2/29/198800
7
m
a
-3
MINUTES OF AN
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
February 29, 1988
An adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of
Rolling Hills was called to order at 6:37 p.m., in the Theater Arts
Building at Miraleste High School, 29323 Palos Verdes Drive East,
Rancho Palos Verdes, California, by Mayor Swanson.
MEETING RECESSED
The meeting was recessed at 7:21 p.m.
M4:4Dye$ZOO "12Ld01Zit" "1361
Mayor Swanson reconvened the meeting at 7:39 p.m.
ROLL CALL
i*-a**4Zy1F
PAIT-1:004F
ALSO PRESENT:
PUBLIC HEARING
Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh,
Murdock, Pernell, Mayor Swanson
None
Terrence L. Belanger
L. D. Courtright
Betty Volkert
Kathy Uros
Ann Johnson
Anne La Jeunesse
William Bennett
Walter Kreutzen
William Strauss
Steve Tedesco
Rick Zeiser
Approximately 175
City Manager
City Treasurer
Deputy City Clerk
Secretary
Los Angeles Times
Peninsula News
ASL Consulting Engineer
Evensen-Dodge
Richards, Watson, &
Gershon Law Firm
ASL Consulting Engineer
Zeiser Geotechnical
Residents
Mayor Swanson reviewed some of the history of the origin of
the sewer feasibility study. The Mayor reported that at the Rolling
Hills Community Association's 1985 and 1986 Annual Meetings there was
a vote of the residents present at those meetings, requesting that
the City undertake a sewer feasibility study. The process began in
1986. The reason for the delay in beginning this study was to be
sure that this was something that the community desired since it
would require a great deal of work and some expenditures, and also
due to a change in City Managers. In November, 1986, Requests for
Proposals for the Preliminary Feasibility Study of a Sanitary Sewer
System were sent out.' The City Council formed a committee consisting
of Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh and Councilwoman Murdock, who met with
the City Manager and County engineers, to interview the seven firms
that responded to the City's Request for Proposals. After
interviewing these seven firms, Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh and
Councilwoman Murdock returned to the City Council with two
recommendations of two firms that were then interviewed by the entire
City Council. As a result of that interview, the City Council
selected ASL Consulting Engineers to prepare a Sanitary Sewer
Feasibility Study for the City of Rolling Hills. The first draft of
the Preliminary Sewer Feasibility Study was presented to the City
Council at their meeting in December, 1987, at which there was a very
small number of residents who participated. Tonight, the final draft
of the Preliminary Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Study will be presented
to the public as well as the Councilmembers, for the first time. Two
engineers from ASL Consulting Engineers, Mr. Bennett and Mr. Tedesco,
will present the final draft of the Sanitary Sewer Feasibility
Study. Also, the City Council has invited other consultants to
attend this meeting to address other aspects of the sewer system,
i.e., geology/soils, financial, and legal.
74
Mayor Swanson reassured the audience that nothing would happen
fast and nothing would happen that the residents don't wish to
happen. The City Council would need a very clear indication from the
community before proceeding with the next step, the engineering and
design phase, which would require an expenditure of approximately
$2,000,000. The Mayor continued that, for the purpose of discussion,
should the decision be made to proceed with the engineering and
design phase, the following step would be to formulate a financial
plan, afterwhich, construction would begin.
Mayor Swanson announced that tonight's presentations would be
of a technical nature. The Mayor also informed the audience that for
tonight's meeting, the City Council would be part of the audience and
would neither deliberate this issue as a Council nor make any
decisions. The Council will only receive information, both from the
technical consultants and from the public. The format of the meeting
would be as follows: first, the technical consultants will make
their presentations in the order that they appear on the agenda with
the exception of Mr. William Strauss, legal counsel, who will make
his presentation last instead of third; after the technical
presentations, there will be a question and answer period moderated
by the Mayor. The Mayor requested that comments be kept to about 3
minutes. Mayor Swanson also said that if someone doesn't feel
comfortable with speaking in public, they are welcome to write to the
Council expressing their opinions. After this meeting, the Council
will receive from the City staff a summary report of all the comments
from the public and the technical experts. This matter will again be
on the City Council agenda for their second meeting in March or their
first meeting in April. All presentations will be made prior to any
questions or comments.
Mayor Swanson shared a quote, given to her by Mayor Pro Tem
Murdock, of Anatole France who, in 1881 said, "In order that
knowledge be properly digested it must have been swallowed with a
good appetite." She said that she hoped everyone had a good appetite
for knowledge tonight.
Mayor Swanson introduced Mr. Bill Bennett and Mr. Steve
Tedesco, of ASL Consulting Engineers, and presented their
credentials.
Mr. Bennett reported that ASL prepared detailed aerial
photography of the contours to study the lay of the land, topography
of the hills, and the terrain. They took a very general look at the
types of systems that could be applied to our community. After
researching several alternatives, it was their conclusion that the
most cost-effective, in terms of the overall effectiveness in getting
the sewage collected and treated, would be to put in a conventional
sewer system which, given the overall nature and complexity of the
City, isn't an easy thing to do. However, over the 30 to 50 year
life of the system, this is probably the most efficient and most
beneficial, in terms of the amount of dollars spent.
Mr. Bennett introduced Mr. Tedesco, who continued the
presentation for ASL using the overhead projector.
