Loading...
10/24/1983 ��� MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ROLLING HILLSy CALIFORNIA October 24, 1983 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 Murdo�k at 7 : 30 P.M. Monday, _ October 24, 1983 . ROLL CALL � PRESENT: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh, Pernell, Swanson, Mayor Murdock ABSENT: None - " ALSO PRESENT. Ronald Le Smith City Manager T'Iichael Jenkins City Attorney � June Cunningham Deputy City Clexk Richard Esposito Palos Verdes News Fz°ecl Gregory Attorney Morley Mendelson Attorney _ _ Robert Mohr - Advanced Electronics Jason Bevold Student Observers � Craig .Baren Miraleste High Scho.ol _ Tony Drobay Government. Class Glori Mandesec " Sarah McDonald '� Derek Parlces " Price Shoemaker " Ian Webster "' Leah Jeffries Los Angeles County, Deputy Mrse Po Breitenstein Residents - � Mr. & Mrse Je Brogdon Dr o & Mrs . I.o Brody � ' NYr e & '�1r s. A. E s s er Mrse Je Ferris ° 1Kro & Mrs. R. Frost Mrse J. Grubs Dr. & Mrs . Aa Kaufman Mre & Mrso We King Mrse Mo Harper Mrso P. Hathaway Mrs . C . MaclVaughton Mr. & Mrs. D. ?�IcKinnie Nirs e S. Peters Mr. & Mrs . Fe Ripley Mrs. C. Roberts Mro & Mrs . Ro Rudolph �Mrse M. Schmidt Mrs . C. Smith Mrs . S. Swart Mrs . E. Warmbier APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of O�tober 10, 1983 were approved and accepted as presented on a motion made by Councilwoman Swanson, second- ed by Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh and carried by the following roll call vote : AYES : Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh, Pernell, � Swanson, Mayor Murdock NOES : None ABSENT: None 44� October 24, 1983 PAYMENT OF BILLS 31 Demands No . 11377 through 11401 in the amount of $17,193.08 were approved for payment froin the General Fund on a motion made by Council- man Pernell , seconded by Councilwoman Swanson and carried by the follow- ing roll call vote: AYES : Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh, Pernell, Swanson Mayor Murdock NOES : None ABSENT: None � FINANCIAL STATEMENT . Councilwoman Swanson moved that the financial statement� for Septem- ber 1983 be approved and accepted as presented. The motion was se.conded by Councilman Pernell and carried by the following r.oll..call.. �ote: _ � AYES : Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh, Pernell, Swanson � Mayor Murdock . � .: . . . � _ m . NOES : None . " � .. � ABSENT : None Q RECESS Mayor Murdock announced that on the advice of counsel she wo.uld turn the meeting over to the Mayor pro tem, since the next item of business is consideration of a matter in which she participated in the decision making process in her capacity as former Chairman of the . Planning Commission. Mayor pro tem Leeuwenburgh then assumed the Chair and the meeting was reconvened. , - ZONING CASE N0. 212 - ANTENNA STRUCTURE 75 Mayor pro tem Leeuwenburgh announced that the `City Council has reconvened as the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal to consider and review the revocation of a Conditional Use Permit approved in Zoning Case No. 212 . The public hearing in the matter was held on August 9, 1982, and arguments both written and oral were received at that time from the atto.rnies foz Advanced Electronics, holders of the Conditional Use Permit and Mr, and Mrs . William King, who have. objected to the permit for an antenna tower and communications building on property adjacent to their property in Rolling Hills . The Chairman said no testimony was taken at that meeting, and no testimony will be taken at the current meeting. Chairman Leeuwenburgh asked the Citg Manager to present a staff report on the revocation by the Planning Commission of the Conditional Use Permit. � The City Manager explained that the meeting was being conducted to consider revocation of a Conditional Use Permit issued for an -. � antenna tower and appurtenant uses, and the proceedings were for dis= cussion and potential action by the City Council acting as the Board of Zoning Adjustment. and Appeal . As instructed at the August 9, I982 meeting, staff has sent notices of the current meeting to all residents of property within 1, 000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the proper- ty on which the antenna and communications building are located, and a certified copy of the list of property owners was submitted to the Council . The Manager explained that the matter was held by the Council pending completion of consideration of the matter by the Board of Di- rectors of the Rolling Hills Community Association. The Chairman then invited comment on the matter by members of the Council . Councilman Pernell asked the City Attorney to advise the Council what options can be considered by the City Council . Mr. Jenkins said the Council may affirm the decision of the Planning Commission in full; -2- � ��� October 24, 1983 may affirm the decision in part and revoke it in part, or may revoke in its entirety the decision of the Planning Commission. Mr. Jenkins said that the Planning Commission, in adopting Resolution No . 