.3 m) in depth and is placed on natural terrain with a slope flatter than 5 units horizontal to 1 unit vertical (20 percent slope). (b) Is Tess than 3 feet (0.9 m) in depth at its deepest point measured vertically upward from natural grade to the surface of the fill, does not exceed 50 cubic yards, and creates a fill slope no steeper than 2 units horizontal to 1 unit vertical (50 percent slope). (c) Is less than 5 feet (1.5 m) in depth at its deepest point measured vertically upward from natural grade to the surface of the fill, does not exceed 20 cubic yards, and creates a fill slope no steeper than 2 units horizontal to 1 unit vertical (50 percent slope). (d) A drainage plan identifying the existing drainage and any revised drainage for the proposed grading shall be approved by the City for any grading work performed under this grading permit exemption prior to start of grading. (Ord. 311 § 9, 2008: Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 337-U, § 4, 2-10-2014) Section 4 of Ord. No. 337-U, adopted Feb. 10, 2014, changed the title of § 15.04.120 from "Appendix J Grading Section J103 Permit Exemptions" to "Amending Appendix J Grading, Section J103 Permit Exemptions." 15.04.130 Amending Section J106.1 Maximum cut slopes. The slope of cut surfaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use, and shall be no steeper than two units horizontal to one unit vertical (50 percent slope) unless the owner or authorized agent receives a variance for a steeper slope from the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills, pursuant to the provisions of Title 17 of the Municipal Code and the applicant furnishes a geotechnical or an engineering geology report, or both justifying a steeper slope. The reports must contain a statement by the Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering Geologist that the site was investigated and an opinion that a steeper slope will be stable and will not create a hazard to public or private property, in conformance with the requirements of Section 111. The Building Official may require the slope of the cut surfaces to be flatter in slope than 2 units horizontal to 1 unit vertical if the Building Official finds it necessary for the stability and safety of the slope. Exceptions: 1. A cut surface may be at a slope of 1.5 units horizontal to one unit vertical (67 percent) provided that all the following are met: Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 5 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 1.1 It is not intended to support structures or surcharges. 1.2 It is approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills. 1.3 It is adequately protected against erosion. 1.4 It is no more than 8 feet (2438 mm) in height. 1.5 It is approved by the Building Official. 1.6 Ground water is not encountered. (Ord. 311 § 10, 2008: Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 337-U, § 5, 2-10-2014) Editor's note— Section 5 of Ord. No. 337-U, adopted Feb. 10, 2014, changed the title of § 15.04.130 from "Section J106.1 amended" to "Amending Section J106.1 Maximum cut slopes." 15.04.140 Section J106.3 added. Section J106 is amended to add subsection J106.3 to read: Section J106.3 DRIVEWAYS. Driveways which provide access from any lot or parcel of land to any of the private roads in the City of Rolling Hills which are maintained by the Rolling Hills Community Association shall be so constructed that the first twenty feet of said driveway, measured from the edge of the paved portion of said private road, shall not be steeper in grade than seven (7%) percent. All new and relocated driveways require approval of the City of Rolling Hills Traffic Commission prior to construction. (Ord. 311 § 11, 2008: Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). 15.04.150 Section J106.4 added. Section J106 is amended to add subsection J106.4 to read: J106.4 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO Adherence to balanced cut and fill ratio is an important policy of the City and furthers the goals and objectives of its General Plan, except that export of soil generated from construction of basements and other excavation activities, promotes the preservation of natural terrain of the property. A project, which does not include excavation, may deviate from balanced cut and fill only under unusual circumstances related to the size, shape, topography or other physical conditions of the property that qualify it for a variance pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.38.050. 1. No import of soil shall be permitted to any lot in the City, except where a variance pursuant to Chapter 17.38 has been approved. 2. No export of soil shall be permitted from any lot in the City, except where the soil is generated from an excavation activity, as defined in Municipal Code Section 17.12.050 or where a variance pursuant to Chapter 17.38 has been approved. Export of soil must comply with City refuse diversion requirements. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 6 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 3. No grading plan for which a permit is required shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled on the site, except where the soil is generated from an excavation activity or where a variance pursuant to Chapter 17.38 has been approved. 4. The City Manager or his or her designee may grant an exception to the requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph to allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed 500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written reports and other information submitted, that all of the following conditions are present: (a) The project does not require discretionary review (a cut that is three feet or less, or a fill that is three feet or less or where the activity covers 2,000 square feet or less of surface area). (b) That the need to import or export the soil could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of construction, and (c) A professionally prepared drainage plan for permanent repair shall be required if the erosion is re -occurring and if/when the amount of dirt requested, when added to the amount of dirt used in previous years, exceeds a total of 500 cubic yards. 5. The City Manager or his or her designee may grant an exception to the requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph to allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed 500 cubic yards for remedial repair of an area of the lot adjacent to structures, fences, corrals and riding rings that has eroded, and of hillside or trail if he or she finds, based upon written reports and other information submitted, that all of the following conditions are present: (a) The project does not require discretionary review (a cut that is three feet or less, or a fill that is three feet or less or where the activity covers 2,000 square feet or less of surface area). (b) The import or export of soil is no greater than necessary to avoid a threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger. (c) A professionally prepared drainage plan for permanent repair shall be required if the erosion is re -occurring and if/when the amount of dirt requested, when added to the amount of dirt used in previous years, exceeds a total of 500 cubic yards. (Ord. 311 § 12, 2008: Ord. 299 § 3, 2006; Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 337-U, § 6, 2-10-2014) 15.04.160 Amending Section J107.6 Maximum Fill Slopes. The slope of fill surfaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. Fill slopes steeper than 2 units horizontal to 1 unit vertical (50 percent slope) shall not be permitted unless the owner receives a variance for a steeper fill slope from the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills, pursuant to the provisions of Title 17 of the Municipal Code of the City. Such slopes shall be justified by soils engineering reports, conforming with the requirements of Section 111, containing a statement by the soils engineer that the site has been investigated and an opinion that a steeper fill slope will be stable and will not create a hazard to public or private property. Substantiating calculations and supporting data may be required where the Building Official determines that such information is necessary to verify the stability and safety of the proposed slope. The Building Official may require the fill slope to be constructed with a face flatter in slope than 2 units horizontal to 1 unit vertical (50 percent slope) if the Building Official finds it necessary for stability and safety. of the slope. (Ord. 311 § 13, 2008: Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 7 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION (Ord. No. 337-U, § 7, 2-10-2014) Editor's note— Section 7 of Ord. No. 337-U, adopted Feb. 10, 2014, changed the title of § 15.04.160 from "Section J107.6 added" to "Amending Section J107.6 Maximum Fill Slopes." 15.04.170 Section J107.10 added. Section J107 is amended by adding subsection J107.10 to read: J107.10 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO Adherence to balanced cut and fill ratio is an important policy of the City and furthers the goals and objectives of its General Plan, except that export of soil generated from construction of basements and other excavation activities, promotes the preservation of natural terrain of the property. A project, which does not include excavation, may deviate from balanced cut and fill only under unusual circumstances related to the size, shape, topography or other physical conditions of the property that qualify it for a variance pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.38.050. 1. No import of soil shall be permitted to any lot in the City, except where a variance pursuant to Chapter 17.38 has been approved. 2. No export of soil shall be permitted from any lot in the City, except where the soil is generated from an excavation activity, as defined in Municipal Code Section 17.12.050 or where a variance pursuant to Chapter 17.38 has been approved. Export of soil must comply with City refuse diversion requirements. 3. No grading plan for which a permit is required shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled on the site, except where the soil is generated from an excavation activity or where a variance pursuant to Chapter 17.38 has been approved. 4. The City Manager or his or her designee may grant an exception to the requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph to allow for the import or export (other than from excavation activities), of soil not to exceed 500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written reports and other information submitted, that all of the following conditions are present: (a) Construction of a structure on the lot or parcel has commenced, (b) That the need to import or export the soil could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of construction, and (c) That either the structure, as approved, cannot be completed without the requested import or export of soil or that an emergency condition exists due to the threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger. 5. The City Manager or his or her designee may grant an exception to the requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph to allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed 500 cubic yards for remedial repair of an area of the lot adjacent to structures, fences, corrals and riding rings that has eroded, and hillside or trail if he or she finds, based upon written reports and other information submitted, that all of the following conditions are present: (a) The project does not require discretionary review (a cut that is three feet or less, or a fill that is three feet or less or where the activity covers 2,000 square feet or less of surface area). (b) The import or export of soil is no greater than necessary to avoid a threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 8 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION (c) A professionally prepared drainageplan for permanent repair shall be required if the erosion is re -occurring and if/when the amount of dirt requested, when added to the amount of dirt used in previous years, exceeds a total of 500 cubic yards. (Ord. 311 § 14, 2008: Ord. 299 § 5, 2006; Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 337-U, § 8, 2-10-2014) 15.04.180 Section J103.6 amended. Section J103.6 is amended to read: J103.6 Compliance with Zoning Code. The building official shall not issue a grading permit for work on a site unless the proposed land use for the site shown on the grading plan application complies with the provisions of Title 17, entitled "Zoning" of the City of Rolling Hills Municipal Code. (Ord. 311 § 15, 2008: Ord. 290-U § 3, 2002). 15.04.185 Compliance with floodplain management regulations. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.04.010 of this chapter, the Building Code is amended by requiring that all new construction and substantial improvements proposed to be built in a flood -prone area, as determined in accordance with Section 8.36.050 of this code, is subject to the floodplain management regulations set forth in Chapter 8.36 of this code. (Ord. 300 § 3, 2006). 15.04.190 Violations and penalties. A. It is unlawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or perform any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the provisions of the Building Code. B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this code or any permit issued thereunder shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this code is committed, continued or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment (Ord. 277-U § 1(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 337-U, § 9, 2-10-2014) Chapter 15.08 PLUMBING CODE* Sections: 15.08.010 Adoption of Plumbing Code. 15.08.020 Short title. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 9 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND`CONSTRUCTION 15.08.030 Definitions. 15.08.050 Amendments —Fees. 15.08.060 Violations and penalty. 15.08.010 Adoption of Plumbing Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 28, Plumbing Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2014, adopting the California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition (Part 5 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Plumbing Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition, Title 28 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Plumbing Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 28 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition, has been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. (Ord. 311 § 16, 2008: Ord. 290-U § 4, 2002: Ord. 277-U § 2(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 322-U, § 3, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 337-U, § 10, 2-10-2014) 15.08.020 Short title. This chapter shall be known as the "Plumbing Code of the City of Rolling Hills" and may be cited as such. (Ord. 277-U § 2(part), 1999). 15.08.030 Definitions. Whenever any of the following names of terms are used in the California Plumbing Code and the Los Angeles County Plumbing Code, each such name or term shall be deemed and construed to have the meaning ascribed to it in this section, as follows: "Administrative Authority," "Chief Plumbing Inspector," or "Plumbing Inspector" means the persons charged by resolution of the City Council with the responsibility of administering the plumbing code for the City. "Board of Examiners of Plumbers and Gas Fitters" or "Board of Examiners" means the Board of Examiners of Plumbers and Gas Fitters of the County of Los Angeles established by Section 105.3 of the Los Angeles County Plumbing Code. "City" means the City of Rolling Hills. "County," "County of Los Angeles" or "unincorporated territory of the County of Los Angeles" means the City of Rolling Hills. "Gas fitting contractor," "journeyman gas fitter," "journeyman plumber" or "plumbing contractor" means a person holding a valid certificate of registration issued by the County as set forth in Section 105 of the Los Angeles County Plumbing Code. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 10 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION (Ord. 307 § 2, 2007; Ord. 277-U § 2(part), 1999). 15.08.050 Amendments —Fees. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.08.010, the Plumbing Code is amended by increasing the amount of each and every fee set forth in the Plumbing Code to a sum set by resolution of the City Council. (Ord. 277-U § 2(part), 1999). 15.08.060 Violations and penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this code or any permit issued thereunder shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this code is committed, continued or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 277-U § 2(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 337-U, § 11, 2-10-2014) Chapter 15.12 MECHANICAL CODE* Sections: 15.12.010 Adoption of Mechanical Code. 15.12.020 Short title. 15.12.030 Definitions. 15.12.040 Section 120 amended. 15.12.050 Amendments —Fees. 15.12.060 Penalty for violation. 