5/11/198121
MINUTES OFA
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ROLLING.HILLS, CALIFORNIA:
May 11, 1981
A regular meeting of the City Council.of the City of Rolling Hills
was called to order at the Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend_
Road, Rolling Hills, California by Mayor pro tem Rose at 6:00 P.M.
Monday, May 11, 1981.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Pernell, Swanson, Mayor .pro tem Rose
ABSENT: Councilman Heinsheimer, Mayor Crocker
PERSONNEL SESSION
Members of the Council met in a personnel session.
RECESS
The meeting was recessed at 7:30 P.M., to reconvene at 8:00 P.M.
at La Cresta School, 38 Crest Road West,
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Rose called the meeting to order and announced that he would
conduct the meeting until the arrival of Mayor Crocker, who was enroute
from Sacramento.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Swanson
Mayor pro tem Rose
ABSENT: Mayor Crocker (The Mayor arrived at 8:35 P.M.)
ALSO PRESENT: Teena Clifton City Manager
William Kinley Attorney.
Patrick Coughlan Attorney
June Cunningham Deputy City Clerk
Residents City of Rolling Hills
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting on April 27, 1981 were approved and
accepted on a motion made by Councilman Heinsheimer, seconded by
Councilwoman Swanson and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Swanson
Mayor Rose
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Crocker
PAYMENT OF BILLS
. Councilwoman Swanson moved that Demands No. 9595 through 9604,
9606 through 9618, and 9625 be approved for payment in the amount of
$4,870.82 from the General Fund, that Demands No. 9605, 9619 and
9620 be voided, and that Demands No. 9621 through 9624 in the amount
of $2,065.61 be approved for payment from the Fire and Flood Self -
Insurance Fund. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pernell and
carried.by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Swanson
Mayor Rose
None
ABSENT:. Mayor Crocker
22
May 11; 1981
REPORT AND DISCUSSION, KLONDIKE CANYON LANDSLIDE
Mayor Rose asked Councilman Heinsheimer to chair the discussion/
of the Klondike Canyon Landslide. A topographic map of a portion of
the Flying Triangle marked to show the boundaries of the active
slide as defined by the County Engineering Geologist in his report
dated January 1981, and the 1978 Consultant's Boundary, was displayed.
Councilman Heinsheimer read the Rolling Hills Newsletter dated
May 6, 1981, regarding the Flying Triangle Geology Report, into the
record. Residents were notified in the letter that the plan to abate
the Klondike Canyon Landslide by filling a portion of the canyon will
not stabilize the slide, and the proposed Landslide Abatement District
is not an appropriate solution; therefore the Council would rescind
the Resolution to Form the District at the City Council meeting.
Councilman Heinsheimer explained that there has not been any motion
within the area defined in red, the 1978 Consultant's Boundary; all
movement has been within the active slide area, which was defined in
yellow on the map. Councilman Heinsheimer said a study was made to
determine whether filling in the canyon would stop the slide, and in
connection with the study the Council adopted a resolution which would
initiate procedures for the formation of a landslide abatement district.
The study has been completed and the preliminary report indicates that
the proposed plan of action would not be appropriate, and the Council
will abandon the plan for an abatement district.
Councilman Heinsheimer said the draft geology report is not in
final form for distribution, and will be made available to the com-
munity when it is complete. He said there is general agreement about
the situation within the yellow area, and the inadvisibility of pro-
ceeding with filling the canyon. The report prepared by the County's
geologists will be reviewed by Dr. Ehlig, the consulting geologist
hired by the City Council. Dr. Ehlig was present at the litigation,
session with other geologists and the City Council, and he concurred
with the preliminary report, Councilman Heinsheimer said. Further,
Councilman Heinsheimer stated, reading from the Newsletter, analysis
of the stability factors of the active landslide area have called into
question the stability of the entire ancient slide area, and he said
no building permits will be issued for the area encompassed by the
January 1981 boundary of the ancient slide until detailed geotechnical
analysis confirms appropriate stability. He concluded with the state-
ment that filling in the western tributary of Klondike Canyon would,
result in only marginal stability of the active landslide. The area
within which no building permits would be issued until additional
study has been made is the area within the red boundary, he said.
Councilman Heinsheimer introduced Mr. Pat Coughlan, consulting attor-
ney hired by the Council to advise them on geology matters.
Mayor Rose opened discussion to residents in the audience.
Questions were asked about the number of homes involved in the expanded
area of questionable stability, the number of acres encompassed, the
number of building permits issued in the area within the past four
years; the various geology.studies as defined by different areas and
dates on the map. In response to the questions, Mayor Crocker advised
that since 1965 reports by private geologists hired by residents who
wished to improve their properties were required.. The reports were
submitted to and verified by the County after extensive study of all of
the information submitted. Because of more extensive recent study in
the area which indicates that the stability may be marginal., the de-
cision has been made not to issue building permits without further .
analysis of the situation and determination of the stability. Mr.
Coughlan said it is his understanding that the County does not question
the basic testing that was done in earlier studies, but questions some
of the figures that were applied and the assumptions of some of the
tests.