Mr. Tedesco said that when they began the study, the first
thing that they did was to determine how much sewage generation there
would be in the City. Using Los Angeles County's standards, they
determined that an average of 210,000 gallons per day of sewage was
generated in the City. Next, they looked at alternate methods of
treating and disposing this sewage. The first method that they
researched was a conventional sewer system. A conventional system
consists of gravity sewers, manholes, and in some areas sewage
pumping stations. Mr. Tedesco then displayed an overlay on the
overhead projector of a sample sewage pumping station for a
conventional system. As was shown, the entire station, except for
the electrical panel, is located below grade. Usually, the pumping
station consists of two submersible pumps (a primary pump and a
backup pump if one goes down), a wet well that collects the sewage,
and a forced main system which contains piping in a vault that is
pumped into the next gravity line. There are numerous systems like
this located all over Los Angeles County. The Los Angeles County
Engineers' office usually maintains them. The entire unit contains a
'75
radio and control system so that if there are any problems the
central station at the County is contacted by radio. These pumping
stations are very reliable.: One problem with the conventional sewer
pump station is the cost; they,are quite costly.
The next system that they looked at was a pressure system. In
a pressure system, in order to lower costs, each house is fitted with
a pumping unit.. The base of the unit is usually about 30 -inches in
diameter, contains controls and two pumps. This type of system would
pump into a pressure main, and there would be pressure mains located
all over the City. A pressure system is not subject to the problems
of terrain. It can go uphill and downhill, and the lines don't have
to be buried very deeply. However, there are numerous problems with
these types of systems. One problem is that in a hilly area, such as
our City, people on the downstream side and people on the upstream
side always seem to be pumping at the wrong heads, thus contradicting
each other. There are also some real maintenance problems. There
are engineering firms that have designed these, however,'Mr. Tedesco
said that their firm hasn't yet found a system of this type that they
are comfortable with, one that they believe will work. A system like
this has been implemented in Anchorage, Alaska. ASL Consulting
00 Engineers contacted them to see how it is functioning, and were
informed that they have had constant problems with backups and the
L pumps going down. If this type of system were installed in Rolling
—� Hills, the entire pump unit becomes the homeowner's responsibility;
co whereas, a conventional system, once it is installed and accepted by
the County, becomes the County's responsibility to maintain. After
Q looking at the maintenance problems and the terrain of Rolling Hills,
this type of system was completely eliminated as a future
alternative.
The third alternative that was studied was a septic system.
This system also has some problems, as reported by some of the
residents of Rolling Hills. Residents have reported problems with
backups and leach fields, and some geological problems in some
areas. One possibility would be to setup an overall maintenance
district to pump out the existing septic tanks on an annual basis.
Those were the three methods that were researched. With
regards to the conventional system, from the mapping and survey work
that was done, ASL Consulting Engineers developed a system consisting
of a series of gravity sewers and pump stations. The reasons for
choosing this system over the others were: (1) that the majority of
the gravity lines would be located in existing street rights-of-way,
very few easements would be required and very few lines would have to
cross other properties; (2) there would be as little construction as
possible in the canyons; (3) environmentally, this type of system was
the best; (4) it minimizes the construction time and the problems
associated with construction; and, (5) it had the lowest cost of all
the alternatives. This system could be constructed in phases,
however, in any kind of phasing that is done the downstream portions
must be constructed first. The total estimated construction cost for
this alternative was $12.3 million. This is the cost of construction
only. In addition to that cost, various other costs need to be
added, such as: (1) contingencies to be set aside for construction
problems; (2) design and assessment engineering costs; (3) costs for
acquisition of easements; (4) legal costs; (5) financial consulting
costs; (6) costs for having the plans checked through the County and
processed through the County system; and, (7) financing and bonds
discount costs. The total incidental costs would be approximately
$3.9 million. Therefore, the total estimated cost to be financed
would be $18.1 million. That concluded the presentation from ASL
Consulting Engineers.
Next, Mayor Swanson introduced Mr. Rick Zeiser of Zeiser
Geotechnical, to give a presentation on the geology/soils aspect of
the project. The Mayor informed the audience of Mr. Zeiser's
credentials, afterwhich, the meeting was turned over to Mr. Zeiser to
make his presentation.
Mr. Zeiser said that he would be speaking on the geotechnical
situation in the City of Rolling Hills, and would briefly and broadly
give some background information on that topic and discuss various
risk management strategies. Specifically, he would be looking at the
in
short-term and long-term alternatives, and what the impacts are on
the City with respect to the proposed sanitary sewer system versus
the septic system. Mr. Zeiser displayed a map prepared in 1976 by
Mr. Cleveland, which was done for the Division of Mines and Geology
in the State of California. Mr. Zeiser stated that in geology there
are several components that are looked at which are important. One
is the different types of units that exist and also the structure of
those units. The structure of Rolling Hills is what is called an
anticline, which means that the bedrock units have been uplifted so
that they incline and are no longer horizontal. In this area, the
anticline runs pretty much parallel to Crest Road. That means that
the slopes that face towards the north are underlain with geologic
units or beds which are inclined generally in that direction. If you
go towards the south of Crest Road, most of the bedding planes are
inclined toward the south. This means that in a hillside environment
there exist situations known as slope stability or, as the case may
be, slope instability. Mr. Zeiser displayed a map indicating, within
specific areas of the City, several landslides or landslide complexes
that have been postulated and identified by state geologists. As
seen on the map, there were quite a few on the north facing slopes of
the City. It has also been well documented that the south facing
slopes also have some slide areas. When evaluating the geology and
geologic units, the physical characteristics are studied, i.e.,
whether they are sand, clay or silts, etc. With respect to slope
stability, there are two areas of concern, gravity and water. With
the addition of water into the subsurface, be it bedrock or another
material, as the soil is saturated and as certain minerals in the
soil are saturated they tend to lose strength. Mr. Zeiser displayed
another graph showing how different kinds of material lose their
strength with the addition of water. The shear strength is reduced
as the water content increases. Mr. Zeiser referred to a
cross-section of ground water migration. Geologists are concerned
with the impact of the long-term introduction of water into the
subsurface. As water is introduced into the subgrade, it migrates
until it is stopped by some natural barrier or boundary. Our local
bedrock consists of very thin beds of alternating types of rocks
(shale, silts, clay, etc.) which have been very fractured and broken,
and they accept a lot of water. Historically, these systems tend to
be closed systems and not open systems, therefore, the ground water
tends to rise and tends to saturate the subsurface soil thereby
promoting an increased level of instability. Mr. Zeiser displayed a
diagram of water percolating down from on-site septic systems.