17, re- voked the Conditional Use Permit for the entire use on the site, both the anfienna and the building. Councilman Heinsheimer asked whether the Council could be briefed on events that have transpire.d since the hearing, if it could be done without presenting new or additional testimony. The City Attomey said a new tower is being constructed outside of the City of Rolling Hills, and the appellant has indicated that the to�ver which is the subject of the appeal will be removed when the new tower has been completed and antenna have been moved to the new towere Mr, Jenkins said that after completion of the new tower only the building will remain under the purview of the City, and it is his understanding that the appellant has not received permission from the FAA to move the building. Coun- cilwoman Swanson asked what assurance the City has that this will be done; specifically she asked whether there is anything in writing to guarantee removal: of the. tower. The City Attorney said the intent ha� been stated verbally, and to his best knowledge there is nothing in _ writing stating what will be done; however, Mr. Jenkins said, removal � of the tower was a condition of approval of the new tower by the FAA. . . Councilman .Heinsheimer s.uggested that for. purposes of discussion,, the . � � Council separate the �atter. into. discussion of- -the .tower, to .be followe.d„ � by discussion of the buildirig. Councilwoman Swanson said that since the resolutiori adopted by the Planning Commission pertained. to the entire operation, it was her opinion that the two items should not be b-roken apart for discussion or consideration. The City Attorney advised the Council that in a letter dated July 7, 1983 Elizabeth Rollins of the FAA advised that the two existing wooden pole structures on the FAA and Rolling Hills site will be removed upon �omp.letion of_ the new replacement tower as a condition of apgroval of the new tower by-the FAA. . Mr. Jenkins said this statement is made to the Council in response to a question by Councilwoman Swanson about whether there is anything i - writing with regard to removal of the tower. Councilwoman Swanson- sai that is between Advanced Electronics and the FAA, and there is nothing to indicate to the City that it will be done. The City Manager said that on July 8, 1983 a Mr. Kemper, acting as agent for Advanced Elec- tronics, signed an agreement with the FAA stating that the conditions of approval will be met. Councilman Pernell asked the completion date of the tower, and Mro Morley Mendelson, attorney for Advanced Electron- ics, explained that after the tower is completed the transfer of equip- ment is a delicate operation, since each will have to be tested indi- vidually by the FCC and FAA for possible interference after it is moved, and it was his estimate that the entire transfer and testing procedure . could be completed in six months from the current date. � Councilman Heinsheimer said the issue of interference with recep- tion was a matter of concern to many residents, and he suggested�tthat it shouid �.be addressed as part of �.the solution, :with a :schedule to �l�.e - developed for completion of the process , including elimination or re- duction of interference. Chairman Leeuwenburgh said the problem of interference was addressed in Item 7 of Resolution No. 17, and Coun- cilman Heinsheimer suggested that staff be requested to work with residents who are still having a problem so the necessary steps can be taken to eliminate the problem when the transfer of antenna from one tower to another takes placeo Councilman Heinsheimer then moved that the City Council , acting as the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal, sustain the action of the Planning Commission with regard to the antenna tower, and to request that staff present to the Council a detailed schedule for transfer of equipment, elimination of inter- ference and demolition of the antenna tower in Rolling Hills, with completion not to exceed six months from this date, to be accelerated as much as possible, and further, that the schedule be presented to the City Council for approval at the next meeting. The City Attorney suggested that the findings set forth in Resolution No . 