Mayor Crocker said the geology report will be made available to
the residents as soon as it is received in final form. Councilman
Pernell commented that there -will not be any surprises in the final
report; it will actually confirm information that has been given to
residents and which is being discussed at the meeting.
-2-
May 11,_ 1981
.23
Councilman Heinsheimer moved that Resolution No. 469, entitled
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING.HILLS, RES-
CINDING RESOLUTION NO. 467 ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 464 AND INITIATING PROCEDURES
FOR THE FORMATION OF KLONDIKE CANYON LANDSLIDE ABATEMENT DISTRICT"
be adopted, and he read the resolution into the record as follows:
"The City Council of the City of Rolling HIlls hereby resolves
as follows:
1. The City Council has been informed by its.geological
experts that the proposed plan of control for the Klondike
Canyon Landslide Abatement District will not permanently and
satisfactorily solve the land motion problem.
2. The Council rescinds Resolution No. 467, rescinding
its action towards the formation of that district."
The motion was seconded by Councilman Pernell and carried by
the following roll call vote:
AYES:. Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Rose, Swanson
Mayor Crocker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Residents present at the meeting thanked the Council for their
effort to try to assist the residents whose homes have been affected
by the landslide. A suggestion was made that residents attempt to
give assistance on an individual basis.
MATTERS FROM THE COUNCIL
CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE
Councilwoman Swanson reported that sheattended a recent meeting
of the City Selection Committee, and she requested that she be author-
ized to vote on behalf of the Council. The authorization was given
unanimously, and Mayor Crocker signed the letter of authorization.'
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 P.M.
APPROVED:'
Mayor
City Clerk
.� ... ....... :sf.^.;,`__ 'f':,.: --,.:_.�,:_,"„:.:*, 'i:=�5'.; �._"_.'"' s-•:-.;''€4«c::.-se=gig:. -..:k _ •+. -r.=F,; -e-
;cm
r-te• �••aa:i-..` �z.;....�, x:-zi--a.:.,:"�+_.'�•^se: f.-zi'`'..�'IsrS,..v_ s:�T:i",:��.'EO.a•�
...-c:.5, - _...ter__ ,.aadc. ..r—• -,-mow s ._ _ -� .�'-ak +:.:'•s,' •+9.•�:.... •_ :+ri - :sx '.'. e—'.'
�+-=- -t :S• r :.,k _-`F-._ :±R -o• "': s-,-: pr's-,...�..:T..c t <.
i s =.3 " K c _e. ^a'<c.., �z: taw" S • ca . _a.. `• ; _ i " `zi
frYruO ; tt, . kf i, F_a.; 3E.,. vk a s? Yxw..s:pd. •3k Si. ., _.s,.
Ile .x , -ti dn.. i:? r• -., j-g,x.'_:, • _ _ .vs.. t _ a ;
- s:i?^
r:
24 ri
City
Ol Polling
Ahle.4
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274
(213) 377.1521
The Rolling Bills City Council will not meet: on Monday,
May 25, 1981 because ofa legal holiday. The Council will
not meet on the next business.day,,Tuesday, May 26; 1981
because of lack of a quorum. The next regular meeting will
be held on Monday, June 8, 1981 at 7030 P.M. in the Council.
Chambers of the Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend
Road, Rolling Hills, California 90274
1
A
Deputy City Cle
May 20, 1981 -
MINUTES OF A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
June 8, 1981
25
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills
was called to order at the Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend
Road, Rolling Hills, California by Mayor Crocker at 7:30 P.M. Monday,
June 8, 1981.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Rose, Swanson
Mayor Crocker
ABSENT: None
ALSO PRESENT: Teena Clifton City Manager
William Kinley City Attorney
L. D. Courtright City Treasurer
June Cunningham Deputy City Clerk
00 J. Murdock,. Chairman, Planning Commission
0 W. Field Planning Commissioner
A. Roberts. Planning Commissioner
m K. Watts Planning Commissioner
L. Amerine Palos Verdes News
m F. Bahrs Residents
Q P. Burnett
Mr. & Mrs. E. Doak
Dr. & Mrs. N. Donner
Dr. R: Hoffman
J. Kirkwood
.r.
B. Raine
C. Raine
APPROVAL OF MINUTES 230
The minutes of the meeting on May 11, 1981 were approved and
accepted as amended on a motion made by Councilman Heinsheimer,
seconded by Councilman Pernell and carried by the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Rose, Swanson
Mayor Crocker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
Councilwoman Swanson moved that the Financial Statements for
April, 1981 and May 1981 be approved and accepted as presented. The
motion was seconded by Councilman Pernell and carried by the following
roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Rose, Swanson
Mayor Crocker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PAYMENT OF BILLS
Councilman•Pernell moved that Demands No. 9638 through 9642,
9644 through 9661, 9663 through 9666, and 9668 through 9685, with
th'e :exception of Demands -No. -9643 and 9667, which are void, be paid
from the General Fund in the amount of $56,758.89, and that Demands
No 9662 and 9673 through 9676 and Demand No. 9685 in the amount of
$3,674.83 be paid from the Fire and Flood Self Insurance Fund. The
motion was seconded by Councilwoman Swanson and carried by the follow-
ing roll call vote:
26 June 8, 1981
AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Rose, Swanson
Mayor Crocker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The Manager advised the'Council that Demand No. 9654 in the amount
of $17.00 should be included in the Fire and Flood Self Insurance Fund
and the amount should be deducted from the General Fund Demands and
added to the Fire and Flood Self Insurance Fund. Mayor Crocker author-
izedI the change.
