The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Agenda 03-13-2017MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 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: Black, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer. Councilmembers Absent: None. Others Present: Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director. Mike Jenkins, City Attorney. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Linda Reid, PVPUSD Board Member. Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road. Richard Colyear, 35 Crest Road West. OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME Linda Reid, PVPUSD Board Member addressed the City Council to provide information regarding social host ordinances. Ms. Reid urged the City to adopt a Social Host Ordinance as a means to reducing underage drinking at parties at private homes. Following discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Black moved that the City Council direct staff to agendize this matter for discussion on a future City Council meeting and check with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes to get a copy of their ordinance. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion, which carried without objection. CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A. Minutes - Regular Meeting of February 13, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. B. Payment of Bills. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. C. Financial Statement for the Month of January 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. D. Republic Services Recycling Tonnage Report for January 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. E. Notice of Completion for FY 2016-17 Replacement of Traffic Striping and Pavement Markings on Certain Streets in the City of Rolling Hills. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. F 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 -1- • • (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). RECOMMENDATION: Second reading, waive full reading and adopt Ordinance. Following brief discussion concerning the Payment of Bills and an explanation from the City Attorney as to the cost associated with City Attorney services, Mayor Pro Tem Black moved that the City Council approve the items on the consent calendar as presented. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion, which carried without objection. COMMISSION ITEMS None. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS CONSIDERATION OF A CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY OF AN INITIATIVE PETITION RELATED TO VIEW PRESERVATION. Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. City Clerk Luce presented a Certificate of Sufficiency for an initiative petition related to view preservation, which seeks to replace the City's current view preservation ordinance. She stated that the City Council has three options for action on this item: adopt the Ordinance as presented, order the measure to be placed on the ballot for the City's next regular election; or direct staff to study the measure and report back to the City Council. In response to Councilmember Pieper, City Clerk Luce stated that there is a section in the California Elections Code that implies that a measure can be taken off of the ballot upon receipt of a timely request from the proponents of the initiative; but the City Attorney has expressed some concern regarding the validity of that Elections Code section. City Attorney Jenkins stated that he would need to do some research with regard to the matter. He stated that there is a relatively new Elections Code section that contemplates this matter, but he would need to look at it further to give a definitive answer. Councilmember Pieper stated that if this initiative measure cannot be taken off the ballot once it is put on, then his suggestion would be to put it on the ballot for the City's next regular election and direct the Planning Commission to rewrite the sections of the ordinance that need to be revised and then let the people decide. He expressed concern that all of the work that the ad hoc committee put into this matter is nullified by the fact that the proponents have submitted the initiative petition. Mayor Pro Tem Black moved that the City Council place the measure on the ballot for the City's next regular election scheduled for March 5, 2019. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion. Discussion ensued concerning the election date for the initiative measure and the provision for removing the measure from the ballot. In response to Mayor Dieringer, City Attorney Jenkins stated that he believes the measure could be placed on the ballot if the City were to call a Special Election between now and the City's next regular election. In response to Councilmember Pieper, City Attorney stated that the measure could be placed on the ballot for a Special Election but there is no obligation to do so — it is ultimately the City Council's decision. In response to Mayor Dieringer, City Attorney Jenkins further explained why he believes there is question as to the newly added elections code section regarding removing a measure from the ballot specifically that it give the option for removal to the proponents of the measure but does not take into account all of the individuals who signed the petition with the understanding that the matter would be placed on the ballot. He commented that he does not believe that was the legislature's intent when Minutes City Council Meeting 02-27-17 -2- • • adopting that language, but he needs to research it further to find a definitive answer. Further discussion ensued concerning the options before the City Council. Mayor Pro Tem Black moved to call the question. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion which failed with Councilmembers Mirsch, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer opposed. Mayor Dieringer moved that that the motion be amended to state the measure be placed on the ballot for the City's next election — whether regular or special — rather than the City's next regular election. The motion died for lack of a second. Mayor Dieringer called for public comment. Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road addressed the City Council stating that it was their understanding in submitting the initiative petition that it could be withdrawn upon submittal of a timely letter requesting withdrawal signed by the proponent of the initiative. He further commented that he believes the Planning Commission is making good progress toward amending the ordinance based on the ad hoc committees discussions and if the proponents agree with what is ultimately decided, they would withdraw the initiative measure and support a repeal of Measure B. He encouraged the City Council to continue on the current path toward amending the ordinance based on the ad hoc committee's suggestions. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Dieringer called for a roll call vote on the motion to place the measure on the ballot for the City's next regular election scheduled for March 5, 2019. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Black, Mirsch, Pieper and Wilson. NOES: Mayor Dieringer. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Following brief discussion, Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council direct staff to agendize a report on the status of the Planning Commission's consideration of amendments to the City's View Preservation Ordinance for discussion at the March 13, 2017 meeting of the City Council. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried without objection. Following further discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Black moved that the City Council direct staff to place the Planning Commission's consideration of amendments to the City's View Preservation Ordinance on hold until April for further direction from the City Council. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried without objection. CONSIDERATION OF A NOMINATION FOR THE 52ND ANNUAL OLDER AMERICANS RECOGNITION DAY. Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. City Manager Cruz stated that before the City Council is consideration of a selecting a nominee for the Los Angeles County Commission on Older Adults 52°a Annual Older Americans Recognition Day on May 31, 2017. He stated that the purpose of the event is to recognize adults over the age of 60 who do great service to their community. He stated that in consultation with the Mayor staff contacted the presidents of the community organizations to solicit nominees and received one suggested nominee, Ray Ferris. He commented that additionally, Frank Hill was nominated previously but was not selected and the City Council may wish to consider him as well. Mayor Dieringer asked if there are any additional nominees. She suggested that Maureen Hill is worthy of consideration as well. Councilmember Mirsch commented that Mrs. Hill has declined in the past. It was noted that Ray Ferris and Frank Hill are both very worthy nominees. Following discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Black moved that the City Council nominate Frank Hill for recognition at the 52°d Annual Older Americans Recognition Day. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion, which carried without objection. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS Councilmember Pieper expressed concern regarding coyotes and asked if there is anything more the City Minutes City Council Meeting 02-27-17 -3- • • can do. City Manager Cruz stated that the City continues to work with both the County and the private trapping firm to address coyote issues. MATTERS FROM STAFF DIRECTION ON WHETHER TO RETAIN A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL TENNIS COURTS. Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. City Manager Cruz provided an update on the status of the tennis court improvement project. He commented that because of the complexity of the project and staff's limited experience and the time requirement involved in managing municipal improvement project, City and Rolling Hills Community Association staff recommend hiring a construction manager to oversee the project to help reduce the likelihood of change orders. He further reviewed the responsibilities that could be assigned to the construction manager as outlined in the staff report including: assisting in developing RFP for hiring a general contractor; supervising the work of general contractor to assure the City's and RHCA's best interest are always being maintained; analyzing the feasibility of materials, methods and other construction factors relating to cost; holding a pre -bid conference and/or explain the project to the contractors; receiving and analyzing the bids for correctness and adherence to specifications; securing the construction contract and schedule; coordinating the contractors' activities to meet the City and Association's needs; and reviewing the work in progress to verify compliance with contract specifications, schedules and invoice requests. Mayor Dieringer commented that depending on the cost for such service, it may be helpful to retain a construction manager to develop just the bid and create a list of pre -qualified contractors for the project. She further suggested that the City should have a more definitive scope of work for the project and get cost proposals to ascertain a more realistic price. Mayor Pro Tem Black expressed concern regarding the overall cost of the project in general and expressed disinterest in adding to that cost by hiring a construction manager. Discussion ensued concerning the estimated cost associated with the project; the various design and construction. elements associated with the project, including the septic system; and the engineering and architectural firms that have been, or need to be retained to finalize the project. In response to Mayor Dieringer regarding developing a pre -qualified bid list, City Attorney Jenkins stated that this process is typically used for larger projects where there is a lot of money at stake but the problem is that it increases the expense of the project because the process is done twice. He commented that for a project this size, it is not clear that there will be enough interest generated in the project for the contractors to be willing to go through the process twice and may limit the contractors that will bid on the project. He further suggested that including basic qualifications in the bid solicitation documents may be a better way to go. Following discussion, Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council direct staff to further investigate possible Construction Management firms to ascertain a more accurate cost and scope of work for these services and bring this matter back to the City Council for further discussion after that information is received. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried without objection. 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 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Government Code §54956.9(d)(4) Initiation of litigation Minutes City Council Meeting 02-27-17 -4- • • Based on existing facts and circumstances, the City Council shall determine whether initiation of litigation is appropriate. Number of potential cases: 1 The City Council recessed into closed session at 8:26 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 9:25 p.m. ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTIONS FROM CLOSED SESSION (ORAL REPORT). City Attorney Jenkins reported that no reportable action was taken. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Dieringer adjourned the meeting at 9:26 p.m. in memory of long time resident, Priscilla Foulk. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, March 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, CVidl(fillf) Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, Bea Dieringer Mayor Minutes City Council Meeting 02-27-17 -5- ,et Rollie -9 qeeed 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 27, 2017 7:00 P.M. Next Resolution No. 1205 Next Ordinance No. 350 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding the items on the consent calendar or items not listed on this agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will take place on any items not on the agenda. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A. Minutes - Regular Meeting of February 13, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. B. Payment of Bills. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. C. Financial Statement for the Month of January 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. D. Republic Services Recycling Tonnage Report for January 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. E. Notice of Completion for FY 2016-17 Replacement of Traffic Striping and Pavement Markings on Certain Streets in the City of Rolling Hills. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. F. 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 Page 1 of 3 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 24th day of February, 2017, I serve the within City Council Meeting - 02/27/2017 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 24th day of February, 2017 at Rolling Hills, California. Ewa Nikodem Administrative Assistant 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). RECOMMENDATION: Second reading, waive full reading and adopt Ordinance. 5. COMMISSION ITEMS NONE. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE. 7. OLD BUSINESS NONE. 8. NEW BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF A CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY OF AN INITIATIVE PETITION RELATED TO VIEW PRESERVATION. B. CONSIDERATION OF A NOMINATION FOR THE 52 ANNUAL OLDER AMERICANS RECOGNITION DAY. 9. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF A. DIRECTION ON WHETHER TO RETAIN A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL TENNIS COURTS. 11. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS 12. CLOSED SESSION A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Government Code §54957 Title: City Manager City Council Agenda 02/27/17 Page 2 of 3 B. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR Government Code §54957.6 City representative: Personnel Committee (Mirsch and Pieper) Unrepresented employee: City Manager C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Government Code §54956.9(d)(4) Initiation of litigation Based on existing facts and circumstances, the City Council shall determine whether initiation of litigation is appropriate. Number of potential cases: 1 13. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION NONE. 14. ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: Monday, March 13, 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 02/27/17 Page 3 of 3 DRAFT Agenda Item No. 4-A Meeting Date: 02/27/17 MINUTES 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: Black, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer. Councilmembers Absent: None. Others Present: 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. 