17 of the Planning Commission be incorporated in the motion; Councilman Heins- heimer agreed. Councilwoman Swanson said she wished to add to the motion a requirement for deposit of sufficient cash with the City to guarantee faithful performance and to assure that the work will be done, stating that cash should be required rather than a bond, the amount of cash required to be determined by staff. Councilman Heins- heimer said the work required is highly technical , and is on land > -3- 449 October 24, 1983 that goes from Rolling Hills to another city, and it was his opinion tliat bonding would not be appropriate in this matter, since the City would not be able to do the work or have it done in the event the work was not done. He said if the projec� is not completed it will be violation of a City Council order, and there are other ways to enforce compliance. Councilman Pernell said a bond is required when the City wants something, and he asked whether a bond could be imposed in this cas.e: The City Attorney said the apellant can not be .forced to give _ - the City a bond. Councilwoman Swanson said she wished to ask the appellant whether he would be willing to bond. Mr. Mendelson said he would not be willing to do so. Councilman Heinsheimer said that in or`der to bring about completion of removal of the antenna tower on a fixed date, the City would stil.l have the building to use as a lever, and the Conditional Use Permit for the building could be revokecl. Councilwoman Swanson said she hopes to have revocation of the Condi- tional Use Permit for the building considered after the matter of the tower has been disposed of. at this meeting. In discussing the matter o.f bonding, _ the City Attorney said the FAA was in a .position to require `a ..bond .when permission was given to build ori ttie FAA site`; the Gi`ty� of ' � Rolling Hil�ls is taking something away, nbt giving something, and no � 0 conditions. such as bonding can be attached to the revocation. Mr. � --� Jenkins said the Gity can stipulate a date by whieh the to�,�ier mus:t be ..- � - removed from the site, and can then enforce it by� law; through either . the City Attomey or the District Attorney:. Councilman .Heinsheimer: m suggested that. the Counc�l corisider an agreement_ .that i€ the_ towe.r.. is.:- : Q vacated and. removed from the City by March 1, 1984, . the Conditional Use Permit for the communications building could be extended for a one year �period; �if the tower is not removed within six mon�hs the Council could then move to revoke the Conditional Use Permit for the building. - Councilwoman Swanson said that the tower and building should ,be con- sidered together, or separately, and if separated one should not be used as leverage against the other. She said the original grant was for Governmental or quasi-Governmental agen�.ies for communication, ' and since it was built the facility, both the to�er and the building, have been use.d for. :servicing and for communications for commercial customers as well as p.ublic agencies, and to serve business customers additional microwave antenna have been added, in violation of the intent of the original Conditional Use Permit. She said the Planning Commis- sion studied the matter from June 1981 until February 1982, holding ten public hearings on the matter. �, � Councilman Pernell asked whether testing of the equipment on an individual basis would prolong the process of moving the antenna from the, existing tower to the new tower. Mr. Mendelson said the antenna are moved individually, and are tested by the FAA and FCC, and if - there is any interference the time required for completion of the move would be increased, but not appreciably. Councilman Pernell said he wished to second Councilman Heinsheimer' s motion that the two issues be separated. Chai�man Leeuwenburgh asked Councilman Heinsheimer to re-state his motion, and the motion was read into the record as follows : that the action of the Planning Commission be sustain�d with regar.d �.to the antenna tower only; that transfer of the equipment from the exi"st- ing tower in Rolling Hi11s to the new tower outside of Rolling Hills and. demolition of the tower in Rolling Hills be completed no later than six.months from today' s date, and that a schedule for completion of the project be submitted to the City Council . at the next regular meeting; further, that the problem of interference be addressed and eliminated. Councilman Perneil seconded the motion. Councilwoman Swanson offered a substitute motion that the City Council uphold the action of the Planning Commission with regard to both the antenna tower and the communications building, and that � the removal of both tower and building be r.equired to be completed within twelve months from this date. The motion died