Loading...
none, , Staff Reports(310) 544-6222 cr!lic!flin9 otilin Community of C?aizaI o Palos. `VE2dEs. • i.1oeiation No. 1 PORTUGUESE BEND RD. • ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 ROLLING HILLS Memorandum CALIFORNIA NOV 1 6 2004 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS By To: Craig Nealis, City Manager From: Peggy R. Minor, Association Manage,z1 Date: November 15, 2004 Re: Torres Letter dated October 24, 2004 (310) 544-6766 FAX Attached is a letter RHCA received back in October from Mr. Rafael Torres. Rolling Hills Community Association Board of Directors reviewed it at it's meeting on November 4th, but wanted the letter forward to the City and to the Tsai's for their information. Thank you very much and sorry for the delay. PRM:jr cc: Albert Tsai RH CITY — NEALIS — re: Torres Letter MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: March 24, 2003 Craig R. Nealis, City Manager Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director Request for driver license and property information for Mr. and Mrs. Tsai, 8 Bowie Road. The code enforcement case pertaining to 8 Bowie Road is scheduled to be forwarded to the District Attorney's Office for resolution. Mr. John Bax, the District Attorney for the South Bay cities requested that a summary letter of city's actions pertaining to this case be submitted to him for initial review. He also requested that driver license information on Mr. and Mrs. Albert and Debra Tsai, as well as property information to show the ownership of the property be submitted to his office. Please provide me with this information, so that if could be forwarded to the District Attorney's office. OCTOBER 24, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO FILE: 8 Bowie Road, Mr. and Mrs. Tsai On October 24, 2002, Yolanta Schwartz measured the retaining wall/drainage device at intervals of 8-10 feet apart. The wall measures between 15" at the start of the wall (entrance to the Tsai property) to 58 inches at the back of the driveway, past the large tree. The wall varies in height from 15" to 36" for the first 72 feet and then varies from 38" to 58" for the next 62 feet. Mrs. Tsai was on the site and informed me that her husband is away on business and will be in town for a few days at a time between now and the end of the year, and will not have time to meet with all parties. She said that her husband would be agreeable to either reducing the remaining portion of the wall to 36 inches, or if the City so desires will remove the entire wall. She also indicated that if the wall is removed, she and her husband do not want to be responsible for what happens with the slope behind their property (where the wall/drainage device is constructed now) and will not answer to the neighbor's future complaints about the drainage. She reiterated that the only reason they built this was to answer to Mr. Torres's complaints about the water coming onto his property from their property and his suggestion that they built a retaining device in a form of a wall. JULY 17, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO FILE: SUBJECT: Drainage device between properties located at 8 Bowie Road and 10 Bowie Road, Rolling Hills On July 17, 2002 a meeting was held between property owners to discuss the drainage between the two properties and the location of the drainage device. Present at the meeting were: Mr. and Mrs. Tsai Mr. Rafael Torres Mr. Ralph Torres, son of Mr. Rafael Torres Mr. William Beverly, attorney for Mr. Torres Rafael Bernal, County District Engineering Associate Craig Nealis, City Manager Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director Mr. Ralph Torres summarized his parents' concerns pertaining to the wall, which was constructed by Mr. Tsai between the properties. He stated that he and his parents are uncertain if the wall was constructed on their property or on Mr. Tsai's property, and whether the wall is structurally sound. He further stated that Mr. Tsai is continually working on his property and that his parents would like to know what exactly he is proposing to do. He stated that Mr. Tsai removed the brush and debris from the westerly corner of his property, which exposed a slope, and that his parents are concerned that the slope will fail and be eroded onto their property. Mr. Tsai responded by giving a history. He stated that it was Mr. Torres who requested that a wall be built to correct the drainage between the properties, and that when Mr. Tsai was in the midst of constructing the wall, Mr. Torres started complaining about the wall. Mr. Tsai stated that before he started the construction, he showed Mr. Torres a survey of the property, and that Mr. Torres at that time had no problems with the construction of the wall in its current location. Mr. Tsai stated that he will not show the survey to Mr. Torres, and that if Mr. Torres is questioning the location of the property line between the properties, then he should have a survey done. Mr. Beverly encouraged Mr. Tsai to share the information. Rafael Bernal stated that a building permit is not required for a Wall which is less than 3 feet high and which retains less than 3 feet of dirt. He further stated that in most instances no building permits are required for drainage devices, unless it is a part of a grading