0 DRAFT 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); 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). 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 g tY p 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. Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 0 DRAFT 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. AB STAIN: 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 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 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 DRAFT 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 23rd 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 23rd 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 23rd 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 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 CU DRAFT 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 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 staffs 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 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 DRAFT 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 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. Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 DRAFT 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, Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, Bea Dieringer Mayor Minutes City Council Meeting 02-13-17 • S CityopeoePnB�r« Agenda Item No: 4-B Mtg. Date: 02/27/17 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 212712017 - CHECK RUN CHECK CHECK PAYEE NO. DATE • 24698 03:01/_2017 CALPERS 24699 03./0112017 CALPERS 24700 03/01/2017 DELTA DENTAL 24701 03/012017 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 24702 - 031012017 VISION SERVICE PLAN 24703 02121:2017 ANIMAL PEST MANAGEMENT 24704 02/212017 CADWEST DIGITAL DESIGN & PRINT 24 705 02.212017 CHRISP COMPANY, INC. 24706 0221/2017 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 24707 - 02;212017 DAILY BREEZE 24708 0221/2017 JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP 24709 02/21/2017 KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS 24710 0321 2017 LA COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT 24711 02/2112017 OPUS BANK 24712 02,2112017 PACIFIC COAST LANDSCAPE 24713 0221:2017 RAYMOND CRUZ 24714 02121.12017 REMOTE SATELLITE SYS INTL 24715 02/2112_017 THE GAS COMPANY 24716 02.21:2017 USCM 24717 0121;2017 V ANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS - 24718 0232112017 \VILLDANINC. • PR LINK 2:1712017 PR LINK - PAYROLL PROCESSING • PR LINK 2117/2017 PR LINK - PAYROLL 4 & PR TAXES I, Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager of Rolling Hills, California areat them is av able in the General Fund a balan Pa} r�tt of. me items Ray; nlmd R'Cn¢, City Manager Previously Disbursed DESCRIPTION HEALTH INSURANCE MARCH 2017 RETIREMENT MARCH 2017 DENTAL INSURANCE MARH 2017 LIFE INSURANCE FEB 2017 VISION INSURANCE MARCH 2017 COYOTE TRAPPINGS 1/1331/17 SUBPOENA RECORDS LEE V MACLEAN FY 16117 90% STRIP S PAVE MARK ANIMAL CONTROL - KENNEL 1/2017 LEGAL ADVERTISING JAN 2017 ATTORNEY SERVICES JAN 20117 MONTHLY MAINTENANCE 1/12/17-2/l1/17 LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE JAN 2017 OFFICE SUPPLIES, CCMF MTG LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE FEB 2017 REIMBURSEMENT FOR LOCC MTG FEB 2017 SATELLITE PHONES MARCH 2017 GAS 01/07117-02106117 DEFERRED COMP 2117;2017 DEFERRED COMP 2'172017 INSPECTION SERVICES JAN 2017 PROCESSING FEE PAY PERIOD- FEBRUARY 01, 2017 THROUGH FEBRUARY 14.2017 that the above demands f 5107,356.04 for the 0 AMOUNT 10,26335 5,519.80 681.72 201.49 113.30 2,500.00 26.58 26,876.70 357.98 288.90 1 L590.00 95.17 25,735.10 1,567,58 565.00 85.01 97.90 129.98 998.00 364.00 725.00 59.95 18,513.53 S 107,356.04 PP.'P+Yr Printed on Recycled Paper Corrected CITY OF ROLLING HILLS BALANCE SHEET January 31, 2017 MUNICIPAL. GENERAL& DEPOSIT COPS& COMMUIN. SELF- REFUSE TRAFFIC TRANSIT UTILITY CAPITAL FUND FUND CLEF.P FACILITIES INSUR, COLLECT. SAFETY PROP A, C. M FUND & TDA ASSETS Cash & Cash Equivalents $ 4,657,387 $ 1,771 $ 146,625 $ 18,282 $ 260,374 $ 236,815 $ 29,798 5 188,279 $ 1,236,507 Cash & Cash Equivalents - Capital Project Fund Poppy Trail Grading Bond 305,000 Accounts Receivable - - 81,581 Prepaid Expense & Deposits 11,218 TOTAL ASSETS 4,668,605 306,771 146,625 18,282 260,374 318,396 29,798 188,279 1,236,507 LIABILITIES Accounts & Contract Payable 14.019 63,459 Employees Benefits Payable 15 Deposits 18,803 306,771 Deferred Revenues 14.012 TOTAI. LIABILITIES 46,849 306,771 63.459 FUND BALANCE Unassigned Fund Balance 4,621,756 146,625 18,282 260,374 254,937 29,798 188,279 1,236,507 TOTAL UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE 4,621,756 146,625 18,282 260,374 254,937 29,798 188,279 1,236,507 TOTAL UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE & IJABUJTIES S 4,668,605 S 306,771 S 146.625 $ 18,282 S 260,374 S 318,396 $ 29,798 $ 188,279 $ 1,236,507 COMPOSITION OF CASH Petty Cash S 1.500 OPUS Bank - Checking Account 54,829 OPUS Bank - Money Market 661,558 OPUS Bank - Interest Checking 1,007,112 Calif. State Local Agency Investment Fund 4,555,839 Malaga Bank/Preferred Bank - CD's 495,000 $ 6,775,838 Prepare : /Ja Terry Shea, I nceDDiiirrectoorr Appr Cruz, City Manag Date BEGINNING YTD OF YEAR TOTAL TOTAL $ 6.775,838 $ 6,891,267 305,000 305.000 81,581 185,238 11.218 37,436 7,173,637 S 7,418,941 77,478 $ 454.364 15 18,305 325,574 325,574 14,012 14,012 417,079 812,255 6,756,558 6,606,686 6,756,558 6,606,686 $ 7,173,637 $ 7,418,941 Copy of RId bal_fy 16-17 2/23/2017 11:25 AM • CITY OF ROLLING HILLS SUMMARY STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES Actual Compared to Annual Budget July 1, 2016 to January 31, 2017 GENERAL Fund Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue CITIZENS' OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue COMMUNITY FACILITIES Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue MUNICIPAL SELF-INSURANCE Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue REFUSE COLLECTION Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue TRAFFIC SAFETY Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue TRANSIT - PROPOSITION A, C, M & TDA Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue UTILITY FUND Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue TOTAL ALL FUNDS Revenues Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers Transfers in (out) Net Revenue This Year Last Year This Year Better (Worse) Annual Budget & Adj. Remaining Budget $ 878,962 $ 829,936 $ 49,026 1,931,600 $ 1,052,638 872,199 735,434 (136,765) 1,842,793 970,594 6,763 94,502 (87,739) 88,807 82,044 14,000 (19,455) 33,455 (344,050) (358,050) 20,763 75,047 (54,284) (255,243) (276,006) 115,082 91,914 23,168 115,125 43 62,854 60,939 (1,915) 164,000 101,146 52,228 30,975 21,253 (48,875) (101,103) - - - - 0 52,228 30,975 21,253 (48,875) (101,103) - - - 100 100 - - - 62,700 62,700 - - - (62,600) (62,600) - - - 62,600 62,600 - - - - 0 - 235 235 6,000 6,000 - (235) 235 (6,000) (6,000) - (235) 235 (6,000) (6,000) 456,636 448,952 7,684 771,900 315,264 444,213 440,988 (3,225) 761,508 317,295 12,423 7,964 4,459 10,392 (2,031) (14,000) (14,000) - (24,000) (10,000) (1,577) (6,036) 4,459 (13,608) (12,031) 32,932 - 32,932 50 (32,882) 3,134 33,455 30,321 55,500 52,366 29,798 (33,455) 63,253 (55,450) (85,248) - 33,455 (33,455) 55,450 55,450 29,798 - 29,798 - (29,798) 48,661 48,476 185 85,786 37,125 -. - - 190,000 190,000.00 48,661 48,476 185 (104,214) (152,875) 48,661 48,476 185 (104,214) (152,875) - 33,799 33,799 150,000 150,000 - (33,799) 33,799 (150,000) (150,000) - - - 250,000 250,000 - (33,799) 33,799 100,000 100,000 1,532,273 1,419,278 112,995 2,904,561 1,372,288 1,382,400 1,304,850 (77,550), 3,232,501 1,850,101 149,873 114,428 35,445 (327,940) (477,813) $ 149,873 $ 114,428 $ 35,445 $ (327,940) $ (477,813) 0 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RESIDENTIAL ALLIED WASTE RECYCLE NOW REPORT Report Date: 2017 MONTH 2017 January RECYCLED (tons) 51.34 February March April May June July August September October November December Year to Date Totals: 51.34 Average Monthly Totals: 2017 51.34 GREEN WASTE (tons) 83.67 83.67 83.67 C&D C&D Disposal Recycled Disposed I Tonnage Diversion 29.80 6.62 133.36 54.07% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% - - - 0.00% 29.80 29.80 6.62 133.36 304.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 54.07% 6.62 133.36 54% MONTHLY TOTALS (tons) 304.80 304.80 iv FEB 2 2 2017 City of Rolling Hills By tes* atlirdie:09 qeek INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No: 4-E Mtg. Date: 02/27/17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER Ofj- SUBJECT: NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR FY 2016-17 REPLACEMENT OF TRAFFIC STRIPING AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS ON CERTAIN STREETS IN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2017 ATTACHMENT: Notice of Completion Contract Change Order No. 1 Contract Change Order No. 2 Attached to this staff report is a Notice of Completion for the FY 2016/17 Replacement of Traffic Striping and Pavement Markings on Certain Streets Project in the City of City of Rolling Hills and Change Orders No. 1 and No. 2. The work was completed by Chrisp Company on February 15, 2017 within budget at a total cost of $29,863.00 and has been inspected and found to be satisfactory pursuant to the contract requirements. The project included the following. streets that had been repaved or needed striping: Buckboard Trail, Buggy Whip Drive, Cinchring Road, Crest Road East, Crest Road West, Eucalyptus Lane, Hackamore Road, Hillside Lane, Hummingbird Lane, Meadowlark Lane, Outrider Road, Pinto Road, Poppy Trail, Portuguese Bend Road, Possum Ridge Road, Quail Ridge Road South, Ranchero Road, Reata Lane, Ringbit Road East. After the striping was completed, it was found that Hummingbird Lane was inadvertently included in the striping project because staff thought it was a maintained Roadway recognized by the City's municipal code and the Rolling Hills Community Association. However, it is actually a private driveway that includes three homes that get U.S. mail to that street name. Unfortunately, one of the residents of the private driveway formally complained and wants the striping removed. The Chrisp Company provided a bid of $3,851 to remove the striping on Hummingbird Lane. Although this bid amount is well within the City's budget for striping related costs, staff is pursuing other bids that could be lower before it makes a final decision on who will do the work and for how much. Regardless, the Chrisp Company completed the work as requested and approval of the completion of striping should move forward. RECOMMENDATION The Notice of Completion is recommended for approval. Upon approval, it will be forwarded to the Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorders Office for formal recording and once recorded all bonds will be returned together with the proof of recordation to Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America and to Chrisp Company. RRC: en 02-27-17 striping NoticeOfCompletion-sta.docx RECORDING REQUESTED BY: WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: r Name Street Address City State Zip L Raymond R. Cruz City Manager 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills CA 90274 J Space above this line for recorder's use NOTICE OF COMPLETION Notice pursuant to Civil Code Section 3093, must be filed within 10 days after completion. (See reverse side for complete requirements.) Notice is hereby given that: 1. The undersigned is owner or corporate officer of the owner of the interest or estate stated below in the property hereinafter described. 2. The full name of the owner is City of Rolling Hills 3. The full address of the owner is 2 Portuguese Bend Road 4. The nature of the interest or estate of the owner is: In fee. General Law City (If other than Fee, strike in fee" and insert, for example, `purchaser under contract of purchase; or 'Lessee") 5. The full names and full addresses of all persons, if any, who hold title with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tenants in common are: NAMES ADDRESSES N/A 6. The full names and full addresses of the predecessors in interest of the undersigned, if the property was transferred subsequent to the commencement of the work or improvements herein referred to: NAMES ADDRESSES N/A 7. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on February 15, 2017" . The work done was: FY 2016/17 Replacement of Traffic Striping and Pavement Markings. 8. The names of the contractor, if any, for such work of improvement was Chri sp Company, 43650 Osgood Road, December 6, 2016 Fremont, CA 94539 (If no contractor for work of improvement as a whole, insert `None') (Date of Contract) 9. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Rolling Hills county of Los Angeles State of CA and is described as follows: FY 2 01 6 / 1 7 Replacement of Traffic Striping and Pavement Markings on Certain Streets. 10. The street address of said property is Various Streets. (If no street address has been officially assigned, insert "none'.) Dated February 23, 2017 /C (Signature of Owner or corporate officer of Owner named in fZa'ragraph 2, or his agent) Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager VERIFICATION 1, the undersigned, say: I am the City Clerk , the Declarant of the foregoing Notice of Completion; (President of, Manager of, Partner of, Owner of, etc.) I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on February 23 ,20 1 7 at Rolling Hills , CA (Personal signature of the individual who is swearing that the contents of the Notice of Completion are true) eidi Luce, City Clerk Before you use this form, fill in all blanks, and make whatever changes are appropriate and necessary to your particular transaction. Consult a lawyer if you doubt the form s fitness tor your purpose and use. Wolcotts makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, with respect to the merchantability or fitness of this form for an intended use or purpose. ©2005 WOLCOTTS FORMS, INC. 117 111111111 IUIIIIlIII 2 FORM 1114 Rev. 10-05 640 gfea INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO.1 NO.2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310)377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 To: David Morris, Executive Vice President ChrisP Company 43650 Osgood Road Fremont, CA 94539 Original Order - Incorrect Qty of RPMS oniy: Date: Project: December 27, 2016 Replacement of Traffic Striping and Pavement Markings A • RPMs blue - qty: 300 9 $10 each $ -3,000.00 B • RPMs yellow - qty: 20 ® $5 each $ - 100.00 Amount to be deducted from the original Order $ -3,100.00 The Scope of Work and costs included A • RPMs blue - qty: 20 @ $10 each $ 200.00 B • RPMs yellow - qty: 300 a S5 each $ 1,500.00 Amount of this Correction $ 1,700.00 I Amount of this Change Order No.1 { S I -1,400.00 Revised Contract Summary Original Contract -Sum S 30,653.00 Original Contract Sum: Incorrect QLy RPMS only - S -3,100.00 _Change Order No. 1: CorrectRPMS only • S 1,700.00 New. Contract Sum Including Change Order No.1 S '29,253.00 Approved B Contractor: Date: December 27; 2016 Eiger Date:. Decenber 29,.2010 etsbr , VP of Operations 6(4 al Ref/419 a e4 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 To: David Morris, Executive Vice President Chrisp Company 43650 Osgood Road Fremont, CA 94539 Date: Project: February 21, 2017 Replacement of Traffic Striping and Pavement Markings The Scope of Work and costs included in this Change Order No. 2 are described below: Verbally approved on 2/15/2017 A Additional RPMs blue - qty: 11 @ $10 each $ 110.00 B Additional RPMs yellow - qty: 100 ® $5 each $ 500.00 Amount of this Correction $ 610.00 Amount of this Change Order No. 2 Revised Contract Summa $ 610.00 Original Contract Sum $ 30,653.00 Original Contract Sum: Incorrect Qty-RPMS only $ -3,100.00 Change Order No. 1: Correct RPMS only 5 1,700.00 Change Order No. 2: Additional RPMS only 610.00 New Contract Sum Including Change Order No. 2 $ 29,863.00 Approved By: ___, 1 Date: February 21, 2017 Raym • d R. Cruz, Ci} ` ► anager Contractor `.,_1� i l,''_ -�?t._ %��Ii)ate: TO: FROM: THRU: SUBJECT: Raile:g9 gtek INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No: 4-F Mtg. Date: 02/27/17 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER 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); 111 LE 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; 111 LE 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 111LE 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 1'1TLE 8 (HEALTH AND SAFETY) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONFORM TO STATE LAW. DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2017 ATTACHMENT: Ordinance No. 350 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council waive full reading and adopt Ordinance No. 350, adopting by reference the Los Angeles County Building Codes. BACKGROUND At the February 13, 2017 meeting, the City Council introduced the attached ordinance and held a public hearing. Following discussion, the City Council directed staff to bring the Ordinance forth for second reading and adoption. The purpose of the proposed ordinance is to adopt by reference the amendments to the 2017 Los Angeles County Codes, including Building, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Residential, Green Building Standards, Existing Buildings, 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. At the February 13, 2017 meeting the City Council unanimously adopted the same ordinance (Ordinance 350-U), under an Urgency procedures. That Ordinance is in effect. Per the City Attorney's advice it is good practice to in addition to the adoption of an Urgency Ordinance, 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. CONCLUSION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 350. 