3/14/2005MINUTES OF
A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF .ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
MARCH 14, 2005
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor
Heinsheimer at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road,
Rolling Hills, California.
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Present: Black, Hill, Mayor Pro Tem Pernell and Mayor Heinsheimer.
Councilmembers Absent: Lay (excused).
Others Present: Craig Nealis, City Manager.
Mike Jenkins, City Attorney.
Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director.
Nan Huang, Finance Director.
Marilyn Kern, Deputy City Clerk.
Captain Jay Zuanich, LASD, Lomita Station.
Sgt. Dave Rosas, LASD, Lomita Station.
Captain Hansen, LAFD, Station 56.
Battalion Chief August, LAFD, Station 106.
Roy Itani, LA County Building & Safety.
Ed Acosta, LA County Building & Safety.
Sara Curran, LA County Building & Safety.
Mike Martinet, Area G.
Mike Reader, Geologist.
SPECIAL ITEMS
RESOLUTION NO. 973: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA RECITING THE FACT OF THE GENERAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION ON MARCH 8, 2005, DECLARING THE RESULT AND -SUCH
OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW.
Mayor Pro Tem Pernell moved that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 973.
Councilmember Hill seconded the motion, which carried unanimously by those
Councilmembers in attendance.
INSTALLATION AND OATH OF OFFICE OF NEWLY ELECTED OFFICIALS
City Manager Nealis administered the Oath of Office to elected Councilmembers Thomas
Heinsheimer and Godfrey Pernell.
COMMENTS FROM CITY COUNCILMEMBERS.
Mayor Heinsheimer and Mayor Pro Tem Pernell provided brief comments and thanked those
in attendance for their support.
Mayor Heinsheimer called for a recess at 7:32 p.m. for a reception. The meeting reconvened at
7:40 p.m.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any
Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing
it to be considered under Council Actions.
a. Minutes -Regular Meeting of February 28, 2005.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
b. Payment of Bills.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
C. FY 2005-2006 City of Rolling Hills Budget Preparation Memorandum.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
d. Approval of establishment of an Underground Utility Ad Hoc Subcommittee for
Minutes
City Council Meeting
03/14/05 -1-
specific underground utility projects.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
Mayor Pro Tem Pernell moved that the City Council approve the recommendations in the
Consent Calendar. Councilmember Hill seconded the motion. In response to
Councilmember Black, City Manager Nealis, explained that the computer consultant provides
support for the City's computer systems and responds to our computer related problems.
The motion carried unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
None.
TRAFFIC COMMISSION ITEMS
None.
Mayor Heinsheimer suggested that the City Council consider the status report regarding
response to land movement in the Poppy Trail area at this time. Hearing no objection, he so
ordered.
MATTERS FROM STAFF
STATUS REPORT REGARDING RESPONSE TO LAND MOVEMENT ADJACENT TO
POPPY TRAIL ROAD INCLUDING UPDATES FROM CITY STAFF AND PUBLIC
SAFETY AGENCIES AND ADOPTION OF A CONSULTANT AGREEMENT FOR
GEOLOGICAL SERVICES.
City Manager Nealis thanked the residents of Poppy Trail for their cooperation and provided
an update regarding the situation that began on the weekend of March 5, 2005.
Councilmembers and those in attendance heard reports from representatives from the Fire
Department, Sheriff's Department, Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety,
Area G Disaster Management, and proposed Consulting Geologist Mike Reader of Group
Delta. The updates focused on each agency's' initial response, how routine daily services are
being provided and how emergency services and response would be handled if the situation
were to change.
City Manager Nealis provided the City Council with a copy of a draft proposed agreement
between the City and Group Delta Consultants, to study the land movement, evaluate
temporary access, evaluate the re -opening of the roadway and repair the land movement. He
apologized for not being able to provide an advance copy of the draft agreement and
reported that minor amendments proposed by the City Attorney had just been discussed that
afternoon during a conference call meeting with staff, the RHCA and the proposed Consulting
Geologist. He explained that the City Attorney has offered some amendments which will be
evaluated by Group Delta.
City Manager Nealis explained the three phases of the proposed agreement that will provide a
short term assessment study and plans to improve the trail access area (Phase 1), the mid term
assessment for study and plans to open Poppy Trail (Phase 2) and the overall slope
stabilization phase (Phase 3). He explained the costs associated with each phase and indicated
that RHCA staff and attorney would discuss this agreement with the RHCA Board at their
next meeting and propose the idea of the RHCA funding 50% of the costs incurred by the City
that are not recovered by other agencies or parties.
