The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Agenda 05-22-2017MINUTES OF' A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, MAY 8, 2017 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Black at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: Dieringer, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Black. Councilmembers Absent: None. Others Present: Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Mike Jenkins, City Attorney. Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director. Julia Stewart, Assistant Planner. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Steve & Diana Nuccion, 18 Portuguese Bend Road. Mary Hazelrigg, 33 Chuckwagon Road. James Aichele, 14 Crest Road West. Janet Westergaard, 21 Caballeros Road. Beth Myerhoff, President, Palos Verdes Peninsula Council of PTAs. Linda Reid, Board Member, Palos Verdes Peninsula U.S.D. OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME Steve Nuccion, 18 Portuguese Bend Road addressed the City Council concerning enforcement and other matters relating to the resolution setting forth the required restorative action in a view impairment complaint between the properties at 15 Portuguese Bend Road and 18 Portuguese Bend Road. Following brief discussion concerning the issues raised by Dr. Nuccion, the City Council directed staff to record the resolution and agendize a report on the status of the restorative action at the next meeting of the City Council. Mary Hazelrigg, 33 Chuckwagon Road addressed the City Council to express concern regarding the prevalence of coyotes in the community and the dangers they pose to pets, other animals and humans. She urged the City Council to do something to control the population. Jim Aichele, 14 Crest Road West addressed the City Council to also express concern regarding coyotes in the community. 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 April 24, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. B. Payment of Bills - (1) April 24,2017 (Revised); and (2) May 8, 2017 RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council approve the items on the consent calendar as presented. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried without objection. Recognizing that there were members of the public present to address Item 8A regarding consideration of a Social Host Ordinance; and hearing no objection, Mayor Black stated that this item will be taken out of order. -1- NEW BUSINESS ORDINANCE NO. 352 — AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 9.58 (SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY FOR PARTIES AT WHICH UNDERAGE DRINKING OCCURS) TO ARTICLE VII (OFFENSES BY OR AGAINST MINORS) OF TITLE 9 (PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND WELFARE) OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPOSE LIABILITY ON PERSONS WHO FACILITATE OR ALLOW THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY MINORS AT ANY PARTY, GATHERING OR EVENT AT A PRIVATE RESIDENCE; AND AMENDING SECTION 1.08.010 AND ADDING SECTIONS 1.08.030 THROUGH 1.08.090 TO CHAPTER 1.08 (GENERAL PENALTY) TO TITLE 1 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CREATE AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION PROCESS FOR CODE VIOLATIONS. Mayor Black introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. City Manager Cruz presented the staff report stating that at the direction of the City Council in response to an urging from the Palos Verdes Council of PTA's in an effort to reduce underage drinking at parties held at private homes, staff has prepared a DRAFT Social Host Ordinance for the City Council's consideration. He reviewed the proposed ordinance, stating that it is designed to protect the safety and welfare of residents by placing a civil fine on persons responsible for gatherings where alcohol is made accessible to underage persons through an administrative citation process. He further reviewed the administration citation process and stated that the Ordinance has been reviewed by Lomita Sheriff's Station Captain Dan Beringer and he indicated that his personnel can enforce the proposed ordinance as proposed. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Wilson's concern related to definition of "responsible person" including a landlord, City Attorney Jenkins stated these are fact specific cases made on a case by case basis and a landlord would only be issued a citation if there was evidence that he landlord knew or should have know about the behavior. In response to Councilmember Dieringer regarding the amount that will be set for fines reference in the staff report, City Attorney Jenkins stated that fines are set by resolution and that resolution will be brought back with second reading of the ordinance. Also in response to Councilmember Dieringer regarding the increase fines for successive violations, City Attorney Jenkins stated that State Law requires that the increased fines for successive violations must be within the same year. In response to Councilmember Mirsch regarding post fact enforcement of the ordinance, City Attorney Jenkins stated that the ordinance can be enforced post fact if there is evidence to support the issuance of a citation. Mayor Black called for public comment. Janet Westergaard, 21 Caballeros Road addressed the City Council expressing concern that the proposed ordinance is meddlesome and does not provide an option for responsible drinking. Beth Myerhoff, President, Palos Verdes Peninsula Council of PTAs addressed the City Council in support of the ordinance and urged the City Council to adopt the ordinance. Linda Reid, Board Member, Palos Verdes Peninsula U.S.D. addressed the City Council in support of the ordinance and urged the City Council to adopt the ordinance. Following brief discussion, Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council introduce Ordinance No. 352 for first reading, waive full reading of the ordinance and schedule second reading at the May 22, 2017 City Council meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Wilson seconded the motion, which carried without objection. COMMISSION ITEMS RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03 — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR A RESIDENCE ADDITION, BASEMENT, VARIOUS WALLS AND GRADING; WIDEN ONE OF THE TWO RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYS AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT SETBACK WITH Minutes City Council Meeting 05-08-17 -2- PORTIONS OF THE ADDITIONS, BASEMENT AND GARAGE IN ZONING CASE NO. 915 AT 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH, (PARTS OF LOTS 15, 16, 17 -MR), (CIPOLLA). AND CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE WIDENING OF AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY APRON AT 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH. Mayor Black introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applicant's request for an addition to the existing residence and other improvements on the property including widening an existing driveway apron in Zoning Case No. 915 at 1 Middleridge Lane North. She stated that he Planning Commission approved the project on a 4-0 vote with Commissioner Cardenas recused due to proximity. She stated that variances are requested for encroachment into the front setback and a conditional use permit is requested to retain an existing double driveway. She stated that the Traffic Commission reviewed the request for widening the driveway apron and recommended approval. She stated that the development standards are within the code requirements. She commented that the original request also included a large stable and in response to concerns raised by the neighbors, the applicant withdrew the request for a stable and asked for it to be considered separately. She further reviewed the current code enforcement case that staff is enforcing related to a path that was created to access the rear part of the lot and stated that this matter will be further addressed and legalized as part of consideration of the proposed stable when it comes back before the Planning Commission in the near future. Mayor Black called for comments from the public. Hearing none, he asked for comments or a motion from the City Council. Mayor Black expressed concern regarding the limited amount of usable space behind the home and the fact that there may not be room for a pool. Following brief discussion, Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council receive and file Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017-03 granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 915 at 1 Middleridge Lane North and per the Traffic Commission's recommendation, approve the widening of the existing driveway apron a 1 Middleridge Lane North. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried without objection. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-04 — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE ADDITION WITH A BASEMENT, DETACHED GARAGE, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, PATIO TRELLIS, TENNIS COURT, NEW SECOND DRIVEWAY, STABLE AND CORRAL; TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED GRADING AND GRADED AREA FOR THE TENNIS COURT AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMI II'ED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 917 AT 5 PINE TREE LANE, (LOT 94-RH), (SHARNG). AND CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION TO APPROVE A NEW DRIVEWAY APRON FOR A SECOND DRIVEWAY AND A NEW PATHWAY APRON FOR ACCESS TO THE STABLE AT 5 PINE TREE LANE. Mayor Black introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Assistant Planner Stewart reviewed the applicant's request to construct an addition to existing residence and other improvements including a basement, detached garage, pool, spa, stable, corral and tennis court along with a new second driveway on the property in Zoning Case No. 917 at 5 Pine Tree Lane. She stated that staff prepared a summary comparison table of this project compared to previous approvals at the request of Councilmember Dieringer and that table has been placed on the dais. She further reviewed the request stating that the existing residence will remain with only the wall providing access to the new wing being demolished. She stated that the applicant proposes to retain the existing driveway, which provides access to the existing garage; and to add a second driveway for access to the new detached garage as well as adding an access pathway to the stable. She stated that both of the new aprons have been reviewed by the Traffic Commission and recommended for approval with a condition that the pathway apron be revised to the Traffic Engineer's satisfaction, which has been achieved. Ms. Stewart further reviewed the project stating that variances are requested to exceed the maximum allowed disturbance with disturbance proposed at 47.22% and to exceed the maximum allowed grading as well as graded surface for the tennis court. She stated that at the suggestion of the Planning Commission, Minutes City Council Meeting 05-08-17 -3- the applicant investigated the option to import dirt in order to reduce the amount of grading required, but determined doing so was not feasible due to an exponential increase in truck traffic. She further reviewed the comparison of the new proposed project with the previous approval. In response to Councilmember Dieringer concerning the proposed second driveway with Ms. Stewart explained that the new second driveway was approved through a Conditional Use Permit and will provide access to the front of the property and the new detached garage where the existing driveway serves the existing garage as well as the neighboring property at 3 Pine Tree Lane. Mayor Black called for public comment. Hearing none, he expressed concern regarding the grading associated with the project as well as the appearance of the project resulting in two separate houses with a walkway in-between. Councilmember Mirsch commented that she visited the site during the Planning Commission's site visit to this property. Following brief discussion, Mayor Black moved that the City Council take the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 917 at 5 Pine Tree Lane, including the new driveway apron for a second driveway and a new pathway apron for access to the stable under jurisdiction. Councilmember Dieringer seconded the motion, which carried without objection. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-05 — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SITE PLAN REVIEW AND. VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DRESSAGE ARENA, STABLE, RESIDENCE AND GARAGE ADDITION, VARIOUS RETAINING WALLS, SWIMMING POOL AND RELATED PATIOS, DECKS; TO LOCATE A PORTION OF THE EQUESTRIAN FACILITIES IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF THE LOT, TO RETAIN, BUT REDUCE IN SIZE AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE, TO LOCATE A NOT TO EXCEED 5' HIGH RETAINING WALL IN THE SIDE SETBACK AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 896 - MODIFICATION (M) AT 11 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (WARREN). Mayor Black introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Assistant Planner Stewart reviewed the applicant's request for a major modification to a previously approved project in Zoning Case No. 896 - Modification at 11 Saddleback Road. She stated that the modifications include moving the stable closer to the dressage arena, modifying the residence to allow for the minimum distance required between stable and residential uses and a new infinity pool. She stated that the proposed changes result in a larger residence, smaller pool and slightly larger stable; which further results in less disturbance and grading, as well as fewer retaining walls. Ms. Stewart further reviewed the applicant's request including the variances requested and the comparison between the current project and the previously approved project. Mayor Black called for public comment. Hearing none, he asked for comments or a motion from the City Council. Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council receive and file Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017-05 granting approval of the applicant's request to modify the original request in Zoning Case No. 896-M at 11 Saddleback Road. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried without objection. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-06 — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPRQVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE FOR A 1,000 SQUARE FOOT POOL/SPA, POOL EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE, AND TO LOCATE THE STRUCTURES IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 919 AT 7 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, (LOT 249-A-UR), (MCCARTHY/CHENG). Mayor Black introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Assistant Planner Stewart reviewed the applicant's request to construct a new pool and pool equipment in the front yard area in Zoning Case No. 919 at 7 Middleridge Lane South. She stated that the Planning Commission asked that the pool equipment be fully enclosed with the doors opening to the interior of the property to reduce any noise impact on the neighbors. Mayor Black called for public comment. Hearing none, he asked for comments or a motion from the City Council. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-08-17 -4- Following brief discussion, Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council receive and file Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017-06 granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 919 at 7 Middleridge Lane South. Councilmember Dieringer seconded the motion, which carried without objection. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. OLD BUSINESS FINAL STATUS REPORT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 1203 CONCERNING AZUL, THE DOG OWNED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER AT 27 CABALLEROS ROAD WITH REGARD TO THE CONFINEMENT RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED ON AZUL. Mayor Black introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. City Manager Cruz presented the staff report stating that the conditions imposed by the resolution have been meet and the City has received no further complaints regarding the dog. Following brief discussion, the report was received and filed. No further action was taken. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPING AN ORDINANCE TO REGULATE DRONES IN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. Mayor Black introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. City Manager Cruz stated that at a previous meeting the City Council directed staff to agenize a discussion for consideration of developing an ordinance to regulate drones in the City of Rolling Hills. He stated that the staff report contains a copy of a draft ordinance which is a modified version of the Hermosa Beach ordinance changed to be more specific to Rolling Hills and if the City Council wishes to pursue this matter further, staff could be directed to bring an ordinance back for first reading. Discussion ensued concerning the provisions in the draft ordinance and the difficulty involved in enforcing such an ordinance. It was noted that there have been relatively few complaints regarding drones in the City. Mayor Black called for public comment. Jim Aichele, 14 Crest Road West addressed the City Council in support of adopting provisions regulating drones and suggesting the drones be allowed only on the drone operator's property. Following further discussion, the report was received and filed. No further action was taken at this time. NEW BUSINESS (continued) CONSIDERATION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANING (MOU) BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AND THE CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY (CJPIA) FOR THE PURPOSE OF AUTHORIZING WORK RELATED TO CJPIA'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILII'1hS ACT (ADA) ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INVOLVING WORK PERFORMED BY DISABILITY ACCESS CONSULTANTS (DAC) INCLUDING CONDUCTING AN ADA SELF -EVALUATION AND DEVELOPING AN ADA TRANSITION PLAN. Mayor Black introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. City Manager Cruz presented the staff report requesting the City Council's approval to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) for the purpose of authorizing work related to the CJPIA's ADA compliance assistance program involving work performed by Disability Access Consultants including an ADA Self -Evaluation and developing an ADA Transition plan as required by the American's with Disabilities Act. He stated that based on the MOU, this work would be done at no cost to the City, but at an estimated value of $14,800. Mayor Black expressed concern that the plan would require the City to track its compliance until all identified barriers are removed and the City may not be able or willing to remove the barriers. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Wilson regarding the potential exposure this may create, City Attorney Jenkins commented that the ADA requirement is for the City to create accessibility when it engages in projects and doing the survey would not create a new obligation to make changes absent a project. Discussion Minutes City Council Meeting 05-08-17 -5- ensued concerning the requirements and the benefits of moving forward with ADA compliance. Following further discussion, Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council approve and direct the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Rolling Hills and the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority for the purpose of authorizing work related to the CJPIA's Americans with Disabilities Act assistance program involving work performed by Disability Access Consultants (DAC) including conducting and ADA Self -Evaluation and developing an ADA transition plan. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion, which carried with Mayor Pro Tem Wilson and Mayor Black opposed. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION CONCERNING THE CIVIC CENTER CAMPUS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE. (ORAL REPORT) Councilmember Pieper reported that he and the RHCA Board President are investigating the possibility of having the RHCA be responsible for the City Hall campus area and tennis court landscape design and installation of new plant material with the City being responsible for weekly maintenance as a response to the poor condition the tennis court landscape maintenance was in when the Tennis Club held its most recent social event. Following brief discussion, staff was directed to work with the current landscape maintenance provider to ensure that the provisions in the landscape maintenance agreement are being met. MATTERS FROM STAFF None. CLOSED SESSION None. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Black adjourned the meeting at 9:14 p.m. in memory of long time resident Frances Price. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, May 22, 2017 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, Idg [6 Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, James Black, M.D. Mayor Minutes City Council Meeting 05-08-17 -6- 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 4``' day of May, 2017, I serve the within City Council Meeting 05/08/2017 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 4`'' day of May, 2017 at Rolling Hills, California. Ewa Nikodem Administrative Assistant Ra (14,9 qe a 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, MAY 8, 2017 7:00 P.M. Next Resolution No. 1206 Next Ordinance No. 352 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 April 24, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. B. Payment of Bills - (1) April 24,2017 (Revised); and (2) May 8, 2017 RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 5. COMMISSION ITEMS A. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03 — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR A RESIDENCE ADDITION, BASEMENT, VARIOUS WALLS AND GRADING; WIDEN ONE OF THE TWO RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYS AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT SETBACK WITH PORTIONS OF THE ADDITIONS, BASEMENT AND GARAGE IN ZONING CASE NO. 915 AT 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH, (PARTS OF LOTS 15, 16, 17 -MR), (CIPOLLA). AND CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE WIDENING OF AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY APRON AT 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH. Page 1 of 3 B. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-04 — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE ADDITION WITH A BASEMENT, DETACHED GARAGE, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, PATIO TRELLIS, TENNIS COURT, NEW SECOND DRIVEWAY, STABLE AND CORRAL; TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED GRADING AND GRADED AREA FOR THE TENNIS COURT AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 917 AT 5 PINE TREE LANE, (LOT 94-RH), (SHARNG). AND CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION TO APPROVE A NEW DRIVEWAY APRON FOR A SECOND DRIVEWAY AND A NEW PATHWAY APRON FOR ACCESS TO THE STABLE AT • 5 PINE TREE LANE. C. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-05 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DRESSAGE ARENA, STABLE, RESIDENCE AND GARAGE ADDITION, VARIOUS RETAINING WALLS, SWIMMING POOL AND RELATED PATIOS, DECKS; TO LOCATE A PORTION OF THE EQUESTRIAN FACILITIES IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF THE LOT, TO RETAIN, BUT REDUCE IN SIZE AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE, TO LOCATE A NOT TO EXCEED 5' HIGH RETAINING WALL IN THE SIDE SETBACK AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 896- MODIFICATION (M) AT 11 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (WARREN). D. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-06 — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE FOR A 1,000 SQUARE FOOT POOL/SPA, POOL EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE, AND TO LOCATE THE STRUCTURES IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 919 AT 7 AHDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, (LOT 249-A-UR), (MCCARTHY/CHENG). 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE. 7. OLD BUSINESS A. FINAL STATUS REPORT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 1203 CONCERNING AZUL, THE DOG OWNED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER AT 27 CABALLEROS ROAD WITH REGARD TO THE CONFINEMENT RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED ON AZUL. B. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPING AN ORDINANCE TO REGULATE DRONES IN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. City Council Agenda 05/08/17 Page 2 of 3 8. NEW BUSINESS A. ORDINANCE NO. 352 — AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 9.58 (SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY FOR PARTIES AT WHICH UNDERAGE DRINKING OCCURS) TO ARTICLE VII (OFFENSES BY OR AGAINST MINORS) OF TITLE 9 (PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND WELFARE) OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPOSE LIABILITY ON PERSONS WHO FACILITATE OR ALLOW THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY MINORS AT ANY PARTY, GATHERING OR EVENT AT A PRIVATE RESIDENCE; AND AMENDING SECTION 1.08.010 AND ADDING SECTIONS 1.08.030 THROUGH 1.08.090 TO CHAPTER 1.08 (GENERAL PENALTY) TO TITLE 1 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CREATE AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION PROCESS FOR CODE VIOLATIONS. RECOMMENDATION: Introduce Ordinance No. 352, waive full reading and schedule second reading of the Ordinance. B. CONSIDERATION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANING (MOU) BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AND THE CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY (CJPIA) FOR THE PURPOSE OF AUTHORIZING WORK RELATED TO CJPIA'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INVOLVING WORK PERFORMED BY DISABILITY ACCESS CONSULTANTS (DAC) INCLUDING CONDUCTING AN ADA SELF -EVALUATION AND DEVELOPING AN ADA TRANSITION PLAN. 9. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS A. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION CONCERNNG THE CIVIC CENTER CAMPUS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE. (ORAL REPORT) 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF NONE. 11. CLOSED SESSION NONE. 12. ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: Monday, May 22, 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 05/08/17 Page 3 of 3 DRAFT Agenda Item No. 4-A Meeting Date: 05/08/17 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, APRIL 24, 2017 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Black at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: Dieringer, Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Black. Councilmembers Absent: None. Others Present: Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Mike Jenkins, City Attorney. Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director. Terry Shea, Finance Director. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Jim Walker, Budget Consultant. Battalion Chief Kirby Neese, Los Angeles County Fire Department. James Aichele, 14 Crest Road West. OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME Battalion Chief Kirby Neese, Los Angeles County Fire Department introduced himself stating that effective April 1St, he is the new Chief assigned to Battalion 14 which serves the City of Rolling Hills. Councilmember Pieper asked Battalion Neese to direct his personnel to be vigilant in enforcement of brush clearance and dead vegetation removal. 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 April 10, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. B. Payment of Bills. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. C. Financial Statement for the Month of March 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. DRAFT Councilmember Dieringer 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 None. At the suggestion of the City Manager and hearing no objection, Mayor Black stated that Matters from Staff will be taken before Matters from the City Council. MATTERS FROM STAFF QUARTERLY SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING MARCH 31, 2017. Finance Director Shea presented the investment report for the quarter ending March 31, 3017. He stated that interest income is up compared to the same quarter of the previous year and the balance in the CERBT investment is up over $200,000 in the six years since the investment was made. In response to Councilmember Dieringer, Finance Director Shea noted that there was a typographical error on circle page 5 on the investment report and it will be corrected going forward. The quarterly investment report for the quarter ending March 31, 2017 was received and filed. FY 2017/2018 BUDGET PREPARATION DOCUMENTS 1) FY 2016/2017 YEAR-END REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE PROJECTIONS 2) FY 2017/2018 CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI) ADJUSTMENT FOR BUDGET AND SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES The City's Budget Consultant Jim Walker reviewed the Fiscal Year 2017/2018 budget preparation documents including the FY 16/17 revenue and expenditure projections which are on track to end with an approximate $200,000 budget surplus before transfers; and the proposed 1.1% CPI increase for refuse service and 2.7% CPI increase to be used for budget preparation purposes. The budget preparation documents were received and filed. Minutes City Council Meeting 04-24-17 0 DRAFT CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS INVESTMENT POLICY; FINANCIAL, BUDGET AND DEBT POLICIES; FUND BALANCE POLICY; AND RESOLUTION NO. 953 — ASSET CAPITALIZATION POLICY. Finance Director Shea stated that as part of the budget preparation process and during the audit process the City's financial policies are reviewed and based on that review, there are no recommended changes for the coming year. Councilmember Dieringer suggested changing the language for the Capital Improvement Fund to make it clearer that the fund is not being eliminated, Following brief discussion, Councilmember Dieringer moved as such and the motion failed for lack of a second. Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council approve the policies as presented. Mayor Pro Tem Wilson seconded the motion, which carried without objection. DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE CONSIDERATION OF CHANGING THE RATE FOR THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS BUILDING PERMIT RELATED FEES AND OTHER FEE CHANGES. City Manager Cruz presented the staff report on proposed changes to building permit related fees and other miscellaneous fees. He stated that the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee discussed the fees and recommends lowering the multiplier for County building permit related fees to 2.25% as well as lowering several other development related fees. He stated that bases on staff's evaluation, the current fees do not cover the cost associated with providing those services and the proposed reduction in the building permit multiplier would result in an approximate $46,966 decrease in revenue He stated that staff's concern with lowering the fees is that in times of an economic downturn, this would result in a significant decrease in revenue for the city recognizing that the city have very limited revenue sources. Councilmember Mirsch commented that she conceded to the recommended fee decreases given that the City does have a revenue surplus each year. Councilmember Dieringer expressed concern over lowering the fees and suggested that instead, the City should use the surplus to fund the City's ADA compliance efforts so that the risk of lawsuits is reduced. She further commented that the City should also maintain healthy reserves so that in the event of an emergency or unforeseen expense, the city is not at risk of bankruptcy. Councilmembers Pieper and Wilson expressed support for lowering the fees. Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council leave the fees as is and not make any of the proposed decreases to the fees. The motion failed for lack of a second. Following further discussion, Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council direct staff to prepare a resolution amending the following planning and development related fees: Lighting ordinance modification $375 Preparation of Negative Declaration or MND $50 (plus State Fees) Environmental Impact Report Consultant fee only Final Parcel/Tract Map County fee only Zoning violation and construction penalty fee $1,500 Parks and Recreation Fee Each new residential dwelling shall pay 2% of first $100,000 of construction valuation plus .25% of such valuation over $100,000 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-24-17 DRAFT and that the City Council keep the following fees at the amount currently listed: View Impairment — Review by Committee on $2,000 Trees and Views processing fee Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Mechanical 2.5 times County fee Permit and Electrical Permit Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion. Following brief discussion, the motion carried without objection. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPING AN ORDINANCE TO REGULATE DRONES IN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. City Manager Cruz stated that this matter was agenized for discussion and consideration at the request of the Mayor and upon having received several complaints regarding drones. Councilmember Pieper expressed concern that it would be very difficult to enforce a law regulating drones. City Attorney Jenkins commented that if the City Council were to direct staff to prepare an ordinance based on the example provide from the City of Hermosa Beach, he would suggest eliminating the permitting requirement. Mayor Black asked for public comment. Jim Aichele, 14 Crest Road West addressed the City Council in support of the City Council adopting an ordinance to regulate drones. Following brief discussion, no action was taken. Consideration of this matter was tabled until the May 8, 2017 meeting of the City Council. The City Council was provided a DRAFT ordinance from the City of Hermosa Beach to review for discussion at the next meeting. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO FORMALLY OPPOSE SB 231 (HERTZBERG) CONCERNING THE RIGHTS TO VOTE ON TAXES ACT. (ORAL) Councilmember Dieringer informed the City Council that there is pending legislation that could limit voters' rights to vote on fees that are added to the tax bill and suggested that the City submit a letter in . opposition to the proposed legislation. Councilmember Pieper commented that he is not in favor of the City taking a position on pending legislation. Following brief discussion, Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council direct staff to prepare a letter opposing SB 231 for the Mayor's signature per the example provided by the City of Glendora as amended. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion, which carried with Councilmember Pieper opposed. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF 2017/2018 APPOINTMENTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE. (ORAL) Minutes City Council Meeting 04-24-17 DRAFT Mayor Black recommended that Councilmember Mirsch and himself remain on the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee; and Councilmembers Dieringer and Pieper be appointed to the Personnel Committee. Mayor Black called for a motion. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council appoint Councilmember Mirsch and Mayor Black to the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee; and appoint Councilmembers Dieringer and Pieper to the Personnel Committee. Councilmember Dieringer seconded the motion, which carried with Councilmembers Mirsch and Pieper opposed. CLOSED SESSION None. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Black adjourned the meeting at 8:03 p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, May 8, 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, James Black, M.D. Mayor Minutes City Council Meeting 04-24-17 CHECK CHECK NO. DATE 24779 04/18/2017 24780 04/18/2017 24781 04/18/2017 24782 04/18/2017 24783 04/18/2017 24784 04/18/2017 24785 04/18/2017 24786 04/18/2017 24787 04/18/2017 24788 04/18/2017 24789 04/18/2017 24790 04/18/2017 24791 04/18/2017 24792 04/18/2017 24793 04/18/2017 24794 04/18/2017 24795 04/18/2017 24796 04/18/2017 24797 04/18/2017 24798 04/18/2017 24799 04/18/2017 24800 04/18/2017 24801 04/18/2017 24802 05/01/2017 24803 05/01/2017 24804 05/01/2017 24805 05/01/2017 * PR LINK 4/14/2017 * PR LINK 4/14/2017 City o/ Rainy _Alio Agenda Item No: 4-B Mtg. Date: 05/08/17 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 04/24/2017 - CHECK RUN (REVISED) PAYEE CABALLEROS DEL RANCHO PALOS CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DAILY BREEZE FOUNTAINHEAD CONSULTING INC. IIMC JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS LA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT LOS ANGELES TIMES MARTIN & CHAPMAN CO. OPUS BANK PACIFIC COAST LANDSCAPE REMOTE SATELLITE SYS INTL ROLLING HILLS ESTATES SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON THE GAS COMPANY TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. VOIDED CHECK VOIDED CHECK VOIDED CHECK VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS USCM CALPERS DELTA DENTAL STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY VISION SERVICE PLAN PR LINK - PAYROLL PROCESSING PR LINK - PAYROLL 8 & PR TAXES DESCRIPTION 2016-2017 EXPENDITURES RADAR UNIT MAINTENANCE ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL MARCH 2017 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS IN PVP NEWS IT CONSULTING APRIL 2017 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES 6/2018 ATTORNEY SERVICE FEES MARCH 2017 MONTHLY MAINT 3/12/17 - 4/11/17 LAW ENFORCEMENT SRVCS MARCH 2017 NEWSPAPER SUBCRIPTION THRU 11/5/17 MINUTE BOOK PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES, APA DUES, ASST PLANNER CONFERENCE MAINTENCE APRIL 2017 SATELLITE PHONES MAY 2017 TRAFFIC OFFICER 10/03 - 12/16/16 SCE PRELIMINARY DESIGN & ENGINEERING STUDY GAS, 3/8/17 - 4/6/17 CURRENT FINANCIAL SOFTWARE MAINT TIL 5/31/18 DEFERRED COMP 04/14/17 DEFERRED COMP 04/14/17 HEALTH INSURANCE MAY 2017 DENTAL INSURANCE MAY 2017 LIFE INSURANCE MAY 2017 VISION INSURANCE MAY 2017 PROCESSING FEE PAY PERIOD - MARCH 29, 2017 THROUGH APRIL 11, 2017 I, Raymond R Cruz, City Manager of Rolling Hills, California certify that the above demands are accurate and there is available in the General Fund a balance of $130,293.24 for the payment o i above ite Raymond Cruz, City Manager * Previously Disbursed AMOUNT 5,000.00 62.87 851.21 346.68 516.00 160.00 13,190.70 84.36 25,735.10 308.07 692.59 1,894.48 565.00 97.90 881.44 50,000.00 50.06 1,305.72 364.00 998.00 7,965.43 681.72 240.16 113.30 53.95 18,134.50 $ 130,293.24 112,104.79 a Printed on Recycled Paper CHECK CHECK NO. DATE 24779 04/18/2017 24780 04/18/2017 24781 04/18/2017 24782 04/18/2017 24783 04/18/2017 24784 04/18/2017 24785 04/18/2017 24786 04/18/2017 24787 04/18/2017 24788 04/18/2017 24789 04/18/2017 24790 04/18/2017 24791 04/18/2017 24792 04/18/2017 24793 04/18/2017 24794 04/18/2017 24795 04/18/2017 24796 04/18/2017 24797 04/18/2017 24798 04/18/2017 24799 04/18/2017 24800 04/18/2017 24801 04/18/2017 24802 05/01/2017 24803 05/01/2017 24804 05/01/2017 24805 05/01/2017 * PR LINK 4/14/2017 * PR LINK 4/14/2017 Cup 0//eolf,.q Jh// INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 PAYEE CABALLEROS DEL RANCHO PALOS CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DAILY BREEZE FOUNTAINHEAD CONSULTING INC. IIMC JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS LA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT LOS ANGELES TIMES MARTIN & CHAPMAN CO. OPUS BANK PACIFIC COAST LANDSCAPE REMOTE SATELLITE SYS INT'L ROLLING HILLS ESTATES SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON THE GAS COMPANY TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. VOIDED CHECK VOIDED CHECK VOIDED CHECK VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENT USCM CALPERS DELTA DENTAL STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY VISION SERVICE PLAN PR LINK - PAYROLL PROCESSINC PR LINK - PAYROLL 8 & PR TAXES. NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 2016-2017 EXPENDITURES RADAR UNIT MAINTENANCE ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL MARCH 2017 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS IN PVP NEWS IT CONSULTING APRIL 2017 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES 6/2018 ATTORNEY SERVICE FEES MARCH 2017 MONTHLY MAINT 3/12/17 - 4/11/17 LAW ENFORCEMENT SRVCS MARCH 2017 NEWSPAPER SUBCRIPTION THRU 11/5/17 MINUTE BOOK PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES, APA DUES, ASST PLANNER CONFERENCE MAINTENANCE APRIL 2017 SATELLITE PHONES MAY 2017 TRAFFIC OFFICER 10/03 - 12/16/16 SCE PRE ' Y DESIGN &ENGINEERING STUDY GAS, ,B }? . 7 CIAL SOFTWARE MAINT TIL 5/31/18 DEFERRED COMP 04/14/17 DEFERRED COMP 04/14/17 HEALTH INSURANCE MAY 2017 DENTAL INSURANCE MAY 2017 LIFE INSURANCE MAY 2017 VISION INSURANCE MAY 2017 PROCESSING FEE PAY PERIOD - MARCH 29, 2017 THROUGH APRIL 11, 2017 I, Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager of Rolling Hills, California certify that the above demands are accurate and there is available in the General Fund a balance of $125,293.24for the payment of abeYeitems. Raymond RfCruz, City Manager * Previously Disbursed was not tncl ud,ed IV) -Mal AMOUNT 5,000.00 * 62.87 851.21 346.68 516.00 160.00 13,190.70 84.36 25,735.10 308.07 692.59 1,894.48 565.00 97.90 881.44 50,000.00 50.06 1,305.72 364.00 998.00 7,965.43 681.72 240.16 113.30 53.95 18,134.50 $ 125,293.24 -k 112,104.79 Printed on Recycled Paper CHECK CHECK NO. DATE 24806 05/08/2017 24807 05/08/2017 24808 05/08/2017 24809 05/08/2017 24810 05/08/2017 24811 05/08/2017 24812 05/08/2017 * PR LINK 4/28/2017 * PR LINK 4/28/2017 eity °moth., INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 05/08/2017 - CHECK RUN PAYEE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES COX COMMUNICATIONS EXECUTIVE -SUITE SERVICES, INC. LA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT USCM VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS - WILLDAN INC. PR LINK - PAYROLL PROCESSING PR LINK - PAYROLL 9 & PR TAXES DESCRIPTION COYOTE CONTROL FEBRUARY 2017 ENGINEERING FEE, EASTFIELD UNDERGROUND PROJECT JANITORIAL SERVICES APRIL 2017 SUPPLEMENTAL TRAFFIC SERVICES MARCH 2017 DEFERRED COMP 04/28/17 DEFERRED COMP 04/28/17 TRAFFIC ENGINEER SERVICES MARCH 2017 PROCESSING FEE PAY PERIOD - APRIL 12, 2017 THROUGH APRIL 25, 2017 I, Raymond R Cruz, City Manager of Rolling Hills, California certify that the above demands are ac to and there is available in the General Fund a balance of $29,234.07 for the payment 0 ove ems. Raymond" R. Cruz, City Manager * Previously Disbursed AMOUNT 1,468.94 3,700.00 392.00 3,007.15 998.00 364.00 775.00 57.45 18,471.53 $ 29,234.07 10,705.09 Printed on Recycled Paper ai Rolle -sot, gee6 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 TO: FROM: THRU: SUBJECT: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No.: 5-A Mtg. Date: 05/08/17 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR (4') RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR A RESIDENCE ADDITION, BASEMENT, VARIOUS WALLS AND GRADING; WIDENING OF ONE OF THE TWO RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYS AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT SETBACK WITH PORTIONS OF THE ADDITIONS, BASEMENT AND GARAGE IN ZONING CASE NO. 915 AT 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH, (PARTS OF LOTS 15,16,17 -MR), (CIPOLLA). AND CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE WIDENING OF AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY APRON AT 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH. APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: DATE PUBLISHED: CHAZ AND EMILY CIPOLLA TAVISHA NICHOLSON, BOLTON ENGINEERING TONY INFERRERA, ARCHITECT JANUARY 5, 2017 RECOMENDATION, PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND REQUEST 1. It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report, approve the driveway or provide other direction to staff. O 2. The applicants request a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit and a Variance. 3. The property is irregular in shape with a very long frontage along Middleridge Lane N. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 4.19 acres. The net lot area, as calculated by the City, is 2.82 acres or 122,943 square feet. The lot is adjacent to the Overlay Zone along Middleridge Lane North properties, which benefit from reduced front setback, (and side setback, only when existing house is rebuilt). A natural drainage course meanders in and out along the _ rear of the property line and a storm drain discharges onto the property on the side of the lot. The property is currently developed with a 2,900 square foot single-family residence and 468 square foot attached garage, tree house, sheds and outdoor kitchen with BBQ and fire pit. 876 sq.ft. of the existing residence encroaches between 8-11 feet into the required front setback and the entire garage encroaches up to 30' into the front setback. Vehicular access is provided through two aprons on Middleridge Lane N. that allow access to and through the existing garage as well as to an existing paved parking area at the front. 4. SPR is requested to construct a 1,750 square feet addition and 1,750 square feet of underlying basement, 380 square feet of covered porches at the house front and side, and a 441 square foot (2 -car) garage to be attached by a 120 square foot breezeway on the east side of the house. The grading for this project is proposed at 2,510 cubic yards total to enlarge the residential building pad and construct several not to exceed 3' high retaining walls, which will average out to 2.5' in height, along the enlarged building pad to accommodate the additions, including the new garage. Variance is required to encroach with portions of the proposed development, including the basement, garage, breezeway and Porte cochere into the front yard setback. 360 sq.ft. of the 1,750 sq.ft. addition and same for the basement, as well as 180 sq.ft. of the new garage and portion of the breezeway will encroach approximately 11 feet into the 50 -foot front setback, aligned with the existing house; and the Porte cochere will encroach along the line of the existing garage. A Conditional Use Permits (CUP) is required to widen one of two existing residential driveways. A non -conforming condition exists on the property, due to the fact that there are two driveway approaches into the house. A CUP is required for more than one driveway apron (except to a stable); and due to the fact that the existing driveway apron is proposed to be widened a CUP is required. The Traffic Commission reviewed the driveway and recommended approval. 