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 1 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 V 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 fme 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 fme and imprisonment. Ordinance No. 350 4 O 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 1 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 27th 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 27, 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 7 ate Ret/4/9 geezi INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No: 8-A Mtg. Date: 02/27/17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK C THRU: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY OF AN INITIATIVE PETITION RELATED TO VIEW PRESERVATION. DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2017 ATTACHMENTS: California Elections Code Sections 1405(b), 9114, 9212(a), 9215, and 9217 Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition Proposed Initiative Title and Summary prepared by the City Attorney Correspondence from Lynn Gill dated February 9, 2017 Certificate of Sufficiency of Initiative Petition RECOMMENDATION Presented for consideration is a Certificate of Sufficiency regarding an initiative petition entitled "AN ORDINANCE REPLACING THE CITY'S VIEW PRESERVATION ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE CITY'S ROLE IN RESOLVING VIEW COMPLAINTS BY LIMITING THE CITY TO RENDERING NONBINDING RECOMMENDATIONS, ENCOURAGING PRIVATE MEDIATION OR ARBITRATION, AND CREATING A RIGHT FOR PRIVATE LAWSUITS WHERE VIEW COMPLAINTS ARE NOT VOLUNTARILY RESOLVED." Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 9215, the City Council is requested to discuss and consider its options to either: adopt the ordinance without alteration, submit the ordinance to the voters; or request a study. BACKGROUND Through the municipal initiative process, California Elections Code provides a process for proponents of an initiative to place an ordinance before the City Council and/or 0 electorate for a vote. For an initiative to be considered on a City's next regular election ballot, California Elections Code sets forth a process that must be followed and requires that 10% of registered voters in the City (144) sign a petition in order for the initiative to be considered. On August 3, 2016, the City Clerk's Office received a Notice of Intent to circulate a petition and a request for a title and summary from Richard Colyear (35 Crest Road West) and Lynn Gill (31 Chuckwagon Road) in regard to a proposed ballot initiative • related to view preservation. The title and summary were provided to the proponents and in conformance with the Elections Code, the notice of intent and the title and summary, as prepared by the City Attorney were published in Peninsula News on September 1, 2016. Subsequently, on February 9, 2017, the petition was submitted to the City Clerk's Office and accepted upon prima facie review. Upon receipt of the petition, the signatures were verified against the County of Los Angeles Registrar of Voters' Records and the petition was found to have 161 valid signatures. As such, the Petition has been examined and certified by the City Clerk as sufficient for the City's next Regular Election scheduled for March 5, 2019. The qualifying petition is now presented to the City Council for action. DISCUSSION Pursuant to State Elections Code Section 9215, the City Council has three options at this meeting, as follows: 1. Adopt the ordinance as is (it would become law as any other City ordinance, but could not be modified or repealed without a vote of the people); or 2. Submit the ordinance to the voters at the City's next regular election (March 5, 2019); or - 3. Direct staff to prepare an analysis of the ordinance and return to the City Council in thirty days. (Per Section 9212(a) of the State Elections Code, the City Council is asked to identify what aspects of the ordinance it would like analyzed. Topics in the analysis could include the fiscal impact, effect on internal consistency, effect on land use, impact on funding for infrastructure, impact on vacant parcels of land, impact on open space and any other topics requested by the City Council.) If option 3 is selected, staff will complete the analysis and return to the City Council at its meeting of March 27, 2017. At that time, the City Council will be required to either: 1. Adopt the ordinance as is; or 2. Submit the ordinance to the voters at the City's next regular election (March 5, 2019) FISCAL IMPACT If the City Council desires an analysis of the initiative, the direct and indirect cost will involve City Attorney and staff time, respectively, and vary based on the scope of the analysis. It is not anticipated that outside consultants will be necessary. With regard to election expenses in general, every other year, the City budgets approximately $30,000 for the City's municipal election. At this time, it is difficult to forecast the expenses for 2019 because there are many changes occurring in the realm of elections; but it can be anticipated that there will be a slight incremental increase in election expenses in 2019 if this measure is placed on the ballot due to an increase in the number of pages for the Voter Information Guide. NOTIFICATION The proponents were notified that this matter is scheduled for City Council consideration and direction tonight. This agenda item was also included in the draft City Council agenda which was included in the City's newsletter. CONCLUSION • It is requested that the City Council consider the alternatives and take an action to either adopt the ordinance as presented; submit the ordinance to the voters; or order a study. HL Initiative staff report.doc THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK ATTACHMENT 1 CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS CODE 1405. (b) The election for a county initiative that qualifies pursuant to Section 9118 shall be held at the next statewide election occurring not less than 88 days after the date of the order of election. The election for a municipal or district initiative that qualifies pursuant to Section 9215 or 9311 shall be held at the jurisdiction's next regular election occurring not less than 88 days after the date of the order of election. 9114. Except as provided in Section 9115, within 30 days from the date of filing of the petition, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, the elections official shall examine the petition, and from the records of registration ascertain whether or not the petition is signed by the requisite number of voters. A certificate showing the results of this examination shall be attached to the petition. In determining the number of valid signatures, the elections official may use the duplicate file of affidavits maintained, or may check the signatures against facsimiles of voters' signatures, provided that the method of preparing and displaying the facsimiles complies with law. The elections official shall notify the proponents of the petition as to the sufficiency or insufficiency of the petition. If the petition is found insufficient, no further action shall be taken. However, the failure to secure sufficient signatures, shall not preclude the filing of a new petition on the same subject, at a later date. If the petition is found sufficient, the elections official shall certify the results of the examination to the board of supervisors at the next regular meeting of the board. 9212. (a) During the circulation of the petition, or before taking either action described in subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 9214, or Section 9215, the legislative body may refer the proposed initiative measure to any city agency or agencies for a report on any or all of the following: (1) Its fiscal impact. (2) Its effect on the internal consistency of the city's general and specific plans, including the housing element, the consistency between planning and zoning, and the limitations on city actions under Section 65008 of the Government Code and Chapters 4.2 (commencing with Section 65913) and 4.3 (commencing with Section 65915) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. (3) Its effect on the use of land, the impact on the availability and location of housing, and the ability of the city to meet its regional housing needs. (4) Its impact on funding for infrastructure of all types, including, but not limited to, transportation, schools, parks, and open space. The report may also discuss whether the measure would be likely to result in increased infrastructure costs or savings, including the costs of infrastructure maintenance, to current residents and businesses. (5) Its impact on the community's ability to attract and retain business and employment. (6) Its impact on the uses of vacant parcels of land. (7) Its impact on agricultural lands, open space, traffic congestion, existing business districts, and developed areas designated for revitalization. (8) Any other matters the legislative body requests to be in the report. (b) The report shall be presented to the legislative body within the time prescribed by the legislative body, but no later than 30 days after the elections official certifies to the legislative body the sufficiency of the petition. 9215. If the initiative petition is signed by not less than 10 percent of the voters of the city, according to the last report of registration by the county elections official to the Secretary of State pursuant to Section 2187, effective at the time the notice specified in Section 9202 was published, or, in a city with 1,000 or less registered voters, by 25 percent of the voters or 100 voters of the city, whichever is the lesser number, the legislative body shall do one of the following: (a) Adopt the ordinance, without alteration, at the regular meeting at which the certification of the petition is presented, or within 10 days after it is presented. (b) Submit the ordinance, without alteration, to the voters pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1405, unless the ordinance petitioned for is required to be, or for some reason is, submitted to the voters at a special election pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 1405. (c) Order a report pursuant to Section 9212 at the regular meeting at which the certification of the petition is presented. When the report is presented to the legislative body, the legislative body shall either adopt the ordinance within 10 days or order an election pursuant to subdivision (b). 9217. If a majority of the voters voting on a proposed ordinance vote in its favor, the ordinance shall become a valid and binding ordinance of the city. The ordinance shall be considered as adopted upon the date that the vote is declared by the legislative body, and shall go into effect 10 days after that date. No ordinance that is either proposed by initiative petition and adopted by the vote of the legislative body of the city without submission to the voters, or adopted by the voters, shall be repealed or amended except by a vote of the people, unless provision is otherwise made in the original ordinance. AO 93 2O City of Rolling Hills By 4'=o Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition Notice is hereby given by the persons whose names appear hereon of their intention to Circulate the petition within the City of Rolling Hills for the purpose of modifying the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. A statement of the reasons of the proposed action as Contemplated in the petition is as follows: (see attached) ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE 2017 In 2012, the voters of Rolling Hills passed "Measure B" which fixed an unfair provision of the city's View Ortfnancethat allowed someone to buy a house with no view, and then force their neighbors to cut their trees to give them a view. Measure B states that "a resident is only entitled to the view that existed when that resident bought their house." Measure B only fixed that one provision of a badly flawed view ordinance. Proponents of the measure have been working with City Council in an effort to repair its outdated and unfair view ordinance. Sadly, after four years of endless hearings and debates, the revised view ordinance adopted by the City Council in 2016 continues to be unfair and subjects the City and its taxpaying residents to the costs of inevitable law suits. Now, the City Council intends to place a measure on the ballot to repeal Measure B. They want us to "trust them" to come up with a fair new view ordinance, when they have already demonstrated their unwillingness to do so. This Measure 2017 provides an integrated view ordinance that replaces the City's flawed ordinance in its entirety. The proposed view ordinance provides: • The view -seeker and the tree/vegetation owner must each pay for their own legal and other costs of a view claim. In the current view ordinance, the City (taxpayers) pays for most of the costs of the view seeker. • The City does not become a legal party to the view dispute; it acts only as a facilitator (ombudsman) to assist the view claim parties. By representing the view -seeker in a view daim action, the City currently subjects itself to expensive litigation. • If you bought a panoramic view, you get to keep a panoramic view. With the current ordinance, you only get to have "view corridors" through trees that grow to obstruct your view. • You can maintain trees and vegetation as they existed when you purchased your property. With the current ordinance, you may buy a property for its beautiful trees and landscaping, and then be required to reduce their height and spread below what you purchased. • The proposed ordinance provides evaluation criteria, definitions and processes to guide a view claim action. There are few guidelines in the current ordinance, so as view committees and dty councils change, parties In view actions with similar circumstances may get inconsistently different deals. Prioritized actions to remedy view impairments include ladng of trees, crown raising or reduction, and removal as a last resort. In the current ordinance, the top priorities are removal, pruning and topping of trees. In most dies, topping of trees is forbidden as it damages and weakens trees and they appear disfigured and mutilated. Let's adopt a view ordinance that is fair to both the view -seeker and the tree/vegetation owner, and protects their property rights. And, reduces the cost to taxpayers of expensive litigation. Please vote "YES" on Measure 2017. Richard Col ear Please prepare a ballot title and summary. Richard Colyear 35 Crest Road West Rolling Hills, CA 90274 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK The following definitions shall be added to Chapter 17.12, Definitions. When there is a conflict between any definition as set forth below and a definition currently found in Chapter 17.12, these definitions as set forth below shall apply. DEFINITIONS 17.12 Words. terms and phrases. For the purpose of this chapter, the meaning and construction of words and phrases hereinafter set forth shall apply: "Crown" means the rounded structure of branches that make up the top of a tree. "Crown lifting" means removing the lower branches of a tree so that a view can be experienced under the tree. Page I 1 "Crown reduction" means a method of pruning that reduces a tree's height and/or spread. Crown reduction means reducing the top, sides or individual limbs of a tree by means of removal of leaders or the longest portion of limbs to a lateral limb large enough to assume the tree's growth. • "Damage" means to endanger the health or vigor of a tree or vegetation, including, but not limited to, girdling, severe pruning (topping or heading back), interfering with the water supply, applying chemicals, or re -grading