Typically, this water drains down into the subgrade and migrates down
until it hits some barrier and then it will migrate laterally, and it
will seek the lowest elevation that it can. Over a period of time,
the water level can build up. As the water builds up it begins to
act on the soils and reduces its strength, which increases the
probability of slope instability. Slope instability usually isn't
instantaneous, it is something that builds up over a very long period
of time. An historical example is Bluebird Canyon in Laguna Beach.
The present thinking in engineering geology and geotechnical
engineering is to try to minimize or mitigate any water going into
the subsurface by collecting it and conducting it somewhere else.
Also, as the community grows the introduction of water increases, and
it is very difficult to predict what will happen with the increased
water introduction. This concluded the presentation by Mr. Zeiser.
Mayor Swanson introduced Mr. Walter Kreutzen from
Evensen-Dodge, the financial consultant, and presented his
credentials. Mr. Kreutzen stated that he would be presenting some
cost scenarios based on the preliminary cost estimates developed by
ASL Consulting Engineers, using $18,081,000 as a base figure. Mr.
Kreutzen displayed a view graph of various methods of financing the
project and maturity schedules of 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 years for
the various methods (hard copies of the view graph are available).
The financing methods presented were General Obligation Bonds,
Certificates of Participation, and Assessment or Revenue Obligations
or Instruments. Also shown were the net interest costs, in today's
market place, on a 30 year maturity bond or obligation, for the
various types of financing: 7.84% for General Obligation Bonds;
8.25% for Certificates of Participation; and, 8.35; for Assessments
and Revenues. The difference in the rates is that the underlying
securities are deemed to be stronger or weaker, as the case may be,
depending upon the given obligation. Using General Obligation Bonds
J
M
as an example, a 10 year maturity of the annual debt service payments
would be $2.5 million per year or $1.56 million per year for a 30
year maturity. This is the .same principle as home mortgages; the
principal and interest on`'a'15,'1year loan will be higher than on a 30
year loan, but it would be for a shorter duration, thus, the net cost
will be less over a 15 year period than over a 30 year period. Also
calculated was the annual cost per acre using 1920 acres (equivalent
to 3 square miles). For example, again using the General Obligation
Bonds financing method with a maturity of 30 years, a one acre lot
would_ owe $813 per acre per year. If an individual owned a five acre
lot, it would cost that same figure times five ($813 x 5 = $4065 per
year). The annual cost per lot was calculated by taking the total
annual debt service divided by the number of lots in the City,
identified to be 710. On a General Obligation Bond, for 30 years,
the annual cost per lot would be $2197 per year. If the system were
to be paid for outright on a cash basis, the initial one-time cash
contribution per lot would be $25,366.00. Mr. Kreutzen again
stressed that these figures were preliminary and would be subject to
change based upon final design and engineering. This concluded the
presentation by the financial consultant.
00 Mayor Swanson introduced Mr. Bill Strauss, from the City's
r"i municipal law firm of Richards, Watson & Gershon, who would be giving
Lo the final presentation of the evening. The Mayor commented that,
although Mr. Mike Jenkins is the attorney for the City, Mr. Strauss
m is an expert in financing districts, therefore, the firm asked him to
Q represent the City tonight. Mr. Strauss stated that if the City
Council concluded that there was support in the community to proceed
and that the engineering and geology considerations were feasible,
and the economics and proposed financing were feasible, there are a
number of different legal procedures which the Council could avail
themselves of in order to implement the financing. The City can
issue General Obligation Bonds after the adoption of resolutions and
ordinances but, more importantly, only after there has been approval
by two-thirds (2/3) of the registered voters in the City voting to
incur that indebtedness. In other words, those bonds can only be
issued upon two-thirds majority vote of the registered voters in the
City, voting in the election. The General Obligation Bonds would be
repaid from taxes that would be levied on each parcel of property in
the City, and the tax would be levied at a uniform rate and would be
levied against the assessed valuation of the property. This means
that a parcel of property that has a higher assessed valuation would
be paying a greater portion of the tax.
Mr. Strauss then discussed assessments. An assessment could
be levied on the parcels within a district which would be deemed to
be benefited by these proposed improvements. Benefited, under the
law, means that the improvements that were installed and constructed
would tend to enhance the value of the property. In order to levy an
assessment the City must go through a procedure whereby they provide
notice and an opportunity to be heard at a public hearing where
property owners would have an opportunity to protest. If there was
not a majority protest and the Council decided to proceed to levy the
assessment, the property owners would have an opportunity, within the
next 30 days, to pay their assessment in cash (estimated to be
$25,000), however, if the property owner chooses not to pay the
entire $25,000 in cash, the City would issue bonds in th aggregate
amount of all unpaid assessments of $25,000, and the property owners
would then, in effect, pay the principal and interest on that
assessment bond over its term (typically anywhere from 15 to 30
years) .
There is another type of tax which could be levied.to support
the payment of Municipal Bonds used to construct the sewer system; it
is called a Special Tax. It would be levied in connection with a
proceedings undertaken, which is provided for by law and is commonly
known as the Mellow -Roos Community Facilities Act. The Mellow -Roos
Community Facilities Act is an act that provides for the levy of a
special tax and the issuance of bonds which would be repaid by that
special tax, again, over a term of anywhere from 15 to 30 years.
