1/27/1992 MINUTES OF A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALZFORNIA
January 27, 1992
A reqular meetinq of the City Council of the City of Rollinq
Hills was called to order by Mayor Pernell at 7:35 p.m. on Monday,
January 27, 1992 in the City Council Chambers at the City Hall/
Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills,
California.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh,
Murdock, Mayor Pro Tem Swanson, Mayor Pernell
ABSENT: None �
ALSO PRESENT: Craig Nealis City Manaqer
L. D. Courtright City Treasurer
Michael Jenkins City Attorney
� Lola Ungar Principal Planner
Lucile Rogers Minutes Secretary
CONSENT CALENDAR `
Councilmember Murdock moved approval of the Consent Calendar, .
Councilmember Leeuwenburgh seconded and the motion passed without
objection.
a. Minutes - Meeting of January 13, 1992.
(Approved as presented)
b. Payment of Bills - Demands Number 6092 through 6139 dated
January 27, 1992 in the amount of $126, 301. 67 were approved for
payment from the General Fund.
c. Financial Statement for the month of December 1991.
(Approved as presented)
d. General Purpose Financial Statements for Fiscal Year endinq
June 30, 1991.
(Approved as presented)
1
�
Rolling Hills City Councfl Meeting - 1/27/92
e. Correspondence from California Contract Cities regardinq ;
apportionment of property tax to "No and Low Property Tax Cities. "
(Received and filed) �
f. Correspondence regarding recycled material totals for the
month of December.
(Received and filed)
g. Correspondence from City of Glendale regarding AB 939 .
(Received and filed)
h. Correspondence from Mountains Recreation and Conservancy
Authority regarding Los Angeles County Park, Beach and Recreation
Act of 1992.
(Received and filed)
i. Budget Calendar Fiscal Year 1992-93.
(Received and filed)
PLANNING COMMIS3ION ITEM8
�. ZONING CASE NO. 402
Applicant: lrir. Dana John KacRap
Address: 4 Buqqy Whip Drive (Lot 2�4-MS)
RE30LIITION OF APPROVAL 92-3 �
Reapprovinq and modifyinq an egpired variance to encroacb and F
reapprovinq and modifyinq an expired site plan review ---
application for a aew sinqle family residence.
City Manager Nealis reported that this case was approved by
the Planning Commission on January 11, 1992 and was continued from
the City Council meeting of January 13, 1992 due to lack of a
qualified quorum. Resolution of Approval No. 92-3 was accepted by
the City Eouncil without objection.
B. ZONING CASE NO. �32A
Applicant: E.B. Development
Address: 6 Ringbit Road West (Lot 8-A-2�SF)
RESOLOTION OF APPROVAL 92-5 -
Grantinq a variance to encroach and site plan review approval.
City Manager Nealis reported that this case was approved by
the Planning Commission on January 11, 1992 and was continued from
the City Council meeting of January 13, 1992 hecause changes made
to the Resolution of Approval required legal review. Resolution of
Approval No. 92-5 was accepted by the City Council without
objection.
;
2
t
Rolling Hills City Council Meeting - 1/27/92
TR�FFIC COMI�iI88ION ITEMB
71. RESOLOTION NO. TC-91-2: � RESOLOTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS
TRAFFIC COMMISSION ENCOURAGZNG THE MAINTENANCB OF TH$
EQOESTRIAN EASEMENT ADJACENT TO 3 EASTFIELD DRIVB, ROLLING
8ILL8, CALIFORNIl�.
City Manager Nealis explained that this Resolution
memorializes an unwritten agreement reached by the Traffic
Commission at their meetinq of January 17, 1992. The property
owner, Mrs. Cherie Bennett, indicated her aqreement with the terms
of the Resolution. The City Council concurred and Resolution No.
TC-91-2 was accepted.
B. CONSIDERATION OF TRAFFIC COMMISSZON RECOXXENDATION RELATIVB TO
A STOP SIGN TO BE PLACED AT PORTOGUES$ BEND ROAD ADJACENT TO
THE MAIN GATE EBIT.
City Manager Nealis reported that the proposed stop sign is
for the purpose of providing increased pedestrian and vehicular
traffic safety in the area of the main gate. The gate is scheduled
to be modif ied to operate the same as the other gates; i.e. , it
will not have to return to a fully closed position each time a
vehicle exits. The Community Association will be asked to maintain
the gate and keep it operative at all times.