5. The project will result in a 4,650 square foot residence, 1,750 sq.ft. basement and 909 square foot garages. The applicants also will relocate a 96 square foot service yard, and retain an existing 140 square foot outdoor BBQ and 15 square foot outdoor kitchen at the home's rear and a tree house in the front. ZC No. 9151 Middleridge Lane North 6. A 1,000 square foot area for a future stable and corral has been set -aside on the property. Access would be provided from Middleridge Lane. 7. There are no records of permits for the outdoor kitchen and sheds. As part of the Planning Commission approval it is required that the applicants obtain building permit for these structures or demolish them. Additionally, following the purchase of the property, Mr. Cipolla cleared the lot of vegetation, much of which was dead and overgrown. According to the property owner, in order to get to the area of the lower lot, his trees/vegetation removal contractor created a path in the rear of the property, which resulted in a code enforcement action. During the early code enforcement efforts, staff was concerned that the grading could have affected the drainage courses, and required that the applicant submit an application to the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Fish and Wildlife for their determination. The agencies have determined that neither of the streams is classified as water bodies that fall under their jurisdiction, and therefore did not require remediation or any permits. Depending on the location of the future stable and grading, the City's grading and drainage engineers will make a determination if further reviews are required by those agencies. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWS 8. In January 2017 the applicants, in addition to the above request, submitted an application to the Planning Commission to construct a 10 -stall two story stable with a turn out ring and a corral, new driveway to the stable, related grading and retaining walls for the project and a request to retain and legalize the "as graded" path, at the lower portion of the lot and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot. At the field trip and at the evening meeting of March 21, 2017 several residents came forward in opposition to the stable- and driveway; and the Planning Commissioners also expressed concerns with the proposed stable. Taking into consideration residents and Commissioners concerns, the applicants requested that the project be separated into two phases; phase one would include the new addition, several of the retaining walls, widening of the residential driveway, retention of the "as graded" path and the exceedance of the disturbed area of the lot (resulting from grading of the path); and phase two would entail a new stable, corral, driveway to the stable and related walls and grading, as needed, which they would submit at a later date. The Planning Commission held another field trip on April 18 to view the graded path. Following the field trip the Planning Commission felt that the grading for the path and the path should be included in the application for the stable and related grading; as depending on what the applicants propose, it may affect the area of the path, and the scope of the project could change. At the April 18, 2017 meeting, the Planning ZC No. 9151 Middleridge Lane North Commission adopted a resolution approving the additions, grading for the additions and the driveway. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9. The structural lot coverage, including future 450 sq.ft. stable, is proposed at 7,092 square feet or 5.8%, (excluding miscellaneous existing structures). The total lot coverage, structures and flatwork, is proposed at 14,187 square feet or 11.54%. The residential building pad, which would be increased by 1,415 square feet from the current pad, is proposed at 7,215 square feet, (not in setbacks), would have coverage of 6,100 square feet (with deductions) or 84.55%. The disturbance of the lot (excluding the path) is proposed at 37.3% of the net lot area, which is 45,825 sq.ft. 10. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff has reviewed environmental information provided in compliance with CEQA. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 11. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2017-03 by a 4-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Cardenas recused, due to proximity of his property to subject site. They found that the project is not obtrusive, that it fits on the lot and that it mostly utilizes the existing flat area of the lot, although in the front setback, the addition follows the line of the existing residence. They found that the addition is modest and that there is no other . area to add on, without much more grading and that much of the house is below the road level and the addition will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped. They also found that when asked of the neighbors, no one had objections to the addition and that the applicant is sufficiently vested in the development of plans for a stable, that the code enforcement case could be considered at the time the stable is considered. ZC No. 9151 Middleridge Lane North SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 11.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 11.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. ZC No. 9151 Middleridge Lane North VARIANCES CRITERIA 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA: 11.42.050 Basis for approval or denial of conditional use permit. The Commission (and Council on appeal), in acting to approve a conditional use permit application, may impose conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure the project is consistent with the General Plan, compatible with surrounding land use, and meets the provisions and intent of this title. In making such a determination, the hearing body shall find that the proposed use is in general accord with the following principles and standards: A. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan; B. That the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, building or structures; C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the use and buildings proposed; D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district; E. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; F. That the proposed conditional uses observes the spirit and intent of this title. ZC No. 9151 Middleridge Lane North ZONING CASE NO. 915 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE N. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT - DATE: 5-08-17 SITE PLAN REVIEW EXISTING PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED 1/17/17 & 3/21/17 PROPOSED 4-18-17 RA -S- 1 ZONE SETBACKS Residence & Garage; miscl. structures RESIDENCE ADDITION, NEW DRIVEWAY, WIDENING OF DRWY, STABLE, CORRAL, LEGALIZE PATH & GRADING RESIDENCE ADDITION, GRADING & WIDENING OF DRWY Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line STRUCTURES Residence Basement Garage attached Stable Loft for Stable Att. Cov. Porches Entry porch Service yard Outdoor Kitchen *Tree House Sheds 2900 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft 468 sq.ft 96 sq.ft 155 sq.ft 75 sq.ft. 162 sq.ft Residence *Basement Garages attached Stable *Loft for Stable Att. Cov. Porches Entry porch Service yard Outdoor Kitchen *Tree House Sheds (demo) 4,650 sq.ft. 1,750 sq.ft. 909 sq.ft. 5,368 sq.ft. 3,840 sq.ft. 1,220 sq.ft. 120 sq.ft 96 sq.ft 155 sq.ft 75 sq ft -162 sqft Residence *Basement Garages attached Stable *Loft for Stable Att. Cov. Porches Entry porch Service yard Outdoor Kitchen *Tree House Sheds 4,650 sq.ft. 1,750 sq.ft. 909 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. sq.ft. 380 sq.ft. 350 sq.ft 96 sq.ft 155 sq.ft 75 sq ft 162 sqft (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by more than 999 sq.ft., & grading TOTAL 3,781 sq.ft. TOTAL 12,593 sq.ft. TOTAL 7,227 sq.ft STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE 0.03% 12,458 sf w/allowances 10.13% of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area 7,092 sf. or 5.8% excl/allowances of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE 0.06% 22,528 w/allowances or 18.32% of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area 14,147 sq.ft. or 11.54% excl/allowances of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area (35% maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) 61.4% of 5,800 sq.ft. pad N/A Residence: 81.4% of 7,215 sf. pad Stable: 41.6%of 13,625 sf pad (including deductions) 84.54% of 7,215 sf. pad Future Residential Stable GRADING N/A 33,090 cy total to be balanced on site . 1,300 c.y. cut, 1,210 c.y. fill; 600 c.y. to be used for recompaction for a total of 2,510 c.y. dirt Site Plan Review required if excavation and/or fill or combination thereof that is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sq.ft.) must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA 35.4% (47.8% with unauthorized grading of a path along the rear of the property) 55.6% (68,325 sq. ft.) including pathway 37.2% or 45,825 sq.ft. area (no variance is required) (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist.) STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT. N/A 5,368 sq. ft. with 3,840 sq. ft. loft 4,300 sq. ft. (new corral) Future & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS N/A Proposed from Middleridge Future from Middleridge ROADWAY ACCESS N/A Two Driveway aprons -CUP Two Driveway aprons -CUP VIEWS N/A Planning Commission condition Planning Commission condition PLANTS AND ANIMALS N/A Planning Commission condition Planning Commission condition *Basements are not included in calculation for structural square footage. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR A RESIDENCE ADDITION, BASEMENT, VARIOUS WALLS AND GRADING; WIDEN ONE OF THE TWO RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYS AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT SETBACK WITH PORTIONS OF THE ADDITIONS, BASEMENT AND GARAGE IN ZONING CASE NO. 915 AT 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH, (PARTS OF LOTS 15,16,17 -MR), (CIPOLLA). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Chaz Cipolla with respect to real property located at 1 Middleridge Lane North, (Part of Lots 15, 16, 17 -MR), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Site Plan Review for the construction of 1,750 square feet addition and 1,750 square feet of underlying basement, 380 square feet of covered porches at the house front and side, and a 441 square foot (2 -car) garage to be attached by a 120 square foot breezeway on the home's east side, for a total of 4,650 square foot residence with 909 square feet garages. The applicants also propose to retain an existing 140 square foot outdoor BBQ and 15 square foot outdoor kitchen at the home's rear and a tree house in the front. Several not to exceed 3' high retaining walls, which will average out to 2.5' in height, are proposed along the enlarged building pad to accommodate the additions, including the new garage. Grading for the enlarged residential pad for the addition and for the widening of the driveway would be 2,510 cubic yards, total cut and fill. The applicants seek a CUP to widened one of the two driveways to accommodate access to the new proposed garage and variances to encroach with portions of the proposed development, including the basement and garage into the front yard setback and to increase the disturbed area from 35.5% to 37.3%, (40% maximum allowed). Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application on January 17, 2017, March 21, 2017 and in the field on March 21, 2017. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed, and studied said proposal. The property owners and their representatives were in attendance at the public hearings. Section 3. Originally included in the request was a conditional uses permit and additional variance for a 10 -stall stable with loft and related grading, additional disturbance, a driveway to the stable and a request to legalize grading for a previously created path in the rear of the property, and allow to retain the path. The grading for the pathway consists of a total of 3,500 cubic yards cut and fill over 15,250 square foot Reso. 2017-03 1\ surface area, and it has been completed. Due to the Planning Commission and neighbors' concerns related to the stable and the proposed third driveway to the stable, the applicants withdrew the request for that portion of the application. At the April 18, 2017 field trip to view the graded path, the Planning Commission decided not to consider it at this time and to re -visit this portion of the application with the future application for a stable and grading. Section 4. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 4.19 acres. The net lot area, as calculated by the City, is 2.82 acres or 122,943 square feet. The property is currently developed with a 2,900 square foot single-family residence and 468 square foot attached garage, tree house, sheds and outdoor kitchen with BBQ and fire pit. Vehicular access is provided through two aprons on Middleridge Lane N. that allow access to and through the existing garage as well as to an existing paved parking area at the front. The easterly existing apron is proposed to be widened to allow access to the proposed second garage. The Traffic Commission reviewed the residential apron widening request and recommended approval. There are no records of permits for the outdoor kitchen and sheds. It is required that the applicants obtain building permit for these structures or demolish them. Section 5. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 1 exemption in that the project is an addition. Section 6. Section 17.46.020(3) requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review for an addition over 999 square feet, and for grading. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting approval of a 1,750 square foot addition with basement, and associated grading the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development. The project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements. The lot is over 2.8 acres, as calculated by City, and the addition will not result in the lot to look overdeveloped. The lot currently is nonconforming for front yard encroachment with the residence and the additional encroachment would be minimal. The proposed project is located below Middleridge Lane and will be screened from the road by the drop in. elevation and landscaping which minimizes the visual impact of the development. B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the addition is located in line with the existing residence, majority of which is below the road and the addition will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the Reso. 2017-03 2 topography of the lot have been considered, and the construction and maintenance of the proposed addition will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed addition will be constructed in line with the existing residence, which partially encroaches into the front setback, will be below street view, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the proposed structure will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. The proposed project is consistent with the scale of homes in the surrounding RA -S-1 similarly zoned neighborhood. The proposed project entails construction of an addition and will create a residence that is 4,650 square feet with 909 square foot garages, which is comparable to the homes in vicinity of subject site. D. The development plan generally follows natural contours of the site to the maximum extent practicable to accomplish groomed and usable areas of the lot, subject to concurrent approval of Variance pursuant to Section 7 of this resolution. Natural drainage courses will not be affected by the project. Minimal grading is proposed for the residence addition. E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed widening of the driveway will be safer and more maneuverable than the current condition and was recommended for approval by the Traffic Engineer and the Traffic Commission. F. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is exempt. Section 7. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties prevent the owner from making use of a parcel or property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. Sections 17.16.110 requires that every lot in the RAS-1 zone shall have a front setback of not less than 50 feet from the road easement line. The applicant is requesting a Variance to encroach with a 360 square foot portion of the addition and same size encroachment of the basement, and with a portion of the porch and Porte Cochere into the front yard setback. With respect to this request for Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: • A. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions because the property was previously developed with the residence close to the front yard setback with a steep slope behind the residential building pad. 876 sq.ft. of the existing residence and the entire garage currently encroach into the front setback. The lot is adjacent to the Reso. 2017-03 3 RAS-1 Overlay Zone where unusually configured lots enjoy a reduced setback; and although this lot is larger than the rest of the lots in the Overlay Zone, the home was constructed to the same setback encroachment as the other homes in the Overlay Zone. The addition will bring the residence more in line and more compatible with other residences in the vicinity. Minimal grading is required for the additional building pad for the addition and the disturbance would only increase by 1.8% for this portion of the project and would be less than 40%. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive the property owner of the rights and benefits enjoyed by similarly situated properties in the same zone, including the ability to enjoy a similar sized home due to physical constraints of the lot. The encroachment permits the use of the lot to the extent allowed for other properties in the vicinity. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Development in the front setbacks is minimal. The area of addition would not impair views. D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the proposed addition will be orderly, attractive, attached to the residence, and will not affect the rural character of the community. The proposed addition will not encroach into potentially future equestrian uses on the property. A suitable stable and corral area has been set -aside on the site. E. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The structural lot coverage and the total impervious lot coverage are within the requirements of the City. Section 8. Section 17.16.210(A)(1) of the Zoning Ordinance contains conditions for a second driveway, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Section 17.24.030 states that a legal non -conforming use may continue, provided that such use is not expanded or extended. The two driveways that exist on the property are legal non- conforming, as no CUP was granted nor required when they were constructed. The applicant proposes to widen one of the driveway aprons by 10 feet, triggering the requirement of Section 17.24.030 of the Zoning Ordinance. With respect to this request for Conditional Use Permits, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. Conditionally permitted uses are not outright permitted by the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. The Commission must consider applications for a Conditional Use Permit and may, with such conditions as are deemed necessary, approve a conditional use which will not jeopardize, adversely affect, endanger or to otherwise Reso. 2017-03 4 constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare or be materially detrimental to the property of other persons located in the vicinity of such use. B. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for widening of the existing driveway apron would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and meet all the applicable code development standards and is located in an area on the property that is not in conflict with vehicular access on the road adjacent thereto. The Traffic Commission approved the request. C. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed widening of the apron is of sufficient distance from nearby driveways so as to not impact the ingress, egress and road condition of surrounding neighbors. D. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the proposed use is not different than what exists and its use will not be increased, as it serves the same house. The second driveway will enable adequate Fire Department access and provide on -site parking opportunities for guests. It will have low profile and allow for that portion of the property to be open and unobstructed. E. The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings in Sections 6, 7 and 8, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review, Variances and a Conditional Use Permit in Zoning Case No. 915 to construct 1,750 square feet addition and 1,750 square feet of underlying basement, 380 square feet of covered porches and a 441 square foot (2 -car) garage to be attached by a 120 square foot breezeway to the residence; to retain an existing 140 square foot outdoor BBQ and 15 square foot outdoor kitchen and a tree house in the front; grading of total of 2,510 cubic yards of dirt, to widen one existing driveway and to encroach with 360 square feet of the new addition and basement, with 180 square feet of the garage and portions of the porch and breezeway into the front yard setback, subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variance approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval if construction pursuant to this approval has not commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.46.080 and 17.38.070(A) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. Reso. 2017-03 5 13 B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee's determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted; the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant's request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan, including but not be limited to the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. Further, pursuant to Section 17.27.030, all utility lines to the residence shall be placed underground. Per Chapter 8.30 of the RHMC the property shall at all times be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated April 12, 2017, including the widened driveway, as recommended approval by the Traffic Commission, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. A copy of the conditions of this Resolution shall be printed on plans approved when a building permit is issued and a copy of such approved plans, including conditions of approval, shall be available on the building site at all times. Any modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed and approved by staff prior to implementing the changes. Such review will require a public hearing before the Planning Commission if the modifications represent a major modification of the project. Reso. 2017-03 6 F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and including conformance with all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. A minimum of five-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of all of the proposed structures, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department. H. - Grading for this project will entail 2,510 cubic yards cut and fill total. Dirt shall not be exported. I. Structural lot coverage, including a minimum of 450 sq.ft. stable, shall not exceed 7,092 square feet or 5.8% of the total net lot area of the lot, excluding the allowed deductions. The total lot coverage will be 14,187 square feet or 11.54% of the net lot area. The residential building pad, which would be increased by 1,415 square feet, is proposed at 7,215 square feet, (not in setbacks), shall have coverage of 6,100 square feet (with deductions) or 84.55%. J. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 45,825 square feet or 37.3%. K. A set -aside area for a future stable and corral of 1,000 square feet, shall be retained on the property at all times, unless an application is filed for a CUP for stable construction, and it is constructed. L. In conjunction with an application for a building permit for this project, the applicant shall submit an application for a permit for the non -permitted outdoor amenities, or they shall be demolished. A final inspection by the Building Inspector must be granted for the "as built" and "as graded" items prior to or in concurrence with a final inspection of the additions. M. A drainage plan, as required by the Building Department shall be prepared and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of a construction permit. Such plan shall be subject to LA County Code requirements. N. The front setback line and the roadway easement line in the vicinity of the construction of this project shall remain staked throughout the construction. O. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local Reso. 2017-03 ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be required. P. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water management. Further the property owners shall be required to conform to the County Health Department requirements for a septic system, should changes to the existing system be required. Q. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences -including construction fences, any hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. R. Minimum of 65% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City's Construction and Demolition permits for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City. S. During construction, to the extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the project site, on the new driveway and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within the unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. To the extent feasible, a minimum of 4' wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment at all times. T. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. U. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http:/ /www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FI RE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. Reso. 2017:03 V. Prior to finaling of the project an "as graded" and an "as built" plans and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the "as built/ as graded" plan. W. Until the applicants execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this approval, the approvals shall not be effective. Such affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THI 8 . DA . J AP t' IL 2017. r ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK C LF, CHAIRM Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 Reso. 2017-03 9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2017-03 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR A RESIDENCE ADDITION, BASEMENT, VARIOUS WALLS AND GRADING; WIDEN ONE OF THE TWO RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYS AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT SETBACK WITH PORTIONS OF THE ADDITIONS, BASEMENT AND GARAGE IN ZONING CASE NO. 915 AT 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH, (PARTS OF LOTS 15,16,17 -MR), (CIPOLLA). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on April 18, 2017 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Cooley, Kirkpatrick, Seaburn and Chairman Chelf. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: Commissioner Cardenas (recused). and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. Reso. 2017-03 10 4e,d ftc0 HEIDI LUCE CITY CLERK 12 84 a/Rd/4ff ge& INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 5-B Mtg. Date: 05/08/17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR op JULIA STEWART, ASSISTANT PLANNER 'a j THRU: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER /IV' SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2017-04 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE ADDITION WITH A BASEMENT, DETACHED GARAGE, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, PATIO TRELLIS, TENNIS COURT, NEW SECOND DRIVEWAY, STABLE AND CORRAL; TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED GRADING AND GRADED AREA FOR THE TENNIS COURT AND TO EXCEED THE MA)QMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 917 AT 5 PINE TREE LANE, (LOT 94-RH), (SHARNG). AND CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION TO APPROVE A NEW DRIVEWAY APRON FOR A SECOND DRIVEWAY AND A NEW PATHWAY APRON FOR ACCESS TO THE STABLE AT 5 PINE TREE LANE. APPLICANT: MS. LAUREN SHARNG REPRESENTATIVE: TAVISHA NICHOLSON, BOLTON ENGINEERING DATE PUBLISHED: FEBRUARY 9, 2017 REQUEST AND PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane Request The applicant is proposing a Site Plan Review for the remodeling of 4,340 square foot of an existing residence and 2,065 square feet of new residence construction for a combined total 6,405 square foot residence and 31,920 cubic yards of overall grading. The residence is proposed to have 1,380 square feet of covered porches, a new 1,100 square foot detached garage, a new 2,065 square foot basement (at a maximum depth of 16 feet), a 96 square foot service yard and 60 square foot enclosed space for pool equipment. Also proposed are a 325 square foot Porte cochere, a 700 square foot swimming pool and spa, and exterior features including two decks, a covered entry, trellis over a patio near the tennis court, a pool deck, and other minor amenities. A Conditional Use Permit is requested for the construction of a 1,200 square foot one- story stable with 640 square feet of covered porches, a 9,150 square foot corral, a new second driveway located north of the existing driveway leading to the new detached garage, and a 7,000 square foot tennis court. A Variance is requested to exceed the maximum permitted 40% disturbance of the lot resulting from general grading for the proposed project and to grade more than the maximum permitted 750 cubic yards of dirt and over 10,000 square feet surface area for the tennis court. The applicant is proposing a total overall disturbance of 46.12%. The grading for the proposed tennis court will require 2,095 c.y. of cut and fill and 13,000 square feet of surface area alteration. Planning Commission Review The project was initially presented to the Planning Commission at its regular meeting held on February 21, 2017. The Planning Commission also viewed the project in the field, opened the hearing to enable brief public testimony and continued the meeting to the evening meeting of the Planning Commission on March 21, 2017. On April 18, 2017, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing, found the project acceptable based on the Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variance zoning code criteria, and approved the resolution for the project. Traffic Commission Review The applicant proposes to retain the existing driveway, which is a shared driveway for 3 and 5 Pine Tree Lane properties, and to construct a new second, 20' -wide driveway with a new driveway apron and turnaround with a 64 foot diameter. The proposed new driveway and motor court will require grading. The slope of the new driveway will be at 8% grade. The apron for the new second driveway is proposed to be just over 100 feet to the south of the existing driveway and pursuant to Section 17.16.210(A)(1) of the zoning code is in compliance with the distance requirement. This new driveway will also include an area for guest parking. Also proposed is a 10 foot wide decomposed granite pathway leading to the stable, which pursuant to Section 17.16.040 does not require a CUP as a third driveway because it leads directly to a stable. Stable access is proposed along the northerly side of the second driveway. ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane 0 The Traffic Commission reviewed the new second driveway and pathway approaches at their March 23, 2017 meeting. The Traffic Commission recommended approval of the second driveway apron. Further, the Traffic Commission recommended approval of the pathway apron if the location of the pathway apron was altered to the satisfaction of the City's Traffic Engineer. The Traffic Engineer has reviewed the altered pathway apron and recommends approval. Special Conditions of Approval At the March 21, 2017 evening Planning Commission meeting, the Commission requested that special consideration regarding the new pathway apron be included in the preparation of the Resolution. The following are special conditions of approval: • Altered location of the apron for the 10 foot wide decomposed granite pathway leading to the stable. Traffic Commission approval is a pre -requisite to Planning Commission approval. • Convert the legal -non -conforming structure located in the setback to a garage use, (which was its original approved use). These conditions are specific to this project and are included in the Resolution approved by the Planning Commission together with the standard findings of facts and conditions of approval. BACKGROUND Zoning and Land Size The property is zoned RAS-2 and the gross lot area excluding the roadway easement is 4.78 acres. For development purposes the net lot area of the lot is 187,196 square feet or 4.3 acres. Neighbor Concerns At the February 21, 2017 Planning Commission meeting, the next door neighbor came and spoke generally in favor of the project. No additional comments from neighboring residents were received. Past Property Approval In 2004 the previous property owner was granted an approval to subdivide the property into two -lots. The approval expired on January 12, 2013. Also in 2004, approval was granted to separate the driveway access to 3 and 5 Pine Tree Land and construct two new driveways, one on each property, however the driveways were not constructed. The Planning Commission and then City Council, upon appeal of the application by a neighbor, on August 22, 2016 approved a new 5,250 sq.ft. residence with same size basement, 1,115 sq.ft. garages (two), 800 sq.ft. guest house, 1,810 sq.ft. stable with 611 sq.ft loft, 964 sq.ft. swimming pool, several retaining walls and miscellaneous outdoor structures and new driveways on the property. A variance for disturbance of the lot was also granted. The applicants decided to change the scope of the project and filed a new application. ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane 0 Demolition The applicant proposes to fill in portions of the existing swimming pool and utilize some of the existing pool area for the new basement. The northeastern wall of the existing residence will remain primarily intact but a small portion will be demolished to accommodate a door leading to the residential addition. The total lineal footage of the walls of the existing residence is 643 feet. The total linear feet of exterior wall to be demolished to accommodate the residential addition is 6 linear feet. This is well below the 50% limit of exterior wall demolition, to be considered a new construction. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE Grading and Stabilization The total combined grading for this project will consist of 31,920 cubic yards of cut and fill. Construction activities will include grading of 8,460 cubic yards of cut (not including 7,500 cubic yards of overexcavation) and 7,610 cubic yards of fill (not including 8,350 of recompaction) and 600 cubic yards will be excavated for the basement. No dirt will be exported. The total grading for the tennis court will be 2,095 cubic yards. The City Municipal Code only allows 750 cubic yards of grading for a tennis court. Therefore, the applicant is seeking a variance. Disturbance An additional 46,875 square feet of the lot is proposed to be disturbed or 25.04%, which includes grading for the residential building and pool & spa pad, tennis court pad, and the stable and corral pad. Currently there is one building pad on the property, for a total of 39,460 square feet of existing disturbance. The existing disturbed area of the lot is 21.08%. Two additional pads are proposed to be constructed for an overall total of three pads. Consequently, the proposed project will result in 46.12% or 86,335 square feet of overall disturbed area. The City Municipal Code allows up to 40% overall disturbance on a lot. The existing topography of the property has almost half of the lot with slopes of 2:1 or steeper. This limits the ability to utilize 3:1 slopes, which would allow the applicant to qualify for additional disturbance and eliminate the need for a variance. Since the project does not qualify for allowance for disturbance, the applicant is seeking a variance. The City Municipal Code allows for up to 10,000 square feet of surface area to be disturbed for the grading of a tennis court. The proposed project includes 13,000 square feet of disturbance for the creation of the tennis court. Therefore, the applicant is seeking a variance. Height The finished height of the existing residence ridgeline is to remain at 20 feet. The ridgeline of the new residential addition will be 17 feet. The finished roof height of the proposed stable is proposed to be 14 feet to the ridgeline. The proposed basement will be approximately 16' in depth. ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane 0 Drainage Storm water runoff will be collected in a biofiltration device and discharged through an erosion control unit to comply with City's Low Impact Development requirements. Storm Water Management This application is subject to the General Permit requirements for storm water management, where the State requires that a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan be submitted and a permit obtained, due to grading on one or more acres of land. This application is also subject to the City's Low Impact Development (LID) ordinance requirements for retention of water on site, and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance where the applicants must implement low water usage planting and devices and certify compliance. All of these requirements will be reviewed at the plan check review process and monitored during construction. Lot Coverage The existing structural coverage on the lot is 5,501 or 2.94% The overall structural net lot coverage once the proposed project is included is 18,671 square feet (with deductions) or 10.0%% (20% max. permitted). The total lot coverage proposed (structural and flatwork) is proposed to be 32,386 square feet overall (with deductions) or 17.30% (35% max. permitted). The residential building pad is proposed to be 21,800 square feet. The total pad structural coverage, including both existing and proposed, is proposed to be 9,191 square feet or 42.16%, with deductions (30% guideline). The coverage includes the residence, new and existing garages, swimming pool & spa, pool equipment, and service yard structures, but excludes the permissible exemptions of the attached porch and several of the miscellaneous outdoor amenities. The tennis court building pad is proposed to be 7,315 square feet.. The pad coverage (with deductions) is proposed at 7,000 square feet or 95.7%, with deductions (30% guideline). The stable building pad is proposed to be 10,925 square feet with a proposed pad coverage of 1,720 square feet or 15.74%, with deductions (30% guideline). Walls There are several walls proposed for this project. The average wall height is 2.5 feet. The wall adjacent to the tennis court is four feet in height and is being used as a retaining wall for the court, which is allowed and is not required to average out to 2.5' in height . The wall along the corral is 2.5 feet. The wall adjacent to the patio landing with the proposed trellis gradually decreases down from the highest height at 3 feet. Stable Access Stable access is proposed along the northerly side of the property. There will be a 10 foot wide decomposed granite pathway primarily for horses. Fire Department access to the stable will be provided via the proposed, stairs between the residential building pad ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane and the stable building pad, where the fire trucks would utilize the motor court at the residence for parking. This design was confirmed with the Fire Department. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUMMARIES A Conditional Use Permit is required for the stable, tennis court, additional detached garage, and new second driveway. Pursuant to Section 17.18.030, a separate apron for a pathway serving a stable area does not require a Conditional Use Permit; however, it must still be reviewed by the Traffic Commission. Stable Requirements The proposed stable will be one-story, 1,200 square feet including 640 square feet of covered porch area. The following requirements must be met for a stable: Pursuant to the zoning code requirements the following is applicable to this request: REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED Not less than 6' wide roughened access; if greater than 1,000 sq.ft. stable access to comply with Fire Dept. requirements. Proposed 10' wide D.G. horse path from the street. Fire Dept. access will be from motor court Stable, corral not to be located on slopes greater than 4:1 Located on area with a slope no greater thar 4:1 Not in front yard or side or front setback. May be located up to 25' in rear setback. Stable and corral comply Min. 35' from any residential structure Complies with requirement- over 60 feet from detached garage Building to be designed for rural and agricultural uses only, but may include storage of vehicles and household items Building is proposed to look like a stable and be used for a stable Size to include the entire footprint including loft, if any 1,200 sq.ft. footprint; No loft is proposed. Minimum of 60% of the size of the structure shall be maintained for agricultural uses Agricultural spaces include 4 stalls, and a feed room and is 83 % of the size of the structure Maximum of 40% of the size of the structure, but not to exceed 800 sq.ft. may be maintained for a tack room Tack room of 204 sq.ft. (including bathroom) - 17% of the structure Tack room may have sanitary and kitchenette amenities Proposed bathroom Tack room may have glazed openings One window proposed in tack room Entry doors to agricultural space to be min. 4'wide & 7.5' high; appearance of a stable door To comply- to be reviewed by the Architectural Committee. Loft is permitted No loft proposed Loft plate height may not exceed 7' No loft proposed Exterior area of stables may not to be paved Unpaved corral surrounds the stable Corral shall be fenced Proposed fenced corral ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane Access not to exceed 25% Corral to be contiguous to stable. Planning Commission may determine the size of a coral based on the size of the stable Access proposed at 17% grade 9,150 sq.ft. corral contiguous to stable. Commercial uses or sleeping is not allowed Applicant is not proposing any commercial uses or sleeping in the stable Tennis Court Requirements Also proposed is a 7,000 square foot sports court with a 4' high maximum retaining wall along southerly side of the court. Section 17.16.210 (A)(7) of the Zoning Ordinance contains conditions for recreational game courts, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. These conditions, listed below, are intended to ensure that such structures: are ancillary recreational uses, do not eliminate an existing or future development for a stable, do not create visual or other impacts and blend in with the existing topography and landscape or views. Recreational Game Courts are defined as: tennis, racquetball and squash courts, and any other fenced, enclosed, paved or hard -surfaced areas used for recreational purposes. They shall adhere to the following conditions: REQUIREMENTS: PROPOSED: A legally required and accessible stable and corral area shall be provided; There is proposed stable and corral A game court shall not be located in the front yard or any setback; Proposed project is not in setback or front yard. A game court shall not be located within fifty feet of any paved road or street easements; Proposed project is not located within fifty feet of any paved road or street easements. Retaining walls constructed for a game court shall not exceed four feet in height at any point along the wall; retaining walls shall not be exposed to the exterior; and if necessary to minimize the visual impact, the game court surface shall be inset or sunken below grade; A 4 foot high maximum retaining wall is proposed along the southerly side of the tennis court. The construction of a game court shall conform to the lot coverage limitations as set forth in Section 17.16.070; All development standards for coverage are within the permitted standards. A game court shall not be located on a slope that exceeds a 2:1 grade; Existing slope in court location does not exceed 2:1 gradient. A game court shall not be located on the side or bottom of a canyon or in the path of a natural drainage course; Location of proposed court is not in a canyon or in a natural drainage course. ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane When grading is required for a game court, cutting and filling shall be balanced on site and shall not exceed a total cut and fill•of 750 cubic yards. The total grading for the game court will be 2,095 c.y. which is over 750 c.y. of dirt. This requires a variance. When grading is required for a game court, cutting and filling shall be balanced on site and shall not exceed 10,000 square feet; Graded area for the proposed court is 13,000 sq. ft. which is over 10,000 sq.ft. This requires a variance. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the site shall be retained to the greatest extent possible; Any areas of the lot not used as a pad for development will remain undisturbed with many natural slopes being retained. Drainage systems shall be incorporated into the game court and shall be approved by the City Engineer; Drainage will be submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval. A game court shall be adequately screened by landscaping on all four sides; Conceptual plan showing screening. Must be submitted prior to obtaining grading permit. Landscape screening shall include native or other drought -tolerant mature trees and shrubs, which shall be maintained in a healthy condition. The landscape screening shall be on all exposed sides. Standard condition of approval to require that the applicant submit detailed plans and a bond or similar financial deposit for landscaping prior to obtaining grading permit. Landscaping shall not interfere with the viewscape of surrounding properties or pursuant to Chapter 17.26; Landscaping to be planted around court perimeter to be designed to screen the perimeter fencing. RHCA regulates height of sport court fences. Game court lighting shall not be permitted; Standard condition to be placed in resolution prohibiting lighting. Design and construction of a game court shall include methods to mitigate visual and noise impacts. Landscaping plan to be required buffering the development. Daytime use only will minimize noise. The Planning Commission could require rubberized surface to dampen the sound. Utility Lines/ Septic Tank It is a requirement that utility lines to all of the proposed structures be placed underground. A new septic tank is being considered for installation. The possible location of the new septic tank is depicted on the plans along with the location of the existing septic tank. General Non -conforming Conditions There are two permitted existing non -conforming uses on the property. The existing residence has a small portion of the structure located within the front setback. The 405 square foot existing garage, along the existing driveway, is located within the side setback and will remain. The existing garage had been converted for non -automotive ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane 0 uses, and in order for it to remain it is a requirement of the approval that it be converted back to a garage. In addition, it is required that the portion of the residence located in the front setback remain intact and no part thereof demolished during remodel/construction or it would not be able to be reconstructed without approval of a Variance. Applicant's Statement of Justification for Variances In justifying the variances, the applicant's agent states, "Due to the steep topography of the lot, it is not possible to utilize 3:1 slopes and thereby qualify for the allowed increase in disturbance. The area of development has been concentrated as much as possible to reduce the overall disturbance. The equestrian uses equate to approximately 16% of the overall disturbance or 8% in the calculations which means that if we were not proposing a stable & corral then we would be at -39.2% disturbance and therefore not require a variance. The tennis court needed to be dropped to be close in elevation to that of the stable, as they are located close to each other. The tennis court is approximately 30' vertically below the house in hopes of sinking it into the hillside. It was thought that additional grading to push the court further into the ground and as much as possible out of the view shed of Pine Tree would be more beneficial than staying within the allowable 750 C.Y. of grading. Additionally, the allowance of 10,000 sq.ft. of graded area means that you are only able to grade about 8' beyond the limits of a typical sized tennis court, which when accounting for topography is quite hard to meet. We have worked to minimize the impact of the tennis court as much as possible and place it next to the 9,000 sq.ft. corral and open space to help soften the overall appearance of the court. Rolling Hills Community Association Review Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. Environmental Review The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 3, Section 15303 exemption. City Council Responsibilities When reviewing a development application, the City Council considers whether the adopted resolution is consistent with the criteria for a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances (as attached below). ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane Development Comparables ZC NO. 917 NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information only) Address House size in sq.ft. (built/add or remodel) Lot Area (gross acres) 1 Pine Tree 6,516* 4.66 2 Pine Tree 6,211* 2.24 3 Pine Tree 4,674* 5.13 4 Pine Tree 8,961* 4.38 6 Pine Tree 6,148 1.31 7 Pine Tree. 3,912 5.64 8 Pine Tree 2,812 2.23 10 Pine Tree 3,253 2.49 23 Portuguese Bend Road 3,348* 2.42 2 Pheasant Lane 5,651 5.0 5 Pine Tree Existing 4,340; Proposed 6,405 5.15 NOTE: The above do not include garages, basements and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records * City records ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane Project Summary SITE PLAN REVIEW EXISTING PROPOSED OVERALL TOTAL RA -S- 2 ZONE SETBACKS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH GARAGE AND POOL. MAJOR ADDITION TO RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY USES & STABLE Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line Add porte cochere/entryway. All Residence Garage Pool Pool Equipment Stable Service Yard Porches Outdoor kitchen Fire Pit Tennis Court Tennis Trellis Entryway/Port. Basement 4,340 sq.ft. 405 sq.ft 756 sq.ft. • 0 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. 0 sq.ft. 0 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. Residence Garages Pool and spa Pool Equipment Stable Service yard Porches Outdoor kitchen Fire pit Tennis Court Tennis Trellis Entryway/Port. Basement 6,405 sq.ft. 1,505 sq.ft. 700 sq.ft. 60 sq. ft. 1,200 sq.ft 96 sq.ft 1,380 sq.ft. 50 sq.ft. 30 sq.ft. 7,000 sq.ft. 315 sq.ft. 325 sq.ft. 2,065 sq.ft. structures are to be listed here.. STRUCTURES (Site Plan Review required for grading, new structures including new residence and if size of addition is 999 sq.ft. or more in a 36 -month period). TOTAL 5,501 sq.ft TOTAL 19,066 sq.ft STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE 2.94% 10.0% (with deductions) of 187,196 sq.ft.net lot area (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE 4.32% 17.13% of 187,196 sq.ft.net lot area (35% maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) 68.51% residence pad coverage No Tennis Court No stable (No deductions are included in the numbers below) 45.46% residence pad coverage 95.7% sports court pad coverage 16.84% stable pad coverage Residence, pool, other misc. structures TENNIS COURT STABLE GRADING Unknown 8,460 c.y. cut and 7,610 c.y. fill to be balanced on site (difference used for recompaction) Over -excavation 7,500 c.y. Re -Compaction 8,350 c.y. No dirt. exported from site Site Plan Review required if excavation and/or fill or combination thereof that is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sq.ft.) must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA 21.08% 46.12% of 187,196 sq.ft.net lot area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any nongraded area where _ impervious surfaces exist.) STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT. No stable CUP required -1,200 sq. ft. stable and 9,150 sq. ft. corral proposed & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS N/A 10 ft. wide D.G. pathway ROADWAY ACCESS Existing driveway approach New driveway approach (north) VIEWS N/A Planning Commission review PLANTS AND ANIMALS N/A Planning Commission review ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 11.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 11.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: 1742.050 Basis for approval or denial of conditional use permit. The Commission (and Council on appeal), in acting to approve a conditional use permit application, may impose conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure the project is consistent with the General Plan, compatible with surrounding land use, and meets the provisions and intent of this title. In making such a determination, the hearing body shall find that the proposed use is in general accord with the following principles and standards: A. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan; B. That the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, building or structures; C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the use and buildings proposed; D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district; E. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; F. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. SOURCE: City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance ZC NO. 917 5 Pine Tree Lane THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK RESOLUTION NO. 2017-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE ADDITION WITH A BASEMENT, DETACHED GARAGE, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, PATIO TRELLIS, TENNIS COURT, NEW SECOND DRIVEWAY, STABLE AND CORRAL; TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED GRADING AND GRADED AREA FOR THE TENNIS COURT AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 917 AT 5 PINE TREE LANE, (LOT 94-RH), (SHARNG). THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Ms. Lauren Sharng to request a Site Plan Review for the construction of a new 2,065 square foot residential addition (resulting in a 6,405 square foot residence), with a 2,065 square foot basement, a new 1,100 square foot detached garage (separate existing 405 square foot detached garage to remain), 1,380 square feet covered porches including 640 square feet at the stable, 700 square foot swimming pool and spa, 60 square foot pool equipment, 96 square foot service yard, 325 square foot porte cochere/entryway, retaining walls 3' high and under, new stairs, trellis and patio, and grading for a total of 31,920 cubic yards of dirt (8,460 c.y. cut and 7,610 c.y. fill; 7,500 c.y. over -excavation and 8,350 c.y. re -compaction). The applicant also requests a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 7,000 square foot tennis court, a new second driveway, and 1,200 square foot stable with 9,150 square foot corral; and Variances to exceed the maximum permitted grading of 750 cubic yards of dirt and over 10,000 square feet surface area for the tennis court, and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at their regular meeting on February 21, 2017, and in the field on March 21, 2017 and continued to the evening meeting of March 21, 2017. Neighbors within 1,000 -foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Peninsula News on February 9, 2017. The applicants and their agents were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail and the applicant and her agents were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal, and from members of the City staff. During the proceedings one neighbor spoke in support of this project and three community members visited the site during the noticed field trip but no objections were voiced. During the field trip on March 21, 2017, the Planning Commissioners expressed concerns with the project's extensive grading, and considered the idea of allowing importing dirt instead of the proposed extensive cutting to create the pads on Reso. 2017-04 5 Pine Tree Lane the site, and especially the tennis court pad. The project engineer calculated an estimate of the amount of dirt that would be necessary to import into the City in order to provide the same project elements. After some discussion, the Planning Commission noted that the amount of truck travel to import the dirt would have a greater impact on the City than allowing the grading as proposed. Also, at the evening meeting of March 21, 2107, the Commissioners discussed the pathway apron leading to the stable due to the recommendation from the Traffic Engineer to the Traffic Commission to relocate access apron. The Commissioners determined that any location recommended for approval by the City's Traffic Engineer would be acceptable. They made this recommendation a special condition of approval for the project. The Planning Commission has reviewed, analyzed and studied the current proposal. Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-2 and the gross lot area is 4.78 acres (excluding roadway easement). The net lot area, as defined by the City, is 4.3 acres or 187,196 square feet. The existing property is currently developed with a single -family residence, detached garage, and swimming pool, which will become a part of the basement. Access to the property is taken from a joint driveway approach with 3 Pine Tree Lane. A new driveway access is proposed to the detached garage and front of the house. A condition of approval is for the applicant to acquire approval recommendation from the Traffic Commission, based on the Traffic Engineer's approval recommendation, for the apron serving the 10 foot wide decomposed granite pathway providing access to the stable. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 (new construction of single family residence and accessory structures), and Section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption) of the CEQA guidelines. Section 5. Section 17.46.020 requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit or any new building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by not more than 999 square feet in any thirty-six (36) month period. The grading for the new residence, garage, swimming pool, second driveway, tennis court, and stable & corral requires Site Plan Review per Zoning Code Sections 17.46.020.A-2 and 17.46.020.A.1. With respect to the Site Plan for grading and the proposed structures the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures and maintaining sufficient setbacks to provide buffers between residential uses. Although the disturbed area Reso. 2017-04 2 5 Pine Tree Lane exceeds the maximum permitted amount of 40% at 46.12%, a large portion of it is for the proposed 1,200 square foot stable (which requires a Conditional Use Permit), and the associated 9,150 square foot corral. The stable and corral promote the rural, equestrian aesthetic of Rolling Hills. None of the proposed new structures are in setbacks. The project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements, except for the lot disturbance and graded area and grading quantities for the tennis court. The net lot area of the lot is 187,196 square feet. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 18,671 square feet or 10.0%, which includes all of the structures, with allowance for permitted deductions, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed, including the driveway would be 32,386 square feet or 17.30%, (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area of the lot is proposed to be 46.12%, which exceeds the maximum allowed disturbance of 40% (Municipal Code 17.16.070B). B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. The topography and the configuration of the lot have been considered, and it was determined that the proposed development will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures, because the proposed project will be constructed partially on the existing building pad of the currently developed lot, will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs, is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will allow the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. The proposed project would be located on a gentler slope of the property and leaving the steeper and more densely vegetated areas in their natural state to the north and northeast, along with the natural drainage course. The project promotes equestrian uses, therefore furthering the City's goal to remain an equestrian community. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, and is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to other residences in the vicinity of said lot as the proposed house will be 6,405 square feet and the average in the vicinity is 5,149 square feet. The development plan follows the natural contours of the site to minimize grading by utilizing a portion of the existing building pad for the new development. The slopes being created have been rounded and it was attempted to mimic the existing slope in the area. The layout of the project has helped to minimize the creation of steep slopes. D. The development plan will introduce additional landscaping, which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and the landscaping will provide a buffer or transition area between private and public areas. There will be some clearing of existing landscaping due to overgrowth and improper maintenance that has become a fire hazard. Reso. 2017-04 3 5 Pine Tree Lane E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the new 20' driveway will be safer to drive on as two cars can safely pass one another. There is ample parking in the garages and there is a proposed 6' wide parking strip along the new driveway, outside of all setbacks, as Pine Tree Lane does not have wide shoulders to park on so all visitor parking must be contained on site. A 10' wide decomposed granite pathway is proposed to safely accommodate travel to the stable and corral area and a pathway apron that is recommended for approval by the traffic engineer is a special condition of approval to ensure vehicular, horse, and pedestrian safety. Section 6. Sections 17.18.060 and 17.18.090 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a stable over 200 square feet and corral over 550 square feet with a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed 1,200 square foot stable and 9,150 square foot corral comply with all requirements of these sections. One new detached garage is proposed (1,100 square feet). Section 17.16.210 (A)(4) of the Zoning Ordinance contains conditions for a detached garage(s), subject to approval of a conditional use permit. A 7,000 square foot tennis court is proposed. Section 17.16.210(7) of the Zoning Ordinance contains conditions for a tennis court, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Section 17.16.210(A)(1) of the Zoning Ordinance contains conditions for a second driveway, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. A second driveway is proposed. The proposed structures comply with the provisions and conditions for such structures apart from the grading variances for the tennis court. With respect to this request for Conditional Use Permits, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. Conditionally permitted uses are not outright permitted by the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. The Commission must consider applications for a Conditional Use Permit and may, with such conditions as are deemed necessary, approve a conditional use which will not jeopardize, adversely affect, endanger or to otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare or be materially detrimental to the property of other persons located in the vicinity of such use. B. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the stable, corral, detached garage, second driveway, and tennis court would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the uses are consistent with similar uses in the community, and meet all the applicable code development standards for a stable and corral, detached garage, second driveway, and tennis court and they are located in areas on the property that are adequately sized to accommodate such uses. The proposed uses are appropriately located in that they will be sufficiently separated from nearby structures used for habitation or containing sleeping quarters. The stable/corral would be constructed in furtherance of the General Plan goal of promoting and encouraging equestrian uses. The detached garage and proposed tennis court are common amenities to Rolling Hills. Reso. 2017-04 4 5 Pine Tree Lane 0) C. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed uses (stable/corral, detached garage, and tennis court) are located in the middle of a 4.3 acre net lot and their general locations are of sufficient distance from nearby residences so as to not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. The proposed stable is to be located adjacent to the corral and a path designated for equestrian uses that runs from the stable to the roadway easement will be separate from the other outdoor living areas on the property and will be comprised of decomposed granite. D. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the proposed uses (stable/corral, detached garage, second driveway, and tennis court) complies with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and will not give the property an over -built look, and areas will remain open and unobstructed. The lot is 4.3 acres net in size and is sufficiently large to accommodate the proposed uses. The stable will be compatible with the uses in the surrounding area because Rolling Hills is an equestrian community and stables are encouraged. The stable will look like a stable and the 9,150 square foot corral will promote open space on the pad. The detached garage will be compatible with surrounding uses as it meets the requirements of the City as well as being proportioned to the house size. It will function like a garage and not a residential structure. The second driveway will enable adequate Fire Department access and provide on -site parking opportunities for guests. It will have low profile and allow for that portion of the property to be open and unobstructed. The tennis court will be compatible with the uses in the surrounding area because it will not be located in any setbacks, is sunken to reduce visual impact, and is an amenity other residences in Rolling Hills enjoy. E. The proposed conditional uses (stable/corral, detached garage, second driveway and tennis court) comply with all applicable development standards of the zone district and require Conditional Use Permits pursuant to Sections 17.18.060, 17.18.090, 17.16.210(A)(1), 17.16.210(A)(4), and 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Zoning Ordinance. F. The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. Section 7. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to Reso. 2017-04 5 5 Pine Tree Lane exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone, strict application of the Code would deny the property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant seeks a variance from the requirement 17.16.210(7)(h)(i) that requires grading for a tennis court not exceed 750 cubic yards of total cut and fill or 10,000 square feet of surface area cut and fill, and from 17.16.070(B) that the disturbance be limited to 40% of the net lot area. The tennis court is a standard 7,000 size but there is no existing pad for it and it requires a variance. The disturbance is proposed at 46.12%, which is higher than the permitted 40%. With respect to this request for Variances, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the existing lot, despite it being just under 5 acres gross, has approximately half of its overall area at a slope of 2:1 or steeper and the remainder undulated and hilly and the lot requires grading in order to create a sufficient flat area to construct the house and accessory structures. The existing building pad could only support a residential addition by removing the existing pool. The tennis court pad needed to be created and access to the residential unit provided by the second driveway helps to screen the tennis court as it is partially sunken into the hillside: There is a drainage course along the western property line, which must also be avoided. In order to generate the dirt needed for the pad, it was necessary to drop the stable and corral pad. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, which would be denied to the property in question absent a variance, because the site is sloped in nature so in order to provide pads that meet the development standards, additional grading is required and it was necessary to push the limits of grading farther out than if the lot did not have as much slope to it. The overage is not significant and the property owner should not be denied the privilege of a new house addition and amenities because the topographic nature of the lot makes it infeasible to comply strictly with Sections 17.16.070.B and 17.16.210.A.7. The exceedance of the disturbance is due in large part to the need for residential pad creation and the resulting grading for the stable and corral. There were no concerns voiced by residents and the Planning Commissioners during the public hearing considered alternatives during the field visit to the site but believed the proposed plan was caused the least impact to the area after further consideration of project alternatives. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. A minor increase in the overall percentage of disturbed area on the lot will have no effect on the public welfare or on property or improvements in the vicinity and the walls which exceed 2.5' average in height are not in any setbacks Reso. 2017-04 6 5 Pine Tree Lane and will not cause any line of sight issues on Pine Tree Lane due to the rows of existing trees currently in the vicinity. D. The variance does not grant special privileges to the applicant. To the contrary, absent a variance, the property owner would be deprived of the same rights and privileges afforded to other property owners in the vicinity. Unique circumstances applicable to the subject property make it infeasible for the property owner to comply with Section 17.16.070. The minor overage requested will allow the property owner to enjoy the same rights and privileges afforded to many other properties in the vicinity and zone. E. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. F. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and will uphold the City's goals to protect and promote construction that is rural in nature. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits and Variances in Zoning Case No. 917, a request for the construction of a new 2,065 square foot residential addition (resulting in a 6,405 square foot residence), with a 2,065 square foot basement, a new 1,100 square foot detached garage (separate existing 405 square foot detached garage to remain), 1,380 square feet covered porches including 640 square feet at the stable, 700 square foot swimming pool and spa, 60 square foot pool equipment, 96 square foot service yard, 325 square foot porte cochere/entryway, retaining walls 3' high and under, new stairs, trellis and patio, and grading for a total of 31,920 cubic yards of dirt (8,460 c.y. cut and 7,610 c.y. fill; 7,500 c.y. over -excavation and 8,350 c.y. re -compaction). The applicant also requests a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 7,000 square foot tennis court, a new second driveway, and 1,200 square foot stable with 9,150 square foot corral; and Variances to exceed the maximum permitted grading of 750 cubic yards of dirt and over 10,000 square feet surface area for the tennis court, and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot to 46.12% (max. 40%), subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan, Variances and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.080, 17.42.070, and 17.38.070 unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections. B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon. receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Reso. 2017-04 5 Pine Tree Lane 7 90 Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee's determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted; the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant's request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in this permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file received on March 20, 2017 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the building department. The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto building plans submitted to the Building Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times. Any modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed and approved by staff prior to implementing the changes. E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to Building and Safety Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform Reso. 2017-04 5 Pine Tree Lane in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 18,671 square feet (with deductions) or 10.0% of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (20% maximum). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork, shall not exceed 32,386 (with deductions) or 17.30%, of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% max). H. Grading for this project shall not exceed 8,460 cubic yards of cut and 7,610 cubic yards of fill; 7,500 cubic yards of over -excavation, and 8,350 cubic yards of recompaction and shall be balanced on site. The disturbed area of the lot, including the approved stable and corral shall not exceed 46.12%. I. The residential building pad is proposed at 21,800 square feet and shall not exceed coverage of 9,191 square feet or 42.16% with allowed deductions. The tennis court pad is proposed at 7,315 square feet and shall not exceed 7,000 square feet of coverage or 95.7% with allowed deductions. The stable pad is proposed at 10,925 square feet and shall not exceed 1,720 square feet of coverage or 15.74% with allowed deductions. J. A new second driveway shall be provided per the Fire Department requirements, with spaces for guest parking. The apron of the second driveway was recommended for approval by the Traffic Commission. K. A new proposed 10 foot wide decomposed granite, or like 100% pervious roughened material, pathway providing stable access shall be configured with an apron on Pine Tree Lane that is recommended for approval by the City's traffic engineer prior to any permit approval. L. A minimum of five-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of all of the proposed structures, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department. M. At any time there are horses on the property, Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be applied for manure control, including but not be limited to removal of the manure on a daily basis or provision of a receptacle with a tight closing lid that is constructed of brick, stone, concrete, metal or wood lined with metal or other sound material and that is safeguarded against access by flies. The contents of said receptacles shall be removed once a week. It is prohibited to dispose of manure or any Reso. 2017-04 9 5 Pine Tree Lane animal waste into the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), into natural drainage course or spread on the property. N. The pool equipment area shall be enclosed and screened with landscaping and shall utilize the most quiet and technologically advanced equipment to dampen the sound. Per LA County Building Code, pool barrier/fencing shall be required. O. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lighting Ordinance of the City of Rolling Hills (RHMC 17.16.190 E), pertaining to lighting on said property, roofing and material requirements of properties in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. P. All utility lines to the residence, guesthouse, detached garages, and stable shall be placed underground, subject to all applicable standards and requirements. Q. Drainage dissipaters shall be constructed outside of any easements, unless approved by the RHCA. The drainage system shall be approved by the Department of Building and Safety. If an above ground swale and/or dissipater is required, it shall be designed in such a manner as not to cross over any equestrian trails or discharge water onto a trail, shall be stained in an earth tone color, and shall be screened from any trail, road and neighbors' view to the maximum extent practicable, without impairing the function of the drainage system. R. All graded slopes shall be landscaped. A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements and graded slopes. A detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted and shall provide that any trees and shrubs used in the landscaping scheme for this project shall be planted in a way that screens the project development from adjacent streets and neighbors, such that shrubs and trees as they mature do not grow into a hedge or impede any neighbors views and the plan shall provide that all landscaping be maintained at a height no higher than the roof line of the nearest project structure. In addition, the landscaping plan shall provide for screening of the proposed tennis court with vegetation not to exceed 10 feet in height or the height of the tennis court fence, if installed, whichever is less, and that the vegetation used for screening shall be planted in an off -set manner, so as to prevent it, as it grows from forming a solid hedge. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area, are water -wise and are consistent with the rural character of the community. S. The applicant shall submit a landscaping performance bond or other financial obligation, to be kept on deposit by the City, in the amount of the planting plus irrigation plus 15%. The bond shall be released no sooner than two years after completion of all plantings, subject to a City staff determination that the plantings required for the project are in substantial conformance with approved plans and are in good condition. Reso. . 2017-04 10 5 Pine Tree Lane The landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, (Chapter 13.18 of the RHMC). Pursuant to Chapter 8.30 of the RHMC the property shall at all times be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation. T. The setback lines and roadway easement lines in the vicinity of the construction for this project shall remain staked throughout the construction. A construction fence may be required. U. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences - including construction fences, any hardscape; driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. V. Minimum of 65% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City's Construction and Demolition permits for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City. W. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be required. X. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices. During construction, an Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 2016 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution. Y. During construction, to the extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the project site, on the new driveway and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within the unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. To the extent feasible, a minimum of 4' wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment at all times. Reso. 2017-04 11 5 Pine Tree Lane Z. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. AA. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIRE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. AB. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water drainage facilities management and to the City's Low Impact development Ordinance (LID). Further the property owners shall be required to conform to the County Health Department requirements for a septic system. AC. Prior to finaling of the project an "as graded" and an "as constructed" plans and certifications, including certifications of ridgelines of the structures, shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the "as built/ as graded" plan. AD. All conditions of this Resolution, when applicable, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit from the Building and Safety Department. AE. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be_effective. The affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. Reso. 2017-04 12 5 Pine Tree Lane PASSED, APPROVED D ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF APRIL 2017. D CHELF, C R ,AN Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. Reso. 2017-04 13 5 Pine Tree Lane STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2017-04 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCl'ION OF A NEW RESIDENCE ADDITION WITH A BASEMENT, DETACHED GARAGE, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, PATIO TRELLIS, TENNIS COURT, NEW SECOND DRIVEWAY, STABLE AND CORRAL; TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED GRADING AND GRADED AREA FOR THE TENNIS COURT AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERM [TED ED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 917 AT 5 PINE TREE LANE, (LOT 94-RH), (SHARNG). was approved and adopted at regular meeting of the Planning Commission on April 18, 2017 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Cardenas, Cooley, Kirkpatrick, Seaburn and Chairman Chelf. NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2017-04 14 5 Pine Tree Lane Ralle# qr. eia INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 5-C Mtg. Date: 05/08/17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR JULIA STEWART, ASSISTANT PLANNER AS THRU: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER ;V SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2017-05. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DRESSAGE ARENA, STABLE, RESIDENCE AND GARAGE ADDITION, VARIOUS RETAINING WALLS, SWIMMING POOL AND RELATED PATIOS, DECKS; TO LOCATE A PORTION OF THE EQUESTRIAN FACILITIES IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF THE LOT, TO RETAIN, BUT REDUCE IN SIZE AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE, TO LOCATE A NOT TO EXCEED 5' HIGH RETAINING WALL IN THE SIDE SETBACK AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 896- MODIFICATION (M) AT 11 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (WARREN).. APPLICANT: CANDICE WARREN REPRESENTATIVE: GARY WYNN, WYNN ENGINEERING INC. DATE PUBLISHED: FEBRUARY 9, 2017 REQUEST AND PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road 0 Request The applicant is proposing a Site Plan Review for a major modification resulting in changes to the grading plan, totaling 8,026 cubic yards of cut and fill (plus excavation and recompaction to be balanced), for a 13,930 square foot dressage arena, the remodel of an existing 3,069 square foot residence and a 1,736 square foot addition resulting in a 4,805 square foot residence and 1,439 square feet of total garage space as follows: 468 sq.ft. of new attached garage and 971 sq.ft. of the existing detached garage will remain. The portion of the detached garage that is located in the front setback will be demolished. Also proposed is 186 square feet of covered residential porches, a new 1,056 square foot basement, a new 425 square foot infinity pool with a terraced set of walls of 3 feet each, 98 square foot service yard and a pool deck. A Conditional Use Permit is requested for the construction of a new 2,430 square foot one-story stable including a 482 square foot tack room, 418 square foot feed room and a 180 square foot covered wash area with 1,350 square feet of fenced open turnout paddocks. No covered porches are included on the stable. Three Variances are requested: 1) a retaining wall on the southerly side of the dressage arena is proposed to be located in the side setback. The wall is 5' at its highest point tapering off to 21h foot wall; 2) the stable and dressage arena are proposed to be partially located in the front yard area of the lot (in front of the leading edge of the residential structure); and, 3) the modified project will result in 43% disturbance of the net lot. The maximum disturbance allowed is 40%. Therefore, a variance is required. The lot is irregularly shaped with road easement on three sides of the property. This increases the overall square footage of setbacks and decreases the net lot area of the subject property. A reduced net lot area increases the disturbance ratios and lot coverages. Planning Commission Review The project was initially presented to the Planning Commission at its regular meeting held on February 21, 2017. A field trip was conducted for the project on March 21, 2017 with additional review and discussion at the evening Planning Commission meeting held on that same date. After review and discussion of revisions to the project, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Resolution of approval. The resolution for the project was approved at the April 18, 2017 regular Planning Commission meeting after the Commissioners closed the public hearing and found the project acceptable based on the Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variance zoning code criteria. No concerns from any residents or neighbors were ever submitted to the Planning Commission. BACKGROUND Zoning, Land Size and Existing Conditions The property is zoned RAS-1 and the lot area (after the lot line adjustment) is 3.25 acres. For development purposes the net lot area of the lot is 98,358 square feet, 2.26 acres. The existing residence is 3,069 square feet with a 475 square foot attached garage and 1,163 square foot detached garage. Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road 0 Previously Approved Project On April 11, 2016, the City Council ratified Planning Commissions approval in Zoning Case No. 896. The previously approved project included a Lot Line Adjustment (LLA) to merge two lots, containing 1.8 acres and 1.4 acres gross, into one lot which would result in a lot having 3.2 acres gross and 2.258 acres net, as calculated by the City for development purposes. The lot line adjustment has been recorded. In conjunction with the lot merger, the applicant received approval, per Resolution No. 2016-08, of a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 13,860 square foot dressage arena, to convert the existing garage, partially located in the front setback to a 2,415 square foot stable and add a 625 square foot loft and 1,685 square foot corral; Site Plan Review for a 4,745 square foot residence plus 659 square foot garage, and other accessory structures, a not to exceed 5' wall that would encircle the majority of the dressage arena, 950 square -foot swimming pool, 23,700 cubic yards total grading - 10,620 cubic yards of project grading plus 13,000 c.y. of overexcavation and recompaction; and Variances to locate the equestrian facilities in the front yard area of the lot and for 75% of lot disturbance. Major Modifications Summary The Major Modification to the previously approved project will result in a new location of the stable -closer to the arena, no loft in the stable, less overall disturbance to the lot and very little grading of the lot where the structures are located, and will result in fewer linear feet of retaining walls, as the dressage arena was proposed to be sunk and was bordered by an up to 5' retaining wall on 3 sides, and a 4' retaining wall was proposed along the pathway leading from the stable around the pool to the arena. The project will increase the overall amount of square footage of the residence and total garage space. Demolition The applicant proposes to demolish elements of the existing home and a portion of the existing detached garage. The areas of demolition on the residence are located adjacent to equestrian uses to allow for the minimum of 35' distance between residential and equestrian uses on the property. The total linear feet of the exterior walls of the residence, once it is completed, is 478 linear feet. The total linear feet of the existing house to be demolished is 216 linear feet, which is less than 50%. This prevents the remodel from being considered new construction. The portion of the existing detached garage being demolished is currently located in the front yard setback. The demolition will eliminate the existing nonconforming condition of a portion of the garage being located in the setback. Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road 0 MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE Grading and Stabilization The total combined grading for this project will consist of 8,026 cubic yards of cut and fill (plus overexcavation and recompaction to be balanced). No dirt will be exported. The dressage arena requires the greatest amount of grading with 3,855 c.y. of cut and 3,176 c.y. of fill. The total combined grading for the previously approved project was 23,700 cubic yards. So, the proposed modification significantly reduces the overall proposed amount of grading to approximately 14,060 cubic yards. Almost all of the grading is proposed for the arena, and other than excavation for the pool and basement and very little fill (161 c.y.) around the basement area and no grading is proposed on the portion of the lot where the house, pool and detached garage are proposed. Disturbance The total disturbed area proposed under the modification is 43%. This is over the maximum allowed disturbance of 40%. However, the previously approved plan had an overall disturbance of 75%. So, the modification significantly reduces disturbance on the lot. Additionally, the existing disturbed area prior to any changes on the property is 36%. Height The finished roof ridgeline of the proposed modified residence will be approximately 16 1/2 feet. The plate roof height of the proposed stable is yet to be considered by the RHCA. The basement will be 10'in depth. Improved Basement The basement is proposed to be used as a recreation room. There is one proposed exterior exit to stairs located in a light well. This exit has been reviewed by the RHCA. Driveway Surface and Stable Access The applicants propose to utilize the existing driveway for access to the garages and to the stable. The driveway and parking area will have an impervious surface, except that a six foot wide path on the driveway will be pervious and roughened to provide access to the stable. Decomposed granite will be used directly adjacent to the stable paddocks. Drainage The applicant states, "Rain gutters and downspouts will collect the roof water from the structures which will be connected to a centralized site drainage system. The site drainage system will be a series of sub surface pipes that will be connected to a series of surface drains and Low Impact Development collection features (Planters, rain gardens etc.) All stormwater will be collected and conducted to [an outlet]." Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road Lot Coverage The net lot coverage is 98,358 square feet. The modified structural net lot coverage is proposed at 10,253 square feet or 10% (20% max. permitted). The modified total lot coverage proposed (structural and flatwork) will be 19,334 square feet or 19.7% (35% max. permitted). The modified residential building pad is proposed at 11,250 square feet. The building pad coverage on the main residence pad is proposed at 6,959 square feet or 61.6% of the pad, which includes the residence, garages, swimming pool & spa, and service yard structures. The Stable pad is proposed at 36,512 square feet. The building pad coverage on the Stable pad is proposed at 2,430 square feet or 6%, which includes the stable and covered wash area. Walls A series of walls are proposed for this project. A 5 foot retaining wall near the dressage arena is proposed to be located within the side setback on the southwesterly side of the property. Two three foot walls are proposed for the edge of the infinity pool on the northeasterly side of the property. The 5 foot wall in the setback requires a variance. Pedestrian Access There will be a minimum of a 5 foot wide walkway around all structures to comply with Fire Department requirements. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TABLES Stable Requirements A Conditional Use Permit is required for the stable. The proposed stable will be one-story with a tack room and wash area. The following requirements must be met for a stable: Pursuant to the zoning code requirements of section 17.18.060 the following is applicable to this request: REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED Not less than 6' wide roughened access Project will comply with City's requirement Stable, corral not to be located on slopes greater than 4:1 Located on area with a relatively flat pad Not in front yard or side or front setback. May be located up to 25' in rear setback. A portion of stable and arena will be in the front yard area. A variance is needed. Min. 35' from any residential structure Approx. 36' to residential structure -on subject property Building to be designed for rural and agricultura: uses only, but may include storage of vehicles and household items Building is proposed to look like a stable and be used for a stable Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road Size to include the entire footprint including loft, if any Stable complies Minimum of 60% shall be maintained for agricultural uses Agricultural spaces include 6 stalls, 418 sq.ft. feed room measuring a total of 1,768 sq.ft. or 72.8% Maximum of 40% not to exceed 800 sq.ft. may be maintained for a tack room Tack room will be 482 square feet or 19.8%, which is less than 40% Tack room may have sanitary and kitchenette amenities Proposed bathroom Tack room may have glazed openings Windows in tack room are proposed Entry doors to agricultural space to be min. 4'wide & 7.5' high; appearance of a stable door Project will comply with City's requirement. Loft is permitted No loft proposed Loft plate height may not exceed 7' No loft proposed Exterior area of stables may not to be paved Compliance is a condition of approval Corral shall be fenced Proposed fenced arena and paddocks Access not to exceed 25% Access will not exceed 25% max. grade Corral to be contiguous to stable. Planning Commission may determine the size of a coral based on the size of the stable Fenced paddocks contiguous to stable. Commercial uses or sleeping is not allowed No commercial uses or sleeping in the stable are proposed Utility Lines It will be a requirement that all utility lines to the residence, stable and detached garage be placed underground. Applicant Justification for Project In regard to some of the proposed modifications, the applicant states, "The dressage ring is in the same location as the previously approved location in 2016, except the majority of the retaining walls have been designed out of raising the ring approximately 4.5 feet. A new barn structure with six stalls and paddocks, a [482] square foot tack room and a wash area [are included in the proposal.] By relocating the barn next to the dressage ring grading for [the] unnecessary circulation trail has been eliminated. A portion of the existing residence is being demolished to achieve a 35 foot separation between the habitable space and equestrian amenities." The Rolling Hills Community Association The Rolling Hills Community Association will review this overall project at a later date. A previous design for the basement was reviewed and altered as a result of RHCA input. City Council Responsibilities When reviewing a resolution for a development application, the City Council must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances (as attached below). Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road Environmental Review The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Development Comparables ZC NO. 896-M NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information onl Address House size in sq.ft. (built/add or remodel) Lot Size (excl. road) 6 Eucalyptus 5,026 (1989) 43,000 6 Saddleback 4,620 (1961/2015) 116,000 10 Saddleback 3,789 (1973) 43,995 12 Saddleback 6,310 (1961/2009) 39,200 16 Saddleback 2,569 (1951) 100,190 22 Saddleback 4,100 (1964/2015) 144,183 26 Saddleback 4,716 (1964) 196,890 11 Saddleback Existing 3,023 Proposed 4,805 Previously approved 4,745 111,170 (incl. restricted area) NOTE: The above do not include garages, basements and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road Project Summary SITE PLAN REVIEW EXISTING APPROVED 2016 PROPOSED 2017 NET LOT AREA 98,358 sq.ft. 98,358 sq.ft. 98,358 sq.ft. RESIDENCE 3,069 sq.ft. 4,745 sq.ft. 4,805 sq.ft. GARAGE ATTACHED 475 sq.ft. 659 sq.ft. 468 sq.ft. GARAGE DETACHED 1,163 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 971 sq.ft. SWIMMING POOL 0 sq.ft. 550 sq.ft. 425 sq.ft. STABLE 0 sq.ft. 2,415 sq.ft. 2,430 sq.ft. SERVICE YARD 98 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 98 sq.ft. PORCH/ STABLE 0 sq.ft. 135 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. PORCH/HOUSE 0 sq.ft. 370 sq.ft. 186 sq.ft. TRELLISES (2) 0 sq.ft. 420 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. BBQJFP/KITCHEN 0 sq.ft. 78 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. BASEMENT 0 sq.ft. 342 sq.ft. 1,056 sq.ft. TOTAL STRUCTURES 9,692 sq.ft. 9,810 sq.ft. 10,253 sq.ft. STRUCTURAL COVERAGE % 4.9 % of net lot 9.9% of net lot 10% of net lot (without deductions) RES. BLDG. PAD COVERAGE 13.5% 34.2% 61.6% GRADING N/A Total of 17,650 c.y. = 4,650 c.y. CUT / 4,650 c.y. FILL plus 13,000 c.y. of over excavation & recompaction Total of 8,026 c.y. = 4,013 c.y. CUT / 4,013 c.y. of FILL nues over an compactionexcavtotiobe balanced) (per soils recommendations) DISTURBED AREA TOTAL Approx. 36,000 sq.ft. 73,805 sq.ft. 42,262 sq.ft. DISTURBED AREA TOTAL % 36% of net lot 75% of net lot 43% of net lot NOTE: The comparison matrix and Project Summary presented above was provided primarily by the proposed project applicant. Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 11.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 11.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature frees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road 0 CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 11.42.050 Basis for approval or denial of conditional use permit. The Commission (and Council on appeal), in acting to approve a conditional use permit application, may impose conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure the project is consistent with the General Plan, compatible with surrounding land use, and meets the provisions and intent of this title. In making such a determination, the hearing body shall find that the proposed use is in general accord with the following principles and standards: A. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan; B. That the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, building or structures; C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the use and buildings proposed; D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district; E. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; F. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. SOURCE: City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance Z.C. No. 896-M 11 Saddleback Road RESOLUTION NO. 2017-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DRESSAGE ARENA, STABLE, RESIDENCE AND GARAGE ADDITION, VARIOUS RETAINING WALLS, SWIMMING POOL AND RELATED PATIOS, DECKS; TO LOCATE A PORTION OF THE EQUESTRIAN FACILITIES IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF THE LOT, TO RETAIN, BUT REDUCE IN SIZE AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE, TO LOCATE A NOT TO EXCEED 5' HIGH RETAINING WALL IN THE SIDE SETBACK AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 896- MODIFICATION (M) AT 11 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (WARREN). THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Ms. Candice Warren, to request a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits and Variances to construct a 4,805 square foot residence (1,736 s.f. new addition and remodel of 3,069 s.f. existing residence), 1,056 square foot basement, 468 square foot attached garage, reduce in size but retain a 971 square foot detached garage, 425 square foot swimming pool, 2,430 square foot new stable with a portion located in the front yard area of the lot (in front of the leading edge of the residence), 1,350 fenced open turnout paddocks, and 13,930 square foot dressage arena, a portion of which would be located in the front yard area of the lot, with not to exceed 5' high retaining wall (at its highest) along the southerly portion of the arena in the side setback. Grading for this project is proposed to be 8,026 cubic yards of dirt total to be balanced on site, which includes 4,013 c.y. cut and 4,013 fill. With the proposed grading, the disturbed area of the lot would be 43%. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at their regular meeting on February 21, 2017, and March 21, 2017, and in the field on March 21, 2017. Neighbors within 1,000 -foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Peninsula News on February 9, 2017, and March 9, 2017. The applicant's and their agents were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail and email and the applicant's agents were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal, and from members of the City staff. No neighbors testified against the modified project. Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-1 and with the lot merger will contain 2.25 acres net for development purposes (98,358 square feet). The previously approved lot line adjustment has been recorded. Reso. 2017-05 1 11 Saddleback Rd. The parcel is located on a curve along Saddleback Road with three sides of the parcel adjacent to the road. Although the gross lot area of the lot is over 3.2 acres; the long roadway easement plus the deductions for development purposes reduces the lot to 2.25 acres net. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 (new construction of single family residence and accessory structures), and section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption) of the CEQA guidelines. Section 5. Section 17.18.040E of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a stable over 200 square feet and riding arena with a Conditional Use Permit provided the uses are not located in the front yard or in any setbacks. Portions of both, the stable and dressage arena are proposed to be located in the front yard area of the lot. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. Conditionally permitted uses are not outright permitted by the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. The Commission must consider applications for conditional use permits and may, with such conditions as are deemed necessary, approve a conditional use which will not jeopardize, adversely affect, endanger or to otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare or be materially detrimental to the property of other persons located in the vicinity of such use. B. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the new stable and for the dressage arena would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the uses are consistent with similar uses in the community, and except for their location, meet all the applicable code development standards for a stable and arena, and they are located in an area on the property that is adequately sized to accommodate such uses. The proposed uses are appropriately located in that they will be sufficiently separated from nearby structures used for habitation or containing sleeping quarters. The development would be constructed in furtherance of the General Plan goal of promoting and encouraging equestrian uses. The existing, legally constructed detached garage will be reduced in size and a portion removed from the front yard setback. C. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed stable orientation is not towards neighbors and its general location is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so as to not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. The proposed stable is to be located next to the arena and is separate from the other outdoor living areas on the property. The dressage arena would be located in an area of the lot that is not in proximity to any residents. The existing detached garage remains in its previous approved location. Reso. 2017-05 2 11 Saddleback Rd. D. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the garage, stable and dressage arena comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and will not give the property an over -built look. The lot is 2.25 acres net in size and is sufficiently large to accommodate the proposed uses. E. The proposed equestrian conditional uses, other than being proposed in the front yard area, comply with all applicable development standards of the zone district and require a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Sections 17.18.090 and 17.18.100 of the Zoning Ordinance. F. The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. Section 6. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit or any new building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by not more than 999 square feet in any thirty-six (36) month period. The grading for the ancillary outdoor structures (swimming pool, decking, and patio) require Site Plan Review, but the actual structures themselves do not. With respect to the Site Plan grading and the proposed structures the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures and maintaining sufficient setbacks to provide buffers between residential uses. Although the disturbed area exceeds the maximum permitted amount of 40%, a large portion of it is for the proposed 13,930 square foot dressage arena (which requires a Conditional Use Permit). The dressage arena promotes the rural, equestrian aesthetic of Rolling Hills. The existing paved driveway leading to the stable will have a portion for a horse pathway replaced with decomposed granite, which also promotes a feeling of open space. One retaining wall is proposed to be located in a side setback, which requires a variance. The project conforms with Zoning Code lot coverage requirements, except for disturbance. The net lot area of the lot is 98,358 square feet. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 10%, which includes all of the structures (no deductions were taken), (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed, including the stable Reso. 2017-05 11 Saddleback Rd. 3 would be 19.7%, (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area of the lot is proposed to increase from 36% to 43% due in large part to the dressage arena. B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. The topography and the configuration of the lot, have been considered, and it was determined that the proposed development will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures, because the proposed project will be constructed largely on an existing building pad of the currently developed lot, will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs, is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. The lot is 2.25 acres net in size and will feature a dressage arena and stable. The proposed 4,805 square foot home is only 1,736 square feet larger than the existing home that will be largely retained and remodeled as part of this project. A portion of the existing garage will be demolished with the rest of the structure retained. The dressage arena will be developed on the currently vacant portion of the lot and will remain open space. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, and is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to new residences in the vicinity of said lot, located on much smaller lots. Portions of the lot will be left undeveloped. The project will be screened from the road and all neighbors. The residences on neighboring properties average to 4,447 square feet. The proposed residence is 4,805 that bring it in -line with homes nearby. D. The development will introduce additional landscaping for vegetated slopes, which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and will provide a transition area between private and public areas. E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the applicants will continue to utilize the existing driveway to the residence and the stable, and the dressage arena will be accessed from the main driveway for heavier vehicles ingress/ egress. F. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section 15303 (new construction of single family residence and accessory structures), and section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption) of the CEQA guidelines. Section 7. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone, strict application of the Code Reso. 2017-05 4 11 Saddleback Rd. would deny the property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant seeks a variance from the requirement 17.18.060A.2. and 17.18.100.3 that stables and riding rings not be located in the front yard; from 17.16.150(G) that only allows walls 3 feet or less in setbacks, and from 17.16.070B. that disturbance be limited to 40% of the net lot area. With respect to this request for Variances, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because Saddleback Road wraps around the property and constrains the lot with a large roadway easement. The topography of the lot, specifically the steep slopes on the western portion of the lot further confine where development can be located. The existing garage is located in the front yard and the applicant proposes to retain the existing structure after demolition of a small portion of it. At 36%, the disturbance is already close to the 40% maximum and is proposed to increase to 42% to accommodate the proposed dressage arena. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because Saddleback Road wraps around the property and the large roadway easement substantially reduces the net lot area for development. The residential building pad and the existing garage pad are largely developed already, and there are no other options for locating structures on new pads due to the steepness of the surrounding slopes. The existing garage is not easily seen from the road. There were no concerns voiced by neighbors about where the existing garage is located nor where the stable and arena will be located. The exceedance of the disturbance is due in large part to the proposed dressage arena. The other structures (pool, remodeled residence, and stable) on the residence building pad are located fairly close to one another and make best use of the shape of the lot as it is constrained by Saddleback Road. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed stable and arena is not in any setbacks. The stable will be compatible with desired rural aesthetic of Rolling Hills and therefore would not affect property values. The dressage arena will remain as open space. D. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. E. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, Reso. 2017-05 5 11 Saddleback Rd. general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and will uphold the City's goals to protect and promote construction that is rural in nature. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Zoning Case No. 896-M a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits and Variances to construct a 4,805 square foot residence with 1,056 square foot basement and 468 square foot attached garage, reduce in size but retain existing detached garage (971 s.f.), 13,930 square foot dressage arena, a 425 square foot swimming pool and various outdoor amenities, hardscape, walls and to locate a portion of the arena and stable in the front yard area of the lot (in front of the leading edge of the residence). Grading for this project is proposed to be 8,026 cubic yards of cut and fill total to be balanced on site with a total disturbance of 42,262 square feet of land. With the proposed grading, the disturbed area of the lot would be 43% subject to the following conditions: A. The Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan and Variance approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.080, 17.42.070 and 17.38.070, unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section. B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee's determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted, the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant's request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be Reso. 2017-05 6 11 Saddleback Rd. complied with unless otherwise set forth in this permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated March 3, 2017, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review, and Variance approvals shall be incorporated into the building permit working . drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the building department. The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto building plans submitted to the Building Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times. E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to the Building and Safety Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 8,970 square feet or 9.1 % of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (20% maximum). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork shall not exceed 19,397 square feet or 19.7%, of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% max). H. Grading for this project shall consist of 8,026 cubic yards with 4,013 cubic yards of cut and 4,013 cubic yards of fill plus disturbance for creation of the dressage arena and stable. The disturbed area of the lot, including the approved stable and corral shall not exceed 43%. I. The residential building pad shall be 48,971 square feet and will have coverage of 9,456 square feet (including deductions) or 21.46%, which includes the stable. Reso. 2017-05 7 p0) 11 Saddleback Rd. J. The dressage arena may not have lights anywhere within it or around it. Should a mirror be installed in the future at the Arena, and if reflection of the sun off the mirror causes glare on adjoining properties, it shall be the responsibility of the property owner or installer to mitigate this problem in a timely manner. K. The applicant shall provide documented proof that the Southern California Edison Easement has been vacated by SO Cal Edison, or the applicant has permission from them to locate the dressage arena in the easement. L. The applicant shall provide verification from Los Angeles County Land Development Division that the dressage arena can be located in the restricted use area. M. The dissipaters and pool equipment area shall be screened with landscaping. Sound attenuating equipment shall be installed to dampen the sound from the pool equipment area and the pool pump. The project shall utilize the most quiet and technologically advanced equipment to dampen the sound. Per LA County Building Code, pool barrier/fencing shall be required N. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lighting Ordinance of the City of Rolling Hills (RHMC 17.16.190 E), pertaining to lighting on said property, roofing and material requirements of properties in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. O. All utility lines to the residence, detached garage and stable shall be placed underground, subject to all applicable standards and requirements. P. A drainage plan, as required by the Building Department shall be prepared and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of a construction permit. Such plan shall be subject to LA County Code requirements. Hydrology, soils, geology and other reports, as required by the Building and Public Works Departments, and as may be required by the Building Official, shall be prepared. Q. All graded slopes shall be landscaped. A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements and graded slopes. Prior to finalizing the project, trees and shrubs shall be planted to screen the project from the neighbors. The landscaping shall not form a hedge like screen but be offset. The height of the trees and shrubs shall not at any time exceed the ridgeline of the roof of the structures. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. If landscaping of 5,000 square foot area or greater is introduced or redeveloped, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Reso. 2017-05 8 11 Saddleback Rd. Pursuant to Chapter 8.30 of the RHMC the property shall at all times be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation. R. The existing portion of the concrete driveway leading directly to the proposed stable shall be removed and direct access to the stable and to the arena shall be decomposed granite or like 100% pervious roughened material. A revised driveway plan shall be submitted to City in compliance with this requirement. S. The setback lines and roadway easement line in the vicinity of the construction for this project shall remain staked throughout the construction. A construction fence may be required. T. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences - including construction fences, any hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. U. Minimum of 65% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City's Construction and Demolition permit for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City. V. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. W. A minimum of five-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of all of the proposed structures, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department. X. At any time there are horses on the property, Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be applied for manure control, including but not be limited to removal of the manure on a daily basis or provision of a receptacle with a tight closing lid that is constructed of brick, stone, concrete, metal or wood lined with metal or other sound material and that is safeguarded against access by flies. The contents of said receptacles shall be removed once a week. It is prohibited to dispose of manure or any animal waste into the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), into natural drainage course or spread on the property. Y. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: Reso. 2017-05 9 11 Saddleback Rd. http//www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIR E. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. Z. During construction, to the extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the project site, on the new driveway and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within the unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. To the extent feasible, a minimum of 4' wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment at all times. A flagmen shall be used to direct traffic when necessary. AA. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water drainage facilities management and to the City's Low Impact development Ordinance (LID). Further the property owners shall be required to conform to the County Health Department requirements for a septic system. AB. Prior to finaling of the project an "as graded" and an "as constructed" plans and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the "as built/ as graded" plan. AC. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. The affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. AD. The entire project and the basement access shall be approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association and shall not appear as a second story from any roadway easement vantage point. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18TH DAY OF APRIL 2017. CHELF, CHAIRMA Reso. 2017-05 11 Saddleback Rd. ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. Reso. 2017-05 11 (� 11 Saddleback Rd. 0' STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2017-05 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DRESSAGE ARENA, STABLE, RESIDENCE AND GARAGE ADDITION, VARIOUS RETAINING WALLS, SWIMMING POOL AND RELATED PATIOS, DECKS; TO LOCATE A PORTION OF THE EQUESTRIAN FACILITIES IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF THE LOT, TO RETAIN, BUT REDUCE IN SIZE AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE, TO LOCATE A NOT TO EXCEED 5' HIGH RETAINING WALL IN THE SIDE SETBACK AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 896- MODIFICATION (M) AT 11 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (WARREN). was approved and adopted at regular meeting of the Planning Commission on April 18, 2017 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Cardenas, Cooley, Kirkpatrick, Seaburn and Chairman Chelf. NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices AriO HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2017-05 12 11 Saddleback Rd. 810 al Railie, gad INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 5-D Mtg. Date: 05-08-17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR tea/ JULIA STEWART, ASSISTANT PLANNER S THRU: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER (it" SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2017-06. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE FOR A 1,000 SQUARE FOOT POOL/SPA, POOL EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE, AND TO LOCATE THE STRUCTURES IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 919 AT 7 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, (LOT 249-A-UR), (MCCARTHY/ CHENG). APPLICANT: KIM MCCARTHY AND BENJAMIN CHENG REPRESENTATIVE: LEONARDO UMANSKY, VIEW SITE DEVELOPMENT PUBLISHED: MARCH 9, 2017 REQUEST AND PLANNING COMMISSION AC'I ION Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. Request The applicant is requesting a Site Plan Review for construction of a 1,000 square foot swimming pool and spa, in place of an existing 855 square foot pool and spa. The longer dimensions and larger size of the new proposed pool will allow for lap swimming. The pool equipment area will be 60 square feet fully enclosed by a 5 foot wall with the opening toward the interior of the property. The applicant is also requesting Variances to allow portions of the newly constructed pool and pool equipment area in the front yard area. Z.C. No. 919 7 Middleridge Lane South Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission first viewed the project in the field, opened the hearing to enable brief public testimony and continued the meeting to the evening meeting of the Planning Commission on March 21, 2017. Due to concerns regarding the placement and orientation of the pool equipment area, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a resolution including conditions to address these points. At its regular evening meeting held on April 18, 2017, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing, found the project acceptable based on the Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variance zoning code criteria, and approved the resolution for the project. BACKGROUND Zoning, Land Size and Existing Conditions The property is zoned RAS-2 and the lot area excluding the roadway easement is 3.48 acres. For development purposes the net lot area of the lot is 148,104 square feet. The residence is a 4,095 square foot house with a 489 square foot garage. This square footage includes the previously approved residential addition. The existing swimming pool and spa are 855 square feet. There is also an existing stable and corral. However, the existing stable is only 332 square feet and a set aside of 450 square foot stable and 550 square foot corral is required before a pool and spa can be approved. Thus, the applicant is including in the proposal a representation of a future stable and corral that will account for additional set aside to supplement the existing area in order to meet this requirement. Neighbor Concerns Two residents inquired about the project apart from the Planning Commission public hearings. Both residents were simply interested in what was being proposed and did not express any apprehension regarding project specifics. Past Approval for the Property In June of 2016, the applicant underwent administrative review of a residential addition of 972 square feet. The applicant secured permits for the residential addition from the Los Angeles County Building and Safety Department. The addition alters the leading edge of the residence reducing the size of the front yard area. However, the new proposed pool has dimensions that push a portion of the pool into the front yard area. The pool equipment area is also proposed in the front yard area. The zoning code prohibits construction in the front yard without a variance. Thus, construction of the newly proposed pool and pool equipment area enclosure requires a variance. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE Grading, Structural and Total Lot Coverage Construction activities will include pool excavation of 185 cubic yards overall. No dirt will be exported. Some of the existing pool depth will enable less overall excavation for the new pool due to partial overlap in location. The overall grading will be balanced Z.C. No. 919 7 Middleridge Lane South with the excavated dirt forming the slope that will come up to the patio area surrounding the pool. The total overall coverage of the net lot area will be 23,095 square feet or 15.6%, well under the 35% maximum allowed. The structural coverage of the net lot including all the structures and the future stable will be 6,632 square feet or 4.5%. The future stable set aside is proposed to total 450 square feet as an addition to the existing 332 square foot stable. The coverage and disturbance calculations include the future stable and corral. Disturbance The proposed project will result in 18% or 26,605 square feet of overall disturbed area. This is under the 40% maximum disturbance allowance. The disturbance calculation includes the stable and corral set aside. Stable Requirements The set asides for the stable and corral do not require a conditional use permit unless they are proposed to be constructed. Additional construction of stable and corral square footage are not proposed with this permit and therefore, are not part of the review included in this application. The applicant shows an area set aside for a future stable and corral but have only included the required set aside square footages for purposes of calculating coverages for this permit. Rolling Hills Community Association Review Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. City Council Responsibilities When reviewing a resolution for a development application, the City Council must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review and Variances (as attached below). Environmental Review The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Z.C. No. 919 7 Middleridge Lane South SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 11.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is. established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 11.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California 'Environmental Quality Act. Z.C. No. 919 7 Middleridge Lane South CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. SOURCE: City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance Z.C. No. 919 7 Middleridge Lane South 0 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2017-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE FOR A 1,000 SQUARE FOOT POOL/SPA, POOL EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE, AND TO LOCATE THE STRUCTURES IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 919 AT 7 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, (LOT 249-A-UR), (MCCARTHY/CHENG). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. Benjamin Cheng with respect to real property located at 7 Middleridge Lane South, (Lot 249-A-UR), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Site Plan Review for a 1,000 square foot pool and spa, and Variance to locate the pool, spa and pool equipment enclosure in the front yard area, (pursuant to City's Zoning Ordinance, no structures are permitted in front of the leading edge of the residence). The pool equipment enclosure will be fully enclosed with the opening facing the interior of the property. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application on March 21, 2017, and April 18, 2017 at regular Planning Commission meetings, and in the field also on March 21, 2017. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicants' representative was in attendance at the public hearings. One neighbor reviewed the plans after the March 21, 2017 meeting. The Planning Commission reviewed the previous proposed pool equipment area which was partially enclosed on 2 sides and faced the neighboring property. As a result of noise concerns, the Planning Commission added a special condition that the pool equipment area must be fully enclosed with the opening facing the interior of the property with walls no greater than 5 feet in height. Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-2 and the gross lot area is 3.48 acres (excluding the roadway easement). The net lot area is 3.4 acres or 148,104 square feet. The existing property is currently developed with a 4,095 square foot residence (including the approved addition) with a 489 square foot garage, and a 332 square foot stable. There is also an existing swimming pool on the property which will be partially filled in with the remaining portion of existing pool excavation being used for the new pool. The new proposed pool enables lap swimming. Section 4. The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. Reso. 2017-06 7 Middleridge Lane South 1c) Section 5. A Site Plan Review is required subject to Section 17.46.020 of the Zoning Ordinance, in that the proposed pool/spa is larger than 800 square feet (which could be approved administratively) and it includes pool equipment. With respect to the Site Plan Review application for the pool/spa, and pool equipment area enclosure, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact A. The proposed development is compliant with all requirements of the Zoning Ordinance except as approved herein a Variance, and is compatible with the General Plan and surrounding uses because the proposed project is consistent with goals and policies that require low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The pool/spa, and pool equipment area enclosure will be situated to ensure they are not obtrusive to neighbors, will be screened from view, and the pool equipment enclosure opening is located in an area that will not create additional noise toward neighboring properties. There is a poo and pool equipment area already in the general location of the proposed development, and the additional square footage of the new pool is minimal. To address City staff and Planning Commissioner's concerns, the applicant reduced the size of the pool equipment enclosure wall from six feet to five, fully enclosed the equipment, and oriented the opening toward the interior of the property. B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot because the required grading has been carefully considered, and the orientation and the location of the structures allows them to be incorporated into the natural slope on the lot. The construction will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed improvements will be constructed on a portion of the lot which is least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with vegetation and is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the proposed project will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. The proposed project is consistent with the scale of homes in the surrounding RAS-2 similarly zoned neighborhood. The proposed project entails construction of a pool/spa, and accessory structure for the purpose of enhancing and facilitating outdoor living on the site, a common residential amenity enjoyed by property owners throughout the City. D. The development plan generally follows natural contours of the site to the maximum extent practicable to accomplish groomed and usable areas of the lot, subject to concurrent approval of Variance pursuant to Section 6 of this resolution. E. Natural drainage courses will not be affected by the project. The project preserves and integrates into the site design existing topographic features by placing the new pool/spa on a previously constructed pad where little to no grading will be required. The Pool pad will be located on a previously disturbed area and the pool Reso. 2017-06 7 Middleridge Lane South equipment enclosure does not require grading. There is no remaining vegetation in the location of development due to previous grading and construction. F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because there is a minimum of a five foot walkable area surrounding all structures to comply with Fire Department requirements. Section 6. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance granting relief from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity or zone. In proposing to locate the pool, spa and pool equipment area enclosure in the front yard area, a Variance is required to grant relief from the following Sections of the Zoning Ordinance: 17.16.200.G.1. (no structures shall be located in the front yard). With respect to the aforementioned request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions on the subject property as follows: Regarding the requested variance from Section 17.16.200.G.1. to locate the proposed structures in the front yard area of the lot, the property was previously developed with a pool located in the front yard area. A new pool and accessory structure for the equipment are being proposed to allow dimensions for lap swimming. Some of the newly proposed pool overlaps with the existing pool in the front yard area. The lot is shaped in a manner where the technical front yard area is actually located behind the existing residence. B. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question by strict application of the code. The property right which otherwise would be enjoyed is the ability to utilize a portion of their front yard with a pool for lap swimming which currently cannot be enjoyed due to the existing configuration of the pool. The proposed location of the pool/spa and corresponding pool equipment structure are the least visually intrusive to the property and its neighbors. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located in that the proposed pool/spa and accessory structure are all unobtrusive. Further, the majority of the proposed structures would not be visible from the adjoining street or private properties and therefore are not expected to result in any visual or privacy impacts. Reso. 2017-06 7 Middleridge Lane South 3- V D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the proposed pool/spa and equipment enclosure will be orderly, attractive, and will not affect the rural character of the community. The subject proposed structures are in the front of the property and will not impact the stable and corral area and the proposed pool/spa will enhance the use of the existing structures and previously approved residential addition. E. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The property is located on an existing residential pad where is unlikely that neighbors will be able to see the proposed structures and the pool equipment area will be fully enclosed. F. The Variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review and Variance in Zoning Case No. 919 for a new pool/spa, and pool equipment area enclosure and to locatethe structures in the front yard, subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan, and Variance Permit approval shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval if construction pursuant to this approval has not commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.46.080, and 17.38.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee's determination that a violationexists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted, the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has Reso. 2017-06 7 Middleridge Lane South 4 0 occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant's request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated March 28, 2017, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. A copy of the conditions of this Resolution shall be printed on plans approved when a building permit is issued and a copy of such approved plans, including conditions of approval, shall be available on the building site at all times. The licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and including conformance with all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. D. The total overall lot coverage of the net lot area shall not exceed 23,095 square feet or 15.6%. E. The total structural coverage of the net lot shall not exceed 6,632 square feet or 4.5%. F. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 26,605 square feet or 18% (of net lot area). G. At any time there are horses on the property, Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be applied for manure control, including but not be limited to removal of the manure on a daily basis or provision of a receptacle with a tight closing lid that is constructed of brick, stone, concrete, metal or wood lined with metal or other sound material and that is safeguarded against access by flies. The contents of said receptacles shall be removed once a week. It is prohibited to dispose of Reso. 2017-06 7 Middleridge Lane South manure or any animal waste into the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) or into natural drainage course. H. A minimum of five-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of the pool and decking. I. The property shall be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation J. The swimming pool shall not exceed 1,000 square feet. Per LA County Building Code, a pool barrier and/or fencing shall be required for the pool. K. A drainage plan, as required by the Building Department shall be prepared and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of a construction permit. Such plan shall be subject to LA County Code requirements. L. The pool equipment area shall be fully enclosed by a five foot wall with the opening to the interior of the property, facing the property residence and and shall utilize the most quiet and technologically advanced equipment to dampen the sound. M. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be required. N. During construction, all parking shall take place on the project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within the unimproved roadway easements on the southside of Hillside Lane adjacent to project site only, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. O. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. P. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water management and comply with the City's Low Impact development Ordinance (LID), if applicable. Q. A minimum of 65% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted. The hauler shall provide the appropriate documentation to the City. Reso. 2017-06 7 Middleridge Lane South 6 R. All graded areas shall be landscaped. In addition, the swimming pool, spa and pool equipment area shall be screened from the neighbors and a landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. If landscaping of 5,000 square foot area or greater is introduced or redeveloped, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Any plants introduced for this project shall not grow into a hedge but be offset and shall not exceed the ridgeline of the recreation room. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. S. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) Architectural Review Committee. Perimeter easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences -including construction fences, any hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the RHCA. T. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http//www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIR E. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. U. All requirements of the Building and Construction Code, the Zoning Code, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with, including the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. V. Prior to finaling of the project an "as graded" and an "as constructed" plans and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the "as built/as graded" plan. W. Until the applicants execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this approval, the approvals shall not be effective. Such affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18t ,,I AY O IL 2017. Reso. 2017-06 7 Middleridge Lane South 7 RAD CH F, AIR £ N ATTEST: giqtat uufh HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. Reso. 2017-06 7 Middleridge Lane South 8 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2017-06 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE FOR A 1,000 SQUARE FOOT POOL/SPA, POOL EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE, AND TO LOCATE THE STRUCTURES IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 919 AT 7 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, (LOT 249-A-UR), (MCCARTHY/ CHENG). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on April 18, 2017, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Cardenas, Cooley, Kirkpatrick, Seaburn and Chairman Chelf. NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2017-06 7 Middleridge Lane South 9 ge4 0-/Railego gal INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No.: 7-A Mtg. Date: 05/8/17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER Pill SUBJECT: FINAL STATUS REPORT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 1203 CONCERNING AZUL, THE DOG OWNED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER AT 27 CABALLEROS ROAD WITH REGARD TO THE CONFINEMENT RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED ON AZUL. DATE: MAY 8, 2017 ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 1203 Amending Resolution 1195 BACKGROUND As a result to multiple incidents by Dr. Jeffrey Ostriker's (27 Caballeros Rd.) dog Azul over a 12 month period involving killing of chickens, the City Council amended its confinement order of Azul. At the January 23rd City Council meeting, the City Manager gave his report that Dr. Ostriker technically was in compliance with Resolution 1195. However, he also reported out that all of residents whose chickens were victims of Azul's violent actions thought that the previous Council action required that Dr. Ostriker build an enclosed dog run/kennel. They further mentioned that they would not feel safe from Azul until the dog kennel would be built. Theses same sentiments were also brought up by a number of City Councilmembers. As a result of the discussion of the item, it was considered infeasible and inhumane to require Azul to wait to relieve himself by being transported outside the City limits. The present situation does not account for unforeseen circumstances, such as inclement weather, emergencies, or illness on the part of either Dr. Ostriker or Azul. It was concluded by the City Council that the only acceptable solution that advances the City's goal of protecting neighboring pets from Azul's violent behavior and providing for the 0 wellbeing of the dog is the construction of a fully enclosed dog run on the property where Azul lives. As a result, the attached Resolution amending Resolution 1195 modified the language of the original resolution requiring that Azul to be confined to Dr. Ostriker's home except when he is being transported by leash to the required enclosed dog kennel on the property or to a vehicle when leaving the City limits. Furthermore, the dog run needed to be completed 45 days from the date of the amended resolution. Finally, the City Council reserved jurisdiction over the matter for 90 days, during which time the City Manager was directed to monitor Dr. Ostriker's compliance with the conditions imposed by the amended resolution. As a result of the February 13th City Council action, the City Manager was instructed to determine if the required enclosed dog kennel was constructed within 45 days, inspect to determine if it was built to the identified specifications and determine if there have been any more aggression issues involving Azul since the last incident. At the April 10 City Council meeting, the City Manager reported that on March 16th, Dr. Ostriker submitted a photograph of the completed dog run that met the timeline identified in the confinement order. The City Manager subsequently personally inspected the dog kennel on March 29th and confirmed that the enclosed dog run met the confinement requirements. He also reported that to date there were no reported incidents of Azul being involved with an aggressive animal attack or seen roaming in any part of the City. Therefore, it was concluded that Dr. Ostriker and Azul were in compliance with the confinement order. DISCUSSION Since the City Council took jurisdiction over the confinement order of Azul for 90 days, the City Manager was directed to report out at the end of that time period if Dr. Ostriker was still in compliance. To date, the City still has not received any reported incidents of Azul being involved with an aggressive animal attack or seen roaming in any part of the City. Therefore, the City Manager has concluded that Dr. Ostriker and Azul have continued to be in compliance with the confinement order. However, should Dr. Ostriker be found not in compliance with any condition in the amended resolution in the future, the City Manager shall schedule a hearing before the City Council. It should be noted that Dr. Ostriker can ask that parts of or the entire confinement order be reconsidered one after year the amended resolution was adopted by the City Council. NOTIFICATION The parties involved in the complaints have been notified. RRC:hl Ostriker Compliance Modifed Resolution Status Staff Report.docx RESOLUTION NO. 1203 AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 1195 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER, FOLLOWING THE APPEAL FILED BY DR JEFFREY OSTRIKER, WHICH ORDERED THE CONFINEMENT OF AZUL TO THE OSTRIKER PROPERTY. The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. City Council Resolution No. 1195, enacted on November 28, 2016, modified the decision of the City Manager in the appeal filed by Dr. Jeffrey Ostriker ("Owner") and ordered the confinement of Azui (a male spaniel mix) to 27 Caballeros Road ("Property") as follows: (1) Azul is ordered confined to the Owner's Property and shall be kept indoors at all times, except that (2) Azul may be allowed outdoors, provided that he is confined to a fully enclosed, secure dog run with a concrete pad; and (3) Azul shall not be walked outdoors off of the Owner's Property anywhere within the territorial boundaries of the City of Rolling Hills. The City Council retained jurisdiction over the appeal for 90 days, during which time the City Manager was directed to monitor Dr. Ostriker's compliance with the conditions imposed by Resolution No. 1195. Section 2. On January 23, 2017, the City Council heard a status report on Dr. Ostriker's implementation of the conditions set forth in Resolution No. 1195 from the City Manager and heard testimony from the public regarding the Dr. Ostriker's compliance with Resolution 1195. During the presentation of this evidence, the City Council learned that Dr. Ostriker had not constructed an enclosed dog run, and that he did not plan to do so in the near future. At the meeting, Dr. Ostriker further testified before Council that due to the requirement that Azul not be walked anywhere within the City, he is currently placing Azul in his vehicle and transporting him outside of the City, twice a day, so that Azul may relieve himself. Section 3. Following the City Manager's report and the public testimony, including testimony from Dr. Ostriker, the City Council reviewed and considered the information in the record, including evidence presented by Dr. Ostrikerand finds as follows: A. In the absence of a dog run, as conditioned by Resolution No. 1195, Azul can relieve himself outdoors only if transported by automobile to a location outside the City. It is infeasible and inhumane to limit Azul's ability to relieve himself outdoors to the times when he is transported out of the City via automobile, and only twice per day; B. Dr. Ostriker's alternative to constructing a dog run — limiting Azul's access to the outdoors to those occasions when he is driven to a location outside the City — does not account for unforseen circumstances, such as inclement weather, emergencies, or illness on the part of either Dr. Ostriker or Azul. Consequently, it is unrealistic, impractical and ultimately doomed to fail; C. It is inhumane to confine Azul to the interior of the Ostriker home with the sole exception of those occasions when he is driven outside the City; the only acceptable solution that advances the City's goal of protecting neighboring pets from Azul's aggressive and violent behavior and providing for well-being of the dog, is the construction of a fully enclosed dog run on the property where Azul lives. Section 4. Consequently, and based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby modifies Resolution 1195 as follows: A. Azul is ordered confined to the interior of the home on the Ostriker property and shall be kept indoors at all times except when he is placed in the dog run constructed as ordered in paragraph B below. B. Dr. Ostriker shall construct a fully enclosed and secure dog run with a concrete pad on his property within 45 days from the date of this Resolution. C. Azul shall not be walked outdoors off the Ostriker property anywhere within the territorial boundaries of the City of Rolling Hills. D. Azul may be placed within a secured vehicle for the purposes of being transported outside of the City. Resolution No. 1203 E. Any time Azul is being transferred to either the dog run or a secured vehicle, he must be leashed and under the control of an adult capable of controlling him. Section 4. The City Council reserves jurisdiction over this matter for 90 days, during which time the City Manager is directed to monitor Dr. Ostriker's compliance with the conditions imposed herein. Should Dr. Ostriker not be in compliance, the City Manager shall schedule a hearing before the City Council. Section 5. The remedial provisions of this Resolution supersede the remedial provisions set forth in Resolution No. 1195. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13'h day of February, 2017. Bea Dieringer Mayor ATTEST: Heidi Luce City Clerk Resolution No. 1203 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS The foregoing Resolution No. 1203 entitled: SS AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 1195 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER, FOLLOWING THE APPEAL FILED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER, WHICH ORDERED THE CONFINEMENT OF AZUL TO THE OSTRIKER PROPERTY. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on February 13, 2017, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councihnembers Black, Mirsch, Pieper and Mayor Dieringer. NOES: Councilmember Wilson. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Heidi Luce City Clerk Resolution No. 1203 -3- 8(4 Ralle:09 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No.: 7-B Mtg. Date: 05/08/17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPING AN ORDINANCE TO REGULATE DRONES IN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. DATE: MAY 8, 2017 ATTACHMENT: Strike-thru Draft of Hermosa Beach Drone Ordinance BACKGROUND Mayor Jim Black at the April 10th City Council meeting asked that staff, at the next City Council meeting, place an item on the agenda to discuss if it wants to pursue drafting an ordinance to regulate drones. Recently he received a call from a resident who felt that a neighbor was spying and harassing her family through the use of a drone. The item was discussed at the April 24th City Council meeting. At the request of the Mayor, for the meeting, staff provided Council members a copy of the Hermosa Beach Drone Ordinance that the City Attorney developed to review. After receiving public comments and having a general discussion about the subject, the City Council agreed with Mayor Black's suggestion to table the item so that the City Council could have more time to review the Hermosa Beach Ordinance. The direction also included having City staff (not the City Attorney) provide a version of the Hermosa Beach Ordinance to the City Council that does not include items that are not relevant to Rolling Hills. After reviewing this version of the Drone Ordinance, the City Council could then decide at its May 8th meeting if a Drone Ordinance should be prepared for the City of Rolling Hills. DISCUSSION Since there are unresolved legal issues with drone regulation pertaining to FAA preemption; the City Attorney recommends the narrower the ordinance the better. Furthermore, a Drone Ordinance will be less susceptible to a legal challenge if no City permits were required. Enforcement of a Drone Ordinance will be a challenge, because finding the drone operator is not always easy and places and burden on law O enforcement or City Staff to make judgment calls on potential violations (e.g. determining how many feet above the ground level a drone is hovering over a particular target). Other issues to consider will be if law enforcement should have the ability to impound violator's drones, and if yes, what is their ability and what penalties should be imposed. The City definitely will need the City Attorneys and Sheriff Department's input if the City Council decides to move forward in its consideration of a Drone Ordinance. CONCLUSION It is requested that the City Council determine if staff, with the assistance of the City Attorney, should proceed to draft a Drone Ordinance and introduce for a first reading at a future date. Should the City Council decide to move forward, staff requests direction on what elements and provisions should be included in the ordinance. RC:hl Ordinance No. Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ROLLING HILLS ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 9.38 9.60 TO THE HERMOSA BEACH CITY OF ROLLING HIILS MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE DRONES, UNMANNED AIRCRAFT AND MODEL AIRCRAFT The City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach Rolling Hills does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. Chapter 9.60 is hereby added to Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals and Welfare) of the Hermosa Beach Rolling Hills Municipal Code to read as follows: "Chapter 9.60 Drones, Unmanned Aircraft and Model Aircraft 9.6-.010 Purpose and Findings. The operation of Unmanned Aircraft such as Model Aircraft and Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems ("UASs"), commonly known as drones, can at times pose a hazard to full-scale aircraft in flight and to persons and property on the ground. Imposing community -based safety requirements on the operation of Model Aircraft and imposing restrictions on the operation of both Model Aircraft and Civil UASs consistent with Federal Aviation Rules and state law is necessary to mitigate such risks and to protect the public from the hazards associated with the operation of Unmanned Aircraft. 9.60.020 Definitions. The following words, phrases and terms as used in this chapter shall have the meanings indicated as follows: 1. "Unmanned Aircraft" shall mean an aircraft, including, but not limited to, an aircraft commonly known as a drone, that is operated without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft. 2. "Unmanned Aircraft System" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft and associated elements, including, but not limited to, any communication links and components that control the Unmanned Aircraft. 3. "Person" shall mean shall mean any individual, partnership corporation, or joint -venture 4. "Model Aircraft" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft or Unmanned Aircraft System operated by any Person strictly for hobby or recreational purposes. Ordinance No. Page 2 5. "Civil UAS" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft or Unmanned Aircraft System operated by any Person for any purposes other than strictly hobby or recreational purposes, including, but not limited to, commercial purposes or in furtherance of, or incidental to, any business or media service or agency. 6. "Public UAS" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft or Unmanned Aircraft System operated by any public agency for government related purposes. 9.38.030 Operating Permit Required) A. Generally. An operating permit shall be required for every Unmanned Aircraft and Unmanned Aircraft System operated in the City. No piessoon-sTh'iall eerraate aanrUUnnmTannedl.. Aircraft or Unmanned) ft System in `^the- ity ��ithout first obtaining an operating permit and "-J . ... ury vray ru wua ��r va vvaurnrn ebtaining-an-identification-number-assigned-by4h-e-Gity-and-submiss inn of -a -c y of the Certificate of Aircraft Registration/Proof of Oawner hip issuer+ by the Fedleral Aviation Administration v a. a.. v.. v� ar ry r vawvr ur . •r ruuvr r r agar r nr nvar uuvrr. B. tiens A a a appppliiccaation fora I JAS ep ating permit shall be a form provided by the City and show: 1. Name and phone number of the operator; 2. Make, model and serial or N number of UAS to be permitted; 3. A description of proposed flight activity, including whether filming, taking of visual images and/or sound recording will occur; �l Copy of Certificate of Aircraft Registration/Proof of Ownership r+ issue by the Federal Aviation dl Amini tration•r 5.As . q ,,igned-statement certrcifying +-trhat-tshe applicant knows how + operate the UAS and) is aware of and) agrees to operate it in full r .. . . r raw ry u.. ury yr ur ru uaJ. r a>a.+v aary compliance with lts—eperravting instrucrra�tions and) with ',,,the pp, ovision-s-ef-this chap+ter a y other few; r state laws 6.A -S- fled-Stat., L that only the applicant may ement acaf�8wlwledginag 7 operate the UAS in the City. 7 A signed: indemnification clay roe protecting the City from liability r i r.�r9� rvv�rry g. S her information as may be requested) by the City . .... a, r r r r a,. ar a. r r a,. r-rrrcry--o�c-r-cga�arcca-v �a-rc- vrr� Payment of an application filing fee in an amount s +forth in v. aw'rrrrvrra yr urr ul✓I./rlvuarVrl rllll-f as set -forth -in the City's master fee resolution. The filing fee for a UAS found to be operating in the City without a permit shall -be -trebled, C OI ement The permit sti er and) identification numharshall-bbe v—r-r��n-r�^r,�ra:�. ^rnMc��r-rr-a a.��arrcr--ry ppllaced on -the -badly of the Un�m,�a,�nned Aircraft or Unmanned A of S' stem imr n a -co spicueuss-location-en the' ea aacing-'su face owe device ands in a manner clearly visible from the gror ndl Plac ment of ... r � rvurru—nrtcemcTra-vr L'J Ordinance No. Page 3 stickers shall be subject to approval of the City or performed by the City. D. Issuance of permit. The permit will include a copy of the operating rules set forth in this chapter. Permits will be issued for a period of one resolution. A permit shall not be issued if the applicant is found to haves_ matted the I IAS in violation of Section 9 38 040 or reneYed4f E. Assignment. The permit is not assignable. No person other than the applicant magi operate the I IAS within the City �.IN.. Vaw��l IIIGr Vl./VI G�V Lr�V� F. pr�7r Revocation./^�..,, The permit may be suspended or revoked if the City Ma T-'onager, G T/ThT cr hiss eigne as s b ed on aQ epolnderance-e e cvidcncc, after the permittce is afforded notice and an opportunity to be heard, that the permittee has violater) any provision of this chapter ��G< v L.v��uuv� ��u..a vw�u� A decision-byhe Ci anag a be as d to_the City Council; the decision of the Council shall be final V VV.V�V�1 VI l��V VVGIIVII VIIGII-i�/V-I�TiQr 9.60.040 Operating Requirements and Restrictions. A. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the City in a manner that interferes with manned aircraft, and Model Aircraft shall always give way to any manned aircraft. B. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft within the City beyond the visual line of sight of the person operating the Model Aircraft. The operator must use his or her own natural vision (which includes vision corrected by standard eyeglasses or contact lenses) to observe the Model Aircraft. People other than the operator may not be used in lieu of the operator for maintaining visual line of sight. Visual line of sight means that the operator has an unobstructed view of the Model Aircraft. The use of vision -enhancing devices, such as binoculars, night vision goggles, powered vision magnifying devices, and goggles or other devices designed to provide a "first -person view" from the model, do not constitute the visual line of sight of the person operating the Model Aircraft. C. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the City other than during daylight hours defined as between official sunrise and official sunset for local time, unless proof of authorization to do so by the Federal Aviation Administration is provided to the City. D. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft within the City more than 400 feet above the earth's surface, unless proof of authorization to do so by the Federal Aviation Administration is provided to the City. Ordinance No. Page 4 E. Excluding takeoff and landing, no Person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the City closer than 25 feet to any individual, except the operator or the operator's helper(s). F. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the City in a manner that is prohibited by any federal or state statute or regulation governing aeronautics, including but not limited to Public Utilities Code Section 24107 and Federal Aviation Rule 91.13. G. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the City in violation of any temporary flight restriction or notice to airmen issued by the Federal Aviation Administration. H. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the City to capture, record or transmit any visual image or audio recording of any person or private real property located in the City under circumstances in which the subject person or owner of the subject real property has a reasonable expectation of privacy kin , —but —net limited to inside a private ofce and inside a hotel -room\ This III 111�VW �V, I�l�i�i— �/� provision is intended to supplement, rather than duplicate, the prohibition against trespassing into the air space above the land of another person in order to capture any type of visual image or sound recording of a person engaging in a private, personal, or familial activity in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person, pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1708.8. I. Unless authorized by federal law, no person shall knowingly and intentionally operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS on the grounds of, or less than 350 feet above ground level within the airspace overlaying, a public school in the City providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. J. Unless authorized by federal law, no person shall knowingly and intentionally use any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS to capture images of public school grounds in the City providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. K. No person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS in a manner that interferes with firefighting, police activity or emergency response activity as detailed in California Penal Code Sections 148.2 and 402. L. No person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the airspace overlaying the Civic Center City Hall complex or RHCA Ordinance No. Page 5 operated a City park or the beach recreational facilities during a scheduled special event unless authorized to do so by the City or RHCA staff. in the special event permit. M. No person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the City in a manner designed, intended or which serves to harass, stalk, vex, annoy, disturb, frighten, intimidate, injure, threaten, victimize or place in extreme mental or emotional distress any particular person, whether that person is located on public or private property. The conduct described in this paragraph includes, but is not limited to, using a Model Aircraft or Civil UAS to follow and film, video -record, live -stream or photograph a person who has not consented to such activity. 9.60.050 Violations. It shall be unlawful for any Person to violate or fail to comply with this chapter. Any Person violating the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to the provisions of Chapter 1.08 of this Code. Any UAS or Model Aircraft found to be operated in violation of this chapter may be impounded and held as evidence in any enforcement proceeding brought under this chapter. An impounded UAS or Model Aircraft will be returned at the conclusion of any enforcement proceeding upon payment to the City of an impound fee as set forth in the City's master fee resolution. 9.60.060 Exemptions. The permit requirement set forth in Section 9.60.030 of this chapter shall not apply to any Civil UAS operated pursuant to and in compliance with the terms and conditions of a valid City issued film permit or special event permit with Federal Aviation Administration authorization or any Public UAS operated pursuant to, and in compliance with, the terms and conditions of any current and enforceable authorization granted by the Federal Aviation Administration. Section 2. This Ordinance was assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines (the Guidelines), and the environmental regulations of the City. The City Council hereby finds that under Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that the provisions contained herein would not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Section 3. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or place, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the final decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 4. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City within fifteen (15) lJ Ordinance No. Page 6 days after its passage in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code, shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance, and shall cause this Ordinance and her certification, together with proof of publication, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of the Council of this City. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS day of , 2017. MAYOR ATTEST: City Clerk TO: FROM: SUBJECT: ge't ieffe:a9 qc 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: 05/08/17 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER ri1iL/ CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 352 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 9.58 (SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY FOR PARTIES AT WHICH UNDERAGE DRINKING OCCURS) OF ARTICLE VII (OFFENSES BY OR AGAINST MINORS) OF TITLE 9 (PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND WELFARE) OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPOSE LIABILITY ON PERSONS WHO FACILITATE OR ALLOW THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY MINORS AT ANY PARTY, GATHERING OR EVENT AT A PRIVATE RESIDENCE; AND AMENDING SECTION 1.08.010 AND ADDING SECTIONS 1.08.030 THROUGH 1.08.090 TO CHAPTER 1.08 (GENERAL PENALTY) TO TITLE 1 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CREATE AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION PROCESS FOR CODE VIOLATIONS DATE: May 8, 2017 ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 352 Study on Social Host Laws in 50 Cities March 15, 2017 Correspondence from Rod Uyeda RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council introduce for first reading Ordinance No. 352, an ordinance creating a new Chapter 9.58 to regulate and impose liability on any person hosting a party at which underage drinking occurs and establishing an administrative citation process for violations of Chapter 9.58, and direct staff to schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 352 for the May 22, 2017 City Council meeting. U BACKGROUND During the public comment portion of the February 27th City Council meeting, PVPUSD School Board Member Linda Reid urged the City Council to adopt a Social Host Ordinance. Ms. Reid and the Palos Verdes Peninsula Council of PTAs have been encouraging all cities on the Peninsula to pass this type of ordinance in order to curb underage drinking at parties held at private homes. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes enacted and Rolling Hills Estates is in the midst of enacting Social Host Ordinances and join the South Bay cities of Hermosa Beach and Manhattan Beach who also in recent years passed similar ordinances. The City Council at that meeting asked staff to put the item on a future agenda to discuss if it wants to consider a similar ordinance in Rolling Hills and provided the City Council a copy of the Rancho Palos Verdes ordinance to assist with the discussion. The issue was again discussed at the March 13th City Council meeting and presented by the City Attorney. There were a number of Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District officials present and they all supported that the City of Rolling Hills enact a Social Host Ordinance. The City Council had a number of questions that included the enforcement process and the effectiveness of such laws. After significant deliberation, the City Council on a 4-1 vote directed staff to prepare a Social Host Ordinance for consideration at a future City Council meeting. DISCUSSION Social Host Ordinances impose liability on adults in private settings that they own, lease or control for providing alcohol and/or allowing underage drinking among children who are not their own. The California State Parent Teacher Association (PTA) had adopted a Social Host resolution in support of enacting civil laws against property owners on whose premises underage drinking occurs in 2009. The Palos Verdes Peninsula Council of PTAs stated at their Special Meeting on January 31, 2017 that it encourages and supports the creation of Social Host Liability legislation by its local governing cities and has gained the support of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District (PVPUSD). The PTA believes that social host laws, public awareness and, enforcement are essential in addressing the problem of underage drinking. A comprehensive 2009 study in Ventura County found that after implementation of social host ordinances, the size of underage drinking parties appear to have decreased and the ease of obtaining alcohol also decreased. Social host laws in this study are associated with declines in heavy episodic drinking (3%), driving after drinking (4%) and alcohol -related traffic deaths (5-9%). Another study published in • 2014 by the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs (enclosed) examined the relationships between Social Host laws and underage drinking for 50 California cities. The study concluded that local Social Host laws that included strict liability and civil penalties that are imposed administratively may be associated with less frequent underage drinking in private settings, particularly among adolescents who have already initiated alcohol use. imposed administratively may be associated with less frequent underage drinking in private settings, particularly among adolescents who have already initiated alcohol use. After the direction by the City Council at their March 13th meeting, staff developed a Social Host Ordinance. The proposed ordinance would do the following: A. Protect the safety and welfare of residents. B. Impose a civil fine on persons responsible for gatherings where alcohol is made accessible to underage persons, defined as any person under the age of 21. C. The responsible party would also be charged the actual cost of law enforcement beyond the initial response by a Sheriff Deputy and for damage to public property and/or injuries to law enforcement personnel incurred during response. D. Prohibit a responsible person from serving alcoholic beverages to underage person, except under the supervision of a parent or a guardian in connection with cultural or religious activity. E. Define responsible person: Responsible person could be a parent, tenant or any person who organizes, supervises, conducts or controls the gathering whether or not the individual is present at the gathering. If an underage person is responsible for the gathering, then both the minor and the parent or legal guardian of the underage person would be the responsible persons. F. Provide for an administrative citation appeals process. As it pertains to the administrative citation fines for a violation for the proposed Social Host Ordinance, the following fee schedule would be imposed: 1. A fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00) for the first violation. 2. A fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) for a second violation of the same provision within one year. 3. A fine not exceeding seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500.00) for each additional violation of the same provision within one year of the first violation. In addition to the administrative penalties, the responding law enforcement, fire or emergency response providers may issue an order requiring the gathering to be disbanded and may cite and/or arrest any law violators under any other applicable ordinances and state statutes. Lomita Sheriff Station Captain Dan Beringer has analyzed the ordinance and verified that Sheriff Deputies could enforce the ordinance as proposed. Since all three cities that utilize Sheriff law enforcement services on the Palos Verdes peninsula plan to pass a Social Host Ordinance, the Lomita Sheriff Station plan to develop a ticket book that will have all three of the cities on it with all pertinent information related to each city's Social Host Ordinance enforcement procedures. This will allow the violator know exactly what is needed and when to correct the violation. If the citation is not paid for or appealed within 30 days, the City will consider the violator non -compliant and could now transition the administrative citation to a misdemeanor offense. If that occurred, the case could then be enforced as a code enforcement case with the assistance of the City Attorney. FISCAL IMPACT The cost for a third party hearing officer for appeals to a violation of a Social Host Ordinance will typically costs around $150/hour with cost for an individual case being somewhere between $750-$1,500 unless it is appealed to the Superior Court. Therefore, in most cases, the administrative citation fine will cover the cost for these services. NOTIFICATION PVPUSD Board Members Malcom Sharp and Linda Reid, Rod Uyeda and Captain Dan Beringer. ORDINANCE NO. 352 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 9.58 (SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY FOR PARTIES AT WHICH UNDERAGE DRINKING OCCURS) OF ARTICLE VII (OFFENSES BY OR AGAINST MINORS) OF TITLE 9 (PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND WELFARE) OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPOSE LIABILITY ON PERSONS WHO FACILITATE OR ALLOW THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY MINORS AT ANY PARTY, GATHERING OR EVENT AT A PRIVATE RESIDENCE; AND AMENDING SECTION 1.08.010 AND ADDING SECTIONS 1.08.030 THROUGH 1.08.090 TO CHAPTER 1.08 (GENERAL PENALTY) TO TITLE 1 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CREATE AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION PROCESS FOR CODE VIOLATIONS The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. A new Chapter 9.58 (Social Host Liability for Parties at which Underage Drinking Occurs) of Article VII (Offenses By Or Against Minors) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Welfare) is hereby added to the Rolling Hills Municipal Code to read as follows: Chapter 9.58 Social Host Liability for Parties at which Underage Drinking Occurs Sections 9.58.010 Purpose and Intent 9.58.020 Definitions 9.58.030 Social host liability for parties at which underage drinking occurs 9.58.040 Exceptions 9.58.050 Notice to responsible person 9.58.060 Cost reimbursement to the City 9.58.070. Penalties. 9.58.010. Purpose and intent. The City Council finds and determines that minors sometimes obtain alcoholic beverages at parties held at private premises. The purposes of this chapter are as follows: A. Protect the public health, safety and general welfare; B. Discourage and decrease underage drinking by imposing a civil fine on persons responsible for gatherings where alcohol is consumed by or served to underage persons; and C. Facilitate the enforcement of laws prohibiting the service to and consumption of alcoholic . beverages by underage persons. Ordinance No. 352 9.58.020. Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following defmitions shall apply: A. "Alcoholic beverage" means and includes alcohol, spirits, liquor, wine, beer and every liquid or solid containing alcohol, spirits, wine or beer, and which contains one-half (%2) of one percent (1 %) or more of alcohol by volume and which is fit for beverage purposes either alone or when diluted, mixed or combined with other substances. B. "Residence or other private property" shall mean a home, yard or other dwelling unit, or a guesthouse, pool house, barn or other similar accessory structure whether occupied on a temporary or permanent basis, whether occupied as a dwelling, party or other social function venue, and whether owned, leased, rented or used with or without compensation. C. "Responsible person" includes the following persons, whether or not present at a gathering in violation of this chapter: 1. A person or persons with a right of possession of the residence or other private property at which a gathering is conducted; 2. Each person who has an ownership interest in the premises. In the event the property is rented, the landlord shall qualify as a Responsible Person where the landlord knew or reasonably should have known of a prior gathering at the same premises; 3. Each person who, although not an owner, nevertheless occupies or has a legal right or legal obligation to exercise possession or control over the premises 4. Any person who organizes, supervises, officiates, conducts or controls the gathering or any other person(s) accepting responsibility for such a gathering; or 5. The parent or legal guardian of an underage person, where the underage person is the host of a gathering in violation of this chapter. D. "Underage person" is any person under the age of twenty-one (21). 9.58.030. Social host liability for parties at which underage drinking occurs. It shall be a violation of this chapter, and a public nuisance constituting an immediate threat to public health and safety warranting summary abatement, for any responsible person to conduct or allow in a residence or other private property any party, gathering or event at which an underage person consumes alcoholic beverages, where the responsible party knows or reasonably should know that an underage person has obtained or may consume an alcoholic beverage. Prior knowledge of the gathering is not pre -requisite to a finding that any specific individual is a responsible person as defined by this section. In the event the responsible person is an underage person, then the underage person, and their parents or legal guardian, shall be jointly and severally liable for any penalties incurred pursuant to this chapter. Ordinance No. 352 2 O 9.58.040. Exceptions This chapter shall not apply to possession or consumption of an alcoholic beverage under the supervision of a parent or guardian in connection with a cultural or religious activity. 9.58.050. Notice to responsible person. When a law enforcement officer makes an initial response to a party, gathering or event at which underage consumption of alcoholic beverages occurs, the officer shall provide a written notice to all identified responsible persons at the time of the initial response. This notice shall include the following information: A. The official has determined that a party, gathering or event at which underage consumption of alcoholic beverages exists; B. The responsible person(s) will be fined for a violation of this chapter, pursuant to Section 9.58.070; C. If the condition is not abated and an additional response is required of law enforcement or emergency service providers, such as emergency personnel or fire, to abate the nuisance, the responsible persons(s) will be billed for any response costs incurred, pursuant to Section 9.58.060; and D. The responsible person(s) are entitled to request a hearing to appeal the fine and response costs pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 1.08.090(H) for appealing administrative citations. 9.58.060 Cost reimbursement to the City. A. The person or persons responsible for any party, gathering or event described in Section 9.58.030 or on whose property the gathering is held, or if such person is a minor then the parents or legal guardians of the minor, shall be e jointly and severally liable for the following costs attributable to the event: 1. The actual cost to the City of law enforcement services beyond the initial response by a Sheriffs deputy necessary to abate the conditions described in Section 9.58.030; 2. Damage to public property resulting from such law enforcement response; and 3. Injuries to law enforcement personnel incurred in such law enforcement response. B. The Sheriffs Department shall accurately compute the cost of providing such services in accordance with the schedule of rates and charges for personnel and equipment contained in the law enforcement services agreement with the City and advise the City Manager of such costs, as well as any other costs of damage to public property or injuries to personnel resulting from the law enforcement response. The person responsible for the Ordinance No. 352 3 event as above described shall be billed for these costs by the City Manager upon notice of the charges from the Sheriff and payment shall be due and payable within fifteen days (15) of the billing date. Should the amount due not be paid, the City may collect the debt, as well as any costs incurred in collecting the debt due to nonpayment, pursuant to any available provision of law. 9.58.070. Penalties. A. The city council shall establish a schedule of administrative fines for any violation of this chapter. B. In addition to the administrative fines described in this chapter, the responding law enforcement officer, may issue an order requiring the gathering to be disbanded and may cite and/or arrest any law violators under any other applicable ordinances and state statutes. Section 2. The following Sections are hereby added to Chapter 1.08 (General Penalty) of Title 1 (General Provisions) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code to read as follows: 1.08.030 Violation — Subject to administrative citation when. Any person violating any provision or failing to comply with any of the mandatory requirements of Chapter 9.58, shall be subject to the administrative penalty provisions of this Chapter. 1.08.040 Administrative Penalty. An administrative penalty shall be assessed by means of an administrative citation issued by an enforcement officer and shall be payable directly to the City. Penalties shall be set forth in a penalty schedule established by resolution of the City Council. A portion of each penalty shall constitute reimbursement for the City's administrative expenses in issuing and processing the citation. Penalties shall be collected in accordance with the procedures specified in this chapter. Payment of a penalty shall not excuse the failure to correct the violation nor shall it bar further enforcement by the City. In the case of violations of the building, plumbing, mechanical or electrical codes, an administrative citation shall not be issued until after the responsible party has been provided a notice and a reasonable opportunity to correct the violation, and has failed to do so. 1.08.050 Service procedures for issuing administrative citations. An administrative citation may be issued to a responsible party by an enforcement officer for violation of those sections set forth in Section 1.08.030 as follows: A. By Personal Service. The person on whom the citation is served is required to confirm receipt by signing a copy of the citation, but his or her failure to do so shall have no effect on the citation's validity or enforceability; or B. By Regular First -Class Mail. Service shall be deemed effective when the citation is deposited in the United States mail; or Ordinance No. 352 4 C. By Posting on Property. If the enforcement officer is unable to serve the citation under subsections (A) or (B) above, by posting a copy of the citation on any real property within the City in which the City has knowledge that the responsible party has a legal interest. Service under this subsection shall be deemed effective on the date when the notice is posted; or D. By Publication. If the enforcement officer cannot serve the citation by any of the above methods, the enforcement officer may publish the citation in a newspaper likely to give actual notice to the party subject to the citation. The publication shall be once a week for four successive weeks in a newspaper published at least once a week. 1.08.060 Contents of administrative citation. Administrative citations shall contain all of the following information: A. The date and the location of the violation and the approximate time the violation occurred; B. The code section violated and a description of how the section was violated; C. The action required to correct the violation; D. The consequences of failing to correct the violation; E. The amount of penalty imposed for the violation; F. The procedure to contest the citation; G. The signature of the enforcement officer and the signature of the responsible party, if that person can be located and will sign the citation, as set forth in Section 1.08.050. 