However, before a Community Facilities District can be formed, it
requires a combination of both the proceedings previously mentioned;
namely, it requires a notice and hearing, and if there is a majority
protest the public entity, such as the City, could not proceed.
However, after the protest hearing, if there were an insufficient
number of protests, in order to issue bonds which are paid for by
this special tax, an approving vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the
registered voters in the City voting in the election is required.
The difference between the General Obligation Bond tax and the
Special Tax is that the Special Tax is not levied at a uniform rate;
it could be levied at a uniform rate, but it typically isn't. It is
typically levied in much the same way as an assessment would be
levied. Specifically, an engineer would be hired to put forth a
Special Tax methodology, and that tax would be spread based mostly on
the benefits that would be received by each of the parcels involved.
The last type of municipal bond that the City could issue to
finance the sewer improvements is what is known as a Revenue Bond.
Revenue Bonds are, in this context, paid from rates or charges, which
are distinguishable, under the law, from taxes or assessments. Rates
or charges can be levied after a notice and public hearing. The
bonds that would be supported by rates or charges would be issued
after a proceedings which included a notice and a hearing, and at the
hearing if 15% of the registered voters protested or if the owners of
15% in area of the area to be served by the sewer improvements
protested, then the City would be forced to hold an election on the
issuance of those bonds. If owners of 50% in area of the property
within the proposed district that would be served by the sewer
improvements protested, then the City would be forced to abandon the
proceedings.
Mr. Strauss reviewed the four different sources of payment or
types of bonds, as follows:
1. General Obligation Bonds - Are secured by and payable
from property tax. Requires a two-thirds vote of
approval.
2. Special Tax - Requires a two-thirds (2/3) vote and also
requires a notice and hearing, and an opportunity to
protest before proceeding with the two-thirds vote.
3. Assessment Bond - Requires a notice and hearing and an
opportunity for a majority protest.
4. Revenue Bond - Has the combination of having an election
if 15% or more protest, however, if 50% or more protest,
proceedings must be abandoned.
Each of these options are exclusive of one another, and each
provides that if there is a failure in the proceedings for one reason
or another the City cannot proceed for a period of time, anywhere
from six months to one year; however, that would not preclude
consideration of another avenue. This concluded the presentation by
Mr. William Strauss.
Mayor Swanson thanked all the consultants for their
presentations.
The Mayor then asked if anyone had any information on the
current costs for a new septic tank system. The City Manager
responded, saying that the source of the information comes from Atlas
Cesspool Service. Currently, the installation of a 1200 - 1500
gallon septic tank system in conjunction with a cesspool and 51x 40'
seepage pit costs in the range of $15,000 to $16,000. In addition,
it is recommended that the septic tank be pumped about every 2 years
to keep it properly maintained and in good working order. The cost
of pumping is in the range of $150 to $200.
The Mayor entertained questions and comments from the floor.
It was requested that comments be limited to 3 minutes.
Mr. Robert Fox
13 Outrider Road
Mr. Fox expressed his appreciation to all the consultants for
their presentations, and directed his comments and question to the
Mayor. Mr. Fox stated that his impression from the presentations is
that it is a foregone conclusion that the City must have this sewer
0
W
system, and asked if this is a correct interpretation. He said that
he has heard no evidence or testimony indicating that it is really
necessary. Mr. Fox asked 'if the City is in danger. For example, on
one of the maps which were.-P.rpsented by Mr. Tedesco there was a
shaded area indicated as a hazardous area. It appeared that this
area included the Flying Triangle area. Mr. Fox asked if the entire
City is a hazardous area.
Mayor Swanson replied that the experts had been asked to give
testimony in general terms and by no means intended to give the
impression that having sewers is a necessity. The Mayor expressed
her disappointment that that was the message received and stated that
was not the intent of the meeting. Mayor Swanson referred Mr. Fox's
question regarding whether or not the City is in danger to'Mr.
Tedesco and Mr. Zeiser. .
Dr. David Basque
49 Eastfield Drive
Dr. Basque stated that he has been a resident of Rolling Hills
for 21 years and, in that time, he has spent approximately $150 to
$200 for pumping of his septic tank. Dr. Basque disagreed with some
of the figures in the summary that was sent to all the residents, and
suggested that another summary with input from some of the residents
be sent to the estimated 475 families not present at the meeting.
According to research material collected at the library, Dr. Basque
said that 65-70% of all water that goes into the ground, either
through a septic tank or from rain water, is lost through evaporation
and through transpiration into the vegetation in the area. Dr.
Basque also commented that the summary should have made it clear that
each property owner would pay $2300 for 30 years, for a total of
$69,000. Another concern expressed by Dr. Basque was the possibility
of the cost of the project being overrun. Dr. Basque sited studies
of the Malibu project by the Rand Corporation, which is very well
known and which has done many studies on public works projects all
over the country, indicating that there is always at least an overrun
of 100-120% on any of these projects. If that is the case, then the
cost would actually be in the neighborhood of $120,000 per household
rather than the $69,000 per household. Dr. Basque also asked for
clarification regarding the sewer connection and hookup fee, which it
is his understanding is $2700 per homeowner. However, apparently
this fee does not cover the cost for the sewer lateral from the house
to the -'IT" connection at the property line, which could be in the
$4000 to $5000 range, according to the Rand Corporation figures.
Mayor Swanson referred the statement on water evaporation and
transpiration to Mr. Tedesco. Mr. Tedesco said that the 210,000
gallons of water per day was assumed to be going into a septic tank,
in which case evaporation and transpiration generally don't come into
play because the water is being introduced at a much deeper level.