around the base of the trunk so as to disrupt the feeder root zone of the tree or vegetation. "Decision -making body" means an arbitrator or a judicial body. "Established view" means a view from a view seeker's real property that existed on the date the property was most recently purchased for fair market value through an arms -length purchase or sale (as evidenced by a deed). "Established trees and/or vegetation" means trees and/or vegetation as existed on a tree/vegetation owner's real property on the date the property was most recently purchased for fair market value through an arms -length purchase or sale (as evidenced by a deed). "Existed" means the height and spread of the trees and vegetation as of that date. Page J 2 'Heading back" means the reduction of the mass of a tree by cutting back major limbs and/or the trunk to stubs. Heading back damages and weakens a tree, makes it susceptible to disease, and usually results in explosive new growth as the tree attempts to save itself by replacing foliage. Headed back trees appear disfigured and mutilated. "Lacing" means a method of pruning trees that selectively removes excess (primarily interior) limbs and foliage to improve the structure of a tree and to provide a view through a tree. • Before and After Lacing "Maintenance" means pruning a tree with the primary objective of preserving or improving tree health and structure and enhancing aesthetics. "Person" means any individual, individual, corporation, partnership, firm or other legal entities. "Pruning" means the removal of plant material from a tree or vegetation. Page 13 "Real property" means rights or interests of ownership of land and all appurtenances to the land including buildings, fixtures, vegetation and improvements erected upon, planted or affixed to the land. "Stand thinning" means the selective removal of specific trees from a group of trees. "Topping'" means the removal of the entire top of a tree's crown by cutting back large diameter branches to stubs and/or truncating the main stem/trunk. Topping damages and weakens trees, often results in explosive new growth as the tree attempts to save itself by replacing canopy foliage, and topped trees appear disfigured and mutilated. "Tree" means any perennial vegetation with a woody main -stem or trunk (sometimes multiple trunks) ordinarily growing to a considerable height, and usually developing branches at some distance from the ground. References herein to "tree" shall include the plural, any "tree" or "trees." "Tree/vegetation owner" means any real property owner in the City of Rolling Hills, or authorized agent of such property owner, who owns real property In Rolling Hills on which tree(s) and/or vegetation is located. "Vegetation" means all types of plants, bushes, hedges and shrubs, including trees. "View" means a vision from a viewing point of a visually impressive scene or vista such as the Pacific Ocean, off -shore islands, and mountains, lights of the Los Angeles basin, the Palos Verdes hills and canyons, the Los Angeles harbor and/or Long Beach harbor. A view may be panoramic, which is an extensive view in at least two directions. A view may include structures, established trees, or established vegetation in the foreground or background that provides visual perspective. "View," "the view" and "views" are synonymous and singular. Page 14 "View and tree/vegetation equity" means a fair, reasonable, and balanced accommodation of real property rights of view seekers deriving from preserving or restoring an established view, and real property rights of tree/vegetation owners deriving from trees and/or vegetation on their real property, such as privacy, shade, soil stability, and the use and enjoyment of real property. "View Seeker" means any real property owner in the City of Rolling Hills, or authorized agent of such property owner, who alleges tree(s)/vegetation located on a tree/vegetation owner's property in the near vicinity within the City of Rolling Hills is/are causing unreasonable impairment of a view benefiting view seeker's real property. "Viewing point" is a location within a principal residence from which a person can experience a view, such as the living, family, kitchen and dining rooms, rooms that have features such as picture windows, sliding glass doors or French doors; and within exterior areas such as patios, balconies, decks, pool areas, guest houses, and gazebos. Minor rooms such as bathrooms, garages, and closets are excluded. Page 15 The following replaces Chapter 17.26 in its entirety. Chapter 17.26 TREES AND VIEWS PRESERVATION Sections: 17.26.010 Intent and purpose. 17.26/020 Retroactivity of revised Chapter 17.26 17.26.030 Burden of proof and criteria for determining unreasonable view impairment. 17.26.040 Criteria for determining appropriate preservation and/or restoration actions. 17.26.050 Hierarchy of view preservation/restoration actions. 17.26.060 Committee on Trees and Views. 17.26.070 Desirable and undesirable trees. 17.26.080 View and tree/vegetation equity process. 17.26.090 Initial discussion. 17.26.100 View claim procedure. 17.26.110 Mediation. 17.26.120 Assistance of Committee on Trees and Views. 17.26.130 Arbitration. 17.26.140 Litigation. 17.26.150 Preservation/restorative action limitations. 17.26.160 Implementation of preservation/restorative actions. 17.26.170 Enforcement 17.26.180 Responsibility for view preservation/restoration action and subsequent maintenance. 17.26.190 Notification of subsequent owners. 17.26.200 Liability and Indemnification. 17.26.210 Severability, adoption, and publication 17.26.010 Intent and purpose. The City of Rolling Hills enjoys both beautiful views and an abundance of trees and other vegetation, and values both as contributing to the unique character of the city and enhancing the quality of life. . Views of the Pacific Ocean, off -shore islands, lights of the Los Angeles basin, the Palos Verdes hills or canyons, the Los Angeles and Long Beach harbors and so forth are a special quality of real property ownership for many residential lots in the dty. Views contributeto real property values. Trees and vegetation produce significant psychological and tangible benefits for both residents and the broader community. Trees and vegetation provide shade, reduce energy costs, provide privacy, provide visual screens and buffers between properties, modify temperatures, screen winds, stabilize soil, replenish oxygen to the atmosphere, remove pollutants from the air, mitigate soil erosion, and provide wildlife habitat. Trees and vegetation contribute to real property values. Page 16 The benefits derived from an established view and the benefits derived from trees and vegetation may come into conflict. Views have the potential to be diminished or eliminated bytrees and other vegetation growing on nearby private ordty property. Trees and other vegetation, particularly when such trees are not properly maintained, can produce harmful effects both on the property on which they are planted and/or on neighboring properties. The purpose of this Chapter 17.26 is to: L Establish a right of a real property owner (view seeker) in the City of Roiling Hills to preserve and/ or restore an established view, 2. Establish a right of a real property owner (tree/vegetation owner) in the City of Rolling Hills to preserve and maintain established trees and vegetation, 3. Mitigate the inherent conflict between an established view and trees/vegetation by establishing procedures for the protection of an established view and/or abatement of view impairments created by trees and vegetation, while at the same time protecting trees and vegetation from indiscriminate damage or removal, 4. Preserve real property rights of tree/vegetation owners by not unreasonably reducing privacy, shade, soil stability, and so forth provided by trees and/or vegetation on their property. The goal is to provide equity between the real property rights of view seekers with established views and the real property rights of tree/vegetation owners, 5. Assure that remediation of impairments of established views are to the greatest degree possible compliant with tree maintenance and pruning standards of the International Sodety of Arboriculture (ISA), so as not to damage trees and/or vegetation. 17.26.020 Retroactivity of revised Chapter 17.26. This revised Chapter 17.26 shall beeffective retroactively to the date Chapter 17.26 was first made an ordinance of the Cityof Rolling Hills. 17.26.030 Burden of proof and criteria for determining unreasonable view Impairment. The burden of proof to show that a view on a view seekers real property Is an established view, and/or that the trees and/or vegetation upon the tree/vegetation owner's real property are established trees/vegetation, and/or that an established view is unreasonably impaired by a tree/vegetation owner's trees/vegetation shall be by "clear and convincing evidence," weighed in the following order of priority: a. Dated photographic prints, negatives, slides, or digital images [California Evidence Code Section 1500.6(a)] , b. Locations of trees/and or vegetation shown on site plans of the real property, c. Expert testimony, and lastly d. Other evidence, Page 1 7 The following factors are to be considered (but are not exclusive) in determining whether unreasonable impairment of an established view has occurred: 1. The most recent date that the view seeker's real property was conveyed for fair market value in an arms -length transaction (as evidenced by a deed), 2. The most recent date the tree/vegetation owner's real property was conveyed for fair market value in an arms -length transaction (as evidenced by a deed), 3. The viewing point on the view seeker's real property from which the alleged established view is claimed, 4. The quality of the alleged established view from the view seeker's real property, including the existence of landmarks, vistas, or other unique features of an established view, s. Determination that the view seeker's view is an established view, as defined by this chapter, 6. The extent to which specific tree(s) and/or vegetation on the tree/vegetation owner's real property obscure the established view, 7. The extent to which tree(s) and/or vegetation on the tree/vegetation owner's real property that obscure the esta blished view are established trees and/or vegetation, as defined by this chapter; and the degree to which such established trees/and or vegetation have further grown from the date they became established or from the date the view became established, 8. The extent to which tree(s) and/or vegetation on the tree/vegetation owner's real property that obscure the estabiIshed view are not established trees and/or vegetation, 9. The extent to which the established view has been or is diminished by a legal building structure that is consistent with city regulations, and vegetation withinthe silhouette of such a structure. Vegetationmay grow up to the height of the roof ridge for a privacy shield and/or to shield the view into a pool or patio and certain other private areas within a real property_ 17.26.040 Criteria for determining appropriate preservation/restoration actions. If it has been determined that an unreasonable impairment of an established view by a tree/vegetation owner's trees or vegetation exists, then the following shall be considered in determining appropriate preservation or restorative actions to the impairing trees and/or vegetation: 1. The extent to which the view -seeker has made diligent and reasonable efforts to maintain the established view through informal agreements with the current tree/vegetation owner or prior tree/vegetation owners and to initiate initial discussions with the current tree/vegetation owner (as described in Section 17.26.90); and the degree to which the current tree/vegetation owner has reasonably participated in initial discussions, 2. Established trees and/or vegetation. If trees and/or vegetation are established trees and/or vegetation as defined in this chapter, the height and spread of those trees and/or vegetation may only be returned to the height and spread that existed on the date the trees and/or vegetation became established, or to their height and Page 18 spread that existed on the date the view became established, whichever height and spread is lesser, subject to mitigating factors below, 3. Trees and or vegetation that are not established trees and/or vegetation. Trees and or vegetation that are not established trees and/or vegetation as defined by this chapter may be subjected to view preservation/restoration actions as are required to restore the established view, subject to mitigating factors below, 4. Mitigating factors. The following non -ranked factors shall be considered In determining appropriate actions to preserve or restore an established view, while at the same time accommodating real property rights of tree/vegetation owners: (a) Visual screening or privacy, and sound buffering between properties, provided by trees /vegetation, (b) Shade, energy conservation and/or climate control (c) Soil stability, as determined by soil composition, degree of slope and extent of the tree's/vegetation's root system when a tree/vegetation is proposed to be removed, (d) Habitat value for wildlife (e) Softening or reduction of the scale and mass of structures; (f) Aesthetic values of the trees/vegetation, (g) Community/neighborhood quality, value or significance, (h) Historical context due to the age or size of the tree/vegetation, (1) Rare and interesting botanical species. 5. Hazards posed by specific tree(s) or vegetation including, but not limited to disease, fire danger or the danger of falling limbs or trees, 6. Environmental Review. In no event shall preservation/restoration action be required if such action would adversely affect the environment. Any proposed agreement or order by a decision -making body shall be reviewed by city staff to determine any required environmental review. If the remediation action is determined by city staff not to be exempt from the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), city staff shall arrange fora CEQA environmental review to determine CEQA compliance and/or conditions. Costs of environmental review shall be paid initially by the view seeker, provided, however, that the ultimate responsibility for such costs may subsequently be modified by mutual agreement of the parties or by order of a decision -making body. 17.26.050 Hierarchy of view preservation/restoration actions. The intent in effecting preservation or restoration of established views is to comply as much as is reasonably possible with tree maintenance and pruning standards of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), so that such actions, in the opinion of an ISA certified master arborist or ASCA registered consulting arborist, would not destroy the visual proportions of the tree/vegetation, adversely affect the tree and/or vegetation's growth pattern or health, or otherwise damage the tree and/or vegetation in question. Page 19 View preservation and restoration actions may include, but are not limited to the following, in order of preference: 1. Lacing. Lacing removes excess foliage and can improve the structure of the tree. Views can be provided through laced trees, 2. Crown Raising. Crown raising may be utilized to provide a view under the crown of a tree, 3. Crown Reduction. Crown reduction may be used to reduce the height and/or spread of a tree/vegetation, 4. Stand Thinning. The removal of some of the total number of trees from a grove of trees may be used, to thin out the grove in order to provide a view through the grove, 5. Heading Back or Topping. Heading back or topping of trees is only permitted for trees or vegetation specifically planted and maintained as a hedge, espalier or in pollard form, 6. Tree/Vegetation Removal. Removal of trees and/or vegetation may be considered when the above -mentioned preservation actions are judged to be ineffective, and which may be accompanied by required replacement plantings of appropriate trees/vegetation to mitigate the level of real property benefits lost due to tree/vegetation removal. 17.26.060 Committee on Trees and Views. A Committee on Trees and Views ("Committee") is established for the purpose of advising view seekers and tree -owners about the provisions of this chapter, providing research and evaluation, facilitating discussions among the parties to arrive at an equitable agreement among the parties, and documenting findings and non -binding recommendations. The role of the Committee shall be advisory in nature and shall not be binding in establishing the preservation or restoration of an established view. Participation of the city and/or any committee of the city in the view and tree/vegetation equity process is as a facilitator, and shall not be construed in any manner as the dty becoming a party to the dispute between the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner(s). The Committee shall be composed of no less than three members, selected from among real property owners in the dty and appointed by the City Council annually at the same time as the Council selects its officers, or whenever a vacancy occurs. Committee meetings shall be scheduled as adjourned or special meetings of the Council. 