- In response to a query from Mayor Pernell regardinq the
willingness of the Community Association to undertake this
responsibility, the City Manager said there was no indication at
the last Traffic Commission meeting that .the suggestion would not
be well received.
Mr. Tom Boyd, 7 S. Middleridge, stated that the Community
Association has tried to maintain safety without inconvenience to
the residents, and he feels at this time the stop sign is the only
way to slow the traffic down. •
Ms. Marge Schmit, 2 Bugqy Whip, also expressed her belief that
the plan will be acceptable to the Community Association.
Mayor Pro Tem Swanson moved approval of the Traffic Commission
recommendation that a stop sign be placed at Portuquese Bend Road
adjacent to the main gate exit. Councilmember Murdock seconded and
the motion passed without objection.
3 '
�
Rollinq Hills City Council Meeting - 1/27/92
SPECIAL PRESENTATION$
A. PRESENTJ►TION OF RECOGNITION AWARD TO RHCA BOARD MEMBER
?tARGARBT SC8?lIT
Mayor Pernell presented . an award of recoqnition and
appreciation to Marqe Schmit for her dedication and volunteer
public service as a member of the Rollinq Hills Traffic Commission.
B. PRESENTATIOId FROM DIMEN3ION CABLB TELEVIBION SERVICEB
REPRESENTATIDBS REGARDING STATUS OF CABL$ TELEVISION
CONSTAOCTION iiITHIN T8E CITY.
This presentation was postponed due to absence of the
representative from Dimension Cable Television Services.
PUBLIC HEARZl�lGB - CONTINi1ED
!►. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF DIEW PRESERaATION COMMITTEB
RESOLDTION NO. 91-1-VPC DECLARING A VIEiT II�IPAIRI�iENT CAOSED BY
SPECIFIC TREEB.
LOCATIOH: 11 QDAIL RIDGB SOUTH
PROPERTY OWNER: DORZS McNABB
COMPLAINANT: SAMIIEL AND BIIRT ARNOLD, 2 SPOR LANB -
APPELLAllT: DORIS McNABB
City Manager Nealis reported that this matter was continued
from the January 13 , 1992 City Council meeting in order to set a
date for a field trip when all Councilmembers could be available.
At the request of Mayor Pernell, this item was postponed until
later in the aqenda.
B. AP�EAI, OF PLANNING COMMIS3ION RESOLIITION IdO. 91-25 DENYING ]1
REQIIEST FOR BITE PLAN REVIEA APPRODAL TO CONSTROCT A IdEW
BINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCB, DENYYNG A REQOEST FOR A VARIANC$ TO
ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YAItD SETBACIC AND DENYII�IG A REQOEST FOR
A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO T�E BIDE YARD 8ETBACIC IN ZONING
CASE NO. 366.
ADDRESB: 5 SOOTHFIELD (LOT 3-SF)
OWNER: MR. JEFFREY FAVER
City Manager Nealis reported that this hearing was continued
a� the request of the property owner from the original hearing on
November 25, 1991. The Planning Commission denied the application
at its October 5 meeting and certified the compliance of the final
Environmental Impact Report. The conclusions reached by the
Planning Commission, as noted in Resolution No. 91-25, were that
4 �
�
Rollinq Hills City Council Meeting - 1/27/92
- the geology of the site is not suitable for the proposed project,
mitigation measures in the EIR cannot avoid all the siqnificant
environmental effects, the Site Plan would not be consistent with
the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan, grading would be extensive,
the project would not minimize building coverage on the pad, and
the driveway off Southfield Drive would create an increased risk of
pedestrian and vehicular accidents.
The Resolution specifically notes that the stability and
seismic safety factors are less than the County of Los Anqeles
standards of 1. 5 for slope stability and 1. 1 for seismic safety.
The mitigation measures recommended the construction of 30-inch
diameter concrete piles (caissons) to be placed 35 to 40 feet into
the ground at 7. 5 feet on center across the entire area to be
covered by the residence, garage, hardscape and driveway. This
would displace a great deal of soil and add a significant amount of
weight and force to the site. The possibility of landslides during
the construction phase was noted, and increased drainaqe and septic
tank seepage could add to the risk of landslides. The proposed
mitigation measures could not avoid all the siqnificant
environmental effects.