Evaporation and transpiration take place when water hits the trees,
shrubs and ground, and then runs off. Mr. Zeiser agreed with Mr.
Tedesco. Mr. Zeiser said that with rainfall the major portion will
run off or evaporate; however, with a seepage pit most of the water
will drain down laterally and will not evaporate. Mr. Bennett
commented on Dr. Basque's concern regarding the possibility of the
cost of the project being overrun. Mr. Bennett said that when an
Mr.
Tedesco said that the area on the map that was shaded and
identified
as a hazard area was field visited and verified, and it
was determined that at this time it would not be appropriate to
construct
a conventional sewer system in that area because of the
00
existing
slides that are occurring in that area. Mr. Zeiser
addressed
the question of there being a hazard to the City, and
ri
stated that
the purpose of showing the map that he presented was to
Lo
indicate
that there are numerous areas within the City that are
purported
to be on or part of ancient landslides. From the
CO
geologist's
standpoint, technically, it is not a good idea to
introduce
water into the ground if it is already in an unstable
<
situation
or in a potentially unstable situation. It is very
difficult
to predict whether or not there is imminent danger or
hazard.
From a risk management standpoint, it isn't advisable to put
the water
into the ground.
Dr. David Basque
49 Eastfield Drive
Dr. Basque stated that he has been a resident of Rolling Hills
for 21 years and, in that time, he has spent approximately $150 to
$200 for pumping of his septic tank. Dr. Basque disagreed with some
of the figures in the summary that was sent to all the residents, and
suggested that another summary with input from some of the residents
be sent to the estimated 475 families not present at the meeting.
According to research material collected at the library, Dr. Basque
said that 65-70% of all water that goes into the ground, either
through a septic tank or from rain water, is lost through evaporation
and through transpiration into the vegetation in the area. Dr.
Basque also commented that the summary should have made it clear that
each property owner would pay $2300 for 30 years, for a total of
$69,000. Another concern expressed by Dr. Basque was the possibility
of the cost of the project being overrun. Dr. Basque sited studies
of the Malibu project by the Rand Corporation, which is very well
known and which has done many studies on public works projects all
over the country, indicating that there is always at least an overrun
of 100-120% on any of these projects. If that is the case, then the
cost would actually be in the neighborhood of $120,000 per household
rather than the $69,000 per household. Dr. Basque also asked for
clarification regarding the sewer connection and hookup fee, which it
is his understanding is $2700 per homeowner. However, apparently
this fee does not cover the cost for the sewer lateral from the house
to the -'IT" connection at the property line, which could be in the
$4000 to $5000 range, according to the Rand Corporation figures.
Mayor Swanson referred the statement on water evaporation and
transpiration to Mr. Tedesco. Mr. Tedesco said that the 210,000
gallons of water per day was assumed to be going into a septic tank,
in which case evaporation and transpiration generally don't come into
play because the water is being introduced at a much deeper level.
Evaporation and transpiration take place when water hits the trees,
shrubs and ground, and then runs off. Mr. Zeiser agreed with Mr.
Tedesco. Mr. Zeiser said that with rainfall the major portion will
run off or evaporate; however, with a seepage pit most of the water
will drain down laterally and will not evaporate. Mr. Bennett
commented on Dr. Basque's concern regarding the possibility of the
cost of the project being overrun. Mr. Bennett said that when an
overrun occurs, one must look at how the cost was determined, whether
it was judged on preliminary costs, concept costs, or final design
costs. The goal of ASL Consulting Engineers is to stay within 2% to
8% of the estimated cost. An exceptional overrun is 10% to 15%. In
the 38 year history of ASL, the rule has been within 2-8% rather than
the exception of 10-15%. Mr. Tedesco addressed the question
regarding the hookup fee, and said that it will vary with each
individual house. Mr. Tedesco gave a breakdown of the estimated
$2700 connection and hookup fee, as follows: the Los Angeles County
Engineers Office has a connection fee of $154; the County Sanitation
District's connection fee is $725; and, assuming an average length of
50 feet of lateral from the property line to the house at a cost of
$30 per foot, for a total of $1500 for the lateral. The lateral from
the sewer main to the property line has already been included in the
estimated construction costs.
Mr. Harry Houghton
9 Outrider Road
Mr. Houghton said that in the past when there has been
discussion of sewers it was because of some septic tank problems, and
he asked if residents in the City are experiencing problems with
their septic tank systems. The Mayor replied that some people are
having problems with their septic tanks.
Mr. Harold Lund
2 Packsaddle Road East
Mr. Lund remarked that his interest in this matter began a
couple of years ago when he was told about the initial geology
reports which basically stated that the potential for activating
ancient slides increases in proportion to the, amount of water
introduced into the ground. He said that although some people are at
more risk than others, it seems that Rolling Hills is the type of
community where neighbors work together to help one another to make
it a better place to live, and to make it less likely for someone to
lose their home in the future. Mr. Lund thanked the Council for
proceeding with the feasibility study, and said that he feels it has
been a worthwhile endeavor. He asked if there is any legal hazard
if, after given the information that the risk of land instability
increases as the amount of water put into the ground increases, the
City elects not to put in those things that prevent the water from
going into the subsurface and in the end someone loses their home.
He also commented that there are some residents that are not as
fortunate as Dr. Basque, and who spend much more than $150 per year
on their septic tank systems.
Mr. Strauss responded to the question and stated that the City
does not have an affirmative legal duty to impose a sewer system on
the residents.