17.26.070 Desirable and undesirable trees. The Committee on Trees and Views is authorized and directed to prepare a list of desirable and undesirable trees appropriate for planting within the city. The list shall be based upon ability of the tree species to flourish in Rolling Hills, tree size and shape, rate of growth, depth or spread of roots, fire resistance/hazard, fall rate of leaves or bark or fruit or branches, and other factors related tosafety, maintenance and appearance. The purpose of this provision is to make information availabieto real property owners which may serve to avoid future view claims and/or fire hazards, and other proceedings authorized by this chapter (Ord. 239 §11(part),1993). Page 1 10 17.26.080 View and tree/vegetation equity process. A view seeker shall follow the process established by this chapter in seeking assistance from the city for preservation or restoration of an alleged estal it hedview. Participation of the city in the view and tree/vegetation equity process is as a facilitator, and shall not be construed in any manner as the city becoming a partyto the dispute between the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner(s). 1. A view seeker applicant must complete the "initial discussion" process described in Section 17.26.090, 2. If that initial discussion process does not yield a result in an agreement mutually equitable to the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner, then the view seeker may file a view claim with the city and request mediation, as described in Sections 17.26.100 and 17.26.110, 3. If the tree/vegetation owner refuses to participate in mediation or if mediation is unsuccessful in resolving the claim, the view seeker may next pursue resolution by requesting assistance from the Committee on Trees a n d Views a s described in Sec. 17.26.120, 4. If the recommendation of the Committee on Trees and Views is not accepted by the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner, either party may appeal the recommendation to Rolling Hills City Council for a recommended resolution, S. If the recommendation of the City Council is not accepted by the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner, the view seeker may next pursue resolution by arbitration, as set forth in Section 17.26.130, 6. If arbitration is not accepted by the tree/vegetation owner, the view seeker may then initiate litigation as described in Section 17.26.140. The prevailing party in any civil action brought pursuant to this chapter shall be entitled to recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees incurred in the litigation, subject to the following exception: a tree/vegetation owner who prevails in litigation shall not be entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs if the tree/vegetation owner has declined to participate in view and tree/vegetation equity processes set forth in Sections 17.26.090 (Initial Discussion), 17.26.110 (Mediation), and/or 17.26.130 (Arbitration). The notice of the view claim and request for mediation provided by the city in accordance with Section 17.26.100 shall inform the tree/vegetation owner of this provision and the consequences of non -participation in the initial discussion, mediation, and/or arbitration process. Page 1 11 17.26.090 Initial discussion. A view seeker, who believes that one or more trees or vegetation on another person's real property in the city has caused unreasonable impairment of an alleged established view from the view seeker's real property, shall first notify the tree/vegetation owner in writing of suchconcerns. The written notification shall request personal discussions to enable the view seeker and tree/vegetation owner to attempt to reach a mutually agreeable solution. The notification shall include a copy of the view preservationordinance (Chapter 17.26), available from the city. Failure of the tree/vegetation owner to respond to the written request for initial discussion within thirty days from the date of delivery shall be deemed formal refusalbythe tree/vegetation owner to participate in the initial discussion. The view seeker shall invite the tree/vegetation owner to examine the alleged view impairment from the viewing point on the view seeker's real property. Theviewseekershallprovide to the tree/vegetation owner clear and convindng evidence of the alleged established view and a written description of the nature and extent of the alleged impairment (17.26.030). The tree/vegetation owner is urged to invite the view seeker to examine the situation from its real property. If the tree and/or vegetation owner purchased its real property after the view seeker purchased their real property, the tree/vegetation owner should provide the view seeker with evidence of the date they took title to their real property. The tree/vegetation owner should also provide dear and convincing evidence of the state (height and spread) of alleged established trees and or/vegetation on their property as of the date that they took title (17.26.030). Criteria to be considered In evaluating appropriate preservation and/or restoration actions are contained in Section17.26.040. A hierarchy of view preservation and/or restoration actions is contained in Section 17.26.50. The view seeker shall document and provide in written form to the tree/vegetation owner the specifics of a view remediation proposal: 1. Which specific trees or vegetation shall be remedied, 2. What specific remediation is requested for each tree and/or vegetation, including diagrams or marked -up photographs, 3. What replacement plantings are required, 4. Who pays for what remediation and replacement, 5. Who pays for future maintenance, and how administered, 6. Other pertinent details of the remediation. If the initial discussion is refused by the tree/vegetation owner, or if the parties cannot come to an agreement about view preservation/restoration actions required to mitigate view seeker's alleged view Impairment, the view seeker may proceed with the subsequent view claim procedure outlined in Section 17.26.100. Page 1 12 17.26.100 View claim armature. lithe initial discussion outlined in Section 17.26.090 does not result in an agreement between the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner, the view seeker may file a written view daim with the city requesting assistance of the city in pursuing abatement of impairment of an alleged established view. Participation of the city and or its committee in the view and tree/vegetation equity process is as a facilitator, and shall not be construed in any manner as the city becoming a party to the dispute between the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner(s). 1. Proof of initial discussion. Before application may be made, the view seeker applicant shall provide written proof that the initial discussion process contained in 17.26.090 has been attempted and failed. If a view remediation proposal was proposed by the view -seeker to the tree/vegetation owner, the specifics of the proposal shall be provided. 2. Application Required. The view seeker applicant shall submit a completed application for abatement of impairment of an alleged established view (view claim) on a form provided by the city. The application shall be accompanied by a fee as shall be set from time to time by the City Council. During the course of a view action, an applicant may be required to amend an application or to provide supplemental materials. 3. Financial Responsibility and Indemnification Agreement. The view seeker applicant shall execute a financial responsibility and indemnification agreement with the city agreeing to indemnify the city of any liability and agreeing to pay the entire cost of the view claim process and for view preservation or remediation actions, except as otherwise may be later agreed between view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner or as later specified by a decision - making body; and shall post a payment bond at the time a view claim is submitted. 4. View claim procedure. A view claim to preserve or restore view shall consist of all of the following: (a) The address in the city of the view seeker's real property, and evidence confirming the ownership and the date of acquisition of the view seeker's real property, (b) The address in the city of the real property upon which the trees and/or vegetation allegedly impairing a view are located, (c) Evidence that initial discussion as described in Section 17.26.090 has been requested and has failed, (d) View point or points from which an alleged established view or views is/are claimed, Page 1 13 (e) A description of the nature and extent of the alleged impairment of an established view, including clear and convincing evidence. Evidence may include, but is not limited to: 1. Dated photographic prints, negatives, slide, or digital images; 11. Identification of all specific trees and/or vegetation alleged to cause the view impairment. Such evidence must show the extent to which the alleged established view has been allegedly impaired by treesand/orvegetation, iii. Expert testimony, and lastly iv. Other evidence (f) Specific actions proposed by the view -seeker to preserve/restore the alleged established view (Sec 17.26.50) 17.26.110 Mediation. If the initial discussion outlined In Section 17.26.90 has not resulted In an agreement between the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner, the view seeker may request mediation to resolve the view claim. 1. Upon receiving the written view claim, financial responsibility and indemnification agreement, payment bond, and processing fee, city staff shall prepare and send by certified mall to the tree/vegetation owner a copy of the written view claim and a notice requesting that the tree/vegetation owner agree to participate in a mediation process to attempt to resolve the view claim. City staff shall provide the tree/vegetation owner with a copy of this ordinance Chapter 17.26. 2. The notice of the view claim and request for mediation provided by the city in accordance with Section 17.26.100 shall inform the tree/vegetation owner of the provision in Sec. 17.26.140 that a tree/vegetation owner who prevails in litigation shall not be entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs if the tree/vegetation owner has dedined to participate in the view and tree/vegetation equity processes set forth in Sections 17.26.090 (Initial Discussion), 17.26.110 (Mediation), and/or 17.26.130 (Arbitration). 3. The tree/vegetation owner shall have 30 days from delivery of the request for mediation to either accept or decline mediation. The notice sent to the tree/vegetation owner shall inform the tree/vegetation owner that a failure to respond to the request for mediation within 30 days from the date of delivery of the notice shall be deemed formal refusal of the mediation process by the tree/vegetation owner. 4. City staff shall notify all real property owners within five hundred feet of the tree/vegetation owner's property of the pending view claim, their right to file a view claim on their own behalves within 45 days of city staffs mailing of notice of the original view claim, and that any view claim they might later make against the same tree/vegetation owner will be subject to a two-year deferral if it is not filed within 45 days of staffs' mailing of notice of the original claim. Any view claim(s) submitted by nearby real property owners after being advised by staff of the pending view claim, to the extent possible, shall be combined with the subject view claim for purposes of mediation and/or arbitration. Page 1 14 5. If the tree/vegetation owner agrees to participate in a mediation process, the mediator shall be chosen by the parties from a list maintained by the dty of qualified and professionally trained mediators, including but not limited to, members of the American Arbitration Association, In the event the parties are unable to agree on a mediator from the approved list, city staff shall randomly select a mediator from the list. City staff, in consultation with the mediator, shall establish a date for mediation, and a written notice of the mediation hearing date shall be sent to each party by certified mail. 6. The mediator shall be guided by the provisions of this chapter, including the evaluation criteria set forth in Sections 17.26.030 and 17.26.040, and the hierarchy of preservation actions set forth in Section 17.26.050, respectively, in attempting to resolve the view claim. The mediator may also solicit recommendations of an ISA certified master arborist or ASCA registered consulting arborist and other experts such as surveyors, landscapers, plant nurseries, and so forth. 7. The role of the mediator shall be advisory in nature and shall not be binding in establishing the preservation or restoration of an established view. Any agreement reached between t h e two parties as a result of the mediation process described herein shall be reduced to writing and signed by the mediator and all of the parties, and two copies shall be submitted to thecity derk. 8. The costs of mediation, including advice of experts, if any, shall be paid initially by the view seeker, provided, however, that the ultimate responsibility for such costs may subsequently be modified by mutual agreement of the parties. The mediator shall recommend a just and reasonable allocation of responsibility for the costs of mediation, including for experts if any, as a part of the mediation process. 9. If agreement is reached through mediation, it shall be reduced to writing and provided to the city for implementation in accordance with Section 17.26.160. 17.26.120 Assistance of Committee on Trees and Views. If the Initial discussion outlined in Section 17.26.090 or mediation outlined in Sections 17.26.110 does not result in an agreement between the tree /vegetation owner and the view seeker, the view seeker may request assistance from the CommitteeonTreesandViews.The role of the Committee shall be advisory in nature and shall not be binding in establishing the preservation or restoration of an established view. Partidpation of the city and/or its committee in the view and tree/vegetation equity process is as a fadlitator, and shall not be construed in any manner as the city becoming a party to the dispute between the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner(s). All costs incurred by the committee and the city, induding that for experts shall be paid initially by the view seeker, provided, however, that the ultimate responsibility for such costs may subsequently be modified by mutual agreement of the parties. The following process shall apply: 1) Public Hearing. The matter shall be returned to the City Manager, who shallschedule the matter for a public hearing before the Committee on Trees and Views. (Ord. 292 §5, 2003;Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993. Public notice of the hearing shall be given a minimum of fifteen days prior to the hearing. The hearing shall not proceed unless proof is shown that the owner of the tree or other obstructing vegetation (tree/vegetation owner) has received notice of the hearing as provided herein: Page 1 15 a) Notice shall be given by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the owner of the real property on which the tree or vegetation allegedly impairing an alleged established view areiocated (tree/vegetation owner), and to i) the complainant (view seeker); ii) Notice shall be given by first lass mail to all real property owners within five hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the property on which the tree or vegetation allegedly impairing an established view islocated, and to other persons who, in the Committee's judgment, might be affected. iii) Where there is more than one real property with trees/vegetation that impairs a view of viewseeker, the Committee will deal with all of those properties, to the extent possible, in a consolidated manner to arrive ata comprehensive recommendation. b) Content of Notice. The notice shall state the name of the complaining party (view seeker), the name of the real property owner against whom the complaint is filed (tree/vegetation owner), the location of the tree(s) or other vegetation, and the time and place of hearing. The notice shall invite written comments to be submitted prior to oratthe hearing. 