City Manager Nealis explained the idea of mitigation measures that would be designed and
supervised by the consulting geologist. He explained that the mitigation measures are
separate from the three phases in the proposed agreement and would be designed to assist
with preventing the situation from getting worse. He indicated that the most important
components for the City Council to consider at this time would be the authorization for staff
to move forward with mitigation measures for #1 and #4 Poppy Trail following the receipt of
signed access agreements by the affected property owners and to approve Phase 1 to allow
the consultant to begin their studies of the short term assessment and plans to improve the
trail access. He indicated that staff could return with the other phases at a later date.
Councilmembers discussed the costs associated with the agreement with the consulting
geologist. City Manager Nealis explained that the costs would be expended from the
Municipal Self Insurance Fund. Mr. Mike Reader, Group Delta, indicated that the costs for
Phase 1 include civil engineering plans and mapping to use as a basis to determine long term
and temporary access using the existing trail. He further explained the costs associated with
Minutes
City Council Meeting
03/14/05 -2-
the other phases. Discussion ensued regarding the timeframe for the consultant to complete
the work outlined in the agreement and for the mitigation measures. Mr. Reader explained
certain technicalities associated with studying land movement. He suggested that they could
begin right away with Phase 1 and indicated that the initial study would take approximately 3
to 4 weeks.
Discussion ensued regarding the three phases outlined in the agreement and the sequence of
events. Mr. Reader explained that plans will be prepared for the temporary vehicular access
and that the over all assessment of the hillside will be conducted simultaneously.
Councilmembers also discussed the proposed mitigation measures suggested for the
properties at #1 and #4 Poppy Trail.
Mr. Bob Jonas, 3 Poppy Trail, queried the consultant about the mid term assessment where it
will be determined if the roadway can be opened. City Manager Nealis indicated that it is
estimated that this phase will take approximately 8-10 weeks to complete the study in Phase 2.
Mr. Ray Ferris, 50 Eastfield Drive, questioned what the process would be if an affected
property owner does not cooperate in these efforts. City Manager Nealis explained that the
City could take action to complete the work under an abatement process.
Mr. Jeffrey Faver, 10 Poppy Trail, commented on the access to the homes on Poppy Trail with
ATVs. City Manager Nealis explained that the goal of Phase 1 would be to study what can be
done to safely improve the temporary trail access.
Mr. Burt Balch, 10 Hackamore Road, commented on the potential for other areas in the City
that may affected by land movement.
Mr. John Lacy, 7 Poppy Trail, thanked the public safety personnel for their efforts and
commented on the proposed mitigation measures. He stated that he feels that it is important
to implement the measures as soon as possible and urged the City Council to approve them
this evening.
Ms. Shannon Freeman, 10 Poppy Trail, commented on Phase 1 and the types of vehicles that
would be able to travel on the access way.
At 8:45 p.m., Councilmember Black asked for a brief recess to allow time for the City Council
to review the agreement. Hearing no objection, Mayor Heinsheimer so ordered. Copies of
Phase 1 were provided to the residents of Poppy Trail in attendance. The meeting reconvened
at 9:00 p.m.
Further discussion ensued regarding the agreement and the three phases. Councilmembers
discussed the costs associated with the phases and the estimated costs for the proposed
mitigation measures. City Manager Nealis further explained the access agreements that are
necessary for studies and mitigation work to be completed on #1 and #4 Poppy Trail. He
indicated the property owners must sign these documents before work can begin.
Mr. Zaffer Hassanally, 6 Poppy Trail, commented on the timeframe for completion of the
work. Mr. Reader commented on the timeframe outlined in his proposal and indicated that
portions of the work will need to be completed on the properties at #1 and #4 Poppy Trail and
that the access agreements must be signed before they can work on those properties. He
indicated that in the meantime, they will be working on how to make the current temporary
access more useable without making the overall situation worse.
There being no further discussion, Mayor Heinsheimer called for a motion.
Councilmember Hill moved that the City Council authorize staff to proceed with Phase 1 of
the proposed agreement with the consulting geologist as well as proceed with mitigation
measures on the effected properties that are yet to be determined, not to exceed $65,000.
Councilmember Black seconded the motion, which carried, unanimously by those
Councilmembers in attendance.