Mr. Paul Iacono
93 Saddleback Road
Mr. Iacono informed the audience that he is a licensed civil
and structural engineer in the State of California, and has done
quite a bit of subdivision work in the area. Mr. Iacono said that he
has never seen a project come in at the estimate and that it would
probably cost 2 or 3 times the estimate. He also stated that a 50
foot lateral tie-in from the house to the property line isn't
realistic and in some instances this could be as great as several
hundred feet, which would run into the tens of thousands. Mr. Iacono
questioned whether or not the problems involved in excavating the
soil and hard rock in the area were taken into consideration when
calculating the estimated cost. He pointed out that if it is decided
to install sewers it could mean a couple of years of inconvenience
during the construction. Being in the construction business, Mr.
Iacono installs septic tank systems all the time, which usually run
between $6000 and $7000, and he couldn't understand how Atlas arrived
at an estimated cost of $16,000. Mr. Iacono feels that if there are
problems with some of the septic tank systems, the people involved
should spend the relatively few dollars to repair the problem and not
involve the entire City in such an expensive endeavor.
I.
LJI
O�
Mr. Tedesco commented that ASL has also done quite a bit of
work on the Peninsula, and the cost estimates were based on previous
projects in the area within ;the• last - year .
Mr. Ray Schaefer
69 Eastfield Drive
Mr. Schaefer stated that he thinks that the majority of
residents have the mistaken impression that the cost of this project
is only about $2000. He feels that another letter needs to go out
explaining that the cost would be upwards of $2300 per year for 30
years. Mr. Schaefer asked how many individual cases are there of
land slippage and houses threatened in Rolling Hills. He remarked
that the City of Rolling Hills is at least forty years old and, in
that time, the number of cases of land slippage indicates that the
septic tank systems have served the City well. If a sewer system had
been installed when he first built his home, 38 years ago, he would
have paid $90,000 by this time. As it stands now, the only cost that
he has incurred is the cost to have the septic tank pumped every 3
years. He asked that the alternative of modifying the existing
septic tank system be discussed further; in particular, what kind of
modification would be required or advised if the City were to
continue to have a septic tank system.
Mayor Swanson commented that one cannot compare today's
dollars with dollars from 30 or 40 years ago. The Mayor also assured
Mr. Schaefer that everyone's comments would be noted and taken under
consideration and review. Mayor Swanson stated that the houses that
have had problems with slippage are in the Flying Triangle and the
number of homes involved is a matter of record. At this time, the
City does not have any information that any other houses are having
similar problems. The Mayor remarked that the City has had septic
tanks ever since it began, 50 years ago. At that time, however, the
houses were only vacation houses and were very small. Those small,
two bedroom, ranch style homes are no longer here. Today, the
community is more dense, the homes are much larger, and our
lifestyles have changed and are sometimes wasteful. Some of the
homes today have 5 or more bathrooms. All of these things have to be
taken into consideration. This doesn't necessarily mean that the
City favors a sewer system, but we must be aware of the environment
around us.
Mr. Bill Bennett said
the possibility of forming a
provide an organized method o
systems throughout the City.
alternative with regards to
other modification plan would be
Mr. Jim Brogdon
5 Maverick Lane
that in the ASL report they discussed
Septic Tank Maintenance District to
f maintaining the existing septic tank
This would be the only feasible
the existing septic tank systems; no
possible or appropriate.
Mr. Brogdon said that the survey which was sent to the
residents should have been a two part question: (1) Do you want
sewers? and, (2) Would you pay for the cost of the sewer system? Mr.
Brogdon said that yes, he would like to have sewers, however, he does
not want to pay the price. They have had septic tank problems and
have learned how important proper maintenance of the septic tank is.
He has to have his septic tank pumped every couple of years at a cost
of about $115 each time. Also, twice, pipes in the septic tank broke
and had to be replaced (the old pipes were clay but now they use
pvc). But, he believes that good septic tank maintenance and
management will work favorably. He asked if there is a city-wide
problem or only individual problems. He believes with proper care
and maintenance, the septic tank systems work fine.
Mr. John Husnak
34 Portuguese Bend Road
Mr. Husnak stated that he has never had anything done to his
septic tank system and has never had any problems. He is completely
against any sewer system.
Mr. Dick Hoffman
3 Hillside Lane
Mr. Hoffman stated that this whole issue boils down to the
cost/benefit ratio of the sewer system. Mr. Hoffman said that the
inconvenience of pumping the septic tanks or the occasional smell
isn't the issue, and this isn't a problem for most residents of the
City. Those reasons certainly would not be sufficient to warrant
installing a sewer system. However, he feels that there is a
city-wide potential problem, that of land slippage. He said that Mr.
Zeiser was a real gentleman when he displayed the map of the
landslide areas in Rolling Hills. Mr. Hoffman then displayed
different map indicating mapped, known, ancient landslides in Rollin
Hills, however, he said that his map, prepared by George Cleveland i
1976, still doesn't include all the landslides in the City. H
pointed out many areas in the City that are either on or adjacent to
ancient landslides. Mr. Hoffman also remarked that Mr. Zeiser isn't
the only geologist that has expressed concern regarding this
problem. Mr. Hoffman quoted Mr. Keene, the County's geologist, as
saying "it would be the most positive thing that the City of Rolling
Hills could do, to go on a sewer system." Mr. Hoffman also quoted a
couple of other geologists that feel that the City should go to a
sewer system. He said that, according to Mr. Tedesco, the sewer
system would cost an estimated $18 million, which he doesn't look
forward to paying any more than anybody else. However, he said that
if there is one more occurrence of a landslide in the City, he
believes that property values will drop at a rate quadruple to the
cost of the sewer system. Mr. Hoffman said that in order to keep the
status quo, sewers would be good insurance. He agrees that it is
terribly expensive but, at the very least, the residents must become
informed. He said that if it is decided not to proceed with sewers,
that is fine as long as it is based on an informed decision. Mr.