for lack of a second, and discussion of the original motion, made and 'seconded, was resumed. . The City Attorney asked Councilman Heinsheimer to incorporate findings in.;s.upport of hi.s motion £or the record. Councilman Heinsheimer refer- enced the findings in Section 3 of Resolution 17 of tlie Planning Com- mission, adopted March 2, 1982, which he reviewed for the record, and asked that the findings be incorporated into his motion .pertinent to the antenna facility. The motion was carried on the following roll call vote of the Council: -4- ��� October 24, 1983 AYES : Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Swanson Chairman Leeuwenburgh NOES : None ABSENT : None Councilman Heinsheimer saicl that in considering the second part of the grant, specifically the communications building, the building is of less dramatic concern to the residents than the antenna, which was considered both unsafe and unsightly, and he suggested that use of the building be extended in order to avoid costly litigation. It was his suggestion that the Council extend use of the Conditional Use Permit with regard to the building for a reasonable period of time, � said tinme period to be det�rmined. Councilman Heinsheimer said it is his opinion that the reasons for revoking the Conditional Use Permit for the building are weaker than those spplied to the antenna tower, and might not be sustained in court, since they apply to commercial use only, and are not matteYs af safety or appearance. Councilmam Pernell asked the City Attorney whether Councilman Heinsheimer' s state- - ments are accurate, and Mr. Jenkins said the analysis is acceptable - - w�ith regard to the situation, - and his reco�endation is one of -the a1- . - ternatives available to the City Council�. Councilwoman Swanson said - the building is the heart of th� .opezationy- and. tfie commerci�l opera= . . tion could not : survive wit�iout :the communications „building,_ which . is � - in violation. of the intent of the Conditional. Use Permit,. .and she. said the threat of potential litigation should not govern the Council ' s - - action. Councilwoman Swanson moved that the Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission with regard to the building, and since the . . removal would be more complex, she suggested. that a time period of 12 . _ months be granted for removal to another .s.ite. CounciTman Heinsheim.er said the motion should include a method for financing the litigation and authorization to a fiscal committee to investigate methods to .rai'se money to fight the action in court, stating that the City now receives revenue from co�ercial activities in the City in the amount of $15,00 Councilman Heinsheimer said the policy of the City is to take an actio against commercial activity whenever a complaint is received, and in -- the absence of complaints certain activities are conducted which gen- - erate revenue for the Cityo To attempt to legislate against an acti- vity in the absence of firm grounds such as unsightliness or being unsafe could end in costly litigation, he said. Councilwoman Swanson said she did not think a decision should be based on threat of a lawsuit. Chairman Leeuwenburgh asked if all complaints regarding commercial act- ivity are pursued; the City 1�Ianager said they are. Councilman Pernell said the b.uilding is the crux of the situa.tion and although the tower was a safety issue, the building is an esthetic and nuisance issue which the City is attempting to eliminate. However, he sai.d the matter did not .come to this point at the insistence of the appellant, but the original concept was approved by the former City Manager and former City Attorney. Councilman Pernell suggested that a reasonable time limit be established for a reasonable and orderly trans- fer from the existing building. Councilwoman Swanson suggested that a time period of twelve months be established. Councilman Pernell said the reasonable time should be determined by the statf and appellant, and that the time limit be incorporated into the Council's motion. Councilman Heinsheimer asked the FAA' s position on time. The City Manager said the FAA has not received an. application for a building on their property, and must authorize such a move. � Chairman Leeuwenburgh asked the City Attorney whether the City, . the appellant and the City Attorney could work out a realistic time period to be incorporated in a motion, with the actual time limit to be determined no later than the City Council meeting on November 28, and whether the motion to revoke the Conditional Use Permit with re- gar.d to the building could be adopted, with the time period to be set at a later date. Mr. ,Jenkins said