Mayor Heinsheimer thanked the residents of Poppy Trail for their cooperation and support
and at 9:05 p.m. he called for a recess. The meeting reconvened at 9:06 p.m.
Minutes
City Council Meeting
03/14/05 -3-
PUBLIC HEARINGS- Continued
CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF COMMITTEE ON TREES AND VIEWS
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-1-CTV SETTING FORTH FINDINGS RELATING TO THE
REMOVAL AND TRIMMING OF TREES AT 61 EASTFIELD DRIVE RELATING TO A
VIEW IMPAIRMENT FROM 65 EASTFIELD DRIVE.
LOCATION: 61 EASTFIELD DRIVE
PROPERTY OWNER: MR. JOE JUGE, JR.
COMPLAINANT: DR. & MRS. RANDOLPH T. TYNDALL
APPELLANT: DR. & MRS. RANDOLPH T. TYNDALL
City Manager Nealis presented the staff report providing background regarding the appeal of
the Committee on Trees and Views Resolution submitted by Dr. and Mrs. Tyndall. He
indicated that the City Council conducted a field trip at the properties on February 14, 2005.
City Manager Nealis reported that one of the subject trees fell during a recent rainstorm.
Mayor Heinsheimer opened the public hearing.
Mr. Joe Juge, 61 Eastfield Drive, stated that his position has not changed and remains as
outlined in the letter he submitted to the City Council on November 19, 2004. He commented
on comments made in Mr. Stan Lamport's letter dated November 22, 2004 and indicated that
he disagrees with certain paragraphs in this letter. Mr. Juge stated that the Committee on
Trees and View's resolution of the matter was basically the offer that he had made and that he
stated that he would agree to.
Mr. Stan Lamport, representing Dr. and Mrs. Tyndall, stated that the Tyndalls feel that
reducing the size of tree number 2 by 5 ft. and lacing it still results in an obstructed view. He
stated that they are asking that this tree brought down to a level where their view will not be
obstructed. He commented on negotiations with Mr. Juge to attempt to settle this matter
privately. He indicated that the Tyndalls were prepared to pay to have the trees cut down and
provide Mr. Juge with reasonable replacement trees that would not grow to a height that
would obstruct their view in the future. He indicated that the negotiations broke down when
Mr. Juge could not provide the Tyndalls with suggestions about trees that he feels would be a
reasonable replacement.
Discussion ensued regarding Mr. Juge's comments and the comments made by Mr. Lamport
on behalf of the Tyndalls. Mr. Juge stated that he does not understand how the Tyndalls offer
of replacement trees would benefit their view or maintain the privacy of his property. He
indicated that he enjoys trees and that they represent a value to him. Further discussion
ensued regarding the Tyndalls offer to pay to have the trees removed and replace them with
lower growing trees and the findings made by the Committee on Trees and Views. Mr. Juge
indicated that he does not agree with the Committee's findings. Councilmember Hill indicated
that he hoped the parties could have reached a mutually beneficial private agreement. In
response to Councilmember Hill, Mr. Juge indicated that he does not feel that the Tyndalls'
offer had any substance. Mr. Lamport further explained the offer that had been made by the
Tyndalls to Mr. Juge regarding a private solution and indicated that a list of trees for possible
replacement was provided to Mr. Juge. Mayor Pro Tem Pernell also urged the parties to come
to a private settlement.
In response to Mayor Heinsheimer, City Attorney Jenkins indicated that the City Council
could direct staff to prepare a resolution related to this case this evening but however, if the
parties come to a mutual private agreement in the meantime that the appeal could be
withdrawn and no final action by the City Council would be necessary.
In response to Councilmember Black, Mr. Juge, explained that Dr. Tyndall had initially
approached him about trees along the driveway. Mr. Juge also explained that the trees in
question had been planted by a previous owner and indicated that several trees had been
removed since he owned the property. He further explained that the trees provide privacy
for his property. Mr. Juge further commented on the Committee on Trees and Views solution
to the matter and indicated that he did not fully agree with it but that he felt that it would be
workable.
In response to Councilmember Black, Mr. Lamport indicated that the Tyndalls have been
discussing the issue of the trees since approximately 1982. He indicated that the Tyndalls have
offered to replace the trees on Mr. Juge's property that would provide privacy and shade but
would not grow into the view.