Hoffman remarked that if he educated himself and learned that his
property was sitting on an ancient landslide, he would fight with
everything he had to make sure that there was a sewer system.
Mr. George Feister
5 Buckboard Trail
Mr. Feister asked if the geologic hazards that have been
mentioned previously have been field checked. He stated that the
maps which have been prepared by Mr. Cleveland are aerial maps. Mr.
Feister pointed out that Mr. Cleveland notes that he has not verified
these maps. Mr. Feister said that in geology, anything that is
mapped by aerial photos must be field checked. Mr. Feister asked Mr.
Zeiser if he had personally checked these landslides that were
indicated on the map, and Mr. Zeiser replied that he had not. Mr.
Feister reported that there is another map that was prepared by 3
famous geologists, and it does not show all these landslides that are
shown on the Cleveland map. Mr. Feister said that their map was
prepared before the days of aerial photos, and they field mapped by
walking over the ground. He went on to say that he hates to see
everybody get worried about these supposed hazards until it is
determined whether or not they are really there. He continued that
obviously there is no doubt about the Flying Triangle and Portuguese
Bend; these ancient landslides are on everyone's map. Mr. Feister
remarked that he would not like to see people stampeded into thinking
that we live in such a hazardous area.
Mr. Zeiser commented that it is standard engineering geolo
practice to map a regional area, such as the Peninsula, using aeri
photographs because you can get a bird's eye view, and it is possib
to look at certain characteristics, which are called morphology
geomorphology, some of which typify landslides or landslide terrain.
As Mr. Feister noted, this region is well noted for its landslides.
Mr. Zeiser said it is not a bad idea to conduct a field investigation
in the City to determine where the high risk areas are. Mr. Zeiser
stated that he really didn't have a good feel for the cost for such
an investigation.
NW
•
Mr. Herb Agid
60 Portuguese Bend Road
Mr. Agid said that r,-he;has_.yread a scant article or two about
new scientific techniques used V,in Sweden and other countries where
land and water were becoming scarce, and they had learned to cope
with these problems using some new technology for disposing of waste
and water. He asked if any of the panelists had any,/knowledge of
this new technology. However, none of the consultants"were aware of
this new technology that Mr. Agid spoke about, and the Mayor said
that it would be researched.
Mr. Paul Grubs
1 Hackamore Road
Mr. Grubs said that one thing that should be mentioned in this
discussion is that the water being discharged from the septic tanks
is "special" water, i.e., it contains many different chemicals such
as amino complexes, various detergents, etc. He said that he
believes there are a great deal of stratifications of various clays,
which react with certain chemicals causing slippage. Mr. Grubs
CO commented that although he is not in favor of a sewer system, he also
rl does not want to see his property value slip away, literally, and
LO asked if anyone has studied the chemical reactions that take place
and the ramifications of those reactions. He feels this type of
information would be beneficial, and we could look at what kind of
m impact these chemical reactions could produce. He said that if the
Q chemistry in the Flying Triangle were studied it might be learned
that the landslide was due to chemical reactions as much as it was to
water flow. He stated that what holds this peninsula together are
ancient salts from the sea, i.e., magnesium, calcium, sodium, etc.
If enough water saturates these salts and the clays, he feels the
slides will continue.
Mr. Zeiser addressed the comments made by Mr. Grubs, and said
that what Mr. Grubs is speaking about is the study of clay mineralogy
and how clays interact with other anions and cations. Mr. Zeiser
said that he is not an expert on that subject but he said that Mr.
Grubs is correct in stating that certain things do react with the
clays to either increase or decrease the amount of absorption of the
fluids and does change the physical properties of the clays. In some
areas, to treat slope stability, it has been proposed that people
pump into the ground certain chemicals to react with these very
treacherous clays to render them less harmful: However, he does not
know to what extent this kind of thing is done.
Mayor Swanson asked if this type of slippage, caused by
chemical reactions with the clay, occurs suddenly or is it something
that happens slowly. Mr. Zeiser replied that generally it is a slow
process. Mr. Zeiser commented that in most hillside areas that he
has seen the phenomenon of slippage, commonly referred to as hillside
creep, it has happened very slowly and wasn't a rapid occurrence. It
is usually noticed by cracks in the foundation, sliding doors and
windows that don't open or close properly, interior doors that do not
continue to open or close properly, etc. This signifies that somehow
or other the structure is undergoing some kind of distress or change.
Mr. John Buchanan
19 Bowie Road
Mr. Buchanan stated that he is both a registered civil
engineer and a licensed engineering contractor. Mr. Buchanan
informed the audience that he used to have a lot in Portuguese Bend.
He said that he is fully aware that by the time you realize that you
have a problem it is too late to do anything about it. He said it is
necessary to prepare in advance. Mr. Buchanan stated that he had a
couple of practical questions for Mr. Strauss. He asked Mr. Strauss
if each of the four financing methods would be tax deductible for
income tax purposes, by the property owner. Mr. Strauss replied that
the two types of financing that involve a tax would be fully
deductible just the same way that property tax is deductible. The
annual installments of the assessments would only be deductible to
the extent that they represented interest. It would be necessary to
make a calculation annually to determine what portion of the
assessment installment represented interest. The principal amount of
the assessment would be added to the base of the property itself,
thereby having some tax advantage. With respect to the Revenue
Bonds, to the extent that the bonds are paid through rates or
charges, it would be necessary to calculate what portion of those
rates or charges represented interest on the bonds and what portion
represented the principal. Basically, the two types of tax are fully
deductible, and the other two options would involve a calculation to
determine what portion represented interest, which would be
deductible the same way that mortgage interest is deductible.