2) Conduct of Hearing. The Committee shall adopt rules for the conduct of required hearings. At the hearing, the Committee shall consider all written and oral testimony and evidence presented in connection with the application. The Committee shall be guided by the provisions of this chapter, including the evaluation criteria set forth in Sections 17.26.030 and 17.26.040, and the hierarchyof preservation actions set forth in Section 17.26.050, respectively, in attempting to resolve the view claim. a) Professional advisors. The Committee may at its discretion retain an ISA certified master arborist or ASCA registered consulting arborist to provide expert advice to the Committee. The Committee may retain other professionals such as surveyors, landscapers, tree maintenance companies, plant nurseries, and so forth to provide expert opinions and cost estimates to the Committee. b) The City Attorney may attend public hearings only to assure the legality of the proceedings, but shall not in any way represent the interests of either the view seeker or the tree -owner. Partidpation of the dty and/or its committee in the view and tree/vegetation equity process is as a fadlitator, and shall not be construed in any manner as the city becoming a party to the dispute between the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner(s). c) The view seeker and tree/vegetation owner may at their own discretion and their own expense appoint authorized agents, and/or retain legal counsel, arborists, surveyors and other professionals. 3) Findings. Based on the evidence received and factors contained in Sec. 17.26.030, 17.26.040, and 17.26. 050, the Committee may find : a) That there is no established view within the meaning of this chapter; b) That there is an established view within the meaning of this chapter, butthat the established view is not significantly impaired; or c) That there is an established view within the meaning of this chapter and that the established view is significantly impaired, d) That the trees and or vegetation impairing the established view are established trees and/or vegetation, or are not established trees and/or vegetation. Actions that apply to established and not established trees and/or vegetation are contained in Sec. 17.26.40, Page j 16 e) That the remediation proposed by the view seeker is reasonable or not reasonable, f) if the proposed remediation plan is not deemed to be reasonable, the Committee shall formulate an alternative remediation plan, g) The Committee shall make specific written findings in support of the foregoing determinations. 4) Actions. If the Committee determines that there is an established view that is significantly impaired by tree/vegetation owner's trees and/or vegetation, it shall provide : a) Non -binding recommendations as is necessary to abate the view impairment and to restore or preserve the applicant's established view, as defined in Sec. 17.26.050 (Hierarchy of view preservation/restoration actions.) b) In order to minimize the number of trees/vegetation recommended to be trimmed or removed, the Committee may recommend abatement of view impairments in increments to determine the effect of each increment. c) The Committee may recommend conditions as are necessary to prevent future view impairments. d) in no event shall restorative action be required if such action would adversely affect the environment or would unreasonably detract from the privacy or enjoyment of the real property on which the objected to vegetation is located, as defined in Sec. 17.26.40 and Sec. 17.26.50. 5) Finality of Decision. In the event that the recommendations of the Committee are accepted by the tree/vegetation owner and the view seeker, the Committee's recommendation shall be final 30 days after adoption of its written findings, unless it Is appealed to the City Council pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.54. (Ord. 295 §7 (Ex. B (part)), 2004; Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993) a) Any agreement reached between the the view seeker and the tree/ Vegetation owner as a result of the process described herein shall be reduced to writing and signed by all of the parties, and two copies shall be submitted to the city clerk. The agreement shall be implemented in accordance with Section 17.26.160. b) It is the intention of this section that any advisory recommendations of the Committee be admissible as evidence in any civil action brought pursuant to Section 17.26.140 of this chapter. 17.26.130 Arbitration. If the proceedings under Sections 17.26.90 (initial Discussion), 17.26.110 (Mediation), and/or 17.26.120 (View Committee or City Council on appeal) fail to achieve agreement between the tree/vegetation owner and the view seeker, the view seeker may deliver by certified mail to the tree/vegetation owner a request to participate in a binding arbitration process. The tree/vegetation owner shall have thirty days from delivery of the request for arbitration to either accept or decline arbitration. Failure to respond within thirty days shall be deemed formal refusal of arbitration. If arbitration is accepted, within thirty days of such acceptance the parties shall agree in writing to the selection of an arbitrator, who shall be chosen from a list provided by the city of qualified and professionally trained arbitrators, including but not limited to, members of the American Arbitration Association. If the parties are unable to agree on a specific Page 117 arbitrator within thirty days, city staff shall randomly select an arbitrator from the list maintained by the dty. In addition, either party may petition a court of competent jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator. The arbitrator shall be guided by the provisions of this chapter, including the evaluation criteria set forth in Sections 17.26.030 and 17.26.040, and the hierarchy of preservation/restoration actions set forth in Section 17.26.050, respectively, in attempting to resolve the view claim, and shall submit a complete written decision to the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner. Costs of remedlation, tree/vegetation replacement, maintenance of trees/vegetation and so forth shall be induded in the decision. Any decision of the arbitrator shall be enforceable pursuant to the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1285 et seq., and two copies of the decision shall be submitted to the city derk. The costs of arbitration shall be paid initially by the view seeker, provided, however, that the ultimate responsibility for such costs may subsequently be modified either by mutual agreement of the parties or by a determination of the arbitrator as to a just and reasonable allocation of financial responsibility. The decision of the arbitrator shall be Implemented in accordance with Section 17.26.160. 17.26.140 Litigation. If a view seeker has attempted to obtain but has been unsuccessful In attaining an agreement or resolution under Sections 17.26.90 (Initial Discussion), 17.26.110 (Mediation), 17.26.120 (View Committee or City Council on appeal), and/or 17.26.130 (Arbitration) of this chapter, the view seeker may Initiate civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction for resolution of his/her view claim under the provisions of this chapter. It is the intent of this chapter that the evaluation criteria set forth herein in sections 27.26.30, 17.26.40, and 17.26.50 are utilized in adjudicating view claims in civil litigation. In the event of civil litigation, the view seeker shall provide two copies of the filed complaint to the city clerk. The prevailing party in any civil action brought pursuant to this chapter shall be entitled to recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees incurred in the litigation, subject to the following exception: a tree/vegetation owner who prevails in litigation shall not be entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs if the tree/vegetation owner has declined to participate view and tree/vegetation equity processes set forth in Sections 17.26.090 (Initial Discussion), 17.26.110 (Mediation), and 17.26.130 (Arbitration). The notice of the view claim and request for mediation provided by the city in accordance with Section 17.26.100 shall inform the tree/vegetation owner of this provision and the consequences of non -participation in the initial discussion, mediation, and/or arbitration process. A decision established by litigation shall be implemented in accordance with Section 17.26.160. Page 1 18 17.26.150 Preservation/restorative action limitations. Except as otherwise authorized by law, no tree and/or vegetation on real property owned or controlled by another person may be removed, destroyed or altered unless the view seeker either enters into a written agreement with the tree/vegetation owner or obtains an arbitration award or judicial decision specifying, in detail, the nature and timing of the preservation or restorative actions and specified replacement plantings, and the parties responsible for performing such action. 17.26.160 Implementation of preservation/restorative action. Restorative action may be determined by agreement among the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner, through arbitration, or through litigation. 1. Within thirty days of a mutual agreement between the parties or arbitration award or judicial decision ordering restorative action by the tree/vegetation owner, the view seeker shall obtain and present to the tree/vegetation owner three bids from licensed and qualified contractors for performance of the work, as well as a cash deposit in the amount ofthe lowest bid. In order to qualify, the contractors must provide insurance which protects and indemnifies the city and the view seeker from damages attributable to negligent orwrongful performance of the work. Any such insurance shall be subject to the approval of the city. 2. The owner of the obstructing vegetation (tree/vegetation owner), if required to remediate the view impairment, may hire any licensed and qualified contractor to perform the restorative action (as long as the insurance requirements of this section are satisfied), at a cost up to the lowest bid obtained by the view seeker for the same work, but shall be responsible for any cost above the amount of the cash deposit. The work shall be completed no more than thirty days from receipt of the cash deposit. 3. The implementation method provided for in this section may be modified by mutual agreement of the parties or by any decision -making body. 4. The costs of implementation shall be paid initially by the view seeker, provided, however, that the ultimate responsibility for such costs may subsequently be modified either by mutual agreement of the parties or by a determination of a decision -making body as to a just and reasonable allocation of financial responsibility. 17.26.170 Enforcement. A final decision rendered under this chapter may be enforced judicially by way of action for injunctive or other appropriate relief, in which event the prevailing party may be awarded attorney's fees and costs as determined by the court, as limited by Section 17.26.140 herein. Nothing in this chapter shall prelude the prosecution of any civil cause of action under the law by any person with respect to the matters covered herein. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993). Page 1 19 17.26.180 Responsibility for view preservation/restorative action and subsequent maintenance. The view seeker shall be responsible for paying the cost of any and all view claim processes, determined preservation/restoration actions, and subsequent maintenance of trees/vegetation, unless the parties agree to share the costs in some other manner, or unless it is otherwise determined by arbitration decision or court order. 17.26.190 Notification of subsequent owners. It is not the intent or purpose of this chapter for the city to create either a covenant running with the land or an equitable servitude (for example, easement or license). However, the city will keep a record of agreements and decisions reached pursuant to this chapter of which it is notified, and will provide those agreements and/or decisions as part of the pre -purchase inspection report to prospective purchasers of real property in the city who request such a. report. This section does not predude recording of the agreements or decisions if that is agreed to by the parties or mandated by a decision -making body. 17.26.200 Liability and Indemnification. 1. Participation of the city and/or its committee in the view and tree/vegetation equity process is as a facilitator, and shall not be construed in any manner as the city becoming a party to the dispute between the view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner(s). The city shall not be liable for any damages, injuries, costs or expenses which are the result of an advisory opinion issued by the Committee on Trees and Views or City Council on appeal, a city employee or official or any agreements or determinations resulting from mediation, arbitration or litigation concerning view claims or a view seeker's assertions pertaining to views remedied or protected herein. 2. The applicant shall execute a financial responsibility agreement with the city and post a payment bond at the time a view claim is submitted as described in Section 17.26.100. The applicant must agree to pay the entire cost of the view claim process and view preservation/remediation, except as otherwise may be agreed between view seeker and the tree/vegetation owner or as required by a decision - making body. View seeker shall agree to indemnify city of anyliability. 3. Under no circumstances shall the city have any responsibility or liability to enforce or seek any legal redress, civil or criminal, for any decision or action that any other person or entity makes concerning a view claim. Page 1 20 17.26.210 Severability. adoption, and publication. t if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Chapter 17.26 and related definitions in Chapter 17.12 is to any extent found by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal, otherwise invalid, incapable of being enforced or unconstitutional, such section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion shall be excluded to the extent of such invalidity or unenforceability; all other terms hereof shall remain in full force and effect; and, to the extent permitted and possible, the invalid or unenforceable term shall be deemed replaced by a term that is valid and enforceable and that comes closest to expressing the intention of such invalid or unenforceable term. 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Chapter 17.26 and related amendments to Chapter 17.12 Definitionsand shall cause the same to be published in accordance with law. Page J 21 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK TITLE AND SUMMARY PREPARED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AUG 1 8 2013 City of Rolling Hills By AN ORDINANCE REPLACING THE CITY'S VIEW PRESERVATION ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE CITY'S ROLE IN RESOLVING VIEW COMPLAINTS BY LIMITING THE CITY TO RENDERING NONBINDING RECOMMENDATIONS, ENCOURAGING PRIVATE MEDIATION OR ARBITRATION, AND CREATING A RIGHT FOR PRIVATE LAWSUITS WHERE VIEW COMPLAINTS ARE NOT VOLUNTARILY RESOLVED The stated purpose of the initiative is to balance the rights and property values of view seekers and tree owners. The changes to the current law primarily eliminate the City's decisionmaking role in determining view complaints, shift the financial responsibility to those seeking to enforce views, and encourage voluntary mediation or arbitration. Like the City's current view preservation ordinance, the proposed initiative ordinance allows a property owner in the City to seek to restore a view that existed when the property owner purchased the property for fair market value in an arms -length transaction. The initiative changes the current procedure in the following material respects: • At the outset, the view seeker must sign a financial responsibility agreement assuming responsibility for all costs incurred by the City in the process and all view restoration costs and indemnifying the City; and the view seeker must post a bond as security for these costs. • The view seeker must prove by "clear and convincing evidence" that the view being sought existed when the view seeker purchased the property, and that the view is "unreasonably impaired." • A broad list of criteria and factors must be considered in determining whether and how to restore a view. • A hierarchy of restorative actions, from least to most impactful to the tree, is established and must be followed. • Vegetation that existed on the tree owner's property at the time the view seeker purchased his or her property cannot be ordered pruned or trimmed beyond its appearance at the time the view seeker purchased his or her property. Panoramic views may be restored. • The view seeker must prove in writing an effort to discuss the complaint with the tree owner before filing request for mediation. If mediation is unsuccessful or refused, the view complaint will be considered by the Committee on Trees and Views and the City Council on appeal. The City is limited to making a nonbinding recommendation to the parties. If the parties do not accept the recommendation, the view seeker may propose binding arbitration. If the tree owner declines to arbitrate, the view seeker may file a lawsuit to enforce the right to the view. The prevailing party in a court action would be entitled to an award of attorney fees; provided, however that the tree owner would not be entitled to attorney fees if he or she declined to participate in informal dispute resolution, including mediation and arbitration. • The initiative applies retroactively. A full copy of the proposed ordinance is printed on this petition for review by any prospective signer. 