project. • • Discussion ensued pertaining the need for a survey to determine the location of the wall. Mr. Ralph Torres and Mr. Beverly asked Mr. Tsai to put in writing exactly what he is proposing to do and the time frame. Mr. Tsai responded that he would like to continue,the wall in a westerly direction down into the canyon. The wall would not be more than 2 feet high. City. Manager informed the parties that they should contact the Rolling Hills Community Association for their approval. He also explained that originally the wall was greater than 3 feet in height. When reported to the City by Mr. Torres, City provided Mr. Tsai with options to reduce the wall to 3 feet or below in height, remove the wall or apply for a variance (above 3 feet in the front yard setback). City Manager commented that the City does not require this wall or drainage device and urged the parties to work together and reach an agreement. Mr. Ralph Torres agreed that continuing the wall would be a good idea, but that the property line question needs to be addressed first. The parties agreed to continue the discussion and to meet in the field to determine the height of the wall. A survey to determine the location of the wall will also be done. No decision was made on whether Mr. Tsai will allow Mr. Torres to look at the existing survey or if Mr. Torres would have to have a new survey done. The parties also agreed to continue the dialogue with each other and to keep the city informed of their discussions. The parties agreed that ultimately, the best solution would be to continue the wall in westerly direction into the canyon. November 14, 2001 MEMO TO FILE: RE: 8 BOWIE LANE, Mr. Albert Tsai, wall along the front property line. City's Building Official, Rafael Bernal and Yolanta Schwartz made an inspection of the wall constructed by Mr. Tsai on Wednesday, November 14, 2001. According to Mr. Tsai: the neighbors below, Mr. & Mrs. Torres have complained about the drainage from the Tsai property onto the Torres' property for many years. Mr. Tsai built a wall along the property line, thinking that he'll pacify the neighbor and alleviate the problem. Mr. Tsai was planning to construct a swale along the wall on his property to further make sure that the water drains on his property down the swale and not onto the Torres' property. Mr. Tsai spoke to the neighbor and told him what his plans are. Mr. Torres did not object. Two courses of wall were removed. The workers informed Mr. Tsai that because the wall was constructed with steel rods and on foundation, it couldn't be removed manually. Special equipment has to be brought in to demo the remaining of the wall. Mr. Tsai would like to keep the wall. Mr. Torres told him that he too would like to keep the wall. Mr. Tsai suggested to plant vine like plants so that in a couple of years the wall on the Torres's property would be covered by the plants. According to Mr. Torres: there always was a drainage problem, because the Tsai's dirt driveway leading into the barn was not compacted. For years Mr. Torres complained to Mr. Tsai and the City about the dirt from the road washing onto his property. Mr. Tsai built the wall without his permission and went onto his (Torres) property to do so. Mr. Torres went away and when he came back, the wall was there. He informed the City about the wall. Before the block wall, there were railroad ties along the driveway - (that were supporting Mr. Tsai's driveway to the barn). Mr. & Mrs. Torres state that through the years Mr. Tsai built-up the dirt driveway by at least 3-4 feet, especially near the barn. They did not compact it. The reason for the wall to be 4-5 feet high on their (Torres's) property is that the driveway was built-up. The railroad ties were never this high, maybe 2-3 tiers only. The railroad ties were rotted and did need replacement. The Torres's never expected the wall to be so high. In addition, Mr. Torres thinks that the Tsai's changed the grade of the other slopes on their property and made is steeper as it meets the driveway to the barn. Mrs. Torres said that she never before was able to see the slope behind the barn driveway. Even though, they think the wall will help with the drainage they would like the following: . 1. Assurance that the wall was engineered properly, (copy of plans and approvals from either City or County) 2. Assurance that the wall will not fall down 3. Assurance (copy of permit) that the wall was constructed legally 4. Acknowledgment that the driveway was built-up and that the City or RHCA knows about it and that it's O.K., since dirt was imported. 5. Assurance that the wall is allowed/permitted to be located on the property line. 6. Assurance that the Tsai's will clean up the brush and debris from the property line and those that go into the canyon. According to Rafael: It does not look like the driveway was built-up by much, maybe 1- 1.5 feet through the years, but as a result of the Torres's complaints that drainage is a problem. If the driveway was built-up more than 1-1.5 feet, there would be a hill near the entrance to the barn. The driveway is pretty much at the same elevation as the existing barn. If a wall does not retain more than 3' of dirt, it does not require building permit. Rafael would consider this wall as a drainage device and no permits would be required.