PROPOSED BUDGET, FISCAL 1981/82 260
Mayor Crocker asked the City Treasurer to summarize the Budget
discussion held by Mr. Courtright, the City Manager, Mayor Crocker
and Councilwoman Swanson held prior to the Council meeting. The
Mayor said that policy questions were addressed, and he reported
that the decision was made not to increase the rents charged the
Community Association, but he asked that the record show that the
Council reserves the right to act on the rentals annually. Mayor
Crocker said the total rent for all four properties, including the
City Hall, Maintenance Building, Riding Ring and Tennis Court is
in line with the total recommended by the appraiser, and it was the
Committee's recommendation that total rent be considered, not the
individual amounts for individual properties.
Mr. Courtright recommended that the Fire and Flood Self Insurance
Fund be increased from $40,000 to $60,000. Further, he recommended
that a policy be established for rentals, and since the current rents
are based on 88% of the appraised valuation, Mr.. Courtright suggested
that a cost of living escalation be included, but not activated, but
which could be included in future budget considerations. Council-
woman Swanson said she thought the escalation should be figured on'the
rents actually charged, not on.the figures.supplied_by the Appraiser:
A straw vote of the Council indicated that members agreed with adding
an escalation factor to the figure presently used. The Manager said
final information has not been received on the revenues which will•be
coming to the City, and the information is plugged into the budget -as
it is received.
The Manager reported that she has received estimates for addi-.
tional recording equipment as a back-up for the existing equipment._.
The Mayor ordered the matter held on the agenda for additional dis-
cussion at the next meeting, when more information is available.
ZONING CASE NO. 259, MASON ROSE, 37 CREST ROAD WEST 384
Mayor Crocker opened a hearing on an appeal filed by Mason Rose,
37 Crest Road West, on the decision of the Planning Commission on
March 17, 1981, denying his request for a variance of front and side
Yard setback requirements for a paved area surrounded by an eight foot
high fence for a guest parking and recreation area. Mr. Rose advised
the Council that he wished a de novo hearing, and that he would not
vote in the matter. The Mayor noted that the Chairman and four members
of the Planning Commission were present at the meeting.
The City Attorney explained that the original submittal was for
a complete ;project which the applicant requested be separated into
two parts; an attached garage, which required a variance of side yard
setback requirements, and which was approved by the Planning Commis-
sion, with conditions, on a field trip on November 25, 1980 and was.
ratified at a regular meeting held on December 9, 1980. The portion
of the request which was deferred included a paved area.in the front
yard, surrounded by an eight foot high fence, which was denied by the
Planning Commission on March 17, 1981. Mr. Rose advised the Council
that during the presentation before the Planning Commission he orally
withdrew anything over which the Planning Commission does not have
jurisdiction, and he said it is his opinion that the only item to be
-2-
2'7
June 8, 1981
considered by the Council is his request for an eightfoot-high chain
link fence which he wishes to have constructed around a paved. area
which he proposes to have installed in the front yard of his property.
Mr. Kinley agreed.that if Mr. Rose wished to have a paved area put
in his front yard, he could have done so', since a slab would not come
under the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, but since the plan
was submitted for a parking and recreation area surrounded by an
eight foot hight fence, it was considered a structure within the
jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, which has responsibilities
over certain uses of property. Mr. Kinley said the zoning ordinance .
has been amended to require a Conditional Use Permit for sport courts.
Mr. Rose said he submitted his request before the ordinance went into
effect. Members of the Council agreed to consider only the fence,
since the paved area would not be of concern to either the Planning
Commission or the City Council, if not surrounded by a fence.
Mr. Rose displayed a plot plan and landscape plan for his property.
He explained that the proposed improvement does not encroach into the
50' easement of Crest Road, since there is more than one acre of unim-
proved land .in front of his house, which is located approximately in
00 the center of his two acre parcel. Mr. Rose said his property is
O surrounded by mature trees from 30' - 100' high, and his adjoining
r neighbors did not object to the request, and Mr. Richard Colyear,
m 35 Crest Road West, had signed a consent for the file. Mr. Rose
m said the largest property within 500' of his property is the school
district.land, which has a -chain link fence closer to Crest Road
Q than his proposed fence, and which also has sport courts located on
it. The Zila property at 39 Crest Road West has paving in the major
portion of the front yard,'which is visible from Crest Road, and the
Webber property located at 2 Buggy Whip has a tennis court in the
front yard, Mr. Rose said. An.addition to the residence will not
require any variances,.Mr..Rose said, and additional landscaping
will be added for increased privacy. A variance has already been
approved for construction of a garage, he said. Mr'. Rose said he
..is requesting a variance for construction of a fence surrounding
the proposed paved area so it can be used for recreation purposes
which he can engage in using his wheelchair. He explained that an
alternate area can not be :considered because of the necessity for
a ramp to accommodate his,wheelchair, and he said.that he feels the
needs of the owner should be considered. In conclusion Mr. Rose
said the five car garage which has been approved will not accommo-
date all of his vehicles, and an,overflow:.parking area will be
needed, since he owns eight automobiles,,plus'"other recreation
vehicles.