31 Chuckwagon Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 February 9, 2017 Ms. Heidi Luce City Clerk/Executive Assistant City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 FEB 0 9 2017 City of Rolling Hills By RE: INITIATIVE MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO THE VOTERS OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Luce: I hand you herewith, in nine separate sections corresponding to nine petition circulators, a petition containing 174 signatures of Rolling Hills registered voters, and entitled: An ordinance replacing the City's view preservation ordinance to change the City's role in resolving view complaints by limiting the City to rendering non binding recommendations, encouraging private mediation or arbitration, and creating a right for private lawsuits where view complaints are not voluntarily resolved. My understanding is that: 1. Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition was filed with the City August 3, 2016 (E.0 Sec. 9202) 2. Date of receipt by the proponents of the Title and Summary from the Rolling Hills election official was August 18, 2016. 3. Last date to file all sections of the petition with the City is within 180 days from date of receipt by the proponents of the title and summary, which was August 18, 2016. 180 days is FEBRUARY 14, 2017. The petition is timely filed. 4. The minimum number of signatures to qualify a petition is 144. The signature requirement is based on the number of registered voters as reported by the County Elections official at the time the notice was published (E.C. 9215). According to the Los Angeles County Registrar/Recorder at the time the notice was published, as of 5/23/2016 the number of registered voters in Rolling Hills was 1440. Ten percent of 1440 registered voters are 144. Signatures of 174 registered Rolling Hills voters are in the petition, which exceeds the requisite 144 signatures. The petition is qualified. Page 5. City Council may adopt the ordinance, without alteration, at the regular meeting at which the certification of the petition is presented, or within 10 days after it is presented (E.C. 9215). The ordinance proposed in Measure 2017 is patterned after Tiburon's view ordinance, which was found by the California Court of Appeals in Kucera v. Lizza (1997) to be valid and constitutional. 6. The election for a municipal initiative that qualifies (pursuant to Sections 1405 and 9215) shall be held at the jurisdiction's next regular election occurring not less than 88 days after the date of the order of election. You have informed me that the date of the next regular election is June 2018. 7. We are informed that City Council intends to submit to the voters a proposition to repeal Measure Bin June 2017. 8. Upon receipt of a written notice of withdrawal signed by the proponents of the initiative, City Council can order the measure to be removed from the ballot through adoption of a resolution (E.C. 9605) up to 83 days before the election. To allow sufficient time for notice, the proponents would need to present a notice of withdrawal to the City 103 days before the election. We are heartened by the process that the City is taking to carefully consider and tailor the view ordinance proposed in Measure 2017, as re -drafted by Spenser Karpf and the Ad -Hoc Committee. We hope that the City will be able to draft a fair and balanced view ordinance that meets the needs of the people and complies with their preferences. We encourage the Planning Commission, Ad -Hoc Committee, and City Council to give very serious consideration to the wishes of Rolling Hills voters to limit the role of the City to rendering nonbinding recommendations in view complaints, versus the current rendering of quasi-judicial binding decisions. These residents do not want their taxpayer dollars to be spent on the city getting mixed up in property owner view disputes. Voter participation at municipal elections is notoriously small; these voters from all over the city who signed the petition are motivated to vote for Measure 2017, and can be expected to be opinion leaders. Sincerely, Lnn E. Gill Proponent cc. Yolanta Schwartz Planning Commission City Council 2 J Page CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY OF INITIATIVE PETITION I, Heidi Luce, City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills, County of Los Angeles, State of California, hereby certify that: The petition entitled "AN ORDINANCE REPLACING THE CITY'S VIEW PRESERVATION ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE CITY'S ROLE IN RESOLVING VIEW COMPLAINTS BY LIMITING THE CITY TO RENDERING NONBINDING RECOMMENDATIONS, ENCOURAGING PRIVATE MEDIATION OR ARBITRATION, AND CREATING A RIGHT FOR PRIVATE LAWSUITS WHERE VIEW COMPLAINTS ARE NOT VOLUNTARILY RESOLVED." was filed with the City Clerk Department on February 9, 2017. That said petition consists of 9 sections; That each section contains signatures purporting to be signatures of qualified electors of the City of Rolling Hills, California; That attached to this petition at the time it was filed, was an affidavit purporting to be the affidavit of the person who solicited the signatures, and containing the dates between which the purported qualified electors signed this petition; That the affiant stated his or her own qualification, that he or she had solicited the signatures upon that Section, that all. of the signatures were made in his or her presence, and that to the best of his or her own information and belief, each signature to that section was the genuine signature of the person whose name it purports to be; That after the proponents filed this petition and based on the County of Los Angeles Registrar of Voters' Records that I have determined the following facts regarding this petition: 1. Total number of signatures filed by proponent raw count: 184 2. Number of signatures found sufficient 161 3. Number of signatures found not sufficient (not in VIMSLite) 15 4. Number of signatures not sufficient because of duplication: 8 5. Total number of signatures required (10% x 1440): 144 Based on the above, the petition is deemed to be sufficient. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Rolling Hills this 23`d day of February, 2017. � di et Heidi Luce City Clerk City of Rolling Hills TO: FROM SUBJECT: geeli INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No.: 8-B Mtg. Date: 02/27/17 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER frite--/ CONSIDERATION OF A NOMINATION FOR THE 52nd ANNUAL OLDER AMERICANS RECOGNITION DAY DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2017 ATTACHMENT: • Letter and Nomination Form from the Los Angeles County Commission for Older Adults • List of recent recipients from Rolling Hills The Los Angeles County Commission for Older Adults (LACCOA) is asking for nominations of seniors to be honored at the 52nd Annual Older Americans Recognition Day (OARD) Awards Program to be held on May 31st at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. At this .awards program, the honorees will be recognized for their dedication to community service. The City unfortunately received this notice late last Thursday, February 16th before the long President's Day holiday weekend. To assist the City Council, the Mayor asked staff to seek the assistance from the Rolling Hills Community Association Board President and the president of each community organization in Rolling Hills to get the word out to its board and membership quickly by providing them the nomination packet from the County via email. The email also requested that the nomination form be completed and submitted to City Hall by noon on February 27, 2017. It is also encouraged that the City Council submit any names that they individually would like to be considered. The City Council is asked to choose a nominee who exemplifies the true spirit of volunteerism and need to be 60 years of age or older. The City Council will evaluate the candidates during this agenda item by reviewing the information provided by the nominator(s) and providing each other their personal knowledge of the candidate's volunteerism and positive impact they have had on improving the community. Staff will provide any nomination form (if any) that were collected at the time the City Council packets were distributed, but it is expected that most will not be collected until the due date which is the day the City Council meeting because of the expedited request for nominations. Therefore, those nominations will then be placed on the dais the night of the City Council meeting for the City Council's consideration. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council discuss the merits of each candidates qualifications and select one to be submitted to Commission to be honored by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors as the City of Rolling Hills nominee. RC:hl LOS ANGELES COUNTY COMMISSION FOR OLDER ADULTS 3333 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 400 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Board of Supervisors Hilda L. Solis, 1' District Mark Ridley -Thomas, 2nd District Sheila Kuehl, 3rd District Janice Hahn, 4th District Kathryn Barger, 5'h District February 10, 2017 Dear Honorable Mayor: (213) 351-5274 FAX (213) 351-7730 http://wdacs.lacounty.gov/ FEB 1 6 2017 City of Rolling Hills By Executive Board Linda Yamauchi, President Paul Jhin, 1' Vice President Charles Mitchell, 2nd Vice President Arlene Okamoto, Secretary Diana Love, Fiscal Officer Executive Liaison Anna Avdalyan, Program Manager Executive Director Guillermo Medina The Los Angeles County Commission for Older Adults (LACCOA) is asking for nominations of older adults to be honored at the 52nd Annual Older Americans Recognition Day (OARD) Awards Program. For the past 51 years, the President, the Governor, and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors have designated the month of May as Older Americans Recognition Month. We hope that your city will continue this tradition of participation at the local level. The 2017 OARD Awards Program will be held on Wednesday, May 31, 2017, at The Dorothy Chandler Pavilion Music Center Grand Hall located at 135 North Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90012. The awards program will start at 11:00 a.m. A light lunch will be served. The 2017 theme is: "Age Out Loud" At this awards program, the honorees will be recognized for their dedication to community service by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. We invite you to select one nominee who exemplifies .the true spirit of volunteerism and we look forward to your participation. Please complete and submit the enclosed OARD Nomination of Honoree Form and email no later than Wednesday, March 1, 2017, to Guillermo Medina Jr. at GMedinairc css.lacounty.9ov. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact Guillermo Medina Jr., OARD Coordinator for the Los Angeles County Commission for Older Adults at (213) 351-5274, or via email at GMedinair{c�css.lacounty.gov. Sincerely, cazda dial Linda Yamauchi, President c: Lorenza C. Sanchez, Assistant Director, Aging & Adult Services Branch Workforce Development, Aging and Community Services Enclosure: OARD Nomination Form LACCOA advocates for the needs and well-being of older adults in Los Angeles County 4 � �� "�' 'Cz-•��.�..r �. x,,...�.�� . .. ,.�_.�' t�'�.�'�w. ,. . � .°�'1•r; S ° r 'i3,s„s, ':�'s-a, r,�r _ .t„�..,�, a''-7, 52nd Annual Older Americans Recognition Day LDE AMERICAN MONT AG T mAy For questions regarding the Older Americans Recognition Day Event, please contact: Guillermo Medina, Jr. Los Angeles County Commission for Older Adults 213.351.5274 or via email at GMedinaJr@css.lacounty.gov CAtIFORtAr" Board of Supervisors Hilda L. Solis, 15' District Mark Ridley -Thomas, 2nd District Sheila Kuehl, 3rd District Janice Hahn, 4th District Kathryn Barger, 5th District LOS ANGELES COUNTY COMMISSION FOR OLDER ADULTS 3333 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 400 Los Angeles, CA 90010 ((213) 351-5274 FAX (213) 351-7730 http://wdacs.lacounty.gov/ Executive Board Linda Yamauchi, President Paul Jhin, 15' Vice President Charles Mitchell, Td Vice President Arlene Okamoto, Secretary Diana Love, Fiscal Officer Executive Liaison Anna Avdalyan, Program Manager NOMINATION FORM 52ND ANNUAL OLDER AMERICANS RECOGNITION DAY (OARD) AWARDS PROGRAM — MAY 31, 2017 DEADLINE MARCH 1, 2017 NAME OF NOMINEE: ADDRESS: Executive Director Guillermo Medina First M.I. Last City PHONE: ( ) and/or Work (Include Area Code) Nominee must be 60 years of age or older. Age Is nominee a U.S. Military Veteran? Yes or No If Yes, which Military Service? (Circle One) Army Navy State Zip Code Home (Include Area Code) Marines Air (Name of contact person and organization submitting the nomination) Name of Contact: Organization Name: Or Municipality (Name of City): Address: City State Phone: Fax: Email Address: Zip Code Supervisorial District: ❑1 ❑2 ❑3 ❑4 ❑5 (Please Circle Appropriate District) LACCOA advocates for the needs and well-being of older adults in Los Angeles County 52ND ANNUAL OLDER AMERICANS RECOGNITION DAY (OARD) AWARDS PROGRAM NOMINEE BIOGRAPHICAL STATEMENT Date Submitted: Please state your reasons, 100 WORDS OR LESS, for nominating the person as an OARD Honoree. The primary focus of the biographical statement should be reasons and/or examples of how your candidate has contributed to improving the overall community through volunteer service within the past ten (10) years. Resumes are not acceptable. PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT CLEARLY. The two short paragraphs should have the following information: 1. The name of the Nominee: • 2. The name of the Nominating Organization that he/she represents: 3. Overview of the Nominee's special contributions to the community during the past 10 years and specifically, what caused you to nominate him/her? Please complete both sides of this form and email or fax to the following: Mail to: Workforce Development, Aging and Community Services Los Angeles County Commission for Older Adults Guillermo Medina Jr., Executive Director 3333 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 400 Los Angeles, CA 90010 (213) 351-5274 Fax (213) 351-7730 Email to: GMedinalr@css.lacountv.gov Page 2 of 2 Older American Recognition Day Award Recipients 1996 Joan Saffo 2001 Don Gales 2002 Catherine Partridge 2005 Arvel Witte 2006 Carl Price 2007 Evie Hankins 2008 Godfrey Pernell 2009 Richard Henke 2010 William Horn 2011 Ralph Black 2012 Don Crocker 2013 Tom Heinsheimer 2014 V'Etta Virtue 2015 Maureen Nunn 2016 Allen Lay TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: 810 a/RW(4'9 qce6 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No.: 10-A Mtg. Date: 02/27/17 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER DIRECTION ON WHETHER TO RETAIN A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL TENNIS COURT AREA. FEBRUARY 27, 2017 ATTACHMENT: Letters of interest from two Construction Management firms. RECOMMENDATION It is recommend by City staff that the City Council approve the action to retain a construction manager for the Tennis Court Area Improvement Project and divide the cost for the services rendered equally with the Rolling Hills Community Association. BACKGROUND Last August the City Council reviewed and approved the preliminary plan and concept to make the municipal tennis courts ADA compliant and improve the outdoor recreational amenities between the two sets of courts. Since that meeting, the tennis court working group (that includes representatives from the City, RHCA and the Tennis Club) have met a number of times to provide further design direction to the architect and designer. These changes entailed making the cabana/outdoor kitchen bigger and relocating the storage facilities, so as to make the space more functional and attractive. Although these changes delayed the project, the architectural plans are now complete. The City and RHCA staff recently met with the architect and designer to review the plans and find out the next steps to secure permits for the project. It was also discussed that very soon we will need to get real estimates for materials and labor costs