City Attorney Jenkins advised that the appeal has been noticed
as a public hearing and will be considered de novo by the City
Council. Any testimony from the public which was not presented
during the Planning Commission hearings can be taken at this
hearing. He added that the City Council could take a f ield trip to
the site if they so desire.
Principal Planner Ungar displayed photographs of the site and
pointed out on the plans where the residence, garage and driveway
would be located. She stated that all the structures would be on �
top of the pilings, with no buildinq pad.
Mayor Pernell opened the public hearinq.
Mr. Stan Denis, attorney for the applicant, stated that the
side yard setback pertains only to a deck on the house, which the
applicant is willinq to eliminate, so the appeal for a variance on
this item is not relevant. Regarding the instability of the top 15
to 20 feet of soil coverinq the property, Mr. Denis pointed out
that this instability extends the entire length of the slope and
beneath Southfield Drive, and the caissons will strengthen the
slope and mitigate the instability that presently exists (confirmed
by both Geofon and American Geotechnical) . He asserted that the
information in Section 6, Paragraph E of Resolution No. 91-25 was
derived from a non-expert neighbor; no geotechnical experts have
yet specified the number, depth or spacinq of the caissons.
5
t
Rollinq Hills City Council Meetinq - 1/27/92
With regard to the risk of landslide durinq the construction
phase, Mr. Denis contended it would be no more than the risk during
the tests that were taken, and that drilling the caissons a few at
a time and allowing them to cure would actually increase the
stability. The concrete trucks could be parked at a distance from
the site and the concrete mixtures could be pumped into the caisson
holes. Regarding drainage on the site, Mr. Denis said that the use
of gutters and underground pipes would decrease the surface water
drainage.
Mr. Denis noted that when the project was first submitted to
the Architectural Committee in 1988, they commended the design as
beinq inconspicuous. He stated there will be no cut and fill, and
the project will be as unobtrusive as possible. He objected to the
mention of increased pedestrian and vehicular safety risk in
Paragraph M, citing an aqreement with the City attorney that the
focus would be on geotechnical aspects.
City Manaqer Nealis advised that letters in opposition to the
project have been received from Russell Chase, William and Florence
Horn, Philip M. Battaglia (representinq Alan and Jody Browninq) ,
and Charles Hillway. Principal Planner Ungar added that two more
recent letters have been received from Mr. Chase and Mr. Hillway,
with approximately 81 signatures on a petition opposinq the
project. -
Mr. Russell Chase, 2 Ringbit Road East, asserted the project
is danqerous and unsightly. He said the residents petitioned the
County in September 1988 to protect the integrity of Southfield
Drive and the area's geoloqy. In September 1991 they requested the
Planning Commission to deny the project. Mr. Chase indicated it is
dangerous because it is in a sensitive area, on a documented
unstable site, abuts the sole road access to Southfield area, is
300 feet from the Flying Triangle landslide area, is 300 feet from
a mapped landslide area downslope on Southfield, and Southfield
Drive is narrow, steep, subject to fast traffic, has blind curves,
and has no shoulders on the east. Mr. Chase testified that most of
the geotechnical experts agree the area is unstable and it fails
the County's minimum requirements for slope stability and seismic
safety factors. He said the total weight of the concrete would be
3,278,000 pounds, or 1640 tons. He stated that Geologist Arthur
Keene has indicated the pilings could be completely sheared off.
Mr. Chase complained of the appearance of the project, and cited
the possibility of project abandonment. He asked the City Council
to sustain the denial.
Mr. Jay Rockey, attorney with the la� f irm of Donovan,
Leisure, Newton & Irvine, spoke in opposition to the project on
behalf of residents Alan and Jody Browning. He agreed with the
6
�
Rollinq Hills City Council Meeting - 1/27/92
points raised by Mr. Chase and cited the report of engineerinq
geologist Arthur Keene which also raised the stability problems.
Mr. Rockey also asked that the Council sustain the denial.
Mr. Charles Hillway, 2 Flying Mane Road, reviewed the history
of the property, stating that there have been two other denials
because the property is not buildable. He commented that the
Flying Trianqle landslide was very costly to the entire community,
and with the hazards inherent in this project it should not be
- approved and developed.
Mr. William G. Horn, 16 Southfield Drive, supported the denial
of the application by the Planning Commission. He said there would
have to be grading on the property, an alternate roadway would have
to be provided, and indemnification of residents should be provided
to cover all consequences of the construction.