1.08.070 Satisfaction of administrative citation. Upon receipt of a citation, the responsible party must do one of the following: A. Pay the Penalty. Pay the Penalty. Pay the fine to the City within thirty (30) days from the date of the citation. All fines assessed shall be payable to the City. Payment of a fine shall not excuse or discharge a failure to correct continuing violations nor shall it bar further enforcement action by the City. Payment of the penalty waives the responsible party's right to the administrative hearing and appeal process pursuant to Section 1.08.090; or B. Remedy the Violation. If the violation is a first-time correctable offense, is deemed by the enforcement officer not to create an immediate threat to health and safety, and the responsible party remedies it within the time indicated on the citation; or C. Request an Administrative Hearing. If the responsible party chooses to contest the citation, the party shall do so no later than thirty (30) days after service of the citation. The request shall be submitted in writing as directed on the citation and shall include a statement of reasons why the citation is being contested. The request shall be accompanied by a deposit in the full amount of the . penalty or written proof of Ordinance No. 352 5 financial hardship, which at a minimum must include tax returns, fmancial statements, bank account records, salary records, or similar documentation demonstrating that the responsible party is unable to deposit the penalty. A hearing will not be scheduled until a full amount of the penalty is deposited, or the City finds the responsible party financially unable to do so and waives the deposit requirement. In the event the responsible party fails or refuses to select and satisfy any of the alternatives set forth in subsection (A), (B) or (C) above, then the penalty shall be immediately due and owing to the City and may be collected in any manner allowed by law for collection of a debt. Commencement of an action to collect the delinquent penalty shall not preclude issuance of additional citations to the responsible party should the violations persist. 1.08.080 Issuing permits or licenses. If an enforcement officer issues an Administrative Citation because the responsible person lacks a required permit or license required by this code and the fine is delinquent, the City shall not issue the permit or license until the delinquent fine, and any applicable penalties and interest, are paid. Similarly, no permit or license shall be renewed until any and all outstanding administrative citations have been paid in full, regardless of the violation that triggered the administrative citation. 1.08.090 Administrative hearings and appeal process. A. Prehearing Dismissal of Citation. The City Manager may dismiss an administrative citation at any time in the interest of justice or if the citation is determined to have been issued in error, in which event any deposit made shall be refunded. Alternatively, the City Manager and the individual may voluntarily enter into a compliance agreement whereby the individual agrees to adhere to the requirements for compliance specified in the agreement and the City agrees to dismiss the citation upon satisfactory correction. B. Time for Administrative Hearing. The administrative hearing shall be scheduled no later than ninety (90) days after receipt of the request for a hearing to contest the citation. The responsible party will be notified in writing at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing by first class mail of the date and time of the hearing. C. Appointment of Administrative Hearing Officer. The hearing shall be conducted by an administrative hearing officer appointed by the City Manager to perform such hearings. D. Request for Continuance of Hearing. The responsible party may request one continuance of the hearing, but in no event may the hearing begin later than ninety (90) days after receipt of the request for hearing from the responsible party. E. Failure to Attend Administrative Hearing. The individual to whom an administrative citation is issued, or that person's representative, may attend the hearing in person, or in lieu of attending may submit an Appearance by Written Declaration on a form provided by the City for that purpose. 1. If the cited individual or his or her representative fails to attend the scheduled hearing, or fails to submit an Appearance by Written Declaration on the form provided by the City Ordinance No. 352 6 for that purpose, he or she shall be deemed to have waived his or her right to an administrative hearing. Under these circumstances, the administrative hearing officer shall dismiss the challenge to the administrative citation, and shall issue a written notice to that effect. An individual whose challenge to an administrative citation is dismissed under this section shall be deemed not to have availed himself or herself of the right to an administrative hearing as provided in this chapter. 2. An individual who has been issued an administrative citation and who has requested an administrative hearing to challenge the citation as provided in this chapter may request in writing that his or her challenge to the citation be dismissed and the hearing cancelled. Upon receipt of such request, the administrative hearing officer shall dismiss the challenge to the administrative citation, cancel the pending hearing, and issue a written notice to that effect. Any individual who requests the dismissal of a challenge to an administrative citation under this section shall be deemed never to have availed himself or herself of the right to an administrative hearing as provided in this chapter. F. Procedures at Administrative Hearing. Administrative hearings are informal, and formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. Each party shall have the opportunity to present evidence in support of his or her case and to cross-examine witnesses. The City bears the burden of proof at an administrative hearing to establish a violation. The citation is prima facie evidence of the violation and the enforcement officer who issued the citation is not required to participate in the hearing. The administrative hearing officer shall use preponderance of the evidence as the standard of evidence in deciding the issues. Evidence shall be submitted under penalty of perjury. G. Decision of an Administrative Hearing Officer. At the conclusion of the hearing or within fifteen 15 days thereafter, the administrative hearing officer shall render a decision as follows: 1. Determine that the violation for which the citation was issued occurred, and impose a fine in the amount set forth in the penalty schedule, and if the violation has not been corrected as of the date of the hearing, order correction of the violation; or 2. Determine that the violation for which the citation was issued occurred, but that the responsible party has introduced credible evidence of mitigating circumstances warranting imposition of a lesser penalty than that prescribed in the penalty schedule, or no penalty at all, and imposing such lesser fine, if any, and if the violation has not been corrected as of the date of the hearing, ordering that the violation be corrected; or 3. Determine that the violation for which the citation was issued did not occur or that the condition did not constitute a violation of the code. The administrative hearing officer shall issue a written decision entitled "Administrative Order" no later than fifteen (15) days after the date on which the administrative hearing concludes. The Administrative Order shall be served upon the responsible party by first class mail, or if that method fails, by any of the other methods set forth in Section 1.08.050. The Administrative Order shall become fmal on the date of mailing or other service, and shall notify the responsible party of his or her right to appeal as provided in subsection (H) of this section. The Administrative Order shall also: (i) either set a deadline for compliance Ordinance No. 352 7 with its terms, in the event that the responsible person fails to file an appeal, in no event less than twenty (20) days from the date of mailing or other service; or (ii) if the hearing officer determines as described in subsection (G)(2) or (G)(3) immediately above, and the responsible party has deposited the penalty with the City, order a partial or full refund of the deposit. If the violation is a continuing violation of the City's building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the responsible person has not more than thirty (30) days from mailing or other service of the Administrative Order to correct the violation. H. Appeal the Administrative Order. If an administrative order is rendered in favor of the City, the responsible person may seek judicial review of the administrative order in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, by filing an appeal of the administrative order pursuant to, and paying the fee required by, Government Code § 53069.4 within twenty (20) days after service of the administrative order. Pursuant to Government Code § 53069.4, the appealing party must serve a copy of the notice of appeal in person or by first-class mail upon the City Clerk. If no notice of appeal is filed within the twenty (20) Day period, the administrative hearing officer's decision is fmal. I. Failure to Comply with Administrative Order. In the absence of a timely appeal to the Superior Court, failure to comply with a fmal administrative order directing the abatement of a continuing violation by the date specified in the order shall be a misdemeanor for each day thereafter, or any portion thereof, that the violation is maintained or permitted. In the event of a timely appeal to the Superior Court pursuant to subsection (H) of this section, and provided the City prevails thereon each day, or any portion thereof, that a continuing violation is maintained or permitted after a court -ordered abatement date shall be a misdemeanor. Filing a misdemeanor action does not preclude the City from pursuing any other remedies to gain compliance provided in this Code or under state law. For purposes of this subsection (I), a "continuing violation" shall mean a single, ongoing condition or activity in Violation of the Municipal Code. Section 3. Section 1.08.010 (Violation — Misdemeanor when) of Chapter 1.08 (General Penalty) of Title 1 (General Provisions) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 1.08.010 - Violation —Misdemeanor when. A. Any person violating any provision or failing to comply with any of the mandatory requirements of the ordinances of the City shall be charged with a misdemeanor, unless the violation is made an infraction by ordinance. B. Any person who violates the same provision, or fails to comply with the same requirement, of the sections of this code set forth in Section 1.08.030 more than three times within a twelve month period shall be charged with a misdemeanor for each violation committed thereafter within that same twelve month period. Any person who violates or fails to comply with the sections of this code set forth in Section 1.08.030 and who possesses no photo identification or refuses to identify him or herself to an enforcement officer, making it impossible to issue an administrative citation, shall be charged with a misdemeanor. Ordinance No. 352 8 Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its passage; and prior to fifteen (15) days after its passage, the City Clerk shall cause a copy of this ordinance to be published in accordance with the provisions of the law. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable. Section 6. Certification and Posting. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public places in the City within fifteen (15) days after its passage, in accordance with the provisions of Section 36933 of the Government Code. The City Clerk shall further certify to the adoption and posting of this Ordinance, and shall cause this Ordinance and its certification, together with proof of posting, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of the Council of this City. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2017. JAMES BLACK, MAYOR ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE CITY CLERK Ordinance No. 352 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 352 entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 9.58 (SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY FOR PARTIES AT WHICH UNDERAGE DRINKING OCCURS) OF ARTICLE VII (OFFENSES BY OR AGAINST MINORS) OF TITLE 9 (PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND WELFARE) OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPOSE LIABILITY ON PERSONS WHO FACILITATE OR ALLOW THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY MINORS AT ANY PARTY, GATHERING OR EVENT AT A PRIVATE RESIDENCE; AND AMENDING SECTION 1.08.010 AND ADDING SECTIONS 1.08.030 THROUGH 1.08.090 TO CHAPTER 1.08 (GENERAL PENALTY) TO TITLE 1 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CREATE AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION PROCESS FOR CODE VIOLATIONS was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on , 2017 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. Ordinance No. 352 HEIDI LUCE CITY CLERK 10 3/15/2017 Relationships Between Social Host Laws and Underage Drinking: Findings From a Study of 50 California Cities J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2014 Nov; 75(6): 901-907. PMCID: PMC4211332 Relationships Between Social Host Laws and Underage Drinking: Findings From a Study of 50 California Cities Maliie J Paschall, Ph.D.,a,* Sharon Lipperman-Kreda, Ph.D.,a Joel W Grube, Ph.D.,a and Sue Thomas, Ph.D.b aPrevention Research Center, Oakland, California bPacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Santa Cruz, California Correspondence may be sent to Maliie J. Paschall at the Prevention Research Center, 180 Grand Avenue, Suite 1200, Oakland, CA 94612, or via email at: paschall(prev.orq. Received 2014 Mar 21; Accepted 2014 Jun 12. Copyright © 2014 by Alcohol Research Documentation, Inc. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Objective: Many states and local communities have enacted social host (SH) laws to reduce underage drinking in private settings. However, little is known about whether such laws are effective. This study examined relationships between city SH laws and underage drinking in general and at parties in private settings. Method: Go to: SH policy data were collected for 50 California cities in 2009, and SH policies were rated for comprehensiveness and stringency. Annual telephone interviews were conducted with a cohort of 1,483 adolescents (ages 13-16 at Wave 1) from 2009 to 2011 to assess past -year alcohol use, heavy drinking, and drinking at parties. Multilevel analyses were first conducted for the total sample to examine relationships between SH laws and adolescents' past -year drinking, with other city and individual characteristics controlled for. Parallel analyses were then conducted for a subsample of 667 youth who had reported any past -year drinking. Results: SH policy ratings were unrelated to any of the past -year drinking outcomes for the total sample of adolescents. However, among past -year drinkers, a stronger SH policy was inversely related to drinking at parties ((3 = -.06, p < .05) but was unrelated to past -year alcohol use and heavy drinking in general. There were no moderating effects of SH policy on change in adolescents' past -year drinking over the 3 -year period. Conclusions: Local SH policies that include strict liability and civil penalties that are imposed administratively may be associated with less frequent underage drinking in private settings, particularly among adolescents who have already initiated alcohol use. HAZARDOUS DRINKING AND alcohol -related problems such as drinking and driving remain prevalent among adolescents in the United States. The 2012 Monitoring the Future Survey indicated that 11% of 8th graders, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211332/ 1/8 3/15/2017 Relationships Between Social Host Laws and Underage Drinking: Findings From a Study of 50 California Cities 27.6% of 10th graders, and 41.5% of 12th graders had consumed at least one alcoholic drink in the past 30 days, whereas prevalence rates for heavy episodic drinking (>5 consecutive drinks) in the past 2 weeks were 5.1%, 15.6%, and 23.7% among youth in these three grades, respectively (Johnston et al., 2013). The 2012 Monitoring the Future Survey also indicated that 57.5% of 8th graders, 78.2% of 10th graders, and 90.6% of 12th graders thought that alcoholic beverages would be "fairly easy" or "very easy" to get. The majority of adolescents obtain alcohol from social sources, notably from friends older than 21 and at parties (Paschall et al, 2007; Pemberton et al., 2008). A growing number of states and communities are enacting social host (SH) laws to prevent or reduce underage drinking in private settings. There are two types of SH laws. Laws prohibiting hosting of underage parties involve statutory prohibitions enforced by state or local governments, generally through criminal proceedings, that can lead to sanctions such as fines or imprisonment. Host party laws often are closely linked to laws prohibiting the furnishing of alcohol to minors, although laws that prohibit the hosting of underage drinking parties may apply without regard to who furnishes the alcohol. Second, SH civil liability laws, which are at the state level only, involve actions by a private party seeking monetary damages for injuries that result from permitting underage drinking on the host's premises. SH laws of both types may be effective strategies for reducing underage drinking and related problems such as drinking and driving (Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation/Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention [PIRE/OJJDP), 2011). However, research on the effectiveness of either type of SH laws is very limited (Hingson and White, 2014; Wagoner et al., 2012). One study examined effects of state SH civil liability laws on alcohol -related motor vehicle fatalities among 18- to 20 -year -olds from 1975 to 2005 (Dills, 2010). Results indicated a 9% reduction in alcohol -related traffic fatalities that was attributable to the presence of SH laws. This study also examined effects of state SH laws on self -reported alcohol use, heavy episodic drinking, and drinking and driving among 18- to 20 -year -olds who participated in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey from 1984 to 2004. Results indicated modest, nonsignificant reductions in alcohol use and heavy episodic drinking. However, a significant reduction in the frequency of self -reported drinking and driving was observed in states with SH laws, compared to those without such laws, when overall trends were controlled for. Less evidence for the effectiveness of SH policies was found in a recent cross-sectional study (Wagoner et al., 2013). The presence of local or state SH policies (prohibitions against hosting underage drinking parties) was unrelated to drinking at home or in someone else's home on the last drinking occasion, heavy drinking, or drinking consequences among adolescents. However, youth living in communities where SH ordinances had been in effect longer were less likely to report drinking with large groups of peers. Limited evidence for effects of either type of SH laws on alcohol use and heavy episodic drinking may be attributable to the lack of specificity regarding drinking settings, as both types of SH laws pertain to private settings where underage youth may obtain and consume alcohol. In addition, the available studies have examined only effects of the presence of SH laws, regardless of the content of the law, which varies considerably across states and communities (Fell et al.. 2008). In states such as California where no comprehensive, statewide hosting -prohibition law exists, some counties and cities have enacted such laws, often in response to a tragic event related to underage drinking in a private setting. As part of a study on local alcohol policies related to underage drinking, Thomas et al. (2012) obtained information on the presence or absence and the content of hosting -prohibition laws in 50 California cities. Of the 50 cities, 24 had an SH law in 2009. SH laws in the 24 cities were rated for comprehensiveness and stringency, based on recommended best practices for local alcohol -control policies and a model SH ordinance. The findings indicate that the most effective SH laws (a) apply specifically to underage drinkers, (b) require civil adjudication with a swift administrative penalty, and (c) do not require prior knowledge (i.e., if it happens on your property, you are responsible regardless of specific knowledge of underage drinking; PIRE/OJJDP, 2011; Ventura County Behavioral Health Department, 2005). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211332/ 2/8 3/15/2017 Relationships Between Social Host Laws and Underage Drinking: Findings From a Study of 50 Califomia Cities Variation in SH laws across the 50 cities and interview data collected from adolescents as part of the 50 -city study allow for an assessment of associations between the strength of SH laws and underage drinking in general and in private settings. We hypothesized that adolescents living in cities with stronger SH laws would report less frequent drinking at parties than youth living in cities where SH laws were absent or relatively weak. We also hypothesized that SH law ratings would not be as strongly associated with drinking in general as with drinking at parties. Based on findings of two recent studies with data from the 50 cities (Paschall et al., 2012, 2014), we also took into account other city and individual characteristics that may act as confounders, including adult drinking, bar density, enforcement of underage drinking laws, and demographic characteristics. Method Go to: Study sample and survey methods Sample of cities. Beginning with a list of all 138 California cities with populations between 50,000 and 500,000, a purposive geographic sample of 50 noncontiguous cities was drawn to maximize representativeness with regard to the geography and ecology of the state. The sampled cities tended, on average, to have slightly smaller populations (106,588 vs. 108,000), somewhat less ethnic diversity (e.g., 64% vs. 59% White), smaller household sizes (2.82 vs. 2.93 persons), and lower median household incomes ($50,000 vs. $52,000) than unsampled cities on the list. Of importance, however, none of these differences was statistically significant, and the coverage of these measures across cities was good. Resampling using different starting seeds provided much the same results, offering further evidence regarding the robustness and representativeness of these sampled places (Gruenewald et al.. 2014). Youth sample and survey methods. This study includes adolescents who participated in at least one of three waves of an annual survey conducted in the 50 cities between 2009 and 2012. The survey targeted adolescents who were 13-16 years old in 2009 (Wave 1). Households within each city were randomly sampled from a purchased list of telephone numbers and addresses. An invitation letter describing the study was mailed to sampled households and followed by telephone contact. Interviewers obtained parental consent for the interviews, followed by assent from the youth respondents. Respondents received $25 at Waves 1 and 2 and $35 at Wave 3 for their participation in the study. Institutional review board approval was obtained before study implementation. Computer -assisted telephone interviews were given in either English or Spanish at the respondent's request and lasted 30-40 minutes. Interviewers assured youth that their responses to survey questions would be kept confidential and checked to ensure that their responses could not be overheard by someone else in the household. Of 3,062 sampled households with eligible respondents, 1,543 (50.4%) participated in the first interview (Wave 1). Of these youth, 1,312 (85%) participated 1 year later in Wave 2, and 1,121 (72%) participated 2 years later in Wave 3. The current study is based on data from 1,483 youths who (a) participated in at least one wave of data collection, (b) lived in the same city across study years, and (c) provided complete data for all demographic measures. An average of 30 adolescents (range: 20-47, SD = 5.91) per city provided data for this study. Youth survey measures Alcohol use. Respondents were asked, "Have you ever had a whole drink (not just a sip or a taste) of an alcoholic beverage? A whole drink is a bottle or can of beer, malt liquor, or flavored malt beverage, a glass of wine, a shot of liquor, or a whole mixed drink." Respondents who answered "yes" were then asked, "In the past 12 months, on how many days did you have a whole drink of an alcoholic beverage?" and "In the past 12 months, on the days when you drank alcohol, how many drinks did you typically have?" Response values for these two variables were multiplied to create a past -year alcohol quantity x frequency (QF) measure. Alcohol QF consumption measures have been shown to have test —retest reliability and validity in clinical and nonclinical studies with adolescents (Sobell and Sobell, 2003). Respondents who indicated any past -year drinking were also asked, "In the past 12 months, on the X days when you dra , on how many of these days would you say you had https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211332/ 3/8 3/15/2017 Relationships Between Social Host Laws and Underage Drinking: Findings From a Study of 50 Califomia Cities five or more drinks?" They were also asked, "Thinking about the past 12 months, how many times did you drink alcoholic beverages at parties?" All past -year drinking variables were log transformed to reduce skewness. Demographics. Youth reported their gender, age, and race/ethnicity. Race/ethnicity was treated as a dichotomous variable (non -Hispanic White vs. non-White). City -level measures Social host policy. Hosting -prohibition policies in the 50 cities in 2009 were identified through a review of local alcohol policy data, using city ordinances available online and interviews with city clerks. We rated each city's SH policy based on a coding system developed in previous studies of state underage drinking laws (Fell et a1., 2008, 2009) and recommended best practices (PIRE/OJJDP, 2011; Ventura County Behavioral Health Department, 2005). Each city received a +1 if it had an SH ordinance or a 0 otherwise. Each element of law was assigned points for comprehensiveness/stringency or the reverse where individual provisions weakened the law. For example, +2 points were assigned if the law applied to underage persons or parties; +2 if it was a civil law only, +1 if it was a criminal law only, and +3 if it was both a civil and a criminal law; +1 if the law applied to the full range of property types (residential and outdoor property); and -1 if there was a knowledge requirement in the law. This gave each city the possibility of 7 total points. The same approach was used to rate SH policies in 2010 and 2011. Strong correlations among the ratings for SH policy in the three study years (r = .89—.96) and comparisons of city SH policies from year to year indicated that there were very few changes during that time. We therefore used 2009 SH policy ratings in the current analyses. This variable was log transformed to reduce skewness. Local enforcement activities. The level of enforcement of underage drinking laws by police departments in California cities is determined to some extent by funding from the California Alcohol Beverage Control Agency (CA ABC). Therefore, we used total funds received from the CA ABC from 2008-2009 to 2010-2011 as a surrogate measure of enhanced enforcement activities. Fifteen of the 50 cities had received CA ABC funds in at least one of those years, ranging from $ 11,500 to $200,000 total. Compliance checks to reduce alcohol sales to underage youth are the most common type of enforcement activity using these funds, but they may also be used for other activities such as enforcement of minor -in -possession laws. Because city population size could influence level of funding, the per capita funding rate was computed. This variable was log transformed to reduce skewness. Bar density. In a previous study with two waves of youth survey data from the 50 cities, we found that bar density was positively related to youth drinking, whereas off -premise outlet density was not (Paschall et al., 2012). Bar density may therefore represent both the physical availability of alcohol and community norms regarding alcohol use. Based on records of licensed establishments obtained from the CA ABC, we computed bar densities based on the number of bars per roadway mile. This measure is thought to be a better indicator of access to alcohol outlets than outlets per square mile (Chen et al., 2010). Adult alcohol use. A random -digit -dial household telephone survey of 8,553 adults in the 50 cities was conducted in 2009 to assess levels of alcohol consumption and related problems (Gruenewald et al., 2014). The number of adult respondents per city ranged from 109 to 204 (M= 171). Respondents' ages ranged from 18 to 98 (M= 54.6), 57% were female, and 59% were White. The survey included a graduated frequency measure that was used to calculate the total volume and frequency of alcohol use in the past 28 days. The mean level of past - 28 -day alcohol use was then obtained for each city. This variable was log transformed to reduce skewness. City demographics. Measures of city demographics were obtained from 2010 census data (Geolvtics, 2010). City demographics included population density, percentage of the population younger than 18 years old, and percentage of White and Hispanic residents. A socioeconomic status factor score was derived from median family income, percentage of the population with a college education, and percentage of the population that was https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211332/ 4/8 3/15/2017 Relationships Between Social Host Laws and Undetage Drinking: Findings From a Study of 50 California Cities unemployed. These measures were significantly correlated (r = .52—.79,p < .01). Principal components analysis yielded a single factor solution, accounting for 75.1% of the variance (factor loadings range: .78—.91). Data analysis Attrition analyses were conducted to determine whether adolescents who participated only in the first survey differed from those who also participated in the second and third surveys with respect to demographic characteristics and alcohol use behaviors at Wave 1. Multilevel linear regression analyses were conducted with HLM Version 7.0 software (Raudenbush et al., 2011) to examine associations between city -level SH policy ratings and drinking behaviors. SH policy rating and other alcohol environment indicators (enforcement of underage drinking laws, adult drinking, bar density) and city demographics were included as city -level variables in all models. Youth gender, age, and race/ethnicity were included as individual -level variables in all models. Drinking behaviors (outcomes) and a time (survey wave) variable were included at the observation level. The cross -level interaction between SH policy rating and time was examined to determine whether it was predictive of outcome slopes. The interaction term was dropped from models if it was not statistically significant. Parallel analyses were conducted for 667 youths who reported any past -year alcohol use for at least one wave of data collection (56% male, Mage at Wave 1 = 14.9 years, SD = 0.95) to determine whether effects of SH policies and other community characteristics would differ when the sample was limited to drinkers. Results Go to: Sample attrition Attrition analyses indicated that the percentage of female youth did not differ significantly across the three waves (range: 47.8%-48.7%), nor did the percentage of Whites (range: 57.8%-59.2%). Ttest results indicated that Wave 1 mean levels of past -year drinking at parties, past -year alcohol use, and heavy drinking were similar among youth who did and did not participate in Wave 2. Mean levels of past -year drinking at parties and past - year alcohol use were significantly higher among youth who did not participate in Wave 3 —drinking at parties: t(628.78) = 2.'74,p = .006; past -year alcohol use: t(644.14) = 2.61,p = .009. Mean levels of past -year heavy drinking were similar among youth who did and did not participate in Wave 3. Descriptive statistics Descriptive statistics for study variables are provided in Table 1. The mean SH policy rating was 2.84 (SD = 3.06, range: 0-7); as noted previously, this variable and others were log transformed for analyses to reduce skewness. Prevalence rates for past -year youth alcohol use were 20.2% at Wave 1, 32.0% at Wave 2, and 44.5% at Wave 3. Prevalence rates for heavy drinking were 8.2% at Wave 1, 14.6% at Wave 2, and 22.7% at Wave 3. Prevalence rates for drinking at parties were 15% at Wave 1, 25% at Wave 2, and 37% at Wave 3. Table 1 Descriptive statistics Social host policy and past -year drinking Results of multilevel analyses examining associations between SH policy ratings and alcohol use behaviors are reported in Table 2. No associations were found between SH policy rating and any of the three past -year drinking outcomes. In addition, no cross -level interactions were found between time and SH policy rating on any of the alcohol use behaviors. Of the other alcohol environmental indicators, bar density was positively related to drinking at parties, whereas adult drinking was positively rela d to past -year heavy drinking. Being older and I� https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211332/ 5/8 3/15/2017 Relationships Between Social Host Lafvs and Underage Drinking: Findings From a Study of 50 California Cities being male were consistently associated with greater heavy drinking, greater alcohol use in general, and drinking at parties, whereas ethnicity was not related to any of the past -year drinking outcomes. Table 2 Results of multilevel analyses for total adolescent sample, (3 (SE) We further examined these associations among the 667 youth who reported past -year alcohol use for at least one wave of data collection (Table 3). A statistically significant inverse association was found between SH policy rating and youth past -year alcohol use at parties, indicating that a stronger SH policy was associated with less frequent alcohol use at parties among drinkers. To help with interpretability, we also ran the model using Poisson (zero -inflated) regression with the original (unlogged) variables. Results indicated a modest, although significant, 3% lower incidence of drinking at parties with each unit increase in the SH policy rating (event rate ratio [95% CI] = 0.97 [0.95, 0.99],p = .03). This represents a 20% lower incidence of drinking at parties among adolescents in cities with the highest SH policy rating compared to those in cities with no SH law. No association was observed between SH policy rating and overall past -year alcohol use or heavy drinking. No cross -level interactions were found between time and SH policy rating on any of the alcohol use behaviors. Of the other alcohol environment indicators, adult alcohol use was positively related to overall past -year alcohol use. Associations between youth demographic characteristics and past -year drinking variables were similar to those observed for the total sample. Table 3 Results of multilevel analyses for adolescent drinkers, (3 (SE) To investigate the possibility that SH policies had a greater effect for older than for younger adolescents, we conducted additional analyses that included the interactions between age and the SH policy rating, for both the total sample and drinkers only. These analyses indicated that age did not significantly moderate the relationships between SH policy and any of the outcomes. Discussion Go to: Many states and local communities have enacted hosting -prohibition laws to reduce hazardous drinking by underage youth in private settings. This study is one of the first to examine whether local hosting -prohibition policies are associated with adolescent alcohol use and heavy drinking in general and at parties that are typically in private settings. Results suggest that stronger SH policies are associated with less frequent drinking at parties among adolescents who have already initiated alcohol use. SH policies, however, were unrelated to drinking at parties among all adolescents, including those who have not already initiated alcohol use. The general measures of past -year alcohol use and heavy drinking were unrelated to SH policy ratings for both the total sample of adolescents and the subsample of drinkers. Thus, SH policies may be most relevant and effective for deterring alcohol use in private settings for adolescents who havealready begun to drink. Our findings also provide some support for the validity of our SH policy ratings. The fact that we found a significant association between SH policy ratings and drinking at parties among alcohol -initiated adolescents suggests that SH policies are effective in a meaningful subset of those situations for which they were designed. To address more broadly the harms that result from underage drinking at parties to the drinkers themselves as well as others, a larger range of underage drinking policies is needed. For example, policymakers and researchers may want to consider the two major types of SH laws that can be implemented. The first is the type of SH policy investigated here, which establishes government -imposed liability against individuals (social hosts) responsible for underage drinking events on property they own, lease, or otherwise control. These laws can be implemented _ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211332/ 6/8 3/15/2017 Relationships Between Social Host Laws and Underage Drinking: Findings From a Study of 50 California Cities at both the state and local levels. The second type involves an action by a private party seeking monetary damages for injuries that result from permitting underage drinking on the host's premises. Only state legislatures or state courts (as opposed to city and county governments) have the authority to impose this form of civil liability. These different approaches to SH liability may have different implications for preventing underage drinking and drinking problems. The effectiveness of SH laws in preventing or reducing underage drinking will depend not only on the content of the laws but also on public awareness and enforcement of SH laws, neither of which was examined in this study. Public awareness of SH laws may be enhanced through a variety of media channels, including written or electronic messages from schools, public service announcements, and news coverage of related enforcement activities. Enforcement of SH laws will most likely occur when there is strong support from the city government and appropriate training of law enforcement officers, who may be accustomed to using party -dispersal operations that do not focus on the party hosts when underage drinking is involved. In addition, resources to support SH law enforcement operations may be limited. Thus, some communities have adopted response cost —recovery ordinances (which are, often, a component of hosting underage drinking party ordinances, although they are sometimes separate ordinances), where fines are imposed on party hosts to cover the costs of enforcement operations and emergency medical services. Findings of this study should be considered in light of several limitations. We cannot make causal inferences because this study examined only the association between SH laws and youth drinking. Adolescents in our sample may not be representative of all adolescents in the 50 California cities, and sample attrition may have affected our results in unknown ways. In addition, California cities in our sample may not be typical of other cities in the United States in terms of demographic makeup, as many California cities have ethnically diverse populations with a relatively high percentage of non-White or Hispanic residents. Therefore, findings of this study may not generalize beyond the study sample. Responses to survey questions were subject to recall and social desirability biases, which may have led to underreportingof alcohol use, although measures were taken to ensure privacy of telephone interviews and truthful responses to survey questions. We also recognize the difficulty of interpreting analysis results, given that many of the variables were log transformed before analyses. In addition, we did not directly measure the level of enforcement of SH policies by local law enforcement agencies; a high level of enforcement may enhance their effectiveness. Additional research is needed to determine whether findings of this study can be replicated in other settings. Ideally, studies with controlled or natural experimental designs are needed to determine whether SH laws are effective (Wagoner et al., 2012). Future research should also examine the level of enforcement of SH laws, which may vary considerably across communities. Without adequate enforcement, support from the public and city officials, and parental awareness, SH laws may be less effective. Research is also needed to better understand the mechanisms through which SH policies may affect youth drinking, such as alcohol availability from social sources, perceived acceptability of alcohol use, and perceived enforcement of underage drinking laws. In addition, future research should examine effects of SH policies on adverse consequences of adolescent alcohol use in private settings, such as drinking and driving. Footnotes Go to: This research and preparation of this article were supported by National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) Grant P60-AA006282. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIAAA or the National Institutes of Health. References Go to: Chen M -J, Grube JW, Gruenewald PJ. Community alcohol outlet density and underage drinking. Addiction. 2010;105:270-278. [PMC free article] [PubMed] Dills AK. Social host liability for minors and underage drunk -driving accidents. Journal of Health Economics. 2010;29:241-249. [PubMed] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211332/ 7/8 3/15/2017 Relationships Between Social Host Laws and Underage Drinking: Findings From a Study of 50 California Cities Fell JC, Fisher DA, Voas RB, Blackman K, Tippetts AS. The relationship of underage drinking laws to reductions in drinking drivers'in fatal crashes in the United States. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2008;40:1430-1440. [PMC free article] [PubMed] Fell JC, Fisher DA, Voas RB, Blackman K, Tippetts AS. The impact of underage drinking laws on alcohol - related fatal crashes of young drivers. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. 2009;33:1208-1219. [PMC free article] [PubMed] Geolytics. Official Census 2010 Data. 2010 Retrieved from http://www.geolytics.corn/USCensus,Census2010,Products.asp. Gruenewald PJ, Remer LG, LaScala EA. Testing a social ecological model of alcohol use: The California 50 -city study. Addiction. 2014;109:736-745. [PMC free article] [PubMed] Hingson R, White A. New research findings since the 2007 Surgeon General's Call to Action to Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking: A review. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. 2014;75:158-169. [PMC free article] [PubMed] Johnston LD, O'Malley PM, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE. Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2012. Volume I: Secondary school students. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan; 2013. Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation/Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Regulatory strategies for preventing youth access to alcohol: Best practices. 2011. Calverton, MD: Author. Retrieved from http://www.udetc.org/documents/accesslaws.pdf. Paschall MJ, Grube JW, Black C, Ringwalt CL. Is commercial alcohol availability related to adolescent alcohol sources and alcohol use? Findings from a multi -level study. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2007;41:168-174. [PMC free article] [PubMed] Paschall MJ, Grube JW, Thomas S, Cannon C, Treffers R. Relationships between local enforcement, alcohol availability, drinking norms, and adolescent alcohol use in 50 California cities. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. 2012;73:657-665. [PMC free article] [PubMed] Paschall MJ, Lipperman-Kreda S, Grube JW. Effects of the local alcohol environment on adolescents' drinking behaviors and beliefs. Addiction. 2014;109:407-416. [PMC free article] [PubMed] Pemberton MR, Colliver JD, Robbins TM, Gfroerer JC. Underage alcohol use: Findings from the 2002-2006 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health (Department of Health and Human Services Publications No. SMA 08-4333, Analytic Series A-30) Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies; 2008. Raudenbush S, Bryk A, Cheong YF, Congdon R, du Toit M. HLM 7: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International; 2011. Sobell LC, Sobell MB. Alcohol consumption measures. In: Allen JP, Wilson VB, editors. Assessing alcohol problems: A guide for clinicians and researchers. 2nd ed. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; 2003. (NIH Publication No. 03-3745, pp. 75-99) Thomas S, Paschall MJ, Grube JW, Cannon C, Treffers R. Underage alcohol policies across 50 California cities: An assessment of best practices. Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention Policy. 2012;7:26-39. [PMC free article] [PubMed] Ventura County Behavioral Health Department. Model social host liability ordinance with legal commentary and resources. Ventura, CA: Author; 2005. Wagoner KG, Francisco VT, Sparks M, Wyrick D, Nichols T, Wolfson M. A review of social host policies focused on underage drinking parties: Suggestions for future research. Journal of Drug Education. 2012;42:99-117. [PubMed] Wagoner KG, Sparks M, Francisco VT, Wyrick D, Nichols T, Wolfson M. Social host policies and underage drinking parties. Substance Use & Misuse. 