15.12.010 Adoption of Mechanical Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 29, Mechanical Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2014, adopting the California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition (Part 4 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is hereby incorporatedby reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Mechanical Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, Title 29 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Mechanical Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 29 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 11 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION (Ord. 311 § 18, 2008: Ord. 290-U § 5, 2002: Ord. 277-U § 3(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 322-U, § 4, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 337-U, § 12, 2-10-2014) 15.12.020 Short title. This chapter shall be known as the "Mechanical Code of the City of Rolling Hills" and may be cited as such. (Ord. 277-U § 3(part), 1999). 15.12.030 Definitions. Whenever any of the following names or terms are used in the California Mechanical Code or the County of Los Angeles Mechanical Code, each such name or term shall be deemed and construed to have the meaning ascribed to it in this section, as follows: "Board of Appeals" means the Board of Examiners of Plumbers provided for in Section 105.3 of the Los Angeles County Plumbing Code. "Building department" means the entities charged by resolution of the City Council with the responsibility of administering the building code for the City. "Building Code," "Uniform Building Code" or "County of Los Angeles Building Code" means Chapter 15.04 of this code. "Building official" means the persons charged by resolution of the City Council with the responsibility of administering the building code for the City. "City" means the City of Rolling Hills. "Electrical Code" means Chapter 15.16 of this code. "Fire Code" or "Los Angeles County Fire Code" means Chapter 15.20 of this code. "General fund" means the City treasury. "Health Code" or "Los Angeles County Health Code" means Chapter 8.04 of this code. "Mechanical Code" means the Mechanical Code of the City. "Plumbing Code" means Chapter 15.08 of this code. (Ord. 307 § 3, 2007; Ord. 290-U § 6, 2002; Ord. 277-U § 3(part), 1999). 15.12.040 Section 120 amended. Section 120. Solid fuel fire pits are prohibited. (Ord. 311 § 19, 2008: Ord. 277-U § 3(part), 1999). 15.12.050 Amendments —Fees. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.12.010, the Mechanical Code is amended by increasing the amount of each and every fee set forth in the Mechanical Code to a sum set by resolution of the City Council. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 12 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION (Ord. 277-U § 3(part), 1999). 15.12.060 Penalty for violation. A. It is unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect, install, alter, repair, relocate, add to, replace, use or maintain heating, ventilating, comfort cooling, or refrigeration equipment in the jurisdiction, or cause the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the provisions of the Mechanical Code. Maintenance of equipment which was unlawful at the time it was installed, and which would be unlawful under the Mechanical Code, shall constitute a continuing violation of the Mechanical Code. B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this code or any permit issued thereunder shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this code is committed, continued or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 277-U § 3(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 337-U, § 13, 2-10-2014) Chapter 15.16 ELECTRICAL CODE* Sections: 15.16.010 Adoption of Electrical Code. 15.16.020 Short title. 15.16.030 Definitions. 15.16.040 Electrical Code fees. 15.16.050 Violations and penalties. 15.16.010 Adoption of Electrical Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 27, Electrical Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2014, adopting the California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition (Part 3 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Electrical Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, Title 27 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Electrical Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 27 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public (Ord. 311 § 20, 2008: Ord. 298-U § 1(part), 2005). Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 13 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION (Ord. No. 322-U, § 5, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 337-U, § 14, 2-10-2014) 15.16.020 Short title. This chapter shall be known as the "Electrical Code of the City of Rolling Hills" and may be cited as such. (Ord. 298-U § 1(part), 2005). 15.16.030 Definitions. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.16.010 of this chapter, whenever any of the following names or terms are used in the Electrical Code, each such name or term shall be deemed and construed to have the meaning ascribed to it in this section as follows: "Chief Electrical Inspector" means the persons charged by resolution of the City Council with the responsibility of administering the Electrical Code for the City. "County," "County of Los Angeles" or "unincorporated area of the County of Los Angeles" means the City of Rolling Hills. "Maintenance Electrician" means a person holding a valid Certificate of Registration as Maintenance Electrician issued by the County of Los Angeles as set forth in Section 82-4(b) of Title 27 of the Los Angeles County Electrical Code. "Special Inspector" means a person holding a valid Certificate of Registration as Special Inspector issued by the County of Los Angeles as set forth in Section 82-14(a) of the Los Angeles County Electrical Code, or a person otherwise determined to be qualified by the Chief Electrical Inspector. (Ord. 307 § 4, 2007; Ord. 298-U § 1(part), 2005). 15.16.040 Electrical Code fees. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.16.010 of this chapter, fees for plan check, inspection and all other miscellaneous services shall be based on the fee schedule set forth by Los Angeles County Code, Title 27, Fees, or as approved by resolution of the City Council. (Ord. 298-U § 1(part), 2005). 15.16.050 Violations and penalties. A. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this code or any permit issued thereunder shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this code is committed, continued or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. B. In addition to the penalty set forth in subsection A of this section, any person who shall commence any electrical work for which a permit is required without first having obtained a permit therefor shall, if subsequently permitted to obtain a permit, pay double the permit costs fixed by Section 82-8 of the Electrical Code for such work. This provision (double fee) shall not apply to emergency work when it shall be proved to the satisfaction of the Chief Electrical Inspector that such work was urgently Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 14 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION necessary and that it was not practical to obtain a permit therefor before the commencement of work. In all such cases, a permit must be obtained as soon as it is practical to do so, and if there be an unreasonable delay in obtaining such a permit, a double permit fee as provided in this chapter shall be charged. (Ord. 298-U § l(part), 2005). (Ord. No. 337-U, § 15, 2-10-2014) Chapter 15.18 RESIDENTIAL CODE Sections: 15.18.010 Adoption of Residential Code. 15.18.020 Short title. 15.18.030 Definitions. 15.18.040 Amendment —Fees. 15.18.060 Reserved. 15.18.100 Violations and penalty. 15.18.010 Adoption of Residential Code. Except as herein provided, Title 30, Residential Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, adopting Sections 102 through 119 of Chapter 1, Section 1207 of Chapter 12, Chapter 34, 67, 69, 98, 99 and Appendix J of Title 26 of the Los Angeles County Code and Chapters 2 through 10, Chapter 44, and Appendix H of that certain code known as and designated as the 2013 California Residential Code as published by the California Building Standards Commission, is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known the Residential Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, Title 30 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Residential Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 30 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. (Ord. No. 322-U, § 6, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 337-U, § 16, 2-10-2014) 15.18.020 Short title. This chapter shall be known as the "Residential Code of the City of Rolling Hills" and will be referred to herein as "this code." (Ord. No. 322-U, § 6, 1-10-2011) Rolling Hills, Califor , Code of Ordinances Page 15 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.18.030 Definitions. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.18.010, names or terms that are used in this code shall be deemed and construed to have the meaning ascribed to it in Section 15.04.040 of Title 15 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. (Ord. No. 322-U, § 6, 1-10-2011) 15.18.040 Amendment —Fees. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.18.010, the fees set forth for this code shall be the same as the fess prescribed for the Building Code in Section 15.04.050 of Title 15 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. (Ord. No. 322-U, § 6, 1-10-2011) 15.18.060 Reserved. Editor's note— Section 17 of Ord. No. 337-U, adopted Feb. 10, 2014, repealed § 15.18.060 which pertained to amendment —roof covering, and derived from Ord. No. 322-U, § 6, adopted Jan. 10, 2011. 15.18.100 Violations and penalty. A. It is unlawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or perform any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of• the provisions of this code. B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this code or any permit issued thereunder shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this code is committed, continued or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (Ord. No. 322-U, § 6, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 337-U, § 18, 2-10-2014) Chapter 15.20 FIRE CODE* Sections: 15.20.010 Adoption of Fire Code. 15.20.020 Short title. 15.20.025 Very high fire hazard severity zone (VHFHSZ). 15.20.030 Permits. 15.20.035 Reserved. 15.20.050 Violations. Rolling Hills, Califor a, Code of Ordinances Page 16 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.20.060 Responsibility. 15.20.010 Adoption of Fire Code. Except as hereinafter provided in this chapter, Title 32 Fire Code of the Los Angeles County Codes, as amended and in effect on April 24, 2014, which constitutes an amended version of the California Fire Code, 2013 Edition (Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) and an amended version of the International Fire Code, 2012 Edition is hereby adopted by reference and shall constitute and may be cited as the Fire Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Fire Code, 2013 Edition, Title 32 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Fire Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 32 of the Los Angeles County Code, along with a copy of the California Fire Code, 2013 Edition, and the International Fire Code, 2012 Edition, has been deposited in the office of the City Clerk and shall be at all times maintained by the Clerk for use and examination by the public. (Ord. 311 § 21, 2008: Ord. 290-U § 8(part), 2002: Ord. 277-U § 5(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 322-U, § 7, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 338, § 2, 6-9-2014) 15.20.020 Short title. This chapter shall be known as the "Fire Code of the City of Rolling Hills" and may be cited as such. (Ord. 277-U § 5(part), 1999). 15.20.025 Very high fire hazard severity zone (VHFHSZ). The entire City of Rolling Hills is designated as a very high fire hazard severity zone, as prescribed by the Director of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and as designated on a map titled City of Rolling Hills VHFHSZ dated July 1, 2008 and which shall be retained on file in the City Clerk's office at the Rolling Hills City Hall. (Ord. 311 § 22, 2008). 15.20.030 Permits. Any permit heretofore issued by the County of Los Angeles pursuant to the Fire Code of said County, for work within the territorial boundaries of the City of Rolling Hills, shall remain in full force and effect according to its terms. (Ord. 277-U § 5(part), 1999). Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 17 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.20.035 Reserved. Editor's note— Ord. No. 338, §§ 1, 3, adopted June 9, 2014, repealed former § 15.20.035 which pertained to amendment -----draft system identification sign, and derived from Ord. No. 277-U, § 5, adopted 1999; Ord. No. 290-U, § 8, adopted 2002; Ord. No. 311, § 21, adopted 2008; Ord. No. 322-U, § 7, adopted Jan. 10, 2011. 15.20.050 Violations. Every person violating any provision of the Fire Code or of any permit or license granted hereunder, or any rule, regulation or policy promulgated pursuant hereto, is guilty of a misdemeanor unless such violation is declared to be an infraction by Section 5101.1 of the Fire Code. Each such violation is a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which such violation is committed, continued or permitted, and conviction of any such violation shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period not to exceed six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 311 § 24, 2008: Ord. 277-U § 5(part), 1999). (Ord. No. 338, § 4, 6-9-2014) 15.20.060 Responsibility. Any person who personally or through another wilfully, negligently, or in violation of law sets a fire, allows a fire to be set, or allows a fire kindled or attended by such person to escape from his or her control, allows any hazardous material to be handled, stored or transported in a manner not in accordance with nationally recognized standards, allows any hazardous material to escape from his or her control, neglects to properly comply with any written notice of the Chief, or wilfully or negligently allows the continuation of a violation of the Fire Code and amendments thereto is liable for the expense of fighting the fire or for the expenses incurred during a hazardous materials incident, and such expense shall be a charge against that person. Such charge shall constitute a debt of such person and is collectible by the public agency incurring such expense in the same manner as in the case of an obligation under a contract, expressed or implied. (Ord. 277-U § 5(part), 1999). Chapter 15.22 GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE Sections: 15.22.010 Adoption of Green Building Standards Code. 15.22.020 Short title. 15.22.030 Definitions. 15.22.035 Water budget. 15.22.038 Low impact development. 15.22.040 Amendment —Fees. 15.22.060 Violations and penalty. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 18 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.22.010 Adoption of Green Building Standards Code. Except as hereinafter provided, Title 31, Green Building Standards Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on January 1, 2014, adopting the Califomia Green Building Standards Code, 2013 Edition (Part 11 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth below, and shall be known and may be cited as the Green Building Standards Code of the City of Rolling Hills. In the event of any conflict between provisions of the California Green Building Standards Code, 2013 Edition, Title 31 of the Los Angeles County Code, or any amendment to the Green Building Standards Code contained in the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, the provision contained in the later listed document shall control. A copy of Title 31 of the Los Angeles County Code and the California Green Building Standards Code, 2013 Edition, have been deposited in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills and shall be at all times maintained by the City Clerk for use and examination by the public. (Ord. No. 322-U, § 8, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 337-U, § 19, 2-10-2014) 15.22.020 Short title. This chapter shall be known as the "Green Building Standards Code of the City of Rolling Hills" and will be referred to herein as "this code." (Ord. No. 322-U, § 8, 1-10-2011) 15.22.030 Definitions. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.22.010, names or terms that are used in this code shall be deemed and construed to have the meaning ascribed to it in the Green Building Standards Code, of the Los Angeles County Code and in Section 15.04.040 of Title 15 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. (Ord. No. 322-U, § 8, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 337-U, § 20, 2-10-2014) 15.22.035 Water budget. A water budget shall be developed for landscape irrigation use installed in conjunction with new construction and new or redeveloped landscaping that conforms to Water Efficient Landscape ordinance, Chapter 13.18 of Title 13 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. (Ord. No. 337-U, § 21, 2-10-2014) 15.22.038 Low impact development. New development, additions or alteration to existing developed sites shall comply with the Storm Water Management and Pollution Control Ordinance, Chapter 8.32 of Title 8 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 19 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION (Ord. No. 337-U, § 22, 2-10-2014) 15.22.040 Amendment —Fees. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15.22.010, the fees set forth for this code shall be the same as the fees prescribed by a resolution of the City Council for the Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Residential and Fire Codes of Title 15 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. (Ord. No. 322-U, § 8, 1-10-2011) 15.22.060 Violations and penalty. A. It is unlawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or perform any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the provisions of this code. B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this code or any permit issued thereunder shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this code is committed, continued or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period of not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (Ord. No. 322-U, § 8, 1-10-2011; Ord. No. 337-U, § 23, 2-10-2014) Chapter 15.32 UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICTS Sections: 15.32.010 Definitions. 15.32.020 Public hearing —Authorized when —Notice. 15.32.030 Public hearing —Consultation. 15.32.040 Council resolution -Procedure. 15.32.050 Maintaining overhead structures prohibited when. 15.32.060 Emergency overhead structures. 15.32.070 Council resolution —Exceptions authorized. 15.32.080 Notice to property owners and utility companies. 15.32.090 Responsibility of utility companies. 15.32.100 Responsibility of property owners —Notice. 15.32.110 Notice —Service. 15.32.120 Notice —Form. 15.32.130 Work by City Engineer —Assessment of costs. 15.32.140 Assessment —Hearing —Notice. 15.32.150 Assessment —Hearing —Decision. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 20 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.32.160 Assessment —Lien. 15.32.170 Responsibility of City. 15.32.180 Extension of time. 15.32.190 Violation —Penalty. 15.32.010 Definitions. Whenever in this chapter the words or phrases defined in this section are used, they shall have the respective meanings assigned to them in the following definitions: A. "Commission" means the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. B. "Person" means and includes individuals, firms, corporations, partnerships, and their agents and employees. C. "Poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures" means poles, towers, supports, wires, conductors, guys, stubs, platforms, crossarms, braces, transformers, insulators, cutouts, switches, communication circuits, appliances, attachments and appurtenances located above- ground within a district and used or useful in supplying electric, communication or similar or associated service. D. "Underground utility district" or "district" means that area in the City within which poles, overhead wires, and associated overhead structures are prohibited as such area is described in a resolution adopted pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.32.040. E. "Utility" includes all persons or entities supplying electric, communication or similar or associated service by means of electrical materials or devices. (Ord. 80 § 1, 1968). 15.32.020 Public hearing —Authorized when —Notice. The Council may from time to time call public hearings to ascertain whether the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures within designated areas of the City and the underground installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication or similar or associated service. The City Clerk shall notify all affected property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and utilities concerned by mail of the time and place of such hearings at least ten days prior to the date thereof. Each such hearing shall be open to the public and may be continued from time to time. At each such hearing all persons interested shall be given an opportunity to be heard. The decision of the Council shall be final and conclusive. (Ord. 80 § 2, 1968). 15.32.030 Public hearing —Consultation. Prior to holding such public hearing, the City Engineer shall consult with all affected utilities and shall prepare a report for submission at such hearing containing, among other information, the extent of such utilities' participation and estimates of the total costs to the city and affected property owners. Such report shall also contain an estimate of the time required to complete such underground installation and removal of overhead facilities. (Ord. 80 § 2A, 1968). Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 21 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.32.040 Council resolution -Procedure. If, after any such public hearing, the Council finds that the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires such removal and such underground installation within a designated area, the Council shall, by resolution, declare such designated area an underground utility district and order such removal and underground installation. Such resolution shall include a description of the area comprising such district and shall fix the time within which such removal and underground installation shall be accomplished and within which affected property owners must be ready to receive underground services. A reasonable time shall be allowed for such removal and underground installation, having due regard for the availability of labor, materials and equipment necessary for such removal and for the installation of such underground facilities as may be occasioned thereby. (Ord. 80 § 3, 1968). 15.32.050 Maintaining overhead structures prohibited when. Whenever the Council creates an underground utility district and orders the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures therein as provided in Section 15.32.040, it is unlawful for any person or utility to erect, construct, place, keep, maintain, continue, employ or operate poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures in the district after the date when said overhead facilities are required to be removed by such resolution, except as said overhead facilities may be required to furnish service to an owner or occupant of property prior to the performance by such owner or occupant to continue to receive utility service as provided in Section 15.32.100, and for such reasonable time required to remove said facilities after said work has been performed, and except as otherwise provided in this chapter. (Ord. 80 § 4, 1968). 15.32.060 Emergency overhead structures. Notwithstanding the provisions of this chapter, overhead facilities may be installed and maintained for a period not to exceed ten days without authority of the City Manager in order to provide emergency service. The City Manager may grant special permission on such terms as the City Manager may deem appropriate, in cases of unusual circumstances, without discrimination as to any person or utility, to erect, construct, install, maintain, use or operate poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures. (Ord. 80 § 5, 1968). 15.32.070 Council resolution —Exceptions authorized. In any resolution adopted pursuant to Section 15.32.040, the City may authorize any or all of the following exceptions: A. Any municipal facilities or equipment installed under the supervision and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; B. Poles or electroliers used exclusively for street lighting; C. Overhead wires (exclusive of supporting structures) crossing any portion of a district within which overhead wires have been prohibited, or connecting to buildings on the perimeter of a district, which such wires originate in an area from which poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures are not prohibited; Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 22 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION D. Poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures used for the transmission of electric energy at nominal voltages in excess of 34,500 volts; E. Overhead wires attached to the exterior surface of a building by means of a bracket or other fixture and extending from one location of the building to another location on the same building or to an adjacent building without crossing any public street; F. Antennae, associated equipment and supporting structures used by a utility for furnishing communication services; G. Equipment appurtenant to underground facilities, such as surface -mounted transformers, pedestal -mounted terminal boxes and meter cabinets, and concealed ducts. H. Temporary poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures used or to be used in conjunction with construction projects. (Ord. 80 § 6, 1968). 15.32.080 Notice to property owners and utility companies. A. Within ten days after the effective date of a resolution adopted pursuant to Section 15.32.040, the City Clerk shall notify all affected utilities and all persons owning real property within the district created by said resolution of the adoption thereof. The City Clerk shall further notify such affected property owners of the necessity that if they or any person occupying such property desire to continue to receive electric, communication, or similar or associated service, they or such occupant shall provide all necessary facility changes on their premises so as to receive such service from the lines of the supplying utility or utilities at a new location. B. Notification by the City Clerk shall be made by mailing a copy of the resolution adopted pursuant to Section 15.32.040, together with a copy of this chapter, to affected property owners as such are shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to the affected utilities. (Ord. 80 § 7, 1968). 15.32.090 Responsibility of utility companies. If underground construction is necessary to provide utility service within a district created by any resolution adopted pursuant to Section 15.32.040, the supplying utility shall furnish that portion of the conduits, conductors and associated equipment required to be furnished by it under its applicable rules, regulations and tariffs on file with the Commission. (Ord. 80 § 8, 1968). 15.32.100 Responsibility of property owners —Notice. Every person owning, operating, leasing, occupying or renting a building or structure within a District shall construct and provide that portion of the service connection on his property between the facilities referred to in Section 15.32.090 and the termination facility on or within said building or structure being served. If the above is not accomplished by any person within the time provided for in the resolution enacted pursuant to Section 15.32.040, the City Engineer shall give, notice in writing to the person in possession of such premises, and a notice in writing to the owner thereof as shown on the last equalized assessment roll, to provide the required underground facilities within ten days after receipt of such notice. (Ord. 80 § 9(a), 1968). Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 23 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.32.110 Notice —Service. The notice to provide the required underground facilities may be given either by personal service or by mail. In case of service by mail on either of such persons, the notice must be deposited in the United States mail in a sealed envelope with postage prepaid, addressed to the person in possession of such premises at such premises, and the notice must be •addressed to the owner thereof as such owner's name appears, and must be addressed to such owner's last known address as the same appears on the last equalized assessment roll, and when no address appears, to General Delivery, City of Rolling Hills, California. If notice is given by mail, such notice shall be deemed to have been received by the person to whom it has been sent within forty-eight hours after the mailing thereof. If notice is given by mail to either the owner or occupant of such premises, the City Engineer shall, within forty-eight hours after the mailing thereof, cause a copy thereof, printed on a card not less than eight inches by ten inches in size to be posted in a conspicuous place on said premises. (Ord. 80 § 9(b), 1968). 15.32.120 Notice —Form. The notice given by the City Engineer to provide the required underground facilities shall particularly specify what work is required to be done, and shall state that if said work is not completed within thirty days after receipt of such notice, the City Engineer will provide such required underground facilities, in which case the cost and expense thereof will be assessed against the property benefited and become a lien upon such property. (Ord. 80 § 9(c), 1968). 15.32.130 Work by City Engineer —Assessment of costs. If upon the expiration of the thirty -day period the required underground facilities have not been provided, the City Engineer shall forthwith proceed to do the work; provided, however, if such premises are unoccupied and no electric or communications services are being furnished thereto, the City Engineer may authorize the disconnection and removal of any and all overhead service wires and associated facilities supplying utility service to said property. Upon completion of the work by the City Engineer, he shall file a written report with the City Council setting forth the fact that the required underground facilities have been provided and the cost thereof, together with a legal description of the property against which such cost is to be assessed. The Council shall thereupon fix a time and place for hearing protests against the assessment of the cost of such work upon such premises, which said time shall not be less than ten days thereafter. (Ord. 80 § 9(d), 1968). 15.32.140 Assessment —Hearing —Notice. The City Engineer shall forthwith, upon the time for hearing such protests having been fixed, give a notice in writing to the person in possession of such premises, and a notice in writing thereof to the owner thereof, in the manner provided in this chapter for the giving of the notice to provide the required underground facilities, of the time and place that the Council will pass upon such report and will hear protests against such assessment. Such notice shall also set forth the amount of the proposed assessment. (Ord. 80 § 9(e), 1968). Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 24 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.32.150 Assessment —Hearing —Decision. Upon the date and hour set for the hearing of protests, the Council shall hear and consider the report and all protests if there be any, and then proceed to affirm, modify or reject the assessment. (Ord. 80 § 9(f), 1968). 15.32.160 Assessment —Lien. If any assessment is not paid within the five days after its confirmation by the Council, the amount of the assessment shall become a lien upon the property against which the assessment is made by the City Engineer, and the City Engineer is directed to turn over to the Assessor and Tax Collector a notice of lien of each of said properties on which the assessment has not been paid, and the Assessor and Tax Collector shall add the amount of said assessment to the next regular bill for taxes levied against the premises upon which said assessment was not paid. Said assessment shall be due and payable, and if not paid when due and payable, shall bear interest at the rate of six percent per annum. (Ord. 80 § 9(g), 1968). 15.32.170 Responsibility of City. The City shall remove at its own expense all City -owned equipment from all poles required to be removed under this chapter in ample time to enable the owner or user of such poles to remove the same within the time specified in the resolution enacted pursuant to Section 15.32.040. (Ord. 80 § 10, 1968). 15.32.180 Extension of time. In the event that any act required by this chapter or by a resolution adopted pursuant to Section 15.32.040 cannot be performed within the time provided on account of shortage of materials, war, restraint by public authorities, strikes, labor disturbances, civil disobedience, or any other circumstances beyond the control of the contractor, then the time within which such act will be accomplished shall be extended for a period equivalent to the time of such limitation. (Ord. 80 § 11, 1968). 15.32.190 Violation —Penalty. It is unlawful for any person to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any requirement of this chapter. Any person violating any provision of this chapter or failing to comply with any of its requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine or not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in County Jail for a period not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each such person shall be guilty of a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which any violation of any provision of this chapter is committed, continued or permitted by such person and shall be punishable accordingly. (Ord. 313 § 2, 2008: Ord. 80 § 12, 1968). Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 25 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION Chapter 15.36 HOURS OF CONSTRUCTION Sections: 15.36.010 Work of improvement defined. 15.36.020 Hours restricted. 15.36.030 Exceptions. 15.36.010 Work of improvement defined. For the purpose of this chapter, "work of improvement" includes but is not restricted to the construction, alteration, addition, or the repair, in whole or in part, of any building, structure, bridge, ditch, pipeline, tunnel, fence, or road; the cutting or removal of weeds, trees and grass; the seeding, sodding or planting of any lot or tract of land for landscaping purposes; the filling, levelling, grading of any lot or tract of land; or the crushing of rock or the hauling of any material to be used or removed in connection with any of the foregoing; the demolition of buildings; or the removal of buildings. (Ord. 118 § 2, 1973). 15.36.020 Hours restricted. There shall be no work of improvement or the operation of mechanical equipment used in connection with work of improvement within the territorial limits of the City except on Monday through Saturday of each week, commencing at the hour of seven a.m. and ending at the hour of six p.m. on each day. (Ord. 118 § 1, 1973). 