Ms. Kathryn Partridge, 69 Portuguese Bend Road, expressed her
opinion that the project should not even be considered if it does
not meet the Los Angeles County seismic and slope code �
requirements. She said that the County has provided professional
people to work with the City and their expertise should not be
disregarded.
In rebuttal, Mr. Denis admitted that there will be a risk to
Southfield Drive if the project goes forward, but said that risk
exists today. Mr. Denis stated that all the qeologists on record
aqree that the site is not very stable, but all those who addressed
the issue agree that the stability will be enhanced as a result of
the project. He said that the applicant had wished to apply for
County approval before bringing the matter to the City, as he feels
the project is sound and the County will qrant approval, but the
City Attorney wanted the City to hear the application first. He
commented that the only reason the project was denied earlier was
because of the lack of geological data. He noted that the warning
letters which should have been in the property file when Mr. Faver
first examined it had been misfiled. Mr. Denis aqreed that there
will be cutting of soil on the project, but said there will be no
fill.
Mr. Chase read excerpts from the EIR which said that the only
geological impact that cannot be reduced to insignificance through
mitigation measures is the risk of geologic instability from water
runoff and septic tank seepage, and an excerpt from Arthur Keene's
letter of July 27 regardinq the possibility that a landslide could
shear the piles.
Mr. A1 Esser, 71 Crest Road East, urged denial of the project
because of its drainage into Klondike Canyon.
7
�
Rolling Hills City Council Meeting - 1/27/92
Mr. Ron Sipes, 1 Ringbit Road, refuted Mr. Denis' testimony
that the applicant and his attorney tried to talk to the neighbors
about the project. He said the only communication was letters with
a threatening tone.
Mr. Hillway questioned the conclusions of the geoloqical firms
which claimed that the pilinqs would enhance the slope stability.
Mr.� Rockey pointed out that on page 15 of the EIR it is stated
that a qeological risk for landslides during construction does
exist.
Mr. Denis, in his final rebuttal, reiterated that the project
site and Southfield Drive would be better off after the
construction, and if there are geological forces strong enouqh to
shear the pilings they will cause much more damage to the area than
just the destruction of the project. Regarding drainage and septic
tank seepage, he said there will be less water goinq on the dirt
after the building is there. He said the letters to residents were
intended to be informative, not threateninq.
Councilmember Heinsheimer asked about the number of caissons
to be utilized and Mr. Denis replied that he does not know where
the figure of 115 came from and it should not have been in the
Planning Commission Resolution.
Mayor Pernell clarified that the City uses the County's
technical expertise under contract with the City, but the County
does not have jurisdiction in this matter.
Councilmember Leeuwenburqh inquired why the plans show a
stable with no vehicular access, and Mr. Denis replied that access
is provided through an easement.
The public hearinq was closed, and Mayor Pernell expressed his
view that the number of pilings is not in character with other
construction in the area.
Mayor Pro Tem Swanson complimented the speakers on their
excellent testimony and went on record asking for a denial of the
appeal. She expressed her opinion that the risk of the development
is enormous, citing concerns regarding the weight of the pilings,
vehicular access, seismic safety, geology, and septic tank seepaqe.
Councilmembers Murdock and Leeuwenburgh agreed, emphasizing
the project's inability to meet the City's minimum slope stability
standards.
8
t
Rolling Hills City Council Meeting - 1/27/92
Councilmember Heinsheimer commented that the project would be
danqerous throughout the construction, commenting that less
challenginq projects had been abandoned and are current blights on
the communi.ty.
City Attorney Jenkins asked if all Councilmembers had visited
the site, and all indicated they had. It was determined that no
observations were made during these visits which had not already
been placed on the record. He advised Council that if a motion is
made at this meeting it should be to direct staff to bring back an
appropriate Resolution presenting findings. Final action could
then be taken at the next meeting to approve the Resolution.
Mayor Pro Tem Swanson moved that staff be directed to prepare
necessary findings and return to the City Council for final
adoption a Resolution of Denial of this application. The motion
was seconded by Councilmember Murdock and passed unanimously on a
roll call vote.
Councilmember Heinsheimer requested that staff provide a
complete copy of all documentation on this matter, if there is any
that Councilmembers have not received.