2013;48:41-53. [PubMed] Articles from Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs are provided here courtesy of Rutgers University. Center of Alcohol Studies https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211332/ 8/8 rTm �3 f9 subject social Host Information Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 10:23 AM From: Rod Uyeda <relaxinrod@gmail.com> To: <mayor_citycouncil@cityofrh.net>, "Raymond R. Cruz" <rcruz@cityofrh.net> 111 1 5 2017 City of Rolling Hills By Good morning. I apologize for not being able to be at your recent Council meeting, but I understand a number of questions came up that perhaps no one had answers to. Perhaps I can be of some assistance as you move forward... My name is Rod Uyeda. I am the former Chief of Police of the Manhattan Beach Police Department. I retired in 2011. I also brought forth the first Social Host Ordinance in LA County for Manhattan Beach. Regarding appeals. You can set your own procedure for appeals. You do not have to hire anyone special. It could be someone already on your staff, such as the City Manager, his assistant or even someone on one of your commissions. It just needs to be someone who probably is well educated, fair, impartial and reasonable. It could also be a volunteer. You can set your own rules as long as they are reasonable. Being a lawyer would probably help since they are well versed in a "reasonable" standard. This ordinance has already been tested in court. It is prevalent in both San Diego and Ventura Counties. Orange County, like LA County, are starting to see more and more cities enact this ordinance to curb underage drinking. If someone refuses to pay, the fine can be turned over to a collection agency. The work is minimal, since most of it has already been done and any costs can be covered by fines down the road. The City of Manhattan Beach averages around 4-6 cites per year. Hermosa Beach I believe has had around two. But what is clear is that the number of these parties have decreased so that cites are rare. It is so important to send a message to families that need that extra pressure to be a parent or responsible adult instead of trying to be their child's friend or one of the "cool" parents. I hope this information helps) Thank you so much for showing strong leadership and moving forward with this ordinance! Rod Uyeda 8(4 a/Rd/a/if qee4 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: 05/08/17 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER kV, SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANING (MOU) BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AND THE CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY (CJPIA) FOR THE PURPOSE OF AUTHORIZING WORK RELATED TO CJPIA'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INVOLVING WORK PERFORMED BY DISABILITY ACCESS CONSULTANTS (DAC) INCLUDING CONDUCTING AN ADA SELF -EVALUATION AND DEVELOPING AN ADA TRANSITION PLAN DATE: May 8, 2017 ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum of Understanding between the JPIA and the City of Rolling Hills RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council allow the City Manager enter into a MOU between the City of Rolling Hills and the CJPIA for the purpose of authorizing work related to CJPIA's ADA Assistance Program involving work performed by Disability Access Consultants including conducting an ADA Self -Evaluation and developing an ADA Transition Plan. BACKGROUND The ADA requires disabled individuals equal access to the City's programs, services and activities. Under Title II of the ADA, the City of Rolling Hills is required to have a continually updated ADA Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan. The City however is out of compliance and at risk for claims and litigation by not having a current ADA Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan. Since staff does not have the time and expertise to do this work, it would be difficult to complete an ADA Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan without the use of a consultant. Fortunately, the CJPIA is now providing minimum funding for each of their client agencies to encourage them to conduct an ADA Self - Assessment and implement an ADA Transition Plan because it makes the insurance pool vulnerable when any client city is out of compliance. The City recently received confirmation via a draft MOU and Professional Services Agreement with the JPIA and the contractor Disability Access Consultants (DAC) to perform an Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan at no cost to the City. DISCUSSION As part of the scope of work to complete an ADA Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan, the consultant will review policies, procedures, practices and programs to determine if any are discriminatory towards disabled individuals. It will also identify all the physical barriers within City facilities that may deny access to a person with a disability. This will include the proposed method to remove each barrier and schedule (including priority) on when the City plans to become ADA compliant with each identified barrier and its estimated cost. Once the Transition Plan is completed, the City will need to continue to document, monitor and track its compliance until all identified barriers are removed. FISCAL IMPACT The JPIA's minimum funding assistance will cover the entire cost of the consultant ($14,800) to perform the ADA Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan. The only possible cost associated with this Plan will be after the first year to purchase the DACTrak Plan implementation software annual license. The JPIA will pay for the first year of the DACTrak software subscription fee, then it is the member's responsibility each year thereafter—it.is $2000 a year. The DACTrak's capabilities would be helpful in maintaining the City's Plan data, update the plan, print various custom reports, etc. until the identified ADA barriers are removed and the Plan is complete. However, the DACTrak is not required to enter this MOU and City can decide if it wants to purchase the annual license after utilizing it after one year for free. The City owns the information that is part of the ADA Self Evaluation and Transition Plan and can track the information itself if it decides the software is too expensive and not worth the cost. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is between the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) and City of Rolling Hills (MEMBER) for purposes of authorizing work related to CJPIA's ADA Assistance Program, which includes conducting self -evaluations and inspections, developing transition plans, and evaluating programs and services. Disability Access Consultants (DAC) will perform all work for MEMBER on behalf of CJPIA in accordance with all terms, covenants, standards and conditions set forth in that certain agreement between the CJPIA and DAC, entered into on March 14, 2017 of which MEMBER shall be considered a third party beneficiary to that agreement. Copies of the agreement are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. This MOU also discloses costs related to the aforementioned work, which will be billed directly to CJPIA. CJPIA will then invoice MEMBER, less the amount of CJPIA ADA Assistance Program funding. MEMBER agrees to pay the invoiced amount within 30 days of billing by CJPIA. 1. Total cost for all work to be performed by DAC, $ 14,800 as per attached DAC written proposal 2. Total program funding provided by CJPIA to be $ 14,800 paid directly to DAC on behalf of MEMBER for the aforementioned work 3. Total amount owed by MEMBER, representing difference between Line 1 and Line 2, which will be billed by CJPIA $0 City of Rolling Hills, Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager Date Date Attachments: DAC Proposal, DAC Professional Services Agreement RECEIVE APR 2 6 2017 City of Rolling Hills By CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT for Professional Services ("Agreement") is made this day of March 14, 2017 ("Effective Date") by and between the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority ("Authority") and Disability Access Consultants ("Consultant") (together sometimes referred to the "Parties"). Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to Authority the services described in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A, and incorporated here. Such work shall be provided at the time and place and in the manner specified in Exhibit A. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A, this Agreement shall prevail. 1.1 Term of Services. The tern of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall end on June 30, 2018. Consultant shall complete the work described in Exhibit A prior to that date, unless the tern of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended as provided for in Section 8. The time provided to Consultant to complete the services required by this Agreement shall not affect the Authority's right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 8. 1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner including the necessary expertise or knowledge of the profession in which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in which Consultant practices its profession and to the sole satisfaction of the project representative. 1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to Agreement. In the event that Authority, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons, Consultant shall, immediately upon receiving notice from Authority of such desire of Authority, reassign such person or persons. 1.4 Time. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to satisfy Consultant's obligations hereunder. 1.5 Authorization to Perform Services. The Consultant is not authorized to perform any services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization from the Authority's project representative. 1.6 Eligible Recipients of Services. Authority members will receive a funding allowance toward ADA assistance level services as outlined under the scope of this agreement. Additional services outside of the ADA assistance level services shall be at the agreed upon hourly rate of $98 per consultant. All members of the Authority are eligible, including but not limited to: 3/14/17 FINAL DAC /1131A REc:EwE APR 2 6 2017 City of Rolling Hills By Page 1 City of Agoura Hills, Agoura Hills/Calabasas Community Center, City of Aliso Viejo, Town of Apple Valley, Area B Disaster Management, Area E Disaster Management, City of Arroyo Grande, City of Artesia, City of Atascadero, City of Azusa, City of Bell Gardens, City of Bellflower, Big Bear City Community Services District, Big Bear Fire Authority, City of Big Bear Lake, City of Bishop, Black Gold Cooperative Library System, City of Bradbury, City of Brawley, City of Buellton, City of Calabasas, City of Camarillo, City of Carpinteria, City of Cerritos, City of Chino Hills, City of Claremont, Coachella Valley Association of Governments, Coachella Valley Conservation Commission, Coastal Animal Services Authority, City of Commerce, City of Dana Point, Desert Recreation District, City of Diamond Bar, City of Duarte, Eastern Sierra Transportation Authority, City of El Centro, City of Fillmore, City of Fountain Valley, Gateway Cities Council of Governments, City of Goleta, City of Grand Terrace, City of Grover Beach, City of Guadalupe, City of Hawaiian Gardens, City of Hidden Hills, City of Imperial, City of Indian Wells, City of Indio, City of Irwindale, City of La Canada Flintridge, City of La Habra Heights, LA IMPACT, City of La Mirada, City of La Palma, City of La Puente, City of La Quinta, City of La Verne, City of Laguna Niguel, City of Laguna Woods, City of Lake Elsinore, City of Lake Forest, City of Lakewood, LA-RICS, City of Lawndale, City of Loma Linda, City of Lomita, City of Malibu, Town of Mammoth Lakes, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, City of Mission Viejo, City of Monrovia, Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District, City of Moorpark, City of Morro Bay, Mountain Area Regional Transportation Authority, City of Needles, City of Norwalk, City of Ojai, Orange County Council of Governments, City of Palm Desert, City of Palos Verdes Estates, Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit Authority, City of Paramount, City of Paso Robles, City of Pico Rivera, City of Pismo Beach, Pomona Valley Transportation Authority, City of Port Hueneme, City of Poway, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, City of Rolling Hills, City of Rolling Hills Estates, City of Rosemead, City of San Clemente, City of San Dimas, City of San Gabriel, City of San Juan Capistrano, City of San Luis Obispo, City of San Marcos, City of San Marino, City of Santa Fe Springs, City of Santa Paula, City of Seal Beach, City of Seaside, Seaside County Sanitation, City of Sierra Madre, City of Signal Hill, City of Solvang, City of South El Monte, Southeast Area Animal Control Authority, Southern California Association of Governments, City of Temple City, Ventura Port District, City of Villa Park, City of Walnut, West Cities Police Communication Center, City of Westlake Village. Section 2. COMPENSATION. Authority hereby agrees to pay Consultant in accordance with the payment schedule as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full, based upon work completed, as defined in Exhibit A. [n the event of a conflict between this Agreement and Exhibit A, regarding the amount of compensation, this Agreement shall prevail. Authority shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and _in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only payments from Authority to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall submit all invoices to Authority in the manner specified herein. Except as specifically authorized in advance by Authority, Consultant shall not bill Authority for duplicate services performed by more than one person. 3/14/17 FINAL DAC / JPIA Page 2 2.1 Invoices. Consultant shall submit invoices during the term of this Agreement, based on the work completed, and within 30 days. All work billed shall be on a per member basis, with an itemized detail of services performed. 2.2 Payment. Authority shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. Authority shall have 30 days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the requirements above to pay Consultant. 2.3 Total Payment. Authority shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever incurred by Consultant in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. Authority shall make no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement. 2.4 Payment of Taxes. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any federal or state taxes. 2.5 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the Authority or Consultant tenninates this Agreement pursuant to Section 8, the Authority shall compensate the Consultant for all outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination. Consultant shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date. Section 3. EQUIPMENT. Except as otherwise provided, Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide all supplies and equipment necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of Authority, and prior to commencement of Work, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the tenn of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to Authority. 4.1 General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO "insured contract" language will not be accepted. 4.2 Automobile Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non -owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident. 3/14/17 FINAL DAC / JPIA Page 3 4.3 Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) Insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three years after completion of the services required by this agreement. 4.4 Workers' Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer's Liability Insurance (with limits of at least S1,000,000). 4.5 Proof of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to Authority as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers' compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by Authority's risk manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with Authority at all times during the term of this contract. Authority reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 4.6 Duration of. Coverage. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or sub -consultants. 4.7 Primary/Noncontributing. Coverage provided by Consultant shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by Authority shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of Authority before the Authority's own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured. 4.8 Authority's Rights of Enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, Authority has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by Authority will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or Authority will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, Authority may cancel this Agreement. 4.9 Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders' Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI 3/14/17 FINAL DAC/JPIA Page 4 (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the Authority's risk manager. 4.10 Waiver of Subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against Authority, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against Authority, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its sub -consultants. 4.11 Enforcement of Contract Provisions (Non Estoppel). Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the Authority to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes 110 additional obligations on the Authority nor does it waive any rights hereunder. 4.12 Requirements Not Limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the Authority requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the Authority. 4.13 Notice of Cancellation. Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide to Authority with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (1 0) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage. 4.14 Additional Insured Status. General liability policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that Authority and its officers, officials, employees, agents, volunteers, and members shall be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies. 4.15 Prohibition of Undisclosed Coverage Limitations. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to Authority and approved of in writing. 4.16 Separation of Insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the 3/14/17 FINAL DAC / PIA Page 5 insurer's limits of liability. The policy/policies shall not contain any cross -liability exclusions. 4.17 Pass Through Clause. Consultant agrees to ensure that its sub -consultants, subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is providedin conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with consultants, subcontractors, and others engaged in the project will be submitted to Authority for review. 4.18 Authority's Right to Revise Specifications. The Authority reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the Authority and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant's compensation. 4.19 Self -Insured Retentions. Any self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by Authority. Authority reserves the right to require that self -insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by Authority. 4.20 - Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shall give Authority prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant's performance under this Agreement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies. 4.21 Additional Insurance. Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work. Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION Consultant shall indemnify, defend with counsel acceptable to Authority and hold harmless the Authority and its officials, officers, employees, agents, members, and authorized volunteers from and against any and all losses, liabilities, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, damages and expenses of any kind, whether actual or threatened, (including but not limited to attorneys' fees and costs, court costs, interest defense costs, and expert witness fees) where the same arise out of, are a consequence of or are in any way attributable to, in whole or in part, the performance of this Agreement (or the failure to perform) by Consultant or by any individual or entity for which Consultant is legally liable, including but not limited to officers, agents, employees or subcontractors of Consultant. Such indemnification, defense and hold harmless extend to Consultant's provision, use, transport and storage of hazardous materials, as those commonly are defined under state and federal laws and regulations. 3/14/17 FINAL DAC / JPJA Page 6 The foregoing obligation of Consultant shall not apply when (1) the injury, loss of life, damage to property or violation of law arises wholly from the negligence or willful misconduct of the Authority or its officers, employees, agents, members, or authorized volunteers and (2) the actions of Consultant or its employees, subcontractors or agents have contributed in no part to the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Acceptance by Authority of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to apply. By execution of this Agreement, Consultant acknowledges and agrees to the provisions of this Section and that it is a material element of consideration. Section 6. STATUS OF CONTRACTOR. 6.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of Authority. Authority shall have the right to control Contractor only insofar as the results of Contractor's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, otherwise Authority shall not have the right to control the means by which Contractor accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other Authority, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Contractor providing services under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by Authority, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) as an employee of Authority and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by Authority for employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits. It is understood by the parties that Contractor is independent and does not constitute a common law (employer -employee) relationship and said agreement is exempt for the post -retirement employment requirements. Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS. 7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this agreement. 7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Consultant and any subcontractor shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations applicable to the performance of the work hereunder. 7.3 Licenses and Permits. Consultant represents and warrants to Authority that Consultant and its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature that is legally required to practice their respective professions. Consultant represents and warrants to Authority that Consultant and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in 3/14/17 FINAL DAC / JPIA Page 7 effect at all times during the term or this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that are legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, Consultant and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the tenn of this Agreement valid Business Licenses from Authority. Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION. 8.1 Termination. Authority and Consultant hereby agree that this Agreement may be cancelled upon 30 days' written notice. In the event of termination, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for services perfonned to the effective date of termination; Authority, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant delivering to Authority any or all documents, photographs, computer software, video and audio tapes, and other materials provided to Consultant or prepared by or for Consultant or the Authority in connection with this Agreement. 8.2 Extension. Both parties agree that extending the Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1 may be in the best interest of alt concerned. Any such extension shall require a written amendment to this Agreement, as provided for herein. Authority and Consultant understand and agree that, if both parties agree to such an extension, all terms and conditions of the original Agreement shall remain the same, and extended to the date provided for in said amendment. 8.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the parties. 8.4 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between Authority and Consultant shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 8.5 Options upon Breach by Consultant. If Consultant materially breaches any of the terns of this Agreement, Authority's remedies shall include, but not be limited to, any or all of the following: 8.5.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement; 8.5.2 Retain the documents, and any other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement; 8.5.3 Retain a different Consultant to complete the work described in Exhibit A not finished by Consultant; or 8.5.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the costs to complete the work described in Exhibit A that is unfinished at the time of breach and the 3/14/17 FINAL DAC / JPIA Page 8 amount that Authority would have paid Consultant pursuant to Section 2 if Consultant had completed the work. Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS. 9.1 Records Created as Part of Consultant's Performance. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form that Consultant prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters covered hereunder, shall be the property of the Authority. Consultant hereby agrees to deliver those documents to the Authority upon termination of the Agreement. 9.2 Consultant's Books and Records. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the Authority under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, or for any longer period required• by law, from the date of final payment to the Consultant to this Agreement. 9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this Agreement requires Consultant to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit, and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of, the Authority. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds expended under this Agreement exceeds Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), the Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the request of Authority or as part of any audit of the Authority, for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the Agreement. Section 10. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 10.1 Attorneys' Fees. Neither party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees in addition to any other relief to which that party maybe entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose. 10.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in Orange County. 10.3 Severabilitv. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement. 3/14/17 FINAL DAC/JPIA Page 9 10.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other tern of this Agreement. 10.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties. 10.6 Consultant Representative. All matters under this Agreement shall be handled for Consultant by Barbara Thorpe. 10.7 Authoritv Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by Norman Lefmann ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract Administrator or his designee. 10.8 Notices. Any written notice to Consultant shall be sent to: Barbara Thorpe, President/CEO Disability Access Consultants 2243 Feather River Boulevard Oroville, CA 95965 Any written notice to Authority shall be sent to the project representative, Abraham Han. 10.9 Integration. This Agreement, including the scope of work attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A, represents the entire and integrated agreement between Authority and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. 10.10 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement. The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. AUTHORITY CONSULTANT Barbara Thorpe. President=CEO 3/14/17 FINAL DAC /PPIA Page 10 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES Consultant will provide the necessary professional services: 1. Assistance Level 1: Member Assessment and Overall Diagnostic Profile Consultant will perform an assessment to determine the current level of ADA compliance, in accordance with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title 24 of the California Building Code, and plan a course of action to enhance compliance. Consultant will review the initiatives of the Member to assess whether the Member has met any or all of the mandatory compliance requirements of the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title 24 and related accessibility standards and requirements. If, after review, it is determined that the member needs to complete or revise any of the required compliance components, Consultant will provide a recommended compliance plan that may include other assistance -level options. All members participating in the Authority's ADA Assistance Program shall receive Assistance Level 1 by default. Following is a list of items determined during an assessment: ® An ADA coordinator has been designated, noticed, and posted. • Each site has a current transition/barrier removal plan that meets the requirements under Title II of the ADA. • A self -evaluation of programs, services, activities, policies, procedures, and practices has been completed. ® The member has updated its current transition/barrier removal plan, if applicable. 9 Current ADA transition/barrier removal plans include all sites, such as new sites added since the completion of the previous plan. • Space leased "to" others by the member is identified. a Any current ADA-related concerns or issues are identified, including any pending or actual litigation. e The member may need questions answered regarding the ADA, Title 24 of the California Building Code (CBC) or related accessibility standards. • Staff development activities have been provided or are requested. • Methods and priorities are recommended to members for achieving ADA compliance. 2. Assistance Level 2: Inspection of Sites, Development of Transition/Barrier Removal Plans Consultant will inspect sites that may be new or not inspected previously, or have had extensive modernization or major remodeling. Work will include inspection of member facilities and public rights -of -way, and identification of barriers to accessibility, solutions to remove these barriers, and incorporation of the information into Consultant's accessibility management software. 3/14/17 FINAL DAC / JPIA Page 11 As part of Assistance Level 2, Consultant will provide training regarding the use of the management portion of DACTrak. Assistance Level 2 does not include comprehensive training in the use of DACTrak for the member to collect their own data. 3. Assistance Level 3: Self -Evaluation of Policies, Procedures, Practices Consultant will conduct a review of policies, procedures, and practices to determine if any are discriminatory or potentially discriminatory. Programs, services, and activities would be reviewed to determine accessibility by persons with disabilities. 3/14/17 FINAL • DAC/JPIA Page 12 EXHIBIT B RATES AND SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS Billing and Reimbursement: 1. Assistance Level 1: Member Assessment and Overall Diagnostic Profile The rate for this assistance level is a total one-time charge per member of $2,800, which includes all expenses. 2. Assistance Level 2: Inspection of Sites, Development of Transition/Barrier Removal Plans The hourly rate is $98 per consultant, plus actual expenses. Any amounts for services provided beyond the $16,500 per -member funding allowance will be billed to Authority for payment. DACTrak Software License Members that have DAC perform inspections of all facilities and public rights of way (Assistance Level 2) shall receive a one-year DACTrak software license at no cost to either the member or the Authority. In all other instances, the Authority shall pay the first year of the DACTrak software license fee for the member. Any DACTrak software license fees beyond the first year shall be paid by the member and not by the Authority. The DACTrak annual software license fee is $2,000. 3. Assistance Level 3: Self -Evaluation of Policies, Procedures, Practices The hourly rate is $98 per consultant, plus actual expenses. For amounts for services provided beyond the $5,000 per -member funding allowance will be billed to Authority for payment. 4. Expenses Reasonable, actual expenses will be charged as authorized by Authority and may include mileage at the IRS rate, hotel, meals, rental car, airfare (no first-class flights) and travel time. 3/14/17 FINAL DAC / JPIA Page 13 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Rolling Hills Proposal for Accessibility Services AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) SELF -EVALUATION AND TRANSITION PLAN April 18, 2017 Disability Access Consultants 2243 Feather River Blvd Oroville, CA 95965 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK COVER LETTER April 18, 2017 To: Mr. Ray Cruz City Manager City of Roiling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hilts, CA 90274 Re: Americans with Disabilities (ADA) Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan Firm Information: Disability Access Consultants (DAC) Headquarters: 2243 Feather River Blvd, Oroville, California 95965 Project Manager: Barbara Thorpe, President bthorpe(dac-corp.com Phone: 1-800-743-7067 We appreciate the opportunity to submit our statement of qualifications and proposal for providing consultant services for an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan for the City of Rolling Hilts public facilities. As you may be aware, under Title II of the ADA, the City of Rolling Hills is required to have a continually updated and current Self Evaluation and Transition Plan. Title II entities, such as Rolling Hills may be at significant risk for claims and litigations by not having a current plan. Also, 'recent inquiries and enforcement activities by the DO1, CalTrans and HUD have shown that Cities can be at risk of losing or not being able to receive their state and federal pass through funding should you not have a current plan in place. DAC has extensive experience in the evaluation of program and facility accessibility and provides a full continuum of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and accessibility services for public entities, such as the City of Rolling Hilts. Founded as a California corporation and woman owned business in 1998, DAC has provided services for the past 19 years to assist public entities to comply and implement accessibility requirements in accordance with the ADA, Title 24 of the California Building Code, Section 504 and related federal, state and local disability -related nondiscrimination laws and regulation. DAC has conducted over 19,000 building inspections, surveyed thousands of parks and playgrounds, thousands of miles of sidewalks and performed hundreds of programmatic reviews and self -evaluations to study the accessibility of programs, services, activities, events and related areas. DAC has a comprehensive understanding of applicable standards, regulations and requirements under Title II of the ADA, California Building Code and related state accessibility standards. DAC has completed over a hundred similar studies. DAC has also been working on a project for the Department of Transportation in Washington, D.C. to develop a pilot study for potential duplication of methodologies in other geographic areas, using tools and standards for public rights -of -way accessibility reviews by means of a software program to update and manage the ADA public rights -of -way transition plan. DAC is providing recommendations for best practices and technologies for the DOT. To provide for easy management of the transition plan and documentation of compliance efforts, DAC has developed web -based software called DACTrak. DACTrak is a powerful tool to manage and update the transition plan, project costs and document progress. Custom reports can be printed in a variety of formats. Respectfully submitted by Barbara Thorpe, President Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 1 FIRM ORGANIZATION AND DESCRIPTION OF QUALIFICATIONS Since Disability Access Consultants was founded as a woman owned California Corporation in 1998, DAC has provided services for the past 19 years to assist public entities to comply and implement accessibility requirements in accordance with the ADA, Title 24 of the California Building Code, Section 504 and related federal, state and local disability -related nondiscrimination laws and regulation. DAC has extensive experience in the evaluation of program and facility accessibility and provides a full continuum of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and accessibility services for public entities, such as the City of Rolling Hills. As our founder, Barbara Thorpe, worked with a public entity for 19 years as the ADA Coordinator, 504 Coordinator, and Director of Planning and Compliance, she has extensive experience working with individuals with disabilities and organizations representing individuals with disabilities. In addition, she has collaborated with individuals with disabilities and organizations that represent individuals with disabilities in a facilitative manner that has benefited city governments during her work with other municipalities. Barbara and the DAC team members have demonstrated the ability to engage and interact with individuals and organizations to assist with the prioritization, long range planning and implementation of the ADA plan. DAC has a team of more than 20 staff, with our Facility Team Leader Michael Boga holding CASp Certificate #152, dedicated to assisting public entities, such as the City of Rolling Hills, with ADA compliance. DAC has a comprehensive understanding of applicable standards, regulations and requirement under Title 11 of the ADA, California Building Code and related state accessibility standards. DAC has a reputation to being responsive to the client's needs, providing on -time project completion within budgets. DAC has a proven track record for comprehensive experience in conducting ADA Self Evaluations and Transition Plans, implementation and related services. Other public entities for which DAC has provided similar services include Fair Oaks Recreation and Park District, Padre Dam Water District, Hayward Parks and Recreation, 15 California Fairs, 160 California public school districts, and several large Joint Power Authorities and insurance carriers for groups of public entities. DAC is currently assisting the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) members, of which the City of Rolling Hills belongs, to assist members with ADA compliance at a discounted rate. DAC has been assisting several Joint Power Authorities since 2000 and currently provides updates, consultation, plan reviews and expert witness services. DAC has worked with public entities of all sizes, from one site to 506 sites. Members of the DAC team have also served as expert witnesses to assist public entities to defend their current practices and ADA plan. DAC has only served on the side to assist public entities to defend their practices and plan and has never assisted with litigation against a public entity. Our mission statement and philosophy embrace the enhancement and assistance to our clients to build an ADA accessibility plan while documenting previous and current compliance methods. Over the 19 years of serving our clients, DAC has demonstrated financial stability, staff stability and has a no claims insurance record. DAC provides a full continuum of professional services that include, but are not limited to: • Facility inspections • Self -evaluations for ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act • Policy review and development • Transition plans • Public rights -of -way surveys • Consultation • Accessibility compliance intake and man. • ement software — DACTrak Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rollin. ;d forADA Consulting Services 2 • DACTrak training to conduct your own inspections • Expert witness services • Plan reviews • ADA Plan implementation assistance and consultation • Outdoor developed and recreational areas (pools, parks, trails, camping areas) • NPSI playground safety inspections • ADA Playground inspections DAC utilizes the appropriate standard(s) for the inspection that may include, but is not limited to: • ADA 2010 Standards • California Building Code • ADA-ABA • UFAS • ANSI • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act • Outdoor developed and recreational standards • National Playground Safety Institute (NPSI) standards • PROWAG — Federal Public Rights -of -way Guidelines • Federal Highway Administration's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Our firm stands out in the public entity arena due to proven performance in a wide range of services, from programmatic and policy reviews, facility inspections, transition plans, consultation, plan reviews and expert witness services. We excel at providing a comprehensive assessment of our clients' current status by preparing a study of all areas related to accessibility in different departments to document ongoing compliance. Innovative Tools, Strategies and Best Practices Based on experience and knowledge of the accessibility field and best practices, DAC continues to develop innovative methodologies, easy to use ADA management tools, and proven, successful strategies for evaluating programs, services, activities, events, facilities, parks and public rights -of -way. DACTrak was developed by DAC for the purpose of easy and useful importing and management of the accessibility data collected in the field. DACTrak is interactive web -based software and is not an enhanced Excel spread sheet. The ability to collect, compile, analyze and use report data in a practical format was one of the driving forces to develop the DACTrak intake and management software. Our DAC accessibility management software, DACTrak, provides our clients with a powerful management tool to document compliance, project costs, print custom reports and record progress. DACTrak is not an Excel spreadsheet, but actual software that has been developed by our company to assist with the implementation and documentation of the City's ADA plan and provides photographs of as -is site conditions, which has proved to be valuable documentation. Findings and recommendations, in addition to other data are preloaded into the DACTrak software. As DAC owns and licenses the DACTrak software, we can make custom modifications for our clients. The DAC team members proposed for the City of Rolling Hills project have worked together on similar projects. A few projects are listed below. References and a description for the scope of work are provided for several of the following recent California projects: • City of Bakersfield • City of Banning • City of Benicia • City of Bishop • City of Carlsbad • City of Carpinteria • City of Cathedral City Disability Access Consultants Pronnsnl to the City ofl?ollina Hills for ADA Consulting Services 3 • City of Claremont • City of Clovis • City of Cudahy • City of Cypress • City of Del Mar • City of Downey • City of Elk Grove • City of Fountain Valley • City of Glendale • City of Goleta • City of Grass Valley • City of Hemet • City of Huntington Beach • City of La Mesa • City of La Quinta • City of Laguna Woods • City of Lakewood • City of Lincoln City • City of Los Alamitos • City of Manteca • City of Menifee • City of Modesto • City of Moreno Valley • City of Newport Beach • City of Oakdale • City of Oroville • City of Palm Springs • City of Palos Verdes Estates • City of Paramount • City of Pismo Beach • City of Poway • City of Red Bluff • City of San Clemente • City of San Dimas • City of San Gabriel • City of San Jose • City of San Juan Capistrano • City of San Luis Obispo • City of Santa Fe Springs • City of Santa Monica • City of Shafter • City of Tustin • City of Wasco • City of Waterford • City of Willows • County of Butte • County of Calaveras • County of Glenn • County of Kern Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 4 • County of Marin • County of Okaloose • County of Placer • County of San Luis Obispo • County of Santa Clara • County of Shasta • County of Solano • County of Tehama • Desert Recreation District • Fair Oaks Recreation and Park District • Town of Paradise DACTrak cf DACTrak Accessibility Management Software The accessibility management software is included at no cost to the City for the first year as the cost is paid by the CJPIA. If the City decides to continue with the use of the web -based management software after the initial year, the cost is $2,000 and includes unlimited seat licenses. The use of the DACTrak software includes the storage and maintenance of the City data. If the City decides not to continue to use the web -based DACTrak Accessibility Management System to maintain, update and document compliance of the ADA plan, the data can be transferred to an Excel spreadsheet or an alternate format. DAC has found that usable and easy to manage software (instead of Excel spreadsheets) is imperative to maintaining and updating the ADA plan. Categories can be customized and findings organized as demonstrated in the screen shots of the DACTrak software included in the supplemental materials Appendix. PROJECT TEAM STAFFING AND RESUMES Disability Access Consultants (DAC) has a dedicated team of twenty professionals with backgrounds in administrative leadership roles with public entities, construction and code enforcement. DAC is an equal opportunity employer and our team composition includes minority and veteran representation. The team has worked together on numerous ADA compliance projects with City governments and public entities. DAC works with several large JPA's and insurance pools to assist public entities with ADA compliance. City Contacts City of Rolling Hills Barbara Thorpe Project Manager Srikant Talasila Director of IT Michael Boga CASp-152, ICC Facility Team Leader/ Quality Control Candice Pursch Field Inspection Supervisor Field In sectors (4-6) Jennie Grover Director of Operations Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling " or ADA Consulting Services 5 The DAC team has a proven record to provide on -site services in a collaborative and efficient manner. DAC has experienced team members who have worked with public entities for successful and on time completion of numerous projects. Necessary staff members have ICC, NPSI, and CASp certification. A CASp certified Team Leader will be involved with the project and field evaluations. The project team is organized to provide a representation of skills needed to accomplish the project objectives. In addition, teams that have worked together previously will be assigned to the City of Rolling Hills project. Barbara Thorpe, M.Ed., LOT - DAC Project Manager As DAC Project Manager, Barbara will coordinate activities and schedules and report to the Assistant to the City Manager or designee. Barbara will serve in the leadership role regarding the ADA Self -Evaluation of programs, services, activities and events along with the review of policies and procedures. Barbara brings twenty years of experience in public administration and providing services to individuals with disabilities to Disability Access Consultants. As an administrator in a public entity, Barbara provides unparalleled understanding of the application of the Americans with Disabilities Act and related legislation. In addition to assisting public entities with compliance with the ADA, Barbara has conducted compliance reviews for the Department of the Interior to audit for compliance with the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and related civil rights laws and regulations. Barbara has served as an expert witness for the Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General. Additionally, Barbara is a licensed occupational therapist. Barbara served on the Division of State Architect Advisory Board and served as the vice -chair for the DSA Access Compliance Committee. Barbara has worked on over 200 public entity projects that are similar to the City. Michael Boga, B.A. Education, California Certified Access Specialist, ICC Accessibility, Usability and Plans Examiner - Facility Team Leader As manager of the production and the inspection team, Michael brings a unique blend of experience in the building industry along with his understanding of individuals with disabilities to the accessibility team. Michael is a certified accessibility specialist through the International Conference of Building Officials (ICC), certified in Accessibility, Usability and Plans examination and is California certified CASp inspector #152. Michael has completed the updated DSA courses regarding the 2010 California Building Code. Michael has provided numerous staff development sessions to public entities regarding accessibility requirements. If requested, Michael would provide training, assist with plan reviews and review new work completed for compliance, as requested. Mike has worked on over 260 projects that are similar to the City of Rolling Hills. Jason Katz, B.S. Urban Planning, B.A. Sustainability and Urban Dynamics - DAC Accessibility Specialist Jason brings to DAC a background in civil design with degrees in Urban Planning and Sustainability/Urban Dynamics. Jason is also certified in Geographic Information Science and Auto CAD. Prior to becoming an Accessibility Specialist with DAC, Jason has worked on projects to compare and estimate future urban area population density differences using ESRI ArcMap 10, and also worked with the City of Mesa, Arizona to help establish green building codes for City owned buildings. Srikant Talasila - Director, Information Technology Srikant brings many years of experience with information technology and management information services from a large corporation. He has the ability to categorize and organize large volumes of information regarding public and school facilities into a manageable database. He provides training and consultation to our clients in the use of DACTrak. Srikant would work directly with City of Rolling Hills staff to train and assist with the data entry and management of data. Jennie Grover - Director of Operations Jennie draws on her experience in technical writing to provide leadership and management of the production and technical writing team, organizing the completion of technical reports, as well as managing production schedules, staff and timelines. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 6 CLIENT REFERENCE LIST The following are a few of the most recently completed references for scopes of work similar to the City of Rolling Hills that include City and County Governments and Park Districts. Numerous additional references are available. City of Bakersfield Caleb Blaschke City Manager's Office, City Hall North 1600 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Phone: (661) 326-3745 cblaschke@bakersfieldcitv.us Project Name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC provided an ADA Self -evaluation and transition plans of City buildings, facilities and parks. • The City is using DACTrak Accessibility Management Software to manage the implementation of the plan and document progress. • DAC also conducted the ADA Self -evaluation of programs, services and activities and provided the City with an Executive Summary detailing the results and recommendations. City of Carpinteria Kevin Silk Assistant to City Manager 5775 Carpinteria Avenue Carpinteria, CA 93013 (805) 755-4450 Project name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC recently completed an ADA self -evaluation and transition plans for City Buildings, facilities, parks and public rights -of -way • DAC has also assisted the City to perform a self -evaluation of services, policies, programs and practices. • City staff is using DACTrak to update and implement their transition plan. City of Grass Valley Bjorn Jones Associate Civil Engineer 125 East Main Street Grass Valley, CA 95945 Phone: (530) 274-4322 bjornj@cityofgrassvalley.com Project name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC created ADA self -evaluation and transition plans for City buildings, facilities, parks and parking lots. • DAC also assisted the City to complete the evaluation of policies, procedures, practices and programs, and provide opportunities for public input. • The City staff is using DACTrak to update and implement their transition plan for facilities. • DAC reviewed the City's existing field assessment reports for curb ramps and sidewalks, and made necessary recommendations to complete a public rights -of -way transition plan County of Inyo Diane Fortney Project Coordinator, Public Works P.O. Drawer Q Independence, CA 93526 Phone: (760) 878-0263 dfortney@inyocounty.us Project name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC recently completed an ADA self -evaluation and transition plan for county buildings, facilities, parks and public rights -of -way • . DAC provided the County with several options and methods to advertise for public input and collect and compile the responses themselves to help in the prioritization of the transition plan • County staff are currently using DACTrak to update and manage the transition plan City of Victorville Christian Guntert Director of Community Services 14343 Civic Drive Victorville, CA 92392 Phone: (760) 955-5262 cguntertPci.victorville.ca.us Project name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC is currently conducting an ADA self -evaluation and transition plan for city buildings, facilities, airport, parks, public rights -of -way and signalized intersections • DAC is also assisting the City to prepare the responses to their annual Caltrans audit and on -going HUD audits • DAC is also assisting the City to advertise their current request for public input, and compiling the results of the responses. • The City is currently using DACTrak to implement their transition plan Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 7 City of Carlsbad Ed Garbo Risk Manager 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone: (760) 602-2471 Ed.garboPcarlsbadca.gov Project Name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC conducted an ADA self -evaluation and transition plan for City buildings, facilities, and parks. • DAC has also assisted the City to successfully prepare and respond to a current Caltrans audit. • DAC also assisted the City to perform a self -evaluation of services, policies, programs and practices. • DAC is providing ongoing, as needed additional consultation such as plans review. • The City is currently using DACTrak to implement their transition plan. City of Palm Springs James Thompson City Clerk 3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Phone: (760) 323-8204 jay.thompson@palmsprings-ca.gov City of La Quinta Terry Deeringer Was Human Resources/General Services Manager of City of La Quinta at time of services 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Project Name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC conducted an ADA self -evaluation and transition plan for City buildings, golf courses, pools, airport, parks and public rights -of -way • DAC has also assisted the City to successfully prepare and respond to a recent Caltrans audit • The City is currently using DACTrak to implement their transition plan Current contact information as Director of Human Resources & Risk Management for City of Indio Phone: (760) 391-4008 Tdeeringer@indio.org Project Name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC has provided the City with an ADA self -evaluation and transition plan for City buildings, parks, intersections and public rights -of -way • The City is currently using DACTrak to implement their transition plan. • Additionally, DAC provided the City with an assessment of City policies and programs to determine if any were discriminatory to individuals with disabilities. County of Butte Grant Hunsicker Director of General Services 2081 2nd Street Oroville, CA 95965-3413 Phone: (530) 538-2511 Ghunsicker@buttecounty.net Benjamin Matray County Architect General Services Department 2081 2nd Street Oroville, CA 95965-3413 Phone: (530) 538-6056 bmatray@buttecounty.net Project Name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC is currently working with the County to inspect County facilities for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and California Building Code. • DAC is also performing a review of County policies, grievance procedures and public notices to evaluate their compliance with the ADA and suggest alternatives if necessary. • DAC is assisting the County in developing their updated transition plan. • DAC has provided training to County staff on ADA compliance, methods for reasonable accommodations, and effective communications with individuals with disabilities. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 8 City of Claremont Jeff Baughman Building Official 207 N Harvard Avenue Claremont, CA 91711 Phone: (909) 399-5477 jbauphman@ci.claremont.ca.us Project Name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • DAC provided ADA self -evaluation and transition plans of buildings, parks, intersections, roadways, sidewalks and public rights -of -way. • The City was provided DACTrak Accessibility Management Software to manage the implementation of the plan, document resources needed and document progress. • DAC also conducted the ADA self -evaluation of programs, services and activities to determine if any were discriminatory for individuals with disabilities and provided the City with an Executive Summary detailing the results and recommendations. City of San Clemente Johanne Thordahl Risk Mgmt. Analyst 100 Avenida Presidio San Clemente, CA 82672 Phone: (949) 361-8203 Thordahli@san-clemente.org Project Name: ADA Self -evaluation and Transition Plan • ADA self -evaluation and transition plans of buildings, parks, piers, beach areas, golf course, pools, beach concessions, lifeguard areas, trails and public rights -of -way. • The City was provided DACTrak Accessibility Management Software to manage the implementation of the plan, document resources needed and document progress. • The ADA self -evaluation of programs, services and activities to determine if any were discriminatory for individuals with disabilities was completed by DAC. • DAC also assisted with the resolution of two complaints. Disability Access Consultants has never been removed from a project or disqualified from proposing on a project. SUBCONSULTANTS DAC does not use subcontractors or subconsultants, as DAC prefers team members that have direct accountability and training by DAC to provide a seamless project delivery and interaction with City staff. SCOPE OF WORK Disability Access Consultants (DAC) understands that the City of Rolling Hills (City) is seeking a qualified firm to inspect, evaluate and prepare reports identifying potential barriers in the City -owned buildings, parks, parking lots and public rights -of -way. The inspections will identify barriers or potential barriers in accordance with applicable Federal and State accessibility standards and regulations. In addition, it is understood that DAC will assist the City in developing a schedule for barrier removal over time in a cost effective and realistic manner, using programmatic solutions where available. In order to successfully complete the project activities in a timely manner, DAC will work closely and collaboratively with the City of Rolling Hills without imposing unnecessary interruptions or burdens to City staff. During the past 19 years, Barbara Thorpe and her team have developed ongoing working relationships with City and County governments and have worked diligently to have clear lines of communication. DAC has the extensive knowledge and experience with all Federal and State regulations during the past 19 years in business, that includes, but is not limited to the ADA up to and including the current 2010 American's Disability Act Standards (ADAS), 28 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) 35, Title 24 California Building Standards Code, Title II of the ADA, PROWAG, MUTCD, Section 504 and related Federal and State Standards and Regulations. Value Added Items to Enhance the Project at No Additional Cost or that Provide a Cost Savings In addition to the above understandings and confirmations, DAC has found through its experience of working with City and County Governments and Joint Power Authorities, such as the California Joint Powers Insurance Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 9 Authority, of which the City of Rolling Hills is a member, that certain other items enhance the level of success and implementation of ADA Transition Plans and Self -Evaluations by public entities. The California JPIA (CJPIA) offers a discounted price to its members that has been negotiated with DAC. The CJPIA is also assisting members, such as the City, with costs for selected services for ADA compliance. The use of DACTrak by City staff to conduct surveys at facilities, process reports and manage the information to implement and document the plan may assist the City to more efficiently and effectively achieve the City's project objectives and will provide longevity to the plan. As an additional value at no cost, DAC provides at least one photograph of each noncompliant accessible item or element, a record number for reference, estimated costs and other features to assist with the implementation of the Transition Plan. To provide for easy management of the transition plan and documentation of compliance efforts, DAC has developed web -based software called DACTrak. DACTrak is a powerful tool to manage and update the accessibility plan, project costs and document progress. Custom reports can be easily prepared, printed and saved in a variety of formats. Disability Access Consultants (DAC) includes the following additions at no additional cost: • Noncompliant findings and recommendations are included in the DACTrak software • One or more photographs of each noncompliant finding are included • Additional photographs can be viewed of the noncompliant item by one click • DACTrak provides a method to schedule and track the barrier removal • Documentation of progress and compliance using the progress reporting feature of DACTrak • Priorities can be established and further refined using DACTrak DACTrak provides for an organized input method that captures all of the information gathered from the site inspections with photographs for each noncompliant finding. In essence, all of the field information is captured in a web -based software package and provides for "green" data collection and avoids paper and pencil checklists and unorganized photographs. DACTrak can also be used on a tablet pc to add new facilities and update compliance assessments and transition plans. DAC has also found that having usable "software" and not just a database is very important to be able to easily manage and update the transition plan. Our extensive experience with clients needing to have an easy to manage and update plan was the catalyst for DAC to develop our DACTrak software for use by our clients. Thus, other critical issues include: • Software to update and manage your Transition Plan • The ability to document progress and barrier removal • The ability to print custom reports • The ability to update the plan "automatically" when codes change without re -inspecting sites • The ability to project costs • The ability to add or delete facilities C}Oatiy Lul Wartelnq Sitins 11rra,n 1 to alk,I: Ll tr.trTtin 15ct La1T OAX000i t0r d.00cca All: 0.000000 u Space t133a Mr 'dad spa/ a ranks, mitt: W133,00* we mane l.akvLna.ega,l sr ri.,'ry VA4th 0.11 imgllt:0.R1 ..,._ .11r:0 W 00.313 l iklralttr• gal .. Mast In,:.ihtlrhl Mlwr y.wrs i>n swab, tnnin \:vl 113 13 tx•,r.n Yynrr'Whim Or sora hark .;l ; ItetM vrlw k. nuy thrntll h inn runts IA hArri ." 100 kmun+knirrndrdMxrmistrylaw nt lnuaint - lrinnrog l nrehrgl with xaavlMyxe t:ammartky lntnt ryu 11111.ntxe h10,4ft' d:lmaryatl 13.,xgth: 4[,1 'vinhi c-Rtia lyri.4;awl00 on Dior Ansle #yi Ilia ItisA %1mxrRB Int71h: 0.00 *AM.' 1.031 IziAdi tart bah tt mt. Height 111h yarn l: hat tii al rmM nt tprcts actessAd! 10131 h.n Irsl Ihn k tensalinnal.ymthrut artts.i.ily ... Sato is tnkel.r this; ;. 11.rs v.itrArt 0.'004 sip , Gars "no yartrs: on yarrow/0( k0 while hx Ante is trt eri.h shit. 01 spate: nthr Gat, -_ I rhtr bright: O OO 04303:0,, itrIgthI 11.00 _ Gilt. Illtn _g II. `no yarihnf sky. Ls attnsahb wtir,l i. tic Atr.s.a lah taar4.1Or dawt.rd ,it aldetht..Unlrastkrgl.d•the4btes kjt to 713 on t.tev Sign lyyv: Wa6 NtArnal fl I kijn Irumy+anl: ltln . ... DAC's collection of actual measurements of as -is conditions and GIS information for public rights -of -way is another value added item. The collection of an as -is condition is a valuable asset to allow the user to make an informed decision based on an actual measurement. For example, if a "yes" or "no" approach is utilized to indicate if an item is compliant, the user may not know what the actual level of noncompliance is and would Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 10 not be able to set a priority or severity rating. If codes change, the information collected can be reprocess without the need to re -inspect, thus providing longevity of the plan and internal capacity of the City in a cost effective manner. SCOPE OF WORK OVERALL PHASES DAC proposes to execute the project in two phases. Detailed activities and deliverables are provided in the following scope of work description. Phase 1: Study and Evaluation - Self-Evaluation/Facility Survey/Barrier Assessment a) DAC will conduct an initial project kick-off meeting, if requested, with selected City of Rolling Hills staff to establish roles and lines of communication, refine project goals, review the overall project schedule, schedule surveys of City of Rolling Hills facilities and identify key City of Rolling Hills personnel related to the project scope. Initial self -evaluation activities will be completed during this step. b) The initial orientation meeting should include an assessment of previous compliance activities and areas of current or potential litigation. The review of compliance activities and high priority areas will assist with the development of an overall project plan. The review and documentation of prior initiatives will also build a more defensible plan if the City is challenged by litigation. c) DAC will conduct field surveys of the buildings and facilities listed in the property schedule, as well as the City maintained public rights -of -way to sidewalks, curb ramps and signalized intersections. City has indicated that they do not have any Public rights -of -way open to the public. d) Surveys will identify all physical barriers (interior and exterior) including the path of travel in and around the facility and from the public right-of-way at each site in accordance with Title 24 of the California Building Code and the ADA Standards (previously referred to as ADAAG). e) DAC currently provides geographical information (latitude and longitude) for each identified exterior barrier in the public right-of-way that can be incorporated into the City's Geographical Information System (GIS). DAC incorporated the map -linked GIS feature based on the needs of many of our City and County clients. DAC uses a comprehensive approach to inspecting public rights -of -way (PROW). In order to conduct an assessment of all the requirements in the PROW, DAC conducts manual measurements of the field conditions and enters the information into our DACTrak pc tablet in the field. DAC has found that the use of automated equipment for running slopes on sidewalks, such as ultra -light profilers, do not provide an actual measurement, but only provide a chart showing ranges. In some cases, if a change in level is greater than % inch, no actual quantifiable information is reported of how much greater or of the severity. In order to get the actual measurements for the sidewalks and intersections, the use of a "profiler" does not provide the measurements needed for items such as automated pedestrian signals and street furniture. (City has indicated that they do not have any Public Rights -of -way). f) As required by the ADA, the 2010 ADA Standards will be compared with state codes (Title 24 of the California Building Code) and the standard that provides the greater level of accessibility utilized. As DAC collects as -is field conditions and records all information, data can be reprocessed if codes change without conducting a re -inspection, thus resulting in a significant savings when codes change and the plan needs to be updated. g) Provisions and standards for historic buildings will be applied as appropriate. h) Assessments and reports will include a high degree of detail with photographs, code references, and cost estimates. The DACTrak software and reports will include additional specifics, such as as -built dimensions, progress reports, additional prioritizations, preset reporting features and other custom reports. Reports will be delivered in the format requested, and reports will also be available using DACTrak. The inclusion of photographs showing the as -is condition has proven to be valuable assistance to clients in the formulation of the decisions regarding barrier removal priorities. The DACTrak software provides an easy to use accessibility management platform that exceeds the ability to manage the plan by hard copies and binders. The assessment report of each facility will include cost estimates to correct deficiencies in accordance with the ADA, Title 24 of the California Building Code. 31 Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 11 i) Barriers are identified by building, floor, or location and given a unique identifier record number (UM) to assist with navigation in the accessibility software and location of the finding and recommendation by area and site. Estimated applicable costs will be given by item and element in accordance with industry standards. Costs can be easily adjusted to adhere to any cost estimates the City may utilize. j) Physical access problems that require structural solutions will be documented in the Compliance Assessment/Transition Plan. The proposed method for removal will be provided. The transition plan will identify physical barriers that may limit accessibility of City programs, services or activities for individuals with disabilities. The schedule for removal of barriers and appropriate timelines will be developed in consultation with the City. k) The field survey information will be presented to the ADA Compliance Team as requested using the DACTrak web -based accessibility management system. Many different types of reports will be available for the City. Feedback will be incorporated as appropriate. I) The survey data will be compiled into a Transition Plan which will identify actual as -is conditions and prioritize current barriers, provide a schedule for barrier removal, as well as establish procedures for addressing future accessibility issues. The Transition Plan data is able to be exported to Excel or PDF formats. The Transition Plan data will include photographs, findings, recommendations, code references, estimated costs, priority settings (in addition to prioritized report) in accessibility software for accessibility management. Photographs and GIS coordinates are valuable for the development of the transition plan. m) DAC will assist the City to solicit input from members of the community and persons with disabilities. Methods will be utilized to solicit public input may include notices, information on the website and surveys. n) The Transition Plan data will be provided using DACTrak which has management, monitoring, and web - based tracking tools that allow staff to manage current and future accessibility issues, update the deficiency status, and generate reports to show progress in meeting the Transition Plan requirements. Phase 11: Implementation Phase - Transition Plan Development a) DAC will develop, in collaboration with the City a comprehensive ADA Self -Evaluation and Transition plan for facilities, buildings and tennis court. b) DAC will develop a first draft of the ADA Transition Plan with recommended priority levels. c) DAC will meet with the City to review the draft document and incorporate any comments, changes or feedback. d) DAC will assist the City to conduct public outreach activities that may include website announcements, postings, surveys, announcements, individual meetings and other activities as requested. e) DAC will prepare and produce a second draft if necessary with a detailed description of the barrier and the proposed method for barrier removal. f) DAC will train the City in the use of the DACTrak web -based accessibility management system to prepare reports as well as update and manage the ADA Plan. g) DAC will provide an executive summary of the project. h) DAC does not recommend that the plan be adopted by the City, as adoption is not required and may cause additional discussion regarding projected dates in the plan that are meant to be "projected and estimated dates" and not final dates of barrier removal. i) DAC will provide the City with DACTrak, a web -based monitoring, tracking, and management system at project completion. DACTrak allows users to review and update progress in barrier removal, and to generate many different styles of reports to document progress. DACTrak contains one or more integrated photographs that are attached to the finding, eliminating the need to reference another area or report supplement. DACTrak is an actual accessibility management software, not just electronic database of items contained in the Facility Survey Report. DAC has found that an electronic database or Excel format does not provide the City with a tool containing integrated photographs needed to implement the plan, set priorities, make notes and print custom reports. If the City does not want to use the software, the data can be placed in an Excel spreadsheet. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 12 j) • DAC will license DACTrak to the City to manage all of the field data collected, print custom reports, document progress, estimate costs and perform other management functions; • Data collected will be the property of the City should the City decide for any reason °"'""" `""'"'"""'°• 01( (II Y.ria Avenwos not to continue to use the DACTrak ' Pamir, <p..+ ewem% accessibility intake and management hs-�< .M,,471.,,,-.7fionEng >_... software system; .: .� • The California JPIA, of which the City is a ��..� .w. � �' .. member, has an agreement with DAC to "�1 • 18 4 pay for the use of DACTrak; • DACTrak will include and provide correlation with field data collected, reports, transition plans, drawings, code references, estimated costs and photographs for each noncompliant accessibility item or element; • Reference maps for GIS information will be provided in addition to a linked mapping system for each item; • DACTrak provides a description, location and record number for each barrier that allows the user to access the information and location DAC will provide City staff with training regarding ADA Compliance from both a programmatic and administrative point of view and also for facility management and maintenance. Fwcitter. 1:,,y 1,7711 e.e.......w 1% _.. ,. -, . _1 6cr��Ccrt 511 L. __ .`_ Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 13 COST PROPOSAL 1. Total Cost for the City of Rolling Hills survey of facilities is: SITE • Administration Building • Caballeros Ring • Community (Homeowners) Association • Tennis Court • Hix Ring 2. Total estimated cost for the inspection of Public Rights -of -Way: City does not have Public Rights -of -Way 3. Review of policies, procedures and programs cost: $7,800 $0.00 $5,000 Review of policies, procedures and programs and assistance with public input at a cost of $5,000 which is paid by the CJPIA for a net cost of zero. 4. DACTrak Licensing cost: $2,000 As a CJPIA member the cost of DACTrak Software licensing is $2,000/year. The cost includes unlimited seat licenses. Cost Summary 1. Total Cost for the City of Rolling Hills inspection/surveys of facilities: $7,800 2. Total Estimated Cost for Public Rights -of -Way inspections: $ 0.00 3. Cost of review of policies, procedures and programs and assistance with public input: $ 5,000 4. DACTrak licensing cost per year: $ 2,000 TOTAL $ 14,800 Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 14 SCHEDULE: SCOPE OF SERVICES SUMMARY BY ESTIMATED TIMELINES Based upon experience, a project milestone chart is provided in weeks. It is estimated that the project will be completed in 4 months, or sooner. The chart below is a summary of major milestones and is not necessarily representative of all of the individual project activities. Scope of Service —Activity or Task DAC Team Meetings with City; survey methodologies, deliverables and schedule confirmation Project planning, scheduling, procedures review Field inspection data compiled (compiled on a daily basis and available for review throughout the inspection process) First Draft of ADA Transition Plan Solicit and record feedback from the City, and members of the community Presentation to ADA Compliance Team of second draft ADA Transition Plan Final Draft Deliverables completed and presentation to the City Weeks Weeks Weeks 1-4 5-8 9-12 Weeks 13-16 Consultant Responsibilities DAC will arrange all project management activities for an efficient process to develop the ADA Transition plan and provide the City with an anticipated project schedule prior to commencement of work. DAC will perform all work in conformance with current City policies and procedures and carry out the instructions received from the City, in cooperation with other City approved and involved agencies. Additional Information Conflict of Interest Statement DAC does not have any financial, business or other relationship with the City that may have an impact upon the outcome of this contract and does not have any current clients that may have a financial interest in the outcome of this contract. Disability Access Consultants has no conflict of interest with the City of Rolling Hills, any associates, representative, consultants, sub consultants, or others. DAC does not have any conditions that would affect our ability to perform the services described in this proposal. DAC does not have any previous, pending or current litigation. Our firm has not been debarred, suspended or declared ineligible to contract with any federal state or local public agency. The firm, owners or president is not in the Federal Excluded parties List System (EPLS) for Ineligible Professionals and Debarred Contractors. Insurance Coverage and Stability Disability Access Consultants carries all the necessary insurance coverage, such as general liability, automobile liability, worker's compensation and employer's liability, and professional errors and omissions malpractice liability insurance. DAC has a no claims record on all policies for our entire 19 years in business and does not have any pending, previous or current litigation. DAC has the financial, operational and staff stability to complete a quality and comprehensive project on time. DAC has no adverse conditions. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 15 Minority Utilization and Affirmative Action DAC is an equal opportunity employer and has recruited minorities and veterans. DAC's quality control team leader is a Vietnam veteran with a disability. Background Checks and Fingerprinting All employees of Disability Access Consultants have been fingerprinted and have background checks. DAC has FBI and DOJ fingerprint clearances on file for DAC staff. We have conducted studies for school districts, state and local governments, the Federal Government, Judicial Chambers and Correctional Institutions that require background checks. DAC has found that background checks are important especially in situations where inspection staff may be working near children, and are required in certain situations. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 16 Supplemental Materials Sample DACTrak Screen Shots and Information These samples are generated from the DACTrak Accessibility Management web -based software program. The following screen shots are recent examples of the DACTrak Management software prepared for several public entity clients. DACTrak City of la Quints lions HI (4411 City Of I a Quints Sports Complex Civic Center I ire Station 4/0 fire Station *93 1 a Quintal (ibraty 1 a (Manta Musettrn 1 a Querta Senior Center La Qumta YMCA Daycare New Iire Station (lire Station * 17) Point' Sutbstation Rubik Works & Maintenance SBrer Rork 1 emporary Clubhouse •.Averrock Maintenance fltrading Buildings 49995 La Qtlir.- Svotts LU9;tdc I a Qu+nra, CA 92253 78-495 Cate Tampico La Quality, CA 92253 54001 Mne4:san Street La Quanta, CA 42253 44555 Adana Street La Quintet, CA 97253 78-275 Cabe Tampka La Quints, CA 92253 11 685 Avenida Montezuma La Quints, CA 92253 18 4.59 Arc:tida la Fonda i y Quint& CA 92253 40-055 Avencre 50 La Quints, CA 32253 78:11 Are!-ue ` icf Qu lita, CA .92253 51351 A enida Betmtdv, t a Quetta, CA 92251 78109 Avenue 52 In (u•ntt, CA 92253 19.179 Ahmanson late La Quintet, CA 92253 19.60n 44 kit-n:ie Fair Oaks Recreation and Parks District Protect Information Address : 4150 Temescal Street Fair Oaks, CA 95628 Start Date : 4/8/2011 Facility List Arts & Crafts Building Bannister Park Community Clubhouse District Office Fair Oaks Park Fair Oaks Preschool Little Phoenix Park McMillan Center Miller Park 7997 California Avenue Falr Oaks, CA 95628 3820 Bannister Road Fair Oaks, CA 95628 7997 California Avenue Fair Oaks, CA 95628 4150 Temescal Street Fair Oaks CA 95628 11549 Fair Oaks Boulevard Fair Oaks, CA 95628 8090 Grand Avenue Fair Oaks, CA 95628 9041 Phoenix Avenue Fair Oaks, CA 95628 8020 Temple Park Road Fair Oaks, CA 95628 8480 Sunset Avenue Upon logging in to the secure DACTrak website, you are able to choose the facility you would like to view and manage. These two screen shots are examples of facility lists for two recent public entity transition plan projects. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 17 W.korme, }glom ! Sufalmrn I r tuo I rsnfp DACTrok City of la Qwnta Civic Center I.uILfty lntvtntattou ICity of La Quints li A Qlenta Sen:o. (ovNry I NYt ■eOert SAW Ptanto Report Deal s•h:., xel.:•r Moto Summary iteipool SWmaary Mow M tlnRe t total Waft Map Ovorlav •I IAIi Categories Accessibility Survey I a Qointa Serum Centel Virniftiliihrda View Cotter_ Pang YNNI IMIM#0 Repcwl 010•062.41111011101 holdings Ail I IN Allro,': N I Ge!R,tile Rewn After choosing a facility, you are able to use Reports drop down menu to choose which report style to view. You may also choose to view multiple facilities in one report. This screenshot is an example of the home page for a Basic Photo Report. The sort and filter panel allows users to quickly run reports that generate findings for specified locations or categories, or by progress, priority or resolution status. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 18 1a Quints 1 ibrary Doors - Chamber Of Commerce : Door , Hardwar t. Door Between Library & Chamber Of Commerce Posh nor / Lever �>_+vr.pia, to as ,.,_'. p*. eni 'Neves,* 1 inding The doer oi>rmirtg forte to this tkur is greater than dl looted. on-Srte Finding 10.00 pound's Stec orunreiidatiwl A IJrrst the r loser nil the dour to meet the door irperiing torte requirements. R+.'comrorndatton Up to 5.00 pound Costing Into (Estimated) Adjust choir closer pressure. $25 Corte Reference CA 11338.2.5, ADA 404.2.9 Progress Ret ord Number Progress Projected Date Actual Cost Contractor t neirments La Quints Museum 4359b Ned ',looted .0 00 Ns r rmmrnt� Resolution At Dual Date Priority Doors - Museum 1st Floor : Door , Hardware Archives 102 lever Finding The door opening force for this door is greater than allowed On -Site Finding 8.00 pounds Recommendation Adjust the closer on the door to meet the door opening force rrqun+ements. Rerommendation Up to S 00 pounds Costing Into (Estimated) Adjust door closer pressure. $25 Code Reference CA 11338.2.5, ADA 404.2.9 Progress Record Number 4393c Progress Not_5terted Projected Date Actual Cost $0.00 Contractor Comments No Comments Resolution Actual Date Priority Nurse Two None Two These two screenshots are examples of a finding page in a Basic Photo Report. This type of report shows the user the finding, with accompanying recommendation to correct the non- compliant item, the associated photo, code reference(s), estimated cost to remove the barrier, and any progress that has been added to update the transition plan. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 19 Fair Oaks Park Path of Travel - Exterior : Path Of Travel , Walking Surfaces Path Of Travel At The Basketball Court Exterior Walkway Walking Surface Slope Finding There are scopes greater than allowed maximum slope on the emery path of travel. (r, -Site Finding 14.70 percent Recommendation Provide compliant sidewalk. Pecofnmended Up to 5.00 percent Costing Information (Estimated) install compliant pathway. $1,840 Pate bf Travel , w•ti.ny surfaces : waikinq Cale Reference ACA 3.7. CA 1133973 Record Number : aaso3 Path of Travel - Exterior : Path Of Travel , Walking Surfaces Path Of Travel At The Entrance To The Horticultural Center Exterior Walkway Walking Surface Slope Finding There are slopes greater than allowed maximum slope on the pnmar path of travel On -Site Finding 6.40 percent Recommendation Pro+iide compliant sidewalk. Recommended Up to 5.00 percent Costing information (Estimated) Install complant pathway. $1,040 Record Number : 9$7(1 7 a Path fit Treuel . Weikel.; Surfaces Watling Surface Sieo. Cad. netee,ce A[` A 4; 7, C A 1133 e 7 3 This screenshot is an example of a finding page in a Dual Photo Report. This type of report shows the user two findings per page, with accompanying recommendations to correct the non- compliant item, the associated photo, code reference(s), and estimated cost to remove the barrier. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 20 The Dual Photo and Basic Photo Reports may be exported to an Excel workbook for easy management of the transition plan data. The Excel workbook exports into a pre -formatted table with the filter function atop each data column. The report is a fully functioning Excel spreadsheet that may be sorted, filtered and manipulated by the user. The column for Picture identification numbers includes cells that are live links to the second tab of the workbook which contains report photos. Clicking the cell for a particular report finding will bring up the associated picture on the Photos tab. ICE 6.+.. av 64.00.00 6 ..+.r tee.• Loa 11: .nee woo I.MWOO We-. Alierlib.OP `mr++/.M.MN lAbseakrAo A...wrae Mow., Mrew a.yr wt..'b-04'.00 r 4000.00 A. 001,7.4.6,....0 t.b.00..0• l r+ra+w/q{+ + 4A6.MY.....Yam moot. 0.0.04•• u/•u+*~�„Nwor -W.. Fw+ M.TnaYN.6 4r..Rr•• r. rrn ....V010. .wu w 0640 vrr,4 6..q Wrvw .R•++ • 60.6...0 w.•.+ ....•••••••••• la n.+ .4rMtr Y+o >v W+0046. Lawame+ Havel 26,, C RA. A01 3600. 144666. av 36.01 a414.•• CYrr50.4n Mao O..a11,AWw 4 43612 • a {361 =1TA f 11)67 6 47621 011134 1%101 IrrMM O" C$e1*o a Door. C46.6 622. 000. 1.tw6.n4d44r1 61 CNn.M tM Cat/worm ••••••64 - Ns. W f Lww 222(66 100040, 00.10 Garden 6,61,646/ 06460* 41661 11!41 0046 IM4.W : 4149 1111) 110146 N.mw 617.6 'usas O.).0. 4)347 11f.6 000., 4400. 14 41336 11745 NO" IMP. 11440 1..4,00,06 Mfr.,* • a6.I4x.y CO3•10110•011•00,0001 WM W J Cora Po.60 lNp.c0 Kt, W:0/14.4404 Arlo.': f1D 11.36 6002.66. A0010 P4/r 110,1D .1 147. • [..6y 4d .k Room 10006 4.m Om, ravrr 4..36141011, wr.orrr. uvw0ry 11-0 A 21 Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services tdray.r i **ppnn 1 "wan u..t s tt.•rp < Hy t.)t 1 it Quints `.torts ( onrpie x ( MN center f <r.' .1.=lrr,n ,.n 1.re %tatnnt sv-1 I (}farm. 1itn.rty t .r Qrwua Musourn F a ()undo war (i•ntt•r 1 .. Qttutla VM( A flay..are New it S4.rtrurr (trrr Slrttiun 9 1/) Vofice Substation Public Works et Mount -notice .i1ver Itna k 1.•mporary t:htt.huus.- .dverr. xt k k4.119/11•11.1114 a• fttri<19111 DACTrok Facrlrhes: Cateyorie' Reports took Fair Oaks Recreation and Parks District Fair Oaks Park IAIl Categories Pro�ertr Users can update progress using the Tools drop down menu. Record Manager allows each record to be updated individually. Global Progress Editor allows many records to be updated at once with identical information. Priority Manager allows many records to be updated at once with unique information. Fair Oaks Recreation and Parks District - All Locations - G2nerate List Name Deficiency pe location Accessible Parking Benches Near The Play Area Community Garden Parking Lot Continuing Path 01 Travel Flom The Softball Fields To The Skate Park Curb Ramp From The Accessible Space Near The Play Area Directional Sig iage From The Public. Right 01 Way Directional Signage To All Common Areas Drinking Fountain At The Horticultural Cenei Drinking Fountain Near The BBQ Area Drinking Fountain Near The Restrooms Drinking Fountain Near The Skate Park Drinking Fountain Near The Softball Field Concession Stands Gates To The Community Garden Horticultural Center Left Curb Ramp From The Accessible Spaces Near The Skate Park Mens tat Womens Restrooms Mens Restroom Mens Restroom Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Extr• Element Este Element Extern,' Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Exterior Element Restrooms Element Restrooms Element Restrooms Record Manager allows the user to choose which record to update individually. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 22 DACTrok ucpon7 i €t4S 0.a lll7w 1 4. 4 , coil Ramps Exterior : Curb Ramp Qrb Ramp From The Accessible Space Veer The Play Area No Detectable \V.Inla ly4 Finding �I a uaf lamp 10. eL 1+J1 prrw4v a 40107 74240 a4+rry 1.7.0 440.0 wkdes en.n:ania dales .n',it. 1ner.a Nat 1ay.71 Recommendation 4.0410 .7 :4711, ale C., ...,7. w2 F1[4,1071.r*O,1 Costing information Mond. 40174 74.:o wary •.. 1+>1a:e 1:44 W Citations Ca l0'1.1F ALA ♦,7.7 Y.w CC'1'IM,I ,c b;71444 $a. 410 .0 of: 0000 ? 4 Oat. Cr :cmLmktlun actual Data N Cc.:+danm ALMS CO.' Drinking Fountains - Exterior : Drinking Fountains Drinking Fountain Near The Skate Park Clear Floor Space Slope Finding y .1q I - Recommendation __ .. t aace a:t _ J , d nisv:. lc 2C.; Costing Information Citations :I At 7,70 ,7 rlwiw:.:•1e, Once a record is chosen in Record Manager, the user can set the priority, select the status of progress, add projected and actual dates of completion and also document any notes regarding the record. This screen shot represents an example of a record with progress, updates and comments added. rTo1e do d Crete a- Cc -I char 8/1 /2011 ny,.a'u:l� .+c.-•r.«rt:.m )/8/2011 Ache cost 585.33 Slope corrected and verified to be compliant by inspector 436 Repair crass area near fountain 1 Update Cancel 43� Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 23 DACTrok itVtIOn• hair (Arks K._s.reuWo caul PalAs Uisll i<I Ian Oaks P. • Para rwiew Ura(11 I loons lair (Irks Ititidealkur :rod Parks Datikt M locations location Element Description Finding Projected Actual Progress Completion Date Completion Date Passenger !eroding 7nne Them tst les6 man he minimum it?rlrirred A( the h(x1 V, natural Canter length In the doors& aisle al The paxaroore locality tore_. Pasrerwlr r inkling lone The close nt tits+ asphalt surtan, lnr the At Isle hptk.nllurui Center access alsia al. the tla6'WinjMr bkirlityi i;uw f•, plea;et awn 2'Sia Passenger totaling late there is rm N1811140. rkrbklnulltwl arse vit: Al the Hui tkultutal Limbo pouted al then {,arxri yv lui(I try zone. Pac6PIAJPr loading Akio Thom am no detectable warning rlevirr-. At Ihn IIIwll.illtitlill Centel prorllo4 ai rto• flawaaAp8a toad ,,l) Pos.-lager loading lone hem the Res/tom r $(n.s tly.l loading L4tn-' Naar The Rest -means There is no signage designating acrt±stoilrillty Parted at Dar tkr4wnpnt balling .•cane. liar slope- of the :asphalt surface for the aCtPtIg aisle at rho tr,000noor Mocking ]nnr is ,n,..a°.•r it,o )% cm cults between the. es:ress aisle and I .,y, t•.uii up tiparo ••,}.".teal toile Actual k.. Pri f. Prod' ,r., . aro! J DACTrok ((.Iry et' : A Qtttrra IS.hreresk itia.'rte.keke P.,-kliry I AS I Punting, it lcaatlrrn • I ix:n-tare kilt ( ><e �v►�sie te*1 Artewl • tor -awn [h'x.n (karma folding Site i>rKlrlt'�' Progress ltl,So�7tliJtt ... ..+(OAI !ppll �r C corrector 1"' r tGtrte! flaa.r emu_ ':(•a;x ttriint e('de1:r'Slnk oassnte, Year M+iyfle n tidarrst L» J [ rit This is an example of Global Progress Editor, where the user may select many records to update at one time. In this example, the category has been filtered to Passenger Loading Zones using the Categories drop down menu. This is an example of Priority Manager, where the user may select many records to update with unique information from one screen. The user may select progress information from the drop down menus and enter dates for each line item. All information is updated with one click of the Submit button. In this example, the category has been filtered to Sinks using the Categories drop down menu. Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rolling Hills for ADA Consulting Services 24 When GPS information is recorded for the location of an outdoor finding, such as the sidewalk report below, a Map Overlay report is available to view on DACTrak. This report shows a map of the area where the survey was performed, and pinpoints the location of the finding. Clicking on the pinpoint brings up a screen showing the finding, recommendation to bring the item into compliance, a photo of the finding and the associated code references. a • f• J • %A taaa-.t., 1 :pP U Crab dn. er• ayy .uvn W -ul 'fra,W ®, Li a • L I is y al • Disability Access Consultants Proposal to the City of Rollin -Hs for ADA Consulting Services 25