Mr. Buchanan then remarked that he is aware of another
assessment district which has been done in two steps. The first step
involved the engineering work and a great deal of the legal work in
anticipation of issuing bonds. This first step was paid for under a
first stage district. Then, the plans were prepared, the bids were
received, and if the bids were within the acceptable range so that
the ultimate final amount could be determined within 10 - 15%, the
second portion of the district was formed and those bonds were
issued. Therefore, no one was responsible for the whole amount at
one time, only for a small portion of the amount until the final
amount was determined. This was suggested by Mr. Buchanan as a
solution to the concern that the project might be greatly overrun.
Mr. Buchanan asked Mr. Strauss if he was familiar with this type of
financing plan. Mr. Strauss replied that he was familiar with this
type of financing, and said that what is done is that the assessment
is levied in phases so to speak. The engineering, design,
feasibility study, etc., would be the first step, and the cost of
that would be levied against the property owners. Then, if there was
a decision to proceed, the actual construction costs and so forth
would be levied. Mr. Buchanan asked what the estimated cost for
engineering and design was, and the Mayor and Mr. Strauss said that
the estimated cost for this part of the project was $2 million. Mr.
Buchanan asked if the financing costs would come in the first stage
or the second stage, and Mr. Strauss said that the financing costs
would apply to the second stage of the project.
Mr. Chester Jenkins
10 Southfield Drive
Mr. Jenkins directed his question to the geology consultant,
Mr. Zeiser. Mr. Jenkins wanted to know what kind of impact there
would be on the ground generated from cutting some 25 miles of
trenches and from trenching to a depth of 24 feet in some instances,
as opposed to the hazards generated from ground water seepage from
the septic tanks. He said that he feels there are two kinds of
hazards, one caused by cutting into the soil and another caused by
water.
Mr. Zeiser explained that construction would be done in
sections. It is standard construction practice to shore up the sides
of any trench while the trench is temporarily open, thereby providing
some system of stabilization.
Mr. Jenkins then asked why sewers would not be constructed in
the Flying Triangle. Mr. Zeiser said that it wouldn't be advisable
to construct sewers in this area since, in his opinion, it is still
moving.
Mr. Tedesco explained that the decision not to install sewers
in the Flying Triangle was based on the assumption that the trench
would actually cut into the portion of the slide area that is still
moving, which could in fact accelerate the sliding in that area.
Mr. Tedesco commented that before any construction was begun
anywhere in the City, they would actually go out and take borings to
determine where they could and could not construct a sewer system.
Georgia Ferderber
3 Poppy Trail
Mrs. Ferderber stated that she has lived at this residence for
30 years and has never had to spend anything for septic tank/cesspool
maintenance.
so
J�
�I
She said that she has never heard of a landslide caused by
cesspools, but the landslides that she has heard of were caused by
engineers who didn't know what they were doing and didn't test things
properly.
Mrs. Ferderber's concerns were in the area of liability
insurance on the part of the City, and questioned whether or not the
City would pay for any landslides that might be caused by them.
Mrs. Ferderber said that she
landslide caused, in her opinion,
installation of some utility lines.
installation of some electric wires
then, certainly, building a sewer
problem.
Mr. William Hines
73 Eastfield Drive
has experienced the danger of a
by engineering error during the
She believes that if the
can cause a landslide problem
system could cause a landslide
Mr. Hines said that the 77,000,000 gallons of effluent is kind
of a frightening figure but when compared with the amount of rainfall
it is insignificant.
Mr. Hines presented some rainfall calculations, indicating
that the amount of water introduced into the ground from rainfall is
many times the amount of effluent from the septic tanks, even
allowing for 70% evaporation. He asked that one of the consultants
comment on how sewers could be beneficial in handling the water from
rainfall.
Mr. Bill Bennett explained that it is difficult to determine
the amount of water from rainfall that actually penetrates into the
subsurface. He said that runoff can vary anywhere from 60% to 90%
depending on the permeability of the subsurface. It is generally
agreed that any amount of water that can be kept out of the
subsurface the better.
Mr. Zeiser commented that each area and each lot is going to
be different. That is why, apparently, some systems have perked
successfully for 30 years and others have not. Mr. Zeiser said that
what he is trying to stress is that putting water into the
subsurface, particularly given the geology of the area, is something
that he would advise against.
Mrs. Bea Fischer
1 Southfield
Mrs. Fischer said that they
system for 40 years with no problems.
some research on the management of
educational program on how to keep
properly. This wouldn't cost any money
Mr. Victor Martinov
33. Chuckwagon
have had the same septic tank
She suggested that the City do
septic tanks, and provide an
a septic tank functioning
and would be beneficial.
Mr. Martinov asked the geologist if the risk or potential risk
of a landslide increases with the passage of time. And, if so, what
is the progression of the increased risk.
Mr. Zeiser said that this is a difficult question to give an
absolute answer on. He explained that when someone puts in a
cesspool or septic tank system, it is assumed to be an open system;
thus, it is not to hold water, it is to pass water through.
Historically, however, it has been learned that the systems are not
open, they are partially closed. Therefore, over a period of time
some of the water is retained in the subsurface. In terms of time,
Mr. Zeiser said that he does not have enough information to answer
that question. Historically, it has taken as much as 30 years,
sometimes less.
Mr. Martinov asked if the risk remains static or does it
increase with time. Mr. Zeiser explained that it depends on the
system. If it is truly an open system, the risk would remain static
and unchanged. However, the more that the system becomes closed the
higher the risk and the rate of increased risk would accelerate.
Mr. John Bennett
3 Eastfield Drive