the time period would not start until adoption of the motion sustaining the action of the Planning Commission; the effective date would be the date of adoption of the resolution of -the Councile Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that the City correspond with the FAA with regard to relocation of the building. Co�ancilwoman Swanson said the new location is not a probl.em of the City _S_ October 24, 1983 and she does not �hinlc the FAA should be contacted and asked whether they would allo�w relocation to their property; she said the applicant should find the best solution, and the Council should not hold their action in abeyance for word from the FAA. Following the discussion Councilman Pernell moved that the City Council, acting as the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal, uphold the revocation by the Planning Co�unission of the. Conditional Use Permit _ . for a transmitter building and mobile communication system operating on Channel 158 . 775 in Rolling Hills, and that the time limit for removal of the building be determined by staff and presented to the City Coun- cil no later than the Council meeting on November 28, 1983, and that the same findings be made as for the tower, namely, Section 3 of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 17 adopted March 2, 1982. Council- woman Swanson urged �that a 'twelve month time limit be established at ' this time. Councilman Perriell said the time limit should not be set without fiscal," legal and technical considerations, and it was his opinion that the matter should be reviewed by staff and a recommend- - ation made to the Council for a time� limit at the November 28 meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilman Heinsheimer and carried by the following roll call vote: �AYES : - Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell ,- Swanson � Chairman. Leeuwenburgh - - NOES : None . _. .. . . - - . . . ABSENT: None _ RECESS " The meeting was recessed at 9 :00 P.Mo MEETING RECONVENED � � Maycr Murdock reconvened the meeting at 9:20 P.M. and noted that " Leah Jeffries, Deputy for Supervisor Deane Dana, and students of a � goveri:ment class in Miraleste High School were present. They were welcomed to the meeting, . RAFAEL TORRES , 10 BOWIE ROAD 1110 The City Manager recommended that no further action be taken. in �he mattez of the violation on property at 10 Bowie Road owned by Rafael Torres, explaining that since he returned from an extensive tri� out of the country the owner has taken steps to comply wi�h the Municipal Code and corrective work is continuing. The Mapor so ordered. Councilwoma.n Swanson asked whether a time limit for com- pletion would be set.. The Manager said the geologist has indicated that it will take 15 - 20 days for his work, and he will make recom- mendations for additional corrective worko Mr. Smith said there has been a genuine effort on the part of the property owner to cooperate, ancl it is difficult to enforce a time limit in bad weather, which is approaching. NOTICE OF VIOLATION, 38 CREST ROAD EAST 1140 " The Manager reported that installation of underground utilities is being completed and fencing is being installed on property at 38 Crest Road, and completion is anticipated within thirty days . The - property has been sold, and the City Attorney will be notified when all work has been completed, and if authorized to do so by the Council, will file a notice of release regarding the notice, of intent to file a� Notice of Violation. Mayor Murdock so ordered. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE N0. 203 1146 � Councilman Pernell moved that Ordinance No. 203 entitled AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AP�NDING SECTION 17 . 16. 050 (ZONING) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE ADDING TO THE DEF- INITION OF HEIGHT LIMITATION AND SPECIFICALLY REFERENCING BASEMENTS . WITH ONE EXTERIOR DOOR AND FURTHER AMEt3�ING RELATED DEFINITIONS IN CHAPTER 15 . 04 (BUILDING) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE be adopted, and that _6_ Uctober 24, 1983 - reading in full be waived. The mot;ion was seconded by Councilman � Heinsheimer and carried by the foll�wing roll call vote: � AYES : Councilmembers Heinsheimer, �eeuwenburgh, Pernell r'Iayor Murdock NOES : Councilwoman Swanson ABSENT: None ' The Manager reported that on October�:10 Allan Roberts, Chairman, of the Planning Commission, wrote� a��.letter to the Council reporting that at the last meeting the Commission discussed the concerns about - basements expressed at the last Council meeting, and suggested �:that�:if the- Council wished the Planning Commission would study the matter of basements