so we can select materials and report to the City Council and RHCA Board in order to make adjustments to the initial proposed budget. Furthermore, there was a serious discussion about preparation of an RFP for contractors, the different bidding • • requirements for the City and RHCA and considered who would oversee the actual construction. This discussion led to the conclusion that there is not a person on the City or RHCA staff who has the expertise to oversee this project from start to finish. Originally, it was thought we could carry the project through the design and permitting process and then hire a general contractor to supervise the grading, build the structure and help us with the selection of materials; but it was concluded that the process is far more complicated and time consuming than originally anticipated and even small mistakes cost both time and money. For example, just obtaining a building permit requires approvals from several separate agencies and drawings with different details for each one: • Fire department reviews the landscaping for Fuel 'Modification and hydrant locations • Health department reviews the septic system and certification requirements • Structural engineering • ADA compliance • Review to confirm that all of the plans and details meet code requirements (electrical, plumbing, roofing, etc.). This approval process involves several sets of plans and visits to different County offices from Lomita to Azusa for all the necessary approvals. DISCUSSION This project has an additional complexity due to the fact that phase one is being paid for by the City and must comply with the State law associated with the closed bidding process and prevailing wage requirements for municipal construction projects and the second phase is being paid for by the Community Association, which has its own procedures for bidding and selection. In fact, the Davis -Stirling law prevents homeowner associations from acting as construction managers unless they have a staff member with a contractor's license —the RHCA does not have one. Furthermore, it is the experience of City staff that most municipal construction projects have construction managers. Beyond the current work load and lack of true expertise of managing construction projects by City Staff, the following are good reasons to retain a construction manager: • Assists in developing RFP for hiring a general contractor • Supervises the work of general contractor to assure the City's and RHCA's best interest are always being maintained • Analyze the feasibility of materials, methods and other construction factors relating to cost • Hold pre -bid conference and/or explain the project to the contractors • Receive and analyze the bids for correctness and adherence to specifications • Secure the construction contract and schedule • Coordinate the contractors' activities to meet the City and Association's needs • Review the work in progress to verify compliance with contract specifications, schedules and invoice requests • • • Review change orders for accuracy and a reasonableness • Maintain cost accounting records • Provide interpretations and resolutions to issues that arise • Verify certificates of insurance for each contractor_ • Review and identify problems with a contractors license • Review and approve product samples, shop drawings or other submittals • Trouble shoot job site issues • Review change order requests • Process requests for information from contractor/subs to architect • Help with permitting and inspections • Negotiate material discounts • Conduct final inspection for the project and develop a "punch list" • Verify the receipt of all guarantees, affidavits, releases and manuals Due to the above reasons, the project will get done faster and will be less expensive overall if we hire a construction manager. The project will have one person to make sure we get all the necessary approvals, knows the order in which the steps need to be completed, will know our budget and will have the capacity to make sure that contractors meet their obligations. The next step, if the request were approved, would be to bring back construction manager proposals from bidders to both the Council and the Board for consideration. FISCAL IMPACT RHCA staff has contacted a few construction management firms and it was found that construction managers charge by the hour for time and materials. Therefore, for a project the size and scope of the Tennis Court Area Improvement Project, it is estimated the cost would be approximately $30,000 to manage the entire project. This would be split between the RHCA and the City, each paying about $15,000. The City Council appropriated $50,000 as a placeholder for the area improvements in the FY 2016-17 Budget. The City Council also approved last August the cost estimates for the different aspects of the project ($165,852) that are still very rough and they do not include payment of prevailing wages that will be required for the labor portion of the project. It is expected that the cost associated with City's portion of the improvements related to construction will be 15% or greater. It is anticipated that the City will pay for the following improvements (assuming including a construction manager): 1. Pathways, railings, low walls along pathways $87,652 and flatwork for ADA compliance. 2. ADA Restroom (25%) $ 5,000 3. Lighting $18,200 4. Planting/Irrigation (50%) $35,000 5. Engineering, plan check & permits (66%) $20,000 6. Construction Manager (50%) $15,000 TOTAL: $180,852* • • This budget is based on the currently proposed project. It is estimated that the RHCA portion would be about $152,750 for which they approved $160,000 at the July 7, 2016 Board meeting and an additional $15,000 for a construction manager was approved at its February 13, 2017 Board meeting. Furthermore, this budget does not include the 15% increase or more for costs associated with the requirement that the City pay prevailing wages for work that is directly associated with construction. This is only an estimate and the true cost will not be known until the project receives bids. RC:YS:hl Tennis Court Improvements-staffreport.docx rtre JVB CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT , INC. "Effective Solutions for Busy People" February 8, 2017 Kristen Raig Rolling Hills Community Association #1 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 RE: Rolling Hills Community Tennis Courts Ms.Raig, CA License #: 824148 T 858-673.3920 F 858.673-7717 info@jvbcm.com www.jvbcm.com Per your request, please find below and attached, information for the requested project management services to be provided for the Rolling Hills Community Association and the City of Rolling Hills; We have significant experience in construction of this nature, which will help to ensure a cost effective and successful project. A) The Project The Rolling Hills Community Tennis Courts is a facility for use by homeowners located in Rolling Hills, and includes tennis courts and other amenities. It is our understanding that it is the intent of the Association and the City to build new amenities such as a cabana, fire pit, outdoor kitchen and improve the overall area for events including ADA improvements. B) Pre Construction Work required Services Recommended: • This will require a review of all typical conditions; review and comment on proposed improvements / suggest revisions to scope / contract as necessary. • Co-ordinate work with Architect, Engineer, City of Rolling Hills and the Rolling Hills Community Assocation to complete plans for each phase of work including materials selections. • Draft project bid documents for each of the two phases as follows; • Phase 1 is Engineering, demolition, grading and ADA compliant hardscape, (including handrails) and lighting (for City of Rolling Hills) • Phase 2 is Construction of the cabana, storage shed, outdoor kitchen, fire pit, landscaping and furnishings (for Rolling Hills Community Association) • Request bids from contractors, including having an on site meeting with potential contractors 0 • Respond to RFI's during bidding, prepare a bid analysis of all bids received, and present to the HOA and the City. • Fee for this phase to be $9,750. • Note: Architect, Engineer, and Permit fess are not included in the above. C) Construction Phase: Manage and observe repair work, including the following services; • JVB will assist with contract negotiation, and obtaining the required insurance from the contractor selected to perform the work. • Have an on site meeting with selected contractor to determine construction duration and phasing, staging areas, job site rules, work hours, traffic control. • Site observation of work, includes site visits, as required by project schedule. • Weekly meeting with the Association, the City and contractor • Developing and following up on punch list items • Review pay requests and change orders • Project close out including obtaining contractors warranty and final lien releases. Fee for this phase will be determined when final project scope has been decided. Thank you for the opportunity to provide a proposal for this project, I'm confident JVB will prove to be an asset to the Association and the City in developing and completing this project. Sincerely yours, eta4c 6'1(44 John van Blerck, P.E. JVB Construction Management, Inc. Phone: 858-673-3920 Page 2 0 • I • DESIGN BUILD ASSOCIATES PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CONSULTING February 1, 2017 Rolling Hills Community Association c/o Kristen Raig, Manager #1 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Re: Construction Management/Consulting Services Dear Kristen & Board: Thank you for your interest in Design Build Associates and how we could be of service to you, the Rolling Hills Community Association and the City of Rolling Hills on your upcoming tennis court entertainment area remodel. Over the . past 30 years we have helped hundreds of homeowner associations achieve successful outcomes with their various projects, including club house remodels to new pools and pool decks, new tennis courts and many other common area amenities. We have worked successfully on other projects involving various governmental agencies and private sector clients, and we can certainly help you and the City of Rolling Hills with this joint project as well. Design Build Associates (DBA) provides full -service construction management services, from initial project development through completion of construction. We are a licensed general contractor, although wecurrently perform solely in the role of construction manager/consultant and our principals and project managers have all served in the capacity of licensed general contractors. We work with associations to make informed decisions throughout the process and represent your interests to help you achieve your goals in a timely and cost-effective manner, with minimal difficulty and disruption to homeowners. Most importantly, DBA provides the leadership to accomplish a quality project, while affording associations the peace of mind that you have a knowledgeable advocate on your side for all construction -related issues. We have found that our clients are best served if there is consistent project management throughout the entire construction process, which ensures a successful project outcome and a satisfied client. These activities are incorporated into two phases: the Preconstruction Phase and the Construction Phase, as follows: Preconstruction Services: • Review all existing documents provided by the HOA related to the project. • Inspect the property and review the proposed scope of work. • Recommend additional professional involvement as or if needed. • Prepare accurate bid specifications and bid forms for the contractor bidding process, which maintains consistency in the bid process. • Bid the work to pre -qualified and experienced contractors. • Ensure that all bidders have the proper licenses and carry the required insurance to work in common interest developments. CIR Corporate Office 1 5655 Lindero Canyon Road, Suite 321, Westlake Village, CA 91362 1 (818) 889-0402 Orange County Office 1 15 Corporate Park, Irvine, CA 92606 1 (949) 250-3910 1 www.dBuild.com 1 Lic#1005935 • • Rolling Hills Community Association Construction Management/Consulting Services Page 2 • Analyze and review the bids for accuracy and completeness; prepare a detailed bid analysis for the Board's review and consideration. • Make a recommendation to the Board regarding the selection of the contractor. • Negotiate the contract with the selected contractor in preparation for your attorney's review. • If desired, conduct Town Hall style meeting(s) to facilitate homeowner understanding of the project costs and benefits. • Develop a project schedule with the selected contractor so that owners and residents will be advised when the work will be accomplished. Construction Services: • Provide administrative, management and related services, as required, to coordinate the work of the contractors with the activities of the Board so as to complete the project in accordance with the construction schedule and the Board's cost, time and quality objectives. • Provide sufficient organization, personnel and management to carry out the requirements of this contract. • Request, review and document certificates of insurance from contractors. • Perform on -site inspections as needed to verify that the materials and work are in accordance with the specifications and the construction schedule. • Work to obtain satisfactory performance from the contractor; recommend courses of action to the Board if the requirements of a contract are not being fulfilled. • Review any change orders that are requested and verify the need and/or validity of the change order, the price to complete the change order, and the effect on the construction schedule; make recommendations to the Board. • Maintain complete cost accounting records on each contractor, vendor, and consultant regarding the work performed under that contract and track association costs against those to be paid by the City. • Conduct weekly jobsite construction meetings to review progress, schedule, issues and performance. • Review contractors' monthly invoices and approve invoices as they relate to the work completed. • Obtain and review lien releases from the general contractor any subcontractors as they relate to monthly and final billings. • Create a "punch list" of incomplete or unsatisfactory work and prepare a schedule for their completion. • Conduct final inspections. • Coordinate the correction, completion and inspection of the remaining punch -list items. • Secure from the contractor any required warranties, guarantees, affidavits, releases and manuals for the Association's permanent record. Our fee for the preconstruction phase services listed above is hourly at $185.00/hour and then for the Construction Phase services it drops to $100.00/hour plus six (6%) percent of construction costs. Although the fee structure quoted above is our standard and has worked well for our clients over the years, we are certainly open to any discussion concerning the way we have proposed our services and fees. If the Association decides that they would prefer that we quote our fee in drA Corporate Office 1 5655 Lindero Canyon Road Suite 321, Westlake Village, CA 91362 1 (818) 889-0402 Orange County Office 1 15 Corporate Park Irvine, CA 92606 1 (949) 250-3910 1 www.dBuild.com CA Lic#1005935 • • Rolling Hills Community Association Construction Management/Consulting Services Page 3 some other manner we would be happy to consider it. Also, if the Board feels additional discussion would be helpful during the evaluation of this proposal please let me know and we would certainly be happy to meet. We have been down this road many times since 1983 and have helped hundreds of associations achieve positive outcomes with their construction projects - we are confident we can help Rolling Hills Community and the City of Rolling Hills realize their goals as well. We believe Design Build Associates' track record of success is the hallmark of our company's story, and we look forward to helping you have a successful project. Enclosed is our brochure which will provide additional insight into who we are, the complete range of services we offer, the pride we take in our work, and what our clients say about the service they have received from us. Also, take a look at our website: www.dBuild.com and feel free to call our references listed in our brochure packet. Thank you again for the opportunity to present our qualifications. Please do not hesitate to call me with any questions or concerns you may have. Respectfully, DESIGN BUILD ASSOCIATES Dennis E. Brooks Principal Enclosure diR Corporate Office 1 5655 Lindero Canyon Road Suite 321, Westlake Village, CA 91362 1 (818)889-0402 Orange County Office 1 15 Corporate Park Irvine, CA 92606 1 (949) 250-3910 1 www.dBuild.com CA Lic#1005935