RECESS AND RECONVENE
The meeting was recessed at 9: 40 p.m. and reconvened at 10:05
p.m. Councilmember Heinsheimer departed and was absent for the
conclusion of the Council meeting.
OPEN AGENDA
Mr. Richard Colyear, 35 Crest Road West, stated that on page
7 of the minutes of the January 13 , 1992 City Council meet'inq the
date of his visit to City Hall should have been October 4, 1991
rather than January 10, 1992. Ne added that the minutes state that
a. request was made by Mr. Colyear for action by the City Council
but they do not state that any action was taken; therefore, he
assumed that his request was still pending. Mayor Pernell
explained that the Open Agenda portion of the meetings is only for
the purpose of receiving testimony; no action can legally be taken
because items for action must be advertised and placed on the
agenda.
Finally, Mr. Colyear contended that the revised Housinq
Element proposed for adoption and duly noticed in the fall of 1992
was not the same as what was sent to the State Department of
Nousing and Community Development on January 6, 1992. He stated
9 ,
�
Rolling Hills City Council Meeting - 1/27/92
there is a need to provide to the residents of Rolling Hills notice
of what is intended to be adopted and give them an opportunity to
comment before adopting it.
�ESOLOTION NO. 91-1-VPC - SCHEDULING OF FIELD TRIP (Continued)
After discussion, it was agreed that the field trip to 11
Quail Ridqe South and 2 Spur Lane will be held at 7 : 00 a.m. Monday,
February 10, 1992 .
OLD BUSINESS
�. RESOLDTZON NO. 66�: A RESOLUTION OF TSE CITY COIINCZL OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THB FINAL DRAFT
OF THE CITY�B SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEI�ENT (SRRB) IN
RESPONSE TO THE INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1989 (AB
939) .
Councilmember Murdock moved adoption of Resolution No. 664,
the motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Swanson and passed without
objection.
NEW BDSINE88
A. CONBIDERATION OF PROPOSED WILDLIFE AWARENE33 ?iEETZNG
City Manager Nealis reported that at their January 20, 1992
meeting the Wildlife Preservation Committee proposed to conduct a
Wildlife Awareness meeting on Monday, March 16, 1992 from 6: 00 p.m.
to 8:00 p.m. in the Rolling Hills City Council Chambers. Mr. and
Mrs. Steve Shultz will provide information to residents concerning
existing wildlife in the community, its preservation, the bird
breeding and release project, and how to enjoy but not disturb
wildlife within the community. It is proposed that the City will
provide flyers regarding the program and also announce it in the
Newsletter.
Mayor Pro Tem Swanson commended the Wildlife Preservation
Committee and suggested that the proqram also address the proper
balance of man and nature. There were no objections to the
proposed presentation.
�?YI'�'ERS FROM MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Pernell reported that unauthorized people have been seen
in the City, and a transient was recently picked up by the
Sheriff's Department on Eastfield Drive and taken out of the City.
10
Rolling Hills City Council Meetinq - 1/27/92 ,
Captain William Mangan, Los Angeles County Sheriff's D�partment,
Lomita Station, stated that homeless people are spreading;;9iut to
the suburban areas and it is up to the residents to notify the
Sheriff's Department so they can attend to the problem.
.' T. 1
The matter of parkinq on school property and along Crest Road
on weekends was discussed. Councilmember Leeuwenburgh not� that
residents have the right to invite guests, and when many qy�sts are
expected they should fill out a form so that the City can notify
the Sheriff's Department. There are equestrian and pedestrian
safety issues involved and the members of the Traffic Commission
have discussed the matter but no resolution has been found.
Councilmember Leeuwenburgh said they will look at it again in the
next couple of months. -
� -.
?
�IATTERS FROM STAFF • • .. :,:t
City Manager Nealis requesed permission to express support on
behalf of the City of Rolling Hills for AB181, which is anfa�tempt
to provide relief under the superfund law, as requested �y the
Leaque of California Cities. Approval was indicated by City
Councilmembers.
I+SATTERB FROM TRE CITY ATTORNEY
None. r
CLOSED SESSION ,,Y.
There was no need for a closed session. �Y
ADJOORNMENT , �-
The meeting was adjourned at 10: 25 p.m. to Monday, February l0
. at 7:00 a.m. for a field trip to 11 Quail Ridqe South and -_2; Spur
Lane.
��C'G� ��
PPROVED. Minutes retary
Mayor "
..
�
il