15.36.030 Exceptions. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to residents of the City who are the record owners of land in the City or who are the lessees of the record owners of land in the City. (Ord..118 § 3, 1973). Chapter 15.40 GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS AND REPORTS REQUIRED Sections: 15.40.010 Requirements. 15.40.020 Authority —Procedure. 15.40.030 Corrective action required when. 15.40.040 Assessment of costs. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 26 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.40.010 Requirements. The requirements provided for in this chapter are in addition to any and all other requirements relating to expansive soils and geological inspections and reports required by the building code of the City or any other ordinance of the City. (Ord. 178 § 1, 1980). 15.40.020 Authority —Procedure. A. No building (as defined in the Los Angeles County Building Laws) for which a building or grading permit is required by the building code of the City, shall be issued by the City Engineer if he, and/or the City Council, is of the opinion that a potentially serious geological condition may exist on the land on which the proposed building is to be constructed, or the proposed grading is to be performed, until a geological report prepared by a geologist registered by the State is delivered to the City Engineer by the applicant for the building or grading permit. The report shall include, among other things, test borings or excavations. B. If said geological report, in the opinion of the City Engineer, indicates a potential serious geological condition, the City Engineer shall have the authority to employ an independent geologist registered by the State, to prepare and provide him with an independent geological report of the land on which the proposed building is to be constructed or the grading is proposed to be performed, and if necessary, to require additional test borings or excavations to be made by an independent testing service, the depth and accuracy of which shall be approved by said registered geologist. C. The City Engineer shall also have authority to submit samples of any and all test borings or excavations to an independent qualified geological laboratory for analysis and report. D. The geological report prepared by the independent registered geologist shall recommend corrective action which is designed to prevent the displacement or slippage of the land. (Ord. 178 § 2, 1980). 15.40.030 Corrective action required when. As a condition to the issuance of a permit by the City Engineer of the City, the corrective action or procedures recommended in the geological report shall be incorporated in the proposed construction or grading for which the permit has been applied. (Ord. 178 § 3, 1980). 15.40.040 Assessment of costs. All expenses incurred by the applicant in complying with the provisions of this chapter shall be paid for by the applicant and shall be in addition to all other charges or fees levied, assessed or charged by the City in connection with the issuance of a building or grading permit. (Ord. 178 § 4, 1980). Chapter 15.44 SECOND UNITS ON SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS Sections: 15.44.010 Prohibition. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 27 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 15.44.020 Findings. 15.44.030 Limitation on housing opportunities. 15.44.010 Prohibition. Second units on single-family lots are prohibited within the City for the reasons set forth in Section 15.44.020. For the purposes of this Chapter, "second unit" means a detached or attached dwelling unit which provides complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation, on the same parcel as is situated the primary residential structure. (Ord. 198 § 1(part), 1983). 15.44.020 Findings. The following findings specify the adverse impacts on the public health, safety and welfare that would result from allowing second units on single-family lots and which justify their preclusion within the City: A. Lack of Sewers. The City has no sanitary sewer system and sewage effluent is disposed of into cesspools and leach lines which enter the earth strata and percolate into the soil. By authorizing second units in the City, the amount of sewage effluent entering the ground, currently 60,133,750 gallons a year, could double. This increase would add to an already existing problem of the effluent water entering the ground and decreasing the shearing strength of the predominant clay soil along slippage surfaces. The strength of clay decreases as its absorbed water content increases, resulting in movement and instability. The authorization of second units would lower the margin of safety by contributing to a decrease in geologic stability. The current method of sewering the City is predicated on one -acre and two -acre sized lots and limited density, which places an acceptable level of risk on the amount of effluent entering the earth strata in the City. B. Geologic Setting. In the City numerous active landslides greatly diminish development potential and call for caution in increasing densities. Reference is made to the Landslide Map following page 86 of the Seismic/Safety Element of the Rolling Hills General Plan. The risk of landslide is affected by development of the land, in that, as is noted in the Seismic/Safety Element, areas shown as probable landslides are "unacceptable risks" and development upon slide masses add to the total weight of the system, thereby increasing driving forces of the land. The addition of second units in the City would compound the problem by increasing development and exposure to levels of risks beyond acceptable standards as described on page 90 of the Rolling Hills Seismic/Safety Element. C. Rural Design and Community Roadway Character. The City has no public streets and all roadways have controlled access. The roadways are rural and narrow (twenty to twenty-four feet of paving), with no curbs, gutters or sidewalks. In many instances equestrian paths are directly adjacent to the roadway paving. This design is predicated on a rural density of one to two acres per unit. The current capacity and design of the entirely private roadways, riding rings and trails cannot withstand increased densities. Roadways in the City are generally long and narrow with lengthy cul-de-sacs (one way in and out) . This standard is acceptable only because of the low rural density, and the authorization of two units on lots would demand a change in the roadway design of the City. There is no funding available for such an endeavor and to proceed with two units on lots without additional access would compromise traffic safety as well as the fire protection needs of the City. Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances • Page 28 Title 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION D. Fire Flow Requirements. The introduction of second units would change the infrastructure requirements on water pressure in the City beyond the current requirements of one thousand two hundred fifty g.p.m. According to the Seismic/Safety Element of the General Plan, water pressure to fight fires would change to one thousand seven hundred fifty g.p.m., and the spacing requirement for fire hydrants would become three hundred thirty feet, rather than the current five hundred feet. The fire -fighting capability of the City would be compromised if proper pressure could not be met. The City has no funds available to revamp the system that was planned and installed for single-family residential lots in a hillside area. (Ord. 198 § 1(part), 1983). 15.44.030 Limitation on housing opportunities. A. The City of Rolling Hills acknowledges that the preclusion of second units in Rolling Hills City may limit housing opportunities of the region. This limitation is justified, however, by the unusual circumstances described in Section 15.44.020. B. Moreover, the City of Rolling Hills has participated in regional housing programs and has contributed its funds for housing projects to the city of Lomita, a neighboring municipality. In adopting the Housing Element of the General Plan in 1981, Rolling Hills accepted a share of the regional housing allocation model and established the documented constraints on housing potential in the City. The Housing Element established that Rolling Hills would work fully with all jurisdictions in insuring that housing needs of the region are met. Given the relatively small number of single-family residences located within the City, this preclusion will not significantly affect housing opportunities in the region. (Ord. 198 § 1(part), 1983). Rolling Hills, California, Code of Ordinances Page 29 st ira qerea INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 TO: FROM: THROUGH: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 6-B Mtg. Date: 02/13/17 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER APPLICATION NO. ZONING CASE NO. 902 - RE -OPEN PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: DATE PUBLISHED: Attachments: 23 CREST ROAD EAST (LOT 132A -MS) RA -S-2, 6.02 ACRES (EXCL. ROADWAY EASEMENT) JIM HYNES TAVISHA NICHOLSON, BOLTON ENGINEERING FEBRUARY 2, 2017 Correspondence dated 1/23/17 Photographs dated 2/7/17 Memo from LA County Drainage and Grading Engineer Resolution No. 1202 BACKGROUND 1. On January 9, 2017, the City Council directed staff to return with a resolution of approval for the construction of a new 10,400 square foot residence, 10,400 square foot basement, 1,120 square foot garage, 475 square foot entry, covered porches totaling 2,869 square feet - 2,500 sq. ft. at main residence, 264 sq. ft. at the stable and 105 sq. ft. at the guest house; a new pool and spa totaling 864 square feet with a 60 square foot pool equipment area, a 171 square foot service yard, a 250 square foot outdoor kitchen, a 350 square foot detached trellis near the proposed 800 square foot guest house, a two-story stable with 1,300 square feet on the first level and a 792 square foot loft, a new driveway and turnaround access, a pervious access to the stable, several retaining walls and ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East grading of a total of 48,180 cubic yards of dirt (the dirt from the basement, 5,750 c.y. may be exported). As well as a new driveway apron. Following the January 9, 2017 meeting, and immediately before the January 23, 2017 meeting, Mr. Charlie Raine submitted correspondence and videos regarding large amount of water run-off in the vicinity of the subject property, the canyons around it and the properties below the subject site during a major storm event. He purports to show that there is no water sheet flow from the Hynes' property in its undeveloped state. Consequently, the Council decided to review the new material and discuss it, necessitating the re -opening and re -noticing of a public hearing. On February 7, 2017, the engineer for the Hynes' project presented the City with five (5) photographs which purport to show that during the storm water drained from the property, as indicated by the ruts in the soil. Staff provided the video and comments from Mr. Raine to the County drainage and grading engineer. Her response is enclosed. In summary, the videos, correspondence and photographic evidence are inconclusive; do not establish that the proposed project is inconsistent or incompatible with the requirements of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code; and do not present additional information or insight which the City Council has not already considered. 2. Since this project was first proposed in March 2016, residents who reside below the proposed development have continued to express concerns regarding stability, erosion and water run-off from the proposed project and the impacts of these on downhill property owners. Over the course of time that this project was being ' considered, neighbors submitted correspondence objecting to the project and questioned the hydrology reports prepared by the applicant's engineer. Concern was also expressed regarding whether the grading activity for this development would cause movement and cracking on the properties below.. In response, the applicant's engineer prepared several hydrology studies and analyses for the proposed method of runoff mitigation - the number of cisterns on the property, the placement of the cisterns of the property, as well as the capacity of said cisterns (i.e., either a 1, 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, or 100 year storm event). Lisa Naslund, the City's grading and drainage engineer, discussed the building code requirements for post development storm water handling on properties, what studies and reports would be required during plan check and building/grading permit issuance process, and the issues that the reviewing engineer would be considering. 3. Following several public hearings, a field visit to the site and submittals by the applicant of a revised scope of the project, the City Council at its January 9, 2017 meeting by a 4-1 vote (Councilmember Wilson voted against) directed staff to prepare a ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East' 0 Resolution of approval of the project, for its consideration at the January 23, 2017 meeting. 4. It should be noted that the proposed project is not required to eliminate all runoff; the only constraints on the proposed project with regard to the issue before the Council is that the project not increase water runoff to the detriment of downhill properties. The applicants' engineer shows that the lot drains to the southwest and south east of the property and the run-off from the residence (upper building pad) is proposed to be collected and stored in two cisterns that are 50' long and 10' in diameter and located on the upper northeast portion of the lot under the driveway and two smaller cisterns, 25' long and 4' in diameter located on the lower pad. Two dissipaters are proposed on each building pad on both sides of the development (east and west) to help collect the overflow from the cisterns and to filter stormwater from the building pads. The cistern storage method stores the difference in stormwater runoff volume between the pre and post construction conditions. The runoff would first pass through a pre- treatment system and then enter into the cisterns' storage barrels. In order to distribute the runoff between the cisterns, a pipe would connect the barrels. The runoff will then enter a manhole containing a pump. The pump will turn on when the runoff reaches a specified overflow level and it will pump the excess volume out for irrigation. When the storm volume exceeds the storage capacity of the tanks, the water will flow through an overflow pipe and be slowly discharged through the dissipaters. The proposed storage system is designed for a 25 -year storm to store the difference in stormwater runoff volume between the pre and post development conditions. However, according to the applicants' engineer, due to the sizing of the cisterns, it can address a 100 year storm event and the project will retain and slow down more run-off on site post construction than what is currently draining off the property. Lastly, any proposed construction with regard to the water mitigation measures must also be approved by the County Building Department grading and drainage engineer when the final grading plans are submitted. SI1'h CONDITIONS 5. The property is zoned RAS-2 and the gross lot area is 7.05 acres. The net lot area for development purposes is 6.02 acres or 262,368 square feet. The existing property is currently vacant. 6. In 2015 the applicant requested to subdivide the existing vacant lot known as 23 Crest Road East, totaling 7.055 acres (gross) into 2 parcels. In February 2016 the applicant withdrew an application for a subdivision. ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East 7. 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. A geotechnical and geological report prepared for the subdivision states that the crown of a landslide (Flying Triangle) is about 230 feet west of the southwestern portion of the lot. 8. The single-family residence on the lot as it is currently proposed is categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Class 3. However, the Planning Commission and/or City Council may require additional information to aid them in the decision -making process and place conditions on the development, which are site specific. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 9. The new residence is proposed at 10,400 square feet and finished floor level of the residence will be between 15'-20' below Crest Road (depending where on Crest Road one is located). With the highest ridgeline of the house at 20', 0-5 feet of the house will be visible from the street, (depending where on Crest Road one is located). The attached garage will have a maximum ridge height of 15' from finished floor. The basement is proposed to be 10,400 square feet and be contained entirely within the footprint of the new residence and will be 15' in depth. Per the applicant, the residence is proposed on the shallowest sloped area with a basement being added to increase the residence size while reducing the footprint. None of the proposed structures are in setbacks. 