Minutes
City Council Meeting
03/14/05 -4-
Dr. Randolph Tyndall, 65 Eastfield Drive, .indicated that the trees cannot be seen from Mr.
Juge's property and they are not in his daily view. Dr. Tyndall also commented on the
discussions that took place during the Committee on Trees and Views review of this case.
In response to Councilmember Hill, Dr. Tyndall explained that the trees were not on the Juge
property when he and Mrs. Tyndall purchased their property 45 years ago. Dr. Tyndall
explained the rapid growth of the trees since they were planted.
Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Heinsheimer closed the public hearing.
Mayor Heinsheimer referred the City Council to the Committee on Trees and View's
recommended restorative action in Section 6 of Resolution No. 2004-1-CTV. Councilmember
Black commented on the restorative action outlined by the Committee and indicated that he
feels that the view is significantly impaired even with this action and moved that the City
Council direct staff to prepare a resolution outlining a restorative action that would provide
for the removal of all of the trees in question. The motion died for a lack of a second.
Mayor Pro Tem Pernell indicated that he feels that the Tyndalls have a significant view even
before the restorative action outlined by the Committee. He indicated that following the
recommendations of the Committee would improve their current view and moved that the
City Council uphold the decision of the Committee. Mayor Heinshiemer seconded the
motion.
Discussion ensued regarding the motion and Mayor Heinsheimer suggested that the motion
be amended to include a reduction in the height of tree number two further than the 5 feet in
overall height as recommended by the Committee to 10 feet in overall height.
Councilmembers discussed the height that tree number two would need to be to have it out of
the view site of Dr. and Mrs. Tyndall. In response to Councilmember Black, Mayor
Heinsheimer explained that it has been suggested that the other recommendations of the
Committee on Trees and Views stand however that it has been suggested that tree number
two be reduced and maintained in height below the site line from the Tyndalls property.
Councilmember Black indicated that he does not agree with the recommendations of the
Committee. Councilmember Hill indicated that he could support the amended motion with
the understanding that all parties understand that no trees can grow back into the view. He
stated that he feels that the view should be fully restored to the point when the Tyndalls
purchased their home.
Discussion ensued regarding the amended motion and the recommended trimming of all of
the trees to below the line of site from the Tyndall's property. In response to Mayor
Heinsheimer, Mayor Pro Tem Pernell indicated that he would amend the motion to uphold
the recommendation of the Committee to also include that tree number two would be
reduced in height below the site line. By a show of hands, the motion did not carry by a
majority vote.
Councilmember Hill moved that the City Council modify the decision of the Rolling Hills
Committee on Trees and Views, Resolution No. 2004-1-CTV, to require that all four remaining
trees under consideration shall be reduced in overall height and maintained below the line of
sight from the perspective established in Resolution No. 2004-1-CTV. Councilmember Black
seconded the motion, which carried by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers Black, Hill and Mayor Heinsheimer.
NOTES:
Mayor Pro Tem Pernell.
ABSENT:
Councilmember Lay.
ABSTAIN:
None.
Staff was directed to present a resolution on this motion of the City Council at the April 11,
2005 City Council meeting for consideration.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT TO THE ROLLING HILLS WILDLIFE
PRESERVATION COMMITTEE.
City Manager Nealis presented the staff report outlining the vacancy on the Wildlife
Preservation and the letters of interest submitted by two residents. Councilmember Black
Minutes
City Council Meeting
03/14/05 -5-
suggested that both interested residents be appointed.
After discussion, staff was directed to prepare appropriate documents to amend the
membership of the Rolling Hills Wildlife Preservation Committee to accommodate both
residents as alternate members on the Committee.
OPEN AGENDA - APPROXIMATELY - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME
None.
MATTERS FROM MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
None.
MATTERS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
CLOSED SESSION
The City Council finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open
session will prejudice the position of the local agency in the litigation.
Existing Litigation:
G.C. 54956.9(a)
Judith Hassoldt and William Hassoldt, Individuals, Plaintiffs, vs City of Rolling Hills, et.
al., Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case No. BC275012.
No closed session was held.
ADIOURNMENT
Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Heinsheimer adjourned the
meeting at 10:05 p.m. to then next regular meeting of the City Council scheduled to be held on
Monday, March 28, 2005, beginning at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, 2
Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California.
Mayor
Minutes
City Council Meeting
03/14/05
Respectfully submitted,
1A
lyn Kern
CI
u