Mayor Crocker asked that the record show that the case will be
heard de novo, since new evidence has been submitted; i.e. proximity
of the school district. :.The Mayor said four legal questions have been
addressed: 1) Personal needs of the applicant; 2) Whether the Council
and/or the Planning Commission has jurisdiction over the use of the..
proposed paved area, since the application was filed prior to the
requirement for a Conditional Use Permit.for a sport court; 3) A
statement in Paragraph V of the Findings and Report that "the approval
of the variance would have the effect of granting to the subject pro-
perty a special privilege----" and 4) The statement in Paragraph IV
that "there are no residential lots on the northerly side of Crest
Road on which there is an enclosed paved area extending into the front
yard setback----". Mayor -Crocker asked Jody Murdock, Chairman of:the
Planning Commission, to speak on the matter, and to answer questions.-.
presented by 'Council members.*
Councilman Heinsheimer.asked whether a request to fence an exist-
ing°paved area would be considered in the same manner by the Planning
Commission: Chairman Murdock said she was of the opinion that it would
be treated the.same; however, she said the application filed by Mr.
Rose was for a paved area surrounded by a fence, and the total appli-
cation was considered and denied. Mrs. Murdock said that in consider-
ing applications for variances within the City, especially on main
thoroughfares and vistas, the Planning Commission is of the opinion
that a request for an eight foot high fence in the front yard of a".
property on -Crest Road should not be approved.
-3-
l
28
June 8, 1981
Mrs. Murdock said the zoning ordinances are exclusionary, and if
something is not called out specifically in the ordinance it is not a
permitted use. Further, Mrs. Murdock said the Planning Commission,
considers the effects of request on all residents, not on one resident
in particular. She said that at one point Mr. Rose was asked whether
it would be acceptable to have a time limit imposed on an approval,
to expire if he sold the property, and he said such a condition would
not be acceptable to him. Councilman Heinsheimer said the.heart of ,
the matter is 'in Paragraph VIII of the Findings: "The Commission finds
that the granting of the variance would be contrary to the public wel-
fare of other property in the vicinity in that it would detract from
the character and basic charm of property with frontage on Crest Road
in the vicinity of the subject property." Councilman Heinsheimer said
this does'not seem to limit the question to the matter of the fence;
he mentioned the specific properties fronting on Crest Road West in the
vicinity of the Rose property and asked Mrs. Murdock to address the
impact on those properties.of an eight foot fence. Mrs. Murdock said
that although the proposed fence might not be highly visible at this
time, if in the future landscaping is removed, the permanent structure
would remain and could adversely affect the surrounding properties.
Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that a condition of approval could -
require maintenance of existing or comparable landscaping. Mrs.
Murdock said a variance has been requested, not a Conditional Use
Permit., in which certain conditions.could be imposed.
Councilwoman Swanson asked Chairman Murdock to comment on Para-
graph IX: "The Commission finds that the topography and shape of the
subject property, and the location of the improvements thereon does
not require the location of the proposed improvements as shown on
Exhibit A, and that there are other locations on the subject property
where such an improvement could be located."- Mrs. Murdock -said -the-=
parcel does have sufficient area for location of recreational facilities
elsewhere; she said she does not have sufficient engineering knowledge-,
to comment on Mr. Rose's statement that it would not be possible to.
provide wheelchair access to another location..
Commissioner Bill'Field addressed the Council and said that in
deliberations the Planning Commission always considers what can happen
if properties change hands or if conditions change, and in looking to
the future,.the Commission is particularly careful with regard to
Crest Road. In response to Mr. Rose's statement that the largest
property close to him has -sport courts, Commissioner Field said the.
Planning Commission is very concerned about the future of t - he school
district property, and will do everything possible to minimize the" -
impact on the community. Commissioner Field explained that in con-
sidering a request for a variance, the Planning Commission considers
hardship in relation to topography of a property, not the physical or
financial.hardship of the applicant, since the approval is attached to
the land, not to the applicant.
Mayor Crocker said he wished to comment for the record that in -
his opinion the Planning Commission has done their best in a very .;.
difficult matter, and he complimented the Commission on -an exemplary
job in preparing the findings.
Councilman Heinsheimer asked that all members of the Council ,
read ARTICLE VI, Section 6.03 of Ordinance No. 33: Required Showing
for Variances, and he read the section into the record. Council-
woman Swanson asked whether the Council should consider certain
conditions of approval for a Conditional Use Permit as well as for A
Variance., Mr. Kinley explained that the application was for a * Variance
and the appeal has been filed on the denial of that Variance.
Mayor Crocker asked Mr. Rose to make his final presentation,
focusing on paragraphs A, B, and C in Section 6.03, covering the
way he feels his position fits within the grounds for requesting
a variance.
ME
June 8, 1981
mm
Mr. Rose said Chairman Murdock had expressed the opinion that the
Planning Commission would turn down a request for a fence alone; he
said there is no basis for that, since the Commission did not consider
.a fence alone. Mr. Rose asked that the Council not consider Mrs. Mur -
dock's opinion about whether uses not called out in the ordinance are .
or are not permitted uses. With regard to removing the improvement in
the event that he sold the property, Mr. Rose said he would not be
willing to remove the paved area because of the expense involved,
but would be willing to compromise by reserving a right to the Council
to require removal of the fence if the property changes ownership; he
said he would also be willing to accept requirements requiring that
the existing screening, or comparable screening be maintained to
screen the fence, if approved.
Mr. Rose said his neighbors cari use the sport courts on the
school property, but on weekends.when he is at home the gate at the
entrance to the property is locked, and he is unable to go down the
stairs to the fields, as his neighbors are. Mr.. Rose then addressed
paragraphs A, B and C in Section 6.03 of Ordinance No. 33, stating
that the school district has a fence, fully visible, not screened,'
oo closer to Crest Road than the fence requested by Mr. Rose would be.
Mr. Rose said granting the variance would permit him to enjoy the
0 use of his property to the same extent his neighbors can enjoy their
property, and he said the granting of the variance would not be mater -
m ially detrimental, since maintenance of the existing or comparable
m screening would eliminate an adverse impact on surrounding properties.
Q Mr. Rose said he would be willing to a stipulation requiring screening.
Asa further safeguard Mr. Rose said he would be willing to a stipu
lation that the City Council could reserve the right to remove the
fence when the house is sold, providing it finds at that time that
it:has a detrimental impact on the neighbors. Mr. Rose said he is
proposing the two conditions. to resolve the matter. Councilwoman
Swanson asked if it would be removed "providing that"; Mr. Rose said
it,would not be appropriate to arbitrarily rip it out unless there is
a finding at that time that it is detrimental. Councilman Pernell
asked whether the Council could accept those conditions if.the variance
is granted. Mr. Kinley said the Council is hearing the matter de novo
and can do as they please.
Councilman Pernell said he wished to discuss consideration of
property exclusive of ownership, and he said he was pleased to hear
the offers Mr. Rose made with regard to stipulations he would accept.
Councilman Pernell asked Mr. Rose to state whether, in the event a
disabled person purchased vacant property, he thought the owner
should be able to install a device such as an elevator, which would
be highly visible, as an aid to developing the property. Mr. Rose
answered affirmatively.
Planning Commissioner Ken Watts said the Planning Commission
had another case before it at the same time Mr. Rose's application
was being considered; the other request was for a tennis court in
.the front yard of a property.on Crest Road West. At the request of
the Planning Commission, the tennis court was moved to a location in
the rear.yard which did not require a variance. Dir. Watts said an
effort is made to comply with the ordinances by changing the proposed
location, if possible, rather than grant a variance. Commissioner
Watts said the Commission is concerned about the future, and although
Mr.. Rose wishes to maintain privacy on his property, a future owner
may wish to have the existing trees removed. Commissioner Allan
Roberts said the Planning Commission is acting under the direction
of the Council, and attempts to act in accordance with the wishes
of -the Counci. In certain circumstances tennis courts have'been
approved, with conditions for landscaping approved, but Commissioner
Roberts said that has been in other areas on a property which will
accommodate a tennis court, not in the front yard.
Mr. Rose said he is familiar with the requirements for ramps
for access, and there is no way he can get to other parts of his
property for the use he wishes. Even if a sport court can be devel-
oped in another area, it could not be combined with an overflow parking
area, as he wishes, he said. Mr. Rose said that many residents of the
City with smaller parcels enjoy their properties more than he can. In
closing, he asked that the Council accept his conditions, so that the
MIM
3® 1
June 8, 198¢
fence can be removed at minimum expense if it ever becomes necessary,
and to condition the installation on maintenance of the existing or
similar screening so there would be no impact on neighboring properties,
and to agree that the City Council, upon finding that there is an
adverse impact after the property is sold, can require that the fence
be removed, retaining its jurisdiction. Mr. Rose said he has requested
the City Attorney to look into changing the ordinances to accommodate,
the needs of residents in the future.. Councilman Pernell said he
considers the ordinances, as they now stand, are beneficial to the
community; he also thinks the special circumstances of residents
should be taken into account, but that should not necessarily run
with the property. Mr. Rose said a landscape plan has been developed
for the property. Mayor Crocker thereafter closed the hearing and
invited discussion by the Council.
Mr. Kinley advised that the City has no jurisdiction over the'
school property with regard to a fence or improvements on the property.
In discussing the matter, Mayor Crocker said that granting a
variance subject to removability opens an important issue, since it
would be difficult to enforce, and everyone who requested a variance
would be willing to compromise with regard .to offers of removability.
Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that consideration be given to a'
policy on removability of improvements that have to do with peoples'
specific circumstances. Mayor Crocker said he would be more concerned
about enforcing removability of a fence surrounding a tennis court or
a paddle tennis court. Councilman Heinsheimer said a document would
have to be developed which would make the requirement enforceable.
Councilwoman Swanson said she felt the -Planning Commission had
acted professionally in dealing with the issue before them based on'
information submitted, and she was sorry to hear Mr. Rose's harsh
words directed against the Commission. In the event the Council
grants Mr. Rose's request, Councilwoman Swanson said some safeguards
should be built in which would serve the needs of Mr. Rose and his
family without establishing a precedent, and she said she would be"
willing to vote for approval of a court with a fence around it, to
serve as'a parking area, subject to -legal :measures requiring removal
of the fence before escrow closes,,if the property is sold.
Councilman Heinsheimer moved that Councilwoman Swanson's
proposal be considered a reasonable compromise and that the -findings
and documentation be developed by the attorney and the applicant for
final action at the next meeting. Mr. Kinley said the Council should
decide exactly what they want, and put a covenant on the .land. '.Mayor
Crocker said he thinks the fence should be removed before the property
is sold. Councilman Heinsheimer said the proposal was that as long
as the property is owned by the present owner, and as long as -it is
appropriately landscaped, the fence would stay up; when the property
changes hands the fence would be removed without the need of any
further action by the City. Mr. Kinley said the only way to protect
the City is to put a covenant on the land to the effect that when
the property is sold, the seller has the burden of removing the fence..
Mayor Crocker said the only way to enforce the condition is through a
bond. Mr. Rose said he i s not willing to put up a bond. Councilman
Heinsheimer's motion died for lack of a second.
Councilman Heinsheimer moved that the Council find that the
requirements of Paragraphs A, B and C in Section 6.03 have been
demonstrated by the applicant, and that an agreement can be reached
whereby the fence in question would be perpetually landscaped, and
that Legal Counsel could draw up appropriate documents to see to it
that the fence was removed without any further findings by the Council
prior to the sale of the property by Mr. Rose, and that under those.
conditions the variance be approved. Councilwoman Swanson seconded
the motion.
Mayor Crocker said there should be a remedy to recommend to the
Council to make the requirements enforceable, stating that litiga-
tion could hold up compliance with the requirements for years.
Councilman Heinsheimer said Counsel has stated that a covenant could
be prepared. Mayor Crocker said the title could be clouded to pre-
vent conveyance of title or new financing without coming to the
we
31
June 8, 1989
Council. Mr. Kinley said a covenant could put a burden on the
property requiring removal of the fence, which would be effective.
Councilman Heinsheimer asked whether the variance could be approved
subject to preparation of documentation by Counsel of an appropriate
way of enforcing the covenant.
Mr. Rose said he is willing to do the following: agree.to keep
the screening in place, or appropriate similar screening; have the
fence installed so that it is, in essence, removable, by putting it
.in sleeves, rather than sinking it solidly into cement; and to agree
that the City Council can reach a determination, at the time he sells
the property, that the fence should be removed. Mr. Rose.said he
would not accept an absolute condition on removal of the fence, but
would wish a vote of .the Council requiring removal. Councilman
Pernell said he would prefer an act on the part of the new owner
which would allow the Council to provide him with the privilege of
keeping the fence. Councilman Heinsheimer said the final remedy
contained in his motion was that the Council, without making any
findings, could vote to have the fence removed when there is a
oo transfer of ownership, without any particular criteria. Mr. Rose
O said he would approve that, preserving' -,therein the right of entry.
Councilman Pernell said that removal of the fence should take a
positive act on the part of the Council. Councilwoman Swanson asked
m what legal remedies the Council has to prevent the close of escrow
M on the property. Mr. Kinley said only a legal document that goes
Q of record and becomes a lien on the property; he.explained that the_
buyer might choose to assume the lien. Mayor Crocker said the
Council appears willing to make.a�.concession to Mr. Rose because of
his special circumstances, and he said the Council should make sure
that the grant is not perpetuated for the next owner. Councilman
Pernell suggested that the City Attorney be asked to research the
means by which the remedy can be enforced. Mr.. Rose suggested that
the Council require renewal of the approval at the time of opening
of escrow; Mr. Kinley said that would not.be effective if the pro-.
perty changed hands without opening an escrow.
Mayor Crocker summarized the position of the Council by saying
that the majority favors making a special concession because of Mr.
Rose's disability, but that the Council assumes that there will'be a
remedy for removal of the fence; three members of.the Council want
mandatory removal, two members think the fence should be removed if
the Council wishes to do so.when the property changes ownership.
The Mayor said it should be enforceable without litigation, and he
said Mr. Rose should work with the City Attorney and present a
remedy which will work. Councilwoman Swanson said.that any costs
incurred in working with the City Attorney to provide the requested
document should be paid by;the:applicant ,:Mr. Rose said he would
not accept that requirement. Further, he asked that the document
be drawn by an attorney other than Mr. Kinley, since Mr. Kinley
is the attorney for the Community Association and the Planning
Commission. Mr. Kinley and the Council concurred with the request.
Councilman Heinsheimer restated his motion that the variance
be granted, subject to an appropriate document developed by the
applicant and:counsel,.concernirig landscaping.requirements.and con-
ditions for ultimate removal of the fence., without the need for.
further review -by the Council. The motion died for lack of a second.
Mayor Crocker moved that the proposal be approved in principle,
subject to the Council's reviewing -:.it and being satisfied that the
remedy does exist to make sure that it is enforced. Mr. Rose said
for the record that he would not accept any requirement for bonding,
or anything that would cloud the title to the property. Councilwoman
Swanson seconded the motion, which was carried by the following roll
call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Swanson, Mayor Crocker
None
None
Councilman Rose
WE
32
June 8, 1981
KLONDIKE CANYON SLIDE 1242
The City Manager reported that Phase II Supplemental Program of
the Geologic Report on the Active Flying Triangle Landslide has been
received and was distributed to residents in the Flying Triangle.
Copies of the blueprints were provided to all residents in the active
slide area, and can be made available to anyone who requests them at
a minimal cost.
Copies -of a letter dated May 13,
the Flood Control District., requesting
from the opening of the pipe on Line C
Bend Road, and installation of a debri
ted to the Council. In a letter dated
trict advised that the request will be
storm season.
1981 from the City Manager.to
removal of horizontal.. bars
on the east side of Portuguese
s rack .instead, were distribu
May 22 the Flood Control Dis.-
fulfilled prior to the 1981-82
6 The Manager reported that Mr. Ronald Dessy, 4 Pinto Road, has
expressed concern to the Board of Directors that loose soil and
debris left in Klondike Canyon by geology testing will cause clog-
ging of the drain on his property when rains wash down through the
canyon to his drain. Mrs. Clifton said the loose material which is
the result of digging in the canyon will be removed.
Mayor Crocker asked that the minutes reflect that the soil
which -will be removed -is tailing from the exploratory digging
and no soil will be removed which could undermine the stability
of the canyon.
In a letter dated June 2, 1981 -Dr. Richard -Hoffman, 73 Portu-
guese Bend Road, requested any information which the city might be
able to supply pertaining to the feasibility and implementation of
a sewer system for the Flying Triangle. Mayor Crocker said the
residents of the Flying Triangle would have to form a district in
order to implement the recommendation of the County Geologist that
a sewer system be installed in the Flying Triangle area of the City.
The Manager said she is working on the matter and will provide cost
information to the Council, with a recommendation. Mrs. Clifton
said she has obtained maps which show the trunk sewer lines which -
surround the City of Rolling Hills, and has discussed the matter
with representatives of Rancho Palos Verdes about tying into an
existing line. Councilmen Heinsheimer and Pernell suggested that the
Council representative to the Sanitati64. District consult .with_,the .-
district. Councilman Rose said on-site treatment should be considered.
RESOLUTION NO. 470
Mayor Crocker said the County Engineer requested that the Council
adopt a resolution by which the sewer system in the Chacksfield-Merit
subdivision, Tract 33871, would be included in a sewer maintenance
district.
Councilwoman Swanson moved that Resolution No. 470 entitled
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING
CONSENT AND JURISDICTION TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR THE INCLU-
SION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS WITHIN A COUNTY
SEWER MAINTENANCE DISTRICT be adopted and that reading in full be
waived. The motion was seconded by Councilman Heinsheimer and carried
by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Rose, Swanson
Mayor Crocker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The Mayor asked that the tract number be inserted in the title
of the resolution for identification.
sm
1�
33
June 8, 1981
PALOS VERDES RECYCLE CENTER
A letter from the Palos Verdes Recycle Center, advising that
.the Los Angeles County Sanitation District will close the Palos
Verdes Landfill by September 30 and anticipates closing the Recycle
Center, was presented to the Council' The Committee requested that
the Council write a letter to the Board of -Supervisors or the Sani-
tation District asking -.that -the recycle center be included in plans
for the landfill area, and that it be moved away from residences
and modernized.
With the concurrence of the Council, Mayor Crocker asked that
a letterofsupport be written.
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT,
A letter dated May 14, 1981 from the South Coast Air Quality
Management District was presented to the Council, advising that
Senate Bill33 on annual motor vehicle inspection and maintenance
was heard by the Senate Finance Committee, and asking that the City
00 support SB -33 in a letter to the Finance Committee Chairman.
0 Councilman Heinsheimer said that since the hearing was already
T-4 held, he would ask that the Council support the bill in the future.
CD The Mayor so ordered.
co
< SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. REQUEST.FOR RESOLUTION --.1374.
. A request by Southern California Edison Company for a resolution
by the Council, in support of legislation removing the restrictions
and prohibitions on the use of natural gas in utility powerplants,
was presented to the Council. Councilman Heinsheimer reported that
the purpose of the request is from the air quality standpoint be-
cause of the improvement when natural gas is burned rather than oil.
Mayor Crocker asked Councilman Heinsheimer to make a recommendation
to the Council in the matter.