10. As mentioned earlier, 2 sets of cisterns are proposed to manage the run-off from the property. Two cisterns that are 50' long and 10' in diameter and located on the upper northeast portion of the lot under the driveway and two smaller cisterns, 25' long and 4' in diameter located on the lower pad. Two dissipaters are proposed on each building pad, on both sides of the development (east and west) to help collect the overflow from the cisterns and to filter stormwater from the building pads. At the time of the subdivision request one set of cisterns was proposed at the upper pad of the lot and Willdan Engineering, City's contracted engineering firm, reviewed the proposed containment system and deemed it adequate to protect the downhill properties from water run-off from the site, after it is developed. LA County grading/ drainage engineer and the building official were present at several of the public hearings and described their role in reviewing proposed developments. The engineer provided information on drainage requirements for new construction. The proposed drainage method will have to meet building code requirements, together with compliance with the Low Impact Development Ordinance, due to land development ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East activities for construction of a new single-family residence where one acre or more of land is disturbed, and where the project adds 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface. (Chapter 8.32 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). 11. The applicant also proposes a new driveway off of Crest Road East. Per the Fire Department requirement, the driveway will be 20' wide and include a turn -around area to accommodate fire truck access. The Traffic Commission reviewed the proposed apron on July 28, 2016 and recommended approval. A not to exceed 3' high retaining wall with a swale is proposed along the north and east sides of the driveway and motor court. A 600 square foot parking pad, east of the main entrance and adjacent to the driveway is proposed to accommodate guest parking. Both, the driveway and the parking pad location and size meet the zoning code provisions. 12. A 1,300 square foot stable - first floor and a 792 square foot loft with a 264 square foot covered porch and 2,250 square foot corral is proposed as part of the guesthouse building pad that will be accessed by both a 10' wide stable pathways on a 25% slope, accessed from Crest Road and a proposed (for pedestrians) 780 square foot stairway with 3' high maximum walls that joins the residence pad and the guesthouse pad. A 3' high retaining wall is required just north of the stable and will have a swale behind it to collect drainage. Pursuant to the zoning code requirements the following is applicable to this request: REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED Minimum 6' wide access with roughened surface 10 'wide access -way from Crest Road with roughened surface (not paved) Stable, corral not to be located on slopes greater than 4:1 Grading is included for the entire pad (guest house and stable/corral). 2,475 c.y. cut, 0 c.y. fill;. 750 c.y. over -excavation and 885 c.y. re -compaction; for a total of 4,110 c.y. Not in front yard or side or front setback. May be located up to 25' in rear setback. Not proposed in any setback Stable min. 35' from any residential structure Proposed stable more than 35' from any residential structure. Stable building to be designed for rural and agricultural uses only, but may include storage for vehicles, household items Stable is proposed with 4 stalls, 400 sf of agricultural storage, 73 sf feed room, and tack space in the loft (792 sf) which is 37.9% of the structure Size to include the entire footprint including loft, if any Ground floor (1,300 sf.): 593 sf stalls, 234 sf center aisle, 73 sf feed room, 400 sf agricultural storage; Loft (792 sf is tack room) ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East Minimum of 60% shall be maintained for agricultural uses Agricultural uses: 1,300 sf (ground floor) 62.1 % Maximum of 40% not to exceed 800 s.f. may be maintained for a tack room use Tack use area comprises 792 sf. or 37.9% Includes tack room/storage & bathroom Tack area may have sanitary and kitchen amenities Bathroom proposed; no kitchen Tack area may have glazed openings Condition of approval. Agricultural space entry doors to be min. 4'wide & 7.5' high; appearance of a stable door Condition of approval. Loft is permitted Loft; proposed for tack room purposes Loft plate height may not exceed 7' The total height of the structure at its highest peak is proposed to be 21' with a 7' plate height shown for the loft. (Plate heights per condition of approval.) Exterior area of stables may not to be paved Dirt or D.G. (condition of approval) Corral minimum 550 sf.; fenced and contiguous to stable. (Planning Commission may determine the size of a corral) Proposed 2,250 sq. ft. corral enclosed with 3' high wall on north side Access slope not to exceed 25% From main driveway and Crest Road with 25% maximum slope Commercial uses or sleeping is not allowed Applicant is not proposing any commercial uses or sleeping in the stable The applicant must comply with all other requirements of Chapter 17.18 of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to stables, as well as to all other regulations including, but not be limited to undergrounding of utility lines to the structures, lighting, roof material, Fire Department requirements and others. The following table lists stables /sizes approved since 2011. LOCATION SQUARE FEET/NO. OF STORIES 11 Blackwater Cyn. Rd. 890 sq. ft. one story 5 Buggy Whip 890 sq. ft. one story 0 Chestnut 900 sq. ft. one story 9 Chuckwagon Rd. 1,296 sq. ft. first floor / 792 sq. ft. loft 2,088 sq.ft. total 10 Crest Rd. W. 735 sq. ft. first floor / 453 sq. ft. loft 1,188 sq.ft. total 49 Eastfield 600 sq. ft. one story 12 Johns Cyn. Rd. 735 sq. ft. one story 3 Meadowlark 480 sf. first floor / 360 sf. loft 840 sq.ft. total 29 Middleridge Rd. S. 2,160 sq. ft. first floor / 800 sf. loft with center aisle; 2,960 sq.ft. total ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East 6 Portuguese Bend Rd. 450 sq. ft. one story 77 Crest Rd. E 3,456 sq. ft. first floor/ 235 sq.ft. loft with center isle; 3,691 sq.ft. total 1 Pine Tree Lane 2,976 sq. ft. one story 11 Saddleback 2,415 sq. ft. with 625 sq. ft. loft with center isle; 3,040 sq.ft. total 5 Pine Tree Lane 1,810 sq. ft. with 611 sq. ft. loft; 2,421 sq.f.t total 34 Saddleback Rd. 1,140 sq.ft. - one story 23 Crest Rd. E. Proposed 1,300 sq.ft. with 792 sq.ft. loft; total - 2,092 sq.ft. 13. An 800 square foot guesthouse with 105 square foot covered porch is proposed with a 14.6' high maximum ridgeline plus chimneys. Section 17.16.210 (A)(5) of the Zoning Ordinance contains conditions for a guesthouse, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. These conditions, listed below, are intended to ensure that such structures are ancillary uses, do not eliminate an existing or future development for a stable and are not converted to other than permitted.uses. REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED Shall not exceed eight hundred square feet An 800 square foot guesthouse is proposed. Shall not be located in the front yard or any setback. The guesthouse is not proposed to be in the front yard or in any setback. A kitchenette and sanitary facility consisting of a shower, sink and toilet shall be permitted. Applicant proposes a kitchenette and a sanitary facility No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within fifty feet of the guesthouse. The driveway is more than fifty feet away. Occupancy of the guesthouse shall be limited to persons employed on the premises, the immediate family of the occupants of the main residence or by the temporary guests of the occupants of the main residence. No temporary guest may remain in occupancy for more than thirty days in any six-month period. This is a standard condition of approval. Renting of a guesthouse is prohibited. This is a standard condition of approval. 14. The proposed disturbed area of the lot will be 95,850 square feet and 36.5% disturbance of the net lot area, where maximum allowed disturbance is 40% (Municipal Code 17.16.070B). Grading will entail a total of 48,180 cubic yards of dirt as follows: 15,185 c.y. cut, 7,300 c.y. fill, 11,750 c.y. over -excavation, 13,885 c.y. re -compaction and ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East all of the dirt from the basement, 5,750 c.y. will be exported. The fill will primarily be placed below the residence and on the west side of the residence. There is no fill proposed for the lower building pad. Maximum 2:1 slopes will be created between the roadway easement and the residential building pad, between the back of the pool decking and the stable/guest house building pad and the areas to the east and west thereof. The areas closest to the front and Crest Road, on both sides of the residence, will be graded to 3:1 slope and on the eastern side to 2.5:1 slope. 15. Two building pads are proposed. The residential building pad is proposed at 41,660 square feet (previously 47,325 sq.ft.) and will have coverage of 14,680 square feet or 35.3% with allowed deductions, (30% max. guideline). Pad 2 for the guesthouse and stable is proposed at 11,100 square feet with 2,259 square feet of coverage or 20.4% with allowed deductions for the trellis and portion of the porches. 16. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 18,659 square feet or 7.1 %, and with allowed deductions would be 18,189 or 6.9%, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage including the structures and all hardscape and flatwork will be 35,749 square feet or 13.6% (35% max. permitted) with deductions. 17. Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. 18. When reviewing a development application the City Council should consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit, included with this report. 19. Included with this staff report is the Resolution of approval provided to the City Council for the January 23rd meeting. Together with standard findings of facts and conditions of approval including those adopted by the Planning Commission, conditions specific to this project have been added in the draft Resolution, such as: • During construction, pedestrian and equestrian passable path of at least 4' wide from the edge of pavement shall be clear at all times along roadway easements on Crest Road E. • During construction, traffic lanes shall not be impeded. If, however, a traffic lane must be impeded for delivery trucks or other construction vehicles, flagmen shall be utilized on both sides of the impeded area to direct traffic • Construction trailer/office and other facilities such as portable toilets, shall to a maximum extent practicable, not be visible from the road and be in a location approved by staff • Construction fence is required ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East ZC NO. 902 NEARBY PROPERTIES For information onl Address House size in sq.ft. Lot Area (gross acres) 16 Crest Road E. 5,460* 1.51 17 Crest Road E. 8,796* (under construction) 9.64 18 Crest Road E. 6,700* 3.84 22 Crest Road E. 10,367* 5.34 26 Crest Road E. 3,904 4.76 29 Crest Road E. 4,766* 6.57 30 Crest Road E. 6,572* 4.72 34 Crest Road E. 6,387 4.87 56 Portuguese Bend Road 2,270 3.21 58 Portuguese Bend Road 2,166 6.96 Average 5,739 5.14 23 Crest Road. E 10,400 Proposed 7.05 NOTE: The above do not include garages, basements or accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records * City records CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: 11.42.050 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: A. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan; 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; C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the use and buildings proposed; D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district; ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East -9- 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; F. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title. SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 11.46.010 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. 11.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. 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; 2. 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; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. 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); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. 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; ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest Road East THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Monday, January23, 2017 5:26: eel" Subject: 23 Crest Road East Water flow in the past 24 hours Date: Monday, January 23, 2017 4:46:11 PM Pacific Standard Time JAN 23 2017 From: Charlie Raine <charlie.rainel0@gmail.com> City of Rolling HMIs To: Pat Wilson <pwilson@fastlanetrans.com>, Leah Mirsch <Ieahmirsch@veeYon.net>, Beat Dieringer <ddabea@msn.com>, ksbmdl@cox.net <ksbmdl@cox.net>, Jeff Pieper <Jeff.Pieper@pieper.com> CC: Yolanta Schwartz <ys@cityofrh.net>, Ray Cruz <rcruz@cityofrh.net>, John Mackenbach <johnfmac@cox.net>, Jim Partridge <jpartridge@sei.us.com>, Terry Rhodes <tlrretired@aol.com>, Robert O'Shea <rmoshea@protonmail.com>, Charlie Raine Dear Council members - Yesterday's rain came at an opportune time. Tonight your vote is to confirm your finding that the development of 23 Crest Road East , as it is proposed, will not negatively affect neighboring properties. Viewing the videos below , particularly #2 , it should be obvious that the information you have received and relied upon as to the differential in runoff from the existing state of the Hynes property to what will be occurring post -development was completely incorrect . The existing runoff is evidenced by the east canyon between Stevens and Hynes - there is NO water coming down here- this canyon has no directed runoff from Crest or from the Stevens, it exhibits the "natural" (non-existent) sheet flow off the property. The west side stream is mainly, if not all, runoff from the hardscape of the few homes on the north side of Crest and Crest road itself. With 3.5 inches of rain received in the past 24 hours, where will that extra water go? Had development already occurred, the cisterns would have been filled weeks ago. Third grade math: 1" of rain falling over 12 square feet equals one CUBIC foot of water. Therefore 40,000 square feet of impermeable area divided by 12 equals 3,333 CUBIC feet of water for every inch of rain. Each CUBIC foot of water equals 7.48 gallons. 3,333 X 7.48= 24,933 gallons of water generated for immediate downhill disbursement for each inch of rain that falls on a wet, impermeable surface. The two cisterns would have been at capacity weeks ago. The 2nd video proves that virtually all rain falling on the Hynes property, even with the heavy and consistent rain we have been receiving, percolates onsite (see ZERO Page 1 of 2 water flow in east side canyon of their property) and does NOT "sheet flow" off the property as they have insisted upon from the beginning. The applicant's position that the development is a net benefit to the properties below due to their capturing of more water than currently flows off the property is a complete fallacy. Regards, Charlie Raine Video#1, about 12:50 January 22nd. P1223979.MOV Video #2, a few minutes later . Top of Mackenbach property at confluence of the two canyons coming from 23 Crest Road East P1223980.MOV Video #3. This is about 5 minutes after the second video and taken of the outflow from the drain at 18 Crest Rd East, the same drain that feeds the west side of the canyon of the Hynes property and would converge (IF there was water coming from the east side of the Hynes property) to go under the Mackenbach shared driveway and on down Little Klondide Canyon • P1223981.MOV Video #4. This is about 1:30 PM on January 22nd and shows the arrival of the "first running" of water in the canyon in 8+ years. • P1223989.MOV Video #5. This is 10 minutes later and shows the increased flow in Little Klondike and how close the pipe under Pinto is to maxi mum capacity. • P1223991.MOV Page2of2 Photographs submitted by Bolton Engineering on behalf of Hynes February 7,2017 ;c< 1 .o :moo\ 2. �� �\yam\� �:.\ ��.. .�,\•�� ����\�. \\. .c v \� \� \�\� ,� \ ���� �"r � \.:.0 Ooo : • \tip \� F ,, • ,,, �"�.�\ �" .. �' a,+' .� `�Q' \\\ \\\ \\ \ r \. rCVD From: "Roy Itani (Riad)" <RITANI@dpw.lacounty.gov> FEB 0 9 2017 Date: Thursday, February 9, 2017 3:48 PM To: Yolanta Schwartz <ys@cityofrh.net> City of Rolling Hills Cc: "Naslund (Eckert), Lisa" <LNASLUND@dpw.lacounty.go'Y Subject: RE: Lisa's memo Hi Yolanta, below is Lisa's comment on the video. Hope that helps. We viewed the video and very much appreciate the information. It is helpful and brings home the point that pervious ground has the ability to infiltrate or attenuate stormwater and that infiltration capabilities decrease as the storm progresses. As with all projects, we will verify through review of calculations using the LA County Hydrology Manual and grading plans designed per Rolling Hills building code to ensure that drainage will not increase nor be concentrated as a result of the development and any drainage design must meet requirements of Low Impact Development and retain any potential increase in drainage to adjacent properties. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK RESOLUTION NO. 1202 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, GARAGES, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, RETAINING WALLS AND NEW DRIVEWAY; AND REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUESTHOUSE AND STABLE WITH LOFT AND CORRAL AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 902 AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, LOT 132A -MS, (HYNES). THE PROJECT WAS DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Initially, in March 2016 an application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. James Hynes with respect to real property located at 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills (Lot 132A -MS) requesting a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variance to allow for the construction of a new 11,500 square foot residence and 11,500 square foot basement, two attached garages totaling 1,540 square feet, 900 square foot swimming pool with spa, an 800 square foot guesthouse in the front yard, 7,150 square foot tennis court and related miscellaneous outdoor structures all requiring over 62,000 cubic yards of grading. Following several public hearings and field visits by the Planning Commission and interested members of the public, the applicants scaled down the project. During the City Council proceedings, described below, the applicants further scaled down the project. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at their regular meeting on April 19, 2016, May 17, 2016, and at a field visit on May 17, 2016. Following the May 2016 meeting the applicants scaled down the project by removing the tennis court, relocating the guesthouse, proposing a stable, reducing the grading quantities and disturbance of the lot, driveway and the size of the residence. Additional public hearings were held on June 21, 2016, July 19, 2016, and at a field trip on July 19, 2016. Throughout the process, neighbors within 1,000 -foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Peninsula News on April 7, 2016 and June 9, 2016. The applicants and their agents were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail and the applicants and agents were in attendance at the hearings evidence was heard and presented from all person interested in affecting said proposal, and from members of the City staff. Section 3. During the proceedings, the Planning Commission and several neighbors in addition to expressing concerns with the mass of the structures, length of the residence, grading and the impact and aesthetics of the overall development on Crest Road East properties, were concerned with the geology, soil stability, drainage and water run-off from the proposed project and its impact on the downhill properties. The City's drainage and grading engineer and the supervising Building and Safety engineer were present at several meetings and addressed the Commission. The applicants revised their drainage plans, provided hydrology study and included cistern system to retain the run-off from the property. Section 4. The Planning Commission at their August 16, 2016 meeting adopted a Resolution approving the revised project. Following Planning Commission approval of the project, the City Council at their September 12, 2016 took jurisdiction of the project. Pursuant to Section 17.54.015 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, a review hearing for cases taken under jurisdiction by the City Council shall be conducted as de novo hearings. Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East Section 5. The City Council conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application on October 4, 2016, in the field, at their regularly scheduled meeting on October 10, 2016, and on January 9, 2017. Neighbors within 1,000 -foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in Palos Verdes Peninsula News on September 22, 2016. In addition, the Agenda for City Council's meetings is printed in the City's Newsletter. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff, City's drainage and grading engineer, neighbors and applicant's engineer and attorney and the City Council had reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. Section 6. At the public hearings several residents expressed concerns regarding the stability, erosion and mostly water run-off from the proposed project and the impact on the downhill properties. Both, Lisa Naslund, the City's grading and drainage engineer and the applicants' engineer discussed the building code requirements for handling post development storm water on properties; what studies and reports would be required and the issues that the reviewing engineer would be looking at. The applicants' engineer prepared several hydrology studies and responses to City Council concerns and to residents' statements and letters. According to the applicants' engineer, the project will retain and slow down more run-off on site post construction than what is currently retained. At the October 10, 2016 City Council meeting, members of the City Council also expressed concerns with the size of the residence, grading quantities, steepness of the resulting slopes and visibility of the proposed project from Crest Road, the City's main thoroughfare, and appointed Councilmembers Black and Pieper to an Ad Hoc Committee to work with the applicants to provide an improved and more acceptable project. Following a meeting with the Ad Hoc Committee and several revisions, on January 3, 2017, the applicants submitted a revised project to the City Council. Following lengthy discussion and objections from a couple of residents regarding the drainage and results of the applicants' hydrology study, members of the City Council by a vote 4-1, at the January 9, 2017 meeting, directed staff to prepare a Resolution approving the revised project. Section 7. The City Council finds that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 (new construction of single family residence and accessory structures), and Section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption) of the CEQA guidelines. Section 8. — Site Plan Review -Proposed Development. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review and approval before any grading requiring grading permit or any new building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involvechangesto grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by not more than 999 square feet in any thirty-six (36) month period. The grading for the development and the new structures require Site Plan Review. The pool/spa requires a Site Plan Review due to the grading and the size (over 800 sq. ft. surface water area), and the dissipater retaining wall require a Site Plan Review due to its height of 5'. With respect to the Site Plan for the development, the City Council hereby approves the request for Site Plan Review in Zoning Case No. 902 to build the proposed project and makes the following findings: Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East 2 A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures and maintaining sufficient setbacks to provide buffers between residential uses. The net lot area of the lot is over 6 acres and the lot is adjacent to other large lots along Crest Road East, where most of the development will take place. The stable and corral promote the rural, equestrian character of Rolling Hills. None of the structures are in setbacks. The project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements, including lot disturbance. The net lot area of the lot is 262,368 square feet. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 18,659 square feet or 7.1%, which includes all of the structures; with allowance for permitted deductions the structural lot coverage will be 6.9%, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed, including the driveway would be 35,749 square feet or 13.6% excluding permitted deductions, (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area of the lot is proposed to be 36.5%. B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. The topography and the configuration of the lot have been considered, and it was determined that the proposed development will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures, because the proposed project will be constructed partially on the existing undulated (not steep) area of the lot, will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs, is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will allow the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. The proposed project would be located on a gentler slope of the property and leaving the steeper and more densely vegetated areas in their natural state to the south, along with the natural drainage course. The revised project provides for less than the maximum permitted slope gradient in areas that would be most visible from Crest Road E. The project promotes equestrian uses, therefore furthering the City's goal to remain an equestrian community. C. 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 development plan takes into consideration the views from Crest Road East and the development will be sunk and moved back from Crest Road East, so that views from the road will not be blocked. The residence is proposed on the shallowest sloped area with a basement being added to increase the residence size while reducing the footprint. The slopes being created have been rounded and it was attempted to mimic the existing slope in the area. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped. The project will be screened from the road and all neighbors. During the review process, at suggestions from the City Council and addressing the neighbors' concerns, the applicant scaled down the grading areas and the project in general to retain as much of the natural terrain as possible and not greatly affect the lower building pad. D. The development plan will introduce additional landscaping, which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and the landscaping will provide a buffer or transition area between private and public areas. There will be some clearing of existing landscaping due to overgrowth and improper maintenance that has become a fire hazard. Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East 3 E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the new 20' driveway will be safe to drive on as two cars can safely pass one another. There is ample parking in the garages and there is a proposed parking pad at the front of the house, outside of all setbacks, so all visitor parking will be contained on site. An adequate driveway is proposed to safely accommodate horse trailers to the stable and corral area. The Traffic Commission reviewed the proposed driveways and has recommended approval. Section 9 — Conditional Use Permits. Sections 17.18.060 and 17.18.090 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a stable over 200 square feet and corral over 550 square feet with a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed 1,300 square foot stable with 792 square foot loft and corral comply with all requirements of these sections. An 800 square foot guesthouse is proposed. Section 17.16.210 (A)(5) of the Zoning Ordinance contains conditions for a guesthouse, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. All of the detached structures comply with the provisions and conditions for such structures. With respect to this request for Conditional Use Permit, the City Council finds as follows: A. Conditionally permitted uses are not outright permitted by the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. The City Council must consider applications for a Conditional Use Permit and may, with such conditions as are deemed necessary, approve a conditional use which will not jeopardize, adversely affect, endanger or to otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare or be materially detrimental to the property of other persons located in the vicinity of such use. B. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the stable, corral and guesthouse would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the uses are consistent with similar uses in the community, and meet all the applicable code development standards for such uses and they are located in areas on the property that are adequately sized to accommodate such uses. The proposed uses are appropriately located in that they will be sufficiently separated from nearby structures used for habitation or containing sleeping quarters. The stable/corral would be constructed in furtherance of the General Plan goal of promoting and encouraging equestrian uses. The proposed guesthouse is a common amenity to Rolling Hills. C. 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 uses (stable/corral, and guesthouse) are located in the middle of a 6.0 acre lot and their general location is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so as to not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. The proposed stable is to be located adjacent to the corral and a path designated for equestrian uses that runs from the stable to the road above is separate from the other outdoor living areas on the property and will be comprised of decomposed granite. D. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the proposed uses comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and will not give the property an over -built look, and areas will remain open and unobstructed. The lot is 6.0 acres net in size and is sufficiently large to accommodate the proposed uses. The stable will be compatible with the uses in the surrounding area because Rolling Hills is an equestrian community and stables are encouraged. The stable will look like a stable and with the corral will promote open space on the pad. Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East 4 The guesthouse will be compatible with the uses in the surrounding area because it will have the same architectural design as the house and is in the rear yard and is an amenity other residences in Rolling Hilts enjoy. E. The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards of the zone district and requires Conditional Use Permits pursuant to Sections 17.18.060, 17.18.090, 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Zoning Ordinance. F. The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing fmdings, and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves Zoning Case No. 902 request for a Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permits for the construction of a new 10,400 square foot residence, 10,400 square foot basement, 1,120 square foot garage, 475 square foot entry, a total of 2,869 square feet covered porches - 2,500 sq.ft. at main residence, 264 sq.ft. at the stable and 105 sq.ft. at the guest house; a new pool and spa totaling 864 square feet with a 60 square foot pool equipment area, a 171 square foot service yard, a 250 square foot outdoor kitchen, a 350 square feet detached trellis near the proposed 800 square foot guest house, a two- story stable with 1,300 square feet on the first level and a 792 square foot loft, a new driveway and turnaround access, a pervious access to the stable, several retaining walls and grading of a total of 48,180 cubic yards of dirt; (the dirt from the basement, 5,750 c.y. may be exported), subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan and Conditional Use Permits approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.080(A) and 17.42.070 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). Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in this permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated January 3, 2017, 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 and Conditional Use Permit 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. The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto building plans submitted to the Building Depat tiuent for review and shall be kept on site at all times. Any modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed and approved by staff prior to implementing the changes. E. The Plans shall be submitted to the LA County Building and Safety Department for review, issuance of,permits and inspections. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to Building and Safety Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the fmal plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 18,659 square feet or 7.1% of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations, and with the permitted allowances 18,189 square feet or 6.9% coverage, (20% maximum). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork, shall not exceed 35,749 square feet or 13.6%, of the net lot area, excluding deductions, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% maximum). H. The disturbed area of the lot, including the approved stable and corral shall not exceed 36.5%; over a 95,850 square feet surface area. Grading for this project shall not exceed a total of 48,180 cubic yards of which 5,750 c.y from the basement may be exported. I. The residential building pad is proposed at 41,660 square feet and shall not exceed coverage of 14,680 square feet or 35.3% with allowed deductions. The stable pad is proposed at 11,100 square feet and shall not exceed 2,259 square feet of coverage or 20.4%. Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East 6 J. A new driveway shall be provided per the Fire Department requirements and the apron of the driveway shall be roughened and the first 20 feet of the driveway shall not exceed 7% in slope. K. Access to the stable and to the corral shall be decomposed granite or like, 100% pervious roughened material. L. Per Section 17.16(A)(5)(c) of the zoning ordinance, only one sanitary facility consisting of a shower, sink, and a toilet and a kitchenette is permitted in the guesthouse; there shall be no parking area within 50 -feet of the guesthouse; no renting of the guesthouse is permitted. 