specifically, before holding additional public hearings and making recommendations to the Council about inclusion of requirements for. basements in the Municipal Code. Councilwoman Swanson said she wished the record to reflect her concerri that the amendment would en- ' , courage construction of homes two anci one. half feet higher than the houses currently builte Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that the Planning Commission be asked to review the height limitation in one . year to -determine whether the change ir� ��he ordinance did a£fect: the building height of new homes . Councilwoman Swanson said h�r recom- : mendation. that -the basement area be limited. .to. 49% or .less of the - floor area of the. house would discourage elevation changes, and she ' . said this should be studied by the Planning Commi�ssion, in her opinion. The Ma�or said that Chairman Roberts stated in his letter thai: although basements entered into the Planning Commission's deliberation, �they iaere _ not specifically addressed, and it w�as his recommendation that study of basemezts should be done separately from the action already recommended and which is the basis for the adoption of 0rdinance No . 203. With the concurrence of inembers of the City Council Mayor Murdock said she would advi.se Chairman Roberts that an additional study of requirements for ba:�ements is requested by the Councilo ,' Mayor Murdock said the Planning CoAunission and City Council ha"ve = ' not met jointly since appointment of three new members of the C�m�mission and she said a joint meeting raill be scheduled in the near future. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES N0. 204 AND 205 1272 The Manager saicl two orclinances intended to clarify requirements in the Municipal Code relating to references to repealed ord�nances, grading, dog attack appeal �ees and consistency of terms were introduced. at the last meeting, and were presented at this time for second reading and adoption. � Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh moved that Ordinance No . 204 entitled ArI ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMEND- ING SECTION 17 .16 . 070A OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING SIDE YARD SETBACKS IN THE RAS-2 ZONING DISTRICT AND SECTION 17 .16:012F. 10 tZEGARDING TENNIS COURT LOT COVERAGE LIMITATIONS be adopted, and that reading in full be waived. The motion was seconded by Council�voman Swanson. C�uncilwoman Leeuwenburgh moved that Ordinance No . 205 entitled AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMEND- ING SECTION 15. 28. 010 OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING C�NSTRUCTION NEAR FIRE HYDRANTS, SECTIONS 6 .24. 040C AND 6. 36 .060C . REGARDING FEES FOR APPEAL HEARINGS ON ANIMAL ATTACKS, SECTIONS 15 .0.4.11.._�. AND 15. 04. 140 REGARDING GRADING AND FILL SLOPE DEVIATIONS BEING RE- VIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND SECTION 2 .08 .010 AND 2.08. 020 ON PUBLIC OFFICIAL BONDS be adopted, and that reading in full be waived. The motions were carried by the following roll call vote: A�ES : Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh, Pernell, Swanson I�Iayor Murdock - NOES : None "1`a•� ABSENT : None -7- October 24, 1983� N0. 497 AND ADOPTING PROCEDURES IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRON- � MENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND THE GUIDELINES OF THE SECRETARY FOR THE RE- SOURCES AGENCY, AS AMENDED 1983 be adopted, and that reading in full be waived. The motion was seconded by Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh and carried by the following roll call vote : AYES : Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh, Pernell, Swanson Mayor Murdock NOES : None ABSENTo None TERMINATION OF DUI PROJECT The Manager reported that the final report regarding the DUI (Driving Under the Influence) project was received and was distributed to members of the City Council< UNSAFE BUILDING AT 54 PORTUGUESE. BEND ROAD. Copies .of a letter dated October 19➢ .1983 from. the . Department- of County. Engineer-Facilities tq Mr.s . F. �;Wagner,. 54. Portuguese: .Bend Road.,: .. - . . . ordering �that the unsafe building on her property be barricaded within � _ thirty days were distributed to the �ouncil_. u EDUCATOR OF THE YEAR AWARD � The Manager reported that the Educator of the Year Award will .be awarded at a dinner on October 27, and he said reservatioris are being : made through the Chamber of Commerce. The Mayor said she planned to attend. ADJOURNMENT 1510 The meeting. was adjourned at 10 :00 P>1�I. to a meeting at 7 :3Q• P.M. � Monday, November 7, 19830 � q% � City C erk APPROVED: ,./.�'.� ayor -9- _