TRAFFIC COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS 1385
The recommendations of the Traffic Commission as contained in
the minutes of the meetings on May 5 and May 19 were presented to
the Council.
The recommendation by Traffic Commission Chairman Swanson that
the Traffic Ordinance No. 116 be amended to eliminate the City Attor-
ney from the Traffic Commission was approved by the Council and Mr.
Kinley was asked to prepare the appropriate amendment to. the ordinance.
Recommendations for traffic safety including installation of
advisory signs, a reflective stripe and paddles with reflectors at
the curve near #71:Saddleback Road. clearing of easement for parking
on Wide Loop Road and clearing of easements for parking and instal-
lation o . f advisory signs on Quail Ridge Road South were approved by
unanimous -vote of the Counci.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE:,JOGGERS, 1409
The City Attorney presented a proposed ordinance prepared at the
request of the Council in response to numerous complaints about joggers.
Councilman Heinsheimer moved that the proposed ordinance, titled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 116
ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA,
REGULATING TRAFFIC WITHIN SAID CITY AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS.,l
AND 16 AND ALL OTHER ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THEREWITH" be introduced,
and that -reading in full be waived. The motion was seconded by
Mayor'Crocker and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Rose, Swanson
Mayor Crocker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
34
June 8, 1981.
Councilwoman Swanson said that at a recent neighborhood meeting
the problem of joggers was discussed and residents were pleased to
hear that under the new ordinance joggers would be required to run in
single file as close as possible to the jogger's left-hand edge of the
road.
CLAIMS AGAINS PUBLIC ENTITY
The City Attorney reported that additional claims have been
filed as follows:.
Dr. and Richard Hoffman $13,000,000
Dr. and Mrs. Donald Borden, 1,400,000
Howard Slusher 1,200,000
and that the claim filed by Robert and Ruth Shifman has been amended.
Mr. Kinley recommended that the claims and the amendment to the claim
be denied.
Councilman Rose moved that the claims filed by Dr. and Mrs.
Hoffman, Dr. and Mrs. Donald Borden, Howard 5.... Slusher, and the
amendment to the claim filed by. Robert and Ruth Shifman be denied.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Pernell and carried by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Rose, Swanson
Mayor Crocker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
WEED ABATEMENT COMPLIANCE
1475
Mayor Crocker asked the Manager to report on compliance by
residents with the Weed Abatement ordinance. -Mrs.-Clifton said
notices have been sent to residents and inspections are being
made.
REQUEST FOR LETTER, W. D, KING
The Mayor reported that Mr. William D. King, 92 Crest Road
East, wrote to him on June 5 and forwarded a copy of his letter
dated May 22, 1981 to the Army Corps of Engineers requesting that
Advanced Electronics be permitted to relocate their antenna struc-
ture from within the City of Rolling Hills to another site on San
Pedro Hill, with a -request that the City Council support him in
his effort to have the structure relocated.
Mr. Kinley advised the Council that Advanced Electronics has
filed an action against the Rolling Hills Community Association to
condemn a portion of the Crest Road easement to acquire title to
that property for the purposes of operating that public utility.
Mayor Crocker was authorized to write a letter to the Army
supporting Mr. King's request that the antenna structure be re-
located to San Pedro Hill.
EXPANDED POSTAL SERVICE ON-PALOS VERDES PENINSULA 1504
In a memo to the Council dated June 3, 1981 the Manager advised
that an effort is being made to find a location for a new postal
facility on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. Mrs. Clifton said she would
be meeting with the Peninsula City Managers to discuss possible loca
tions for a new facility, and would keep the Council informed.
RESOLUTION - REVENUE SHARING PURPOSES 1512
The Manager reported that prior to passage of Proposition 13
cities were permitted to take tax effort credit for revenue sharing
-10-
35
June 8, 1981
purposes for the tax rates of the library and fire districts, and
in order to allow the City to take credit for revenue sharing
purposes the portion of the monies paid by Rolling Hills residents
for library and fire district, a resolution must be passed prior to
September 1.
The Mayor directed the City Attorney to prepare the appropriate
resolution.
EARTHQUAKE PREPAREDNESS 1524
Councilman Pernell requested that a discussion of Earthquake
Preparedness -be placed on an agenda for discussion in the near future.
The Mayor so ordered.
LOMITA SHERIFF STATION
The Manager reported that Captain Ed Douglas, commanding officer
of the Sheriff's Lomita Station has retired. Councilman Rose suggested
that a -letter be sent to Captain Douglas, and that a letter be sent.
CO recommending that Lt. Walt Thurner be considered for the position of
0 commanding officer of Lomita Station.
PERSONNEL SESSION
m
m Mayor Crocker adjourned the meeting to a personnel session at
Q 10:45 P.M: The meeting was reconvened and the Mayor announced that
'Mr. Pat Coughlan of the firm of Richards, Watson, Dreyfuss &_Gershon
has been hired as City Attorney,* effective July 1, 1981.
ADJOURNMENT.
The meeting was adjourned by Mayor Crocker.
APPROVED:
Mayor
-11-
City Clerk
I