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 the proposed structures, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department. N. At any time there are horses on the property, Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be applied for manure control, including but not be limited to removal of the manure on a daily basis or provision of a receptacle with a tight closing lid that is constructed of brick, stone, concrete, metal or wood lined with metal or other sound material and that is safeguarded against access by flies. The contents of said receptacles shall be removed once a week. It is prohibited to dispose of manure or any animal waste into the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), into natural drainage course or spread on the property. O. The pool equipment area shall be enclosed and the enclosure screened with landscaping. Per LA County Building Code, pool barrier/fencing shall be required. P. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lighting Ordinance of the City of Rolling Hills (RHMC 17.16.190 E), pertaining to lighting on said property; roofmg and material requirements of properties in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, and all other ordinances and laws of the City of Rolling Hills and the LA County Building Code. Q. All utility lines to the residence, guesthouse, and stable shall be placed underground, subject to all applicable standards and requirements. R. Hydrology, soils, geology and other reports, as required by the LA County Building and Public Works Departments, and as may be required by the Building Official, shall be prepared. S. Prior to issuance of a final construction approval of the project, all graded slopes shall be landscaped. Prior to issuance of building permit, a landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements and requirements for graded slopes. The landscaping shall not form a hedge like screen but be offset. The height of any new trees and shrubs to be planted in conjunction with this project shall not at any time exceed the ridgeline of the roof of the structures, which they are screening. In order to preserve the sightline of the view from Crest Road East, the height of any landscaping planted on the property along the Crest Road E. roadway easement, or along the front of the residence shall be maintained so as not to exceed three (3) feet from the road elevation. 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. The landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, (Chapter 13.18 of the RHMC). Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East 7 0 T. The dissipaters and pool equipment area shall be screened with landscaping. Sound attenuating equipment shall be installed to dampen the sound from the pool equipment area and the pool pump. The project shall utilize the most quiet and technologically advanced equipment to dampen the sound. U. The setback lines and roadway easement lines in the vicinity of the construction for this project shall remain staked throughout the construction. During construction a construction fence shall be installed. V. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences -including construction fences, any hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. In addition, any construction facility, such as a construction trailer/office or portable toilets, to a maximum extent practicable, shall be located in a manner not visible from the street, and be in a location satisfactory to City staff. W. 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. X. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water 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, and objectionable odors. Y. Construction vehicles or equipment, employees vehicles or delivery trucks, to the maximum extend practical, shall not impede any traffic lanes; if it becomes necessary to block traffic in order to aid in the construction, no more than a single lane or portion thereof may be blocked for a short period of time and flagmen utilized on both sides of the impeded area to direct traffic. Z. During construction, 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 easement along Crest Road East, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. A minimum of 4' wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and clear at all times. AA. 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. AB. 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.pho?suite=safety&page=hazard definitions#FIRE. Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East 8 It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire extinguisher. AC. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage, cistern construction and maintenance, septic tank construction and maintenance in conformance with the County Health Department, storm water drainage facilities management, and to the City's Low Impact development Ordinance (LID). AD. Prior to fmaling of the project an "as graded" and "as constructed" plans and certifications, including certifications of ridgelines of the structures, shall be provided to the Planning Depai went and the Building Department to ascertain that the competed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modification made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the "as built/as graded" plan. AE. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. The affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017. BEA DIERINGER, MAYOR ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East 9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 1202 entitled: -A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, GARAGES, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, RETAINING WALLS AND NEW DRIVEWAY; AND REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUESTHOUSE AND STABLE WITH LOFT AND CORRAL AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 902 AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, LOT 132A -MS, (HYNES). THE PROJECT WAS DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on February 13, 2017, 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. HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Resolution No. 1202 23 Crest Road East 10 qtai INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No.: 7-A Mtg. Date: 02/13/17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 1203 - AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 1195 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER, FOLLOWING THE APPEAL FILED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER, WHICH ORDERED THE CONFINEMENT OF AZUL TO THE OSTRIKER PROPERTY. DATE: February 13, 2017 ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 1203 Amending Resolution 1195 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 1203 amending Resolution 1195 that modifies an earlier order of the City Council concerning the Dr. Ostriker aggressive animal case that ordered the confinement of Azul to the Ostriker property. BACKGROUND The incidents that led to the appeal from Dr. Jeffrey Ostriker (27 Caballeros Rd.) are the second set of incidents in the last 12 months involving killing of chickens by his dog Azul. The first incident occurred in December 2015 when Azul killed a chicken belonging to Matthew Chaisson, occupant of the property at 8 Crest Road East. In response to that incident, the City Manager ordered that Azul be confined to the Ostriker residence and when walked be restrained by a leash by a person capable of controlling the dog. Dr. Ostriker appealed that order to the City Council, in which he urged the Council to allow him to walk Azul without a leash due to his physical disabilities. The outcome of that appeal was memorialized in City Council Resolution No. 1183. The City received a complaint report on August 4, 2016 from Mr. Norm LaCaze (24 Portuguese Bend Road) alleging that Dr. Ostriker's dog Azul (described as "a large, broad chested, whitish type dog) and two other dogs entered his property on two different occasions and attacked his chickens, each incident resulted in the death of numerous chickens. Mr. LaCaze elected not to file a complaint after the first incident. However, the second of these incidents on August 3, 2016, resulting in the killing of 40 juvenile chickens, prompted him to file the complaint. On August 19, 2016, Mrs. Geraldean Belleville (12 Crest Road East) filed a complaint alleging that Azul ("a long body, medium length legs, blonde colored cocker spaniel type hair dog") entered her property on August 5, 2016 where the dog broke down the chicken coop and killed all the chickens within it. Ms. Belleville stated in the report that she witnessed the attack. Pursuant to RHMC Section 6.24.090, following an investigation conducted by the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control, the City Manager conducted an administrative hearing on Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. in the Rolling Hills City Council Chamber to determine if the alleged attacks had occurred and if the conditions imposed by the City Council in Resolution No. 1183 had been violated. At the hearing, each involved party made its initial presentation and brief rebuttals before the hearing was concluded. After reviewing the incident investigation reports from the LA County Department of Animal Care and Control officers, written documents provided by the parties involved, and the oral testimony provided at the administrative hearing, the City Manager determined that the LaCaze and Belleville complaints were meritorious and that Dr. Ostriker violated the conditions of Resolution No. 1183 by allowing Azul to roam freely and out of his immediate control. In view of RHMC Section 6.24.090(A), the City Manager ordered that Azul be removed from the City immediately. Pursuant to Section 6.24.070, Dr. Ostriker appealed the City Manager's order. A hearing on the appeal was scheduled for and conducted on November 14, 2016. The City Council received a written staff report containing numerous attachments, including correspondence from Dr. Ostriker and a report from the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control. Testifying at the hearing were Dr. Jeffrey Ostriker (the dog owner), Matthew Chaisson (previous victim of an Azul attack), Carol LaCaze (current complainant), Norm LaCaze (current complainant), Geraldean Belleville (current complainant), Dianne Wyatt (Azul's groomer), Sue Doyle (Azul's trainer), Cathleen Cunningham (Dr. Ostriker's therapist), Melvyn Honig and James Aichele. The City Council reviewed and considered all of the written and oral evidence submitted in the matter prior to making its decision. Consequently, and based on the foregoing, the City Council modified the decision of the City Manager by requiring that Dr. Ostriker permanently remove Azul from the City as follows: 0 A. Azul is ordered confined to the Ostriker property and shall be kept indoors at all times, except as provided in paragraph B below. B. Azul may be allowed outdoors, provided that he is confined to a fully enclosed, secure clog run with a concrete pad. C. Azul shall not be walked outdoors off the Ostriker property anywhere within the territorial boundaries of the City of Rolling Hills. The City Council reserved jurisdiction over this appeal for 90 days, during which time the City Manager was directed to monitor Dr. Ostriker's compliance with the conditions imposed herein. Should Dr. Ostriker not be in compliance, the City Manager shall schedule a hearing before the City Council. However, the City Council at its January 9th meeting directed the City Manager to provide a status report at its January 23rd meeting to inform them if Dr. Ostriker is in compliance with Resolution 1195. Since the City Council passed, approved and adopted Resolution 1195 on November 28, 2016; there have been no formal complaints made by any members of the community to City staff that Azul has been seen loose or being walked within the City limits. Furthermore, the City Manager contacted the victims of the chicken attacks to determine if they had seen Azul since the resolution was adopted, they all replied they have not. The City Manager drove to Dr. Ostriker's home on January 17th to witness if Azul is running loose on the property and if Dr. Ostriker had started construction on an enclosed dog kennel/run. From what was visible from the roadway easement, the City Manager did not witness either. The City Manager subsequently spoke to Dr. Ostriker and found out he has not constructed an enclosed dog kennel/run anywhere on his property, and has no plans to do so in the future. He stated that the dog is always in his home and only goes out when Dr. Ostriker takes Azul outside the City's boundaries. DISCUSSION At the January 23rd City Council meeting, the City Manager gave his report that Dr. Ostriker technically has been in compliance with Resolution 1195. However, he also reported out that all of residents whose chickens were victims of Azul's violent actions thought that the previous Council action required that Dr. Ostriker build an enclosed dog run/kennel. They further mentioned that they would not feel safe from Azul until the dog kennel would be built. Theses same sentiments were also brought up by a number of City Councilmembers. As a result of the discussion of the item, it was considered infeasible and inhumane to require Azul to wait to relieve himself by being transported outside the City limits. The present situation does not account for unforeseen circumstances, such as inclement weather, emergencies, or illness on the part of either Dr. Ostriker or Azul. It was concluded by the City Council that the only acceptable solution that advances the City's goal of protecting neighboring pets from Azul's violent behavior and providing for the wellbeing of the dog is the construction of a fully enclosed dog run on the property where Azul lives. As a result, the attached Resolution amending Resolution 1195 modifies the language of the original resolution requiring that Azul to be confined to Dr. Ostriker's home except when he is being transported by leash to the required enclosed dog kennel on the property or to a vehicle when leaving the City limits. Furthermore, the dog run needs to be completed 45 days from the date of the amended resolution. Finally, the City Council reserves jurisdiction over the matter for 90 days, during which time the City Manager is directed to monitor Dr. Ostriker's compliance with the conditions imposed by the amended resolution. Should Dr. Ostriker be found not in compliance with any condition in the amended resolution, the City Manager shall schedule a hearing before the City Council. NOTIFICATION The parties involved in the appeal have been notified. RRC:hl Ostriker 2nd appeal Reso_staffreport.docx RESOLUTION NO. 1203 AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 1195 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER, FOLLOWING THE APPEAL FILED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER, WHICH ORDERED THE CONFINEMENT OF AZUL TO THE OSTRIKER PROPERTY. The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. City Council Resolution No. 1195, enacted on November 28, 2016, modified the decision of the City Manager in the appeal filed by Dr. Jeffrey Ostriker ("Owner") and ordered the confinement of Azul (a male spaniel mix) to 27 Caballeros Road ("Property") as follows: (1) Azul is ordered confined to the Owner's Property and shall be kept indoors at all times, except that (2) Azul may be allowed outdoors, provided that he is confined to a fully enclosed, secure dog run with a concrete pad; and (3) Azul shall not be walked outdoors off of the Owner's Property anywhere within the territorial boundaries of the City of Rolling Hills. The City Council retained jurisdiction over the appeal for 90 days, during which time the City Manager was directed to monitor Dr. Ostriker's compliance with the conditions imposed by Resolution No. 1195. Section 2. On January 23, 2017, the City Council heard a status report on Dr. Ostriker's implementation of the conditions set forth in Resolution No. 1195 from the City Manager and heard testimony from the public regarding the Dr. Ostriker's compliance with Resolution 1195. During the presentation of this evidence, the City Council learned that Dr. Ostriker had not constructed an enclosed dog run, and that he did not plan to do so in the near future. At the meeting, Dr. Ostriker further testified before Council that due to the requirement that Azul not be walked anywhere within the City, he is currently placing Azul in his vehicle and transporting him outside of the City, twice a day, so that Azul may relieve himself. Section 3. Following the City Manager's report and the public testimony, including testimony from Dr. Ostriker, the City Council reviewed and considered the information in the record, including evidence presented by Dr. Ostrikerand fmds as follows: A. In the absence of a dog run, as conditioned by Resolution No. 1195, Azul can relieve himself outdoors only if transported by automobile to a location outside the City. It is infeasible and inhumane to limit Azul's ability to relieve himself outdoors to the times when he is transported out of the City via automobile, and only twice per day; B. Dr. Ostriker's alternative to constructing a dog run — limiting Azul's access to the outdoors to those occasions when he is driven to a location outside the City — does not account for unforseen circumstances, such as inclement weather, emergencies, or illness on the part of either Dr. Ostriker or Azul. Consequently, it is unrealistic, impractical and ultimately doomed to fail; C. It is inhumane to confine Azul to the interior of the Ostriker home with the sole exception of those occasions when he is driven outside the City; the only acceptable solution that advances the City's goal of protecting neighboring pets from Azul's aggressive and violent behavior and providing for well-being of the dog, is the construction of a fully enclosed dog run on the property where Azul lives. Resolution No. 1203 -1-0 Section 4. Consequently, and based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby modifies Resolution 1195 as follows: A. Azul is ordered confined to the interior of the home on the Ostriker property and shall be kept indoors at all times except when he is placed in the dog run constructed as ordered in paragraph B below. B. Dr. Ostriker shall construct a fully enclosed and secure dog run with a concrete pad on his property within 45 days from the date of this Resolution. C. Azul shall not be walked outdoors off the Ostriker property anywhere within the territorial boundaries of the City of Rolling Hills. D. Azul may be placed within a secured vehicle for the purposes of being transported outside of the City. E. Any time Azul is being transferred to either the dog run or a secured vehicle, he must be leashed and under the control of an adult capable of controlling him. Section 4. The City Council reserves jurisdiction over this matter for 90 days, during which time the City Manager is directed to monitor Dr. Ostriker's compliance with the conditions imposed herein. Should Dr. Ostriker not be in compliance, the City Manager shall schedule a hearing before the City Council. Section 5. The remedial provisions of this Resolution supersede the remedial provisions set forth in Resolution No. 1195. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of February, 2017. Bea Dieringer Mayor ATTEST: Heidi Luce City Clerk Resolution No. 1203 -2- STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS The foregoing Resolution No. 1203 entitled: SS AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 1195 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER, FOLLOWING THE APPEAL FILED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER, WHICH ORDERED THE CONFINEMENT OF AZUL TO THE ()STRIKER PROPERTY. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on February 13, 2017, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Heidi Luce City Clerk Resolution No. 1203 -3 01 - &O Ralle:g9 qeted INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 TO: FROM: THRU: SUBJECT: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No.: 8-A Mtg. Date: 02/13/17 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGE1 REQUEST FOR A TWO-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 72232 TO SUBDIVIDE ONE EXISTING LOT INTO 2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 852, SUBDIVISION NO. 93, AT 80 SADDLEBACK ROAD (TURPANJIAN). AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUEST.. BACKGROUND Attached is a letter from Mr. David Palacios, a representative for Mr. Gerald Turpanjian-GHT LLC, property owner, requesting a two-year time extension to final and record a previously approved Tentative Parcel Map for a 2 -lot subdivision of land at 80 Saddleback Road in Zoning Case No. 852, which will expire in March 2017. The approval entailed the subdivision of a 7.05 acres (gross) lot into 2 parcels. Parcel 1 would be 2.40 acres gross and 1.96 acres net and Parcel 2 would be 4.64 acres gross and 3.71 acres net. The applicant states that time extension is necessary to allow the property owner additional time to secure the necessary signatures from the neighbors to complete the approval process through the RHCA. Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, approval of a Tentative Map may be extended for not more than six years. Staff normally recommends that extensions be requested and granted for not more than 2 -years at a time. ZC NO. 852, TPM Ext 80 Saddleback Road 0 If this extension is approved for two years, the Tentative Parcel Map approval will expire on March 23, 2019, unless additional extension is requested and approved. Attached is a draft resolution of approval for the requested extension. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council review the request, and adopt the attached draft Resolution No. 1204. ZC NO. 852, TPM Ext 80 Saddleback Road 0 RESOLUTION NO. 1204 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 1171 AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 72232, SUBDIVISION NO. 93, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE ONE EXISTING LOT TOTALING 7.05 ACRES INTO 2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED AT 80 SADDLEBACK ROAD, IN ZONING CASE NO. 852. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A request has been filed by Gerald Turpanjian, GHT LLC, with respect to real property at 80 Saddleback Road, (APN 7569-005-008), Rolling Hills, requesting a two year time extension to a previously approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 72232, Subdivision No. 93 a request to subdivide one existing lot totaling 7.05 acres gross into two (2) single-family lots. The subject property is currently vacant. Section 2. The City Council on March 23, 2015 by Resolution No. 1171 granted an approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 72232, which entitlement expires on March 23, 2017. Section 3. The Council considered this item at a meeting on February 13, 2017 at which time information was presented indicating that the extension of time is necessary to allow the applicant additional time to process the subdivision through the Rolling Hills Community Association. Section 4. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the City Council does hereby amend Paragraph 1, Section 9 of Resolution No. 1171, dated March 23, 2015, to read as follows: "The Tentative Map shall expire four (4) years from the date of City Council approval. The Tentative Map was approved on and shall expire on the following dates: APPROVAL DATE: March 23, 2015 EXPIRATION DATE: March 23, 2019 This approval shall become null and void if a Final Map has not been timely filed prior to the expiration date in accordance with provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, or a timely request for an extension has been filed. The duty of inquiry as to such time expiration shall be upon the subdivider. Section 5. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 1171 shall continue to be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017. BEA DIERINGER, MAYOR Resolution No. 1204 1 ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK p STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 1204 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 1171 AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 72232, SUBDIVISION NO. 93, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE ONE EXISTING LOT TOTALING 7.05 ACRES INTO 2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED AT 80 SADDLEBACK ROAD, IN ZONING CASE NO. 852. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on February 13, 2017 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 HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Resolution No. 1204 2 Agenda Item No: 8-A Mtg. Date: 02/13/17 David M. Palacios Representative for GHT, LLC January 24, 2017 ADDITIONAL ATTACHMENT Rolling Hills City Attention: Yolanta Schwartz RE: Subdivision #80 Saddleback Road Dear City Council Members, We are requesting a two (2) year extension of our approval from the City Council meeting dated March 23, 2015, RESOLUTION NO. 1171. A Resolution to subdivide #80 Saddleback Road into 2 Parcels. We are currently in the final stages of the RHCA process. We have d letter of approval from the Board Directors, and we are still pursuing the required surrounding property owner's signatures. Please consider our request and if you have any question please contact us. Thank you, RECEI JAN 2 4 2017 City of Rolling hf;; Ry-----�_ 2408 Steed Court • Lomita, California 90717 • Phone (310) 502-3237 dmpconst@aol.com Agenda Item No. 10-A Mtg. Date: 02/13/17 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANGER SUBJECT: DATE: REPORT ON JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 1, 2016. FEBRUARY 13, 2017 1. On November 1, 2016 a joint meeting was held between the Planning Commission and the City Council to discuss planning and development topics of mutual interest. 2. Prior to the meeting staff queried members of the Planning Commission and members of the City Council what topics they would like to discuss. The following topics were identified: A. The frequency of Variance approvals B. The size and uses of stables C. What level of review should be given to set aside areas for a future stable and corral on a property and should the area be realistically usable? D. Should the City consider regulating the maximum size of new residential developments? E. Should the topography of a lot be considered when calculating lot coverage and disturbance; in other words, on a lot with extreme slopes and canyons -where no construction can take place, or a lot that is divided by a road where one side is very steep, should those limiting developable areas not be included in the calculations of the net lot area for development purposes? Thus, limiting the size of developments. F. Should the maximum permitted hardscape coverage of the lot be amended due to the Fire Dept. requirements for "all weather surface", 20' wide driveways and turn around areas on the lot, and should the requirement for coverage of driveways in the front setback be amended G. Should there be a requirement to provide more than one building pad or certain distance requirement between structures if there are several accessory structures proposed, so that the development creates more of an open feel. 1 3. Following review of the topics staff recommended and members of the City Council and Planning Commission agreed to discuss the following topics at their November 1, 2016 meeting, and stated that if additional meeting(s) is/are warranted, it/they would be scheduled at a later time. A. The frequency of Variance approvals B. The size and uses of stables (including access) C. Should the City consider regulating the maximum size of new residential developments? D. Should the topography of a lot be considered when calculating lot coverage and disturbance; in other words, on a lot with extreme slopes and canyons -where no construction can take place, or a lot that is divided by a road where one side is very steep, should those limiting developable areas not be included in the calculations of the net lot area for development purposes? Thus, limiting the size of developments. 4. Regarding item F above -updating the zoning code to be in compliance with the Fire Code, staff recognizes that the zoning code needs to be amended to comply with the Fire Dept. requirements and other changes are also needed. As soon as time permits staff will undertake this task. 5. Following the joint meeting, staff provided the Planning Commission a brief summary of the topics discussed and the direction Commissioners received from the City Council, as follows: A. VARIANCE REQUESTS AND APPROVALS (No direction for further review and/or discussion was provided) 1. Recognizing that City's lots are very unique in size, topography, configuration and that each lot is different from another, and specific circumstances are attributable to a specific property, not to an entire neighborhood, members of the City Council and Planning Commission believe that granting of variances is warranted. It was stated that ultimately it is important to look at the finished project and what is best for the City. Members of the Council and Planning Commission discussed what makes a good project for the City. It was stated that smaller garages should be encouraged with basements utilizing lifts to accommodate more cars; that larger basements should be encouraged to reduce the size of the house above it; that structures should be spread out on the lot to allow for openness of the lot; to critically review grading and to encourage less than the maximum permitted 2:1 slopes, even if it means grading and disturbing more than the maximum permitted. B/ C. SIZE AND USES OF STABLES AND FhASIBILITY OF SET ASIDE AREA 1. Discussion ensued regarding the size of stables and location and feasibility of set aside area for future stable and corrals. It was stated'that the Planning Commission determines in the field whether or not a location for future equestrian facilities is feasible and if it is not the Commissioners could require a different location. As for the 2 size of stables, it was recognized that larger stables, with lofts and center isles have been constructed in the past five years that add to the massing of structures on the lot. Members of the City Council were not interested in limiting the size of stables, rather they directed the Planning Commission to evaluate the entire lot and the relationship of the stable to the other structures on the lot and their size, as well as assure that there is adequate area for horses, such as corrals and turn outs, so that the equestrian facilities provide an open feel of the property. 2. The City Council directed the Planning Commission to study this issue in consultation with members of the Caballeros group, and develop guidelines of what makes a working and functional stable and what is the appropriate size of a stable and uses within the stable. D. SHOULD THE CITY CONSIDER REGULATING THE MAXIMUM SIZE OF NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS 1. Members of the City Council' and the Planning Commission reviewed the material provided by staff and recognized that in the past 6 years the average size of homes and basements approved and/or constructed were larger than in any previous time period for which statistics were provided in the staff report. It was stated that the sizes of homes should not be regulated, as the existing development standards and lot size dictate the size of a home. Members of the City Council reiterated that the Planning Commission should review proposed developments on a case -by -case basis recognizing the goals of the City to remain an equestrian and rural community and to maintain the character envisioned by the founders of the City. They have also stated that a development could look less massive by constructing smaller garages and utilizing basements as garages with a lift for cars; spreading the accessory structures on a building pad to create more open areas between structures, and providing gentler slopes. 2. Staff was directed to discuss with an engineer the feasibility of constructing basements that would extend beyond the footprint of the house, such as under driveways. *** SHOULD THE TOPOGRAPHY OF A LOT BE CONSIDERED WHEN CALCULATING LOT COVERAGE AND DISTURBANCE; IN OTHER WORDS, ON A LOT WITH EXTREME SLOPES AND CANYONS -WHERE NO CONSTRUCTION CAN TAKE PLACE, OR A LOT THAT IS DIVIDED BY A ROAD WHERE ONE SIDE IS VERY STEEP, SHOULD THOSE LIMITING DEVELOPABLE AREAS NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATIONS OF THE NET LOT AREA FOR DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES? THUS, LIMITING THE SIZE OF DEVELOPMENTS. 1. This topic was not discussed; however, it was said that it was related to item D - Size of residential developments. 3 6. Since the joint meeting, the Planning Commission selected two if its members to a Stable Ad Hoc Committee and staff contacted the president of Caballeros group to inform him of the City Council direction and request his help. The President has been away and upon return will select two members of the group to aid the Planning Commission ad hoc committee. Staff will contact a local engineer regarding the question of constructing basements outside the footprint of the residence and maximizing garage spaces by constructing double deck garages. RECOMMENDATION 7. It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff whether to schedule another meeting with the Planning Commission and provide topics for discussion. 4 2/13/17 CC Notification List Z.C. NAME email: 6-A Ordinance 350-U and Ordinance 350 already posted on Website and scheduled for Notify Me at 3:45 pm on Friday, 2/13 6-B -902- 23 Crest Road East Hynes Staff Report Staff Report Staff Report Staff Report Staff Report x x x x x x x x Jim Hynes Howard Wienberg Tavisha Nicholson Tony Inferrera Charlie Raine Hanne Ekberg Gordon Schaye John Mackenbach Carmen Schaye John Schoenfeld Craig Ekberg Bonnie Waters Steven Spierer 7-A - Ostriker (Azul confinment) Staff Report Dr. Jefrey Ostriker Geraldean Belleville Mr. & Mrs. Norm LaCaze Matt Chaisson 8-A ZC 852 80 Saddleback Road Gerald Turpenjian Dave Palacios x - agenda only via email only Address Iimphynes@gmail.com 20252 Bancroft Circle Huntington Beach 92646 howard@weinberglaw la tnicholson@boltonengineering.com TonyInferrera@yahoo.com Charlie.rainel0@gmail.com 4 Pinto Road hannege@msn.com gordonschaye@cox.net 58 Portuguese Bend Roi Rolling Hills, CA 90274 johnfmac@cox.net 56 Portuguese Bend Roi Rolling Hills, CA 90274 carmenschaye@cox.net john@jalexanderco.com craigte@msn.com 35 Crest Road East Rolling Hils, CA 90274 bonnie.waters@practicallawyer.com steven.spierer@practicallawyer.com 28 Caballeros Road 12 Crest Road East 24 Portuguese Bend Road 8 Crest Road East 0 Pine Tree Lane 2408 Steed Court, Lomita CA 90717 Public:2017 CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS:02-13-17 City Council Agenda:Notification List.xlsx 2/13/17 CC Notification List City Public:2017 CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS:02-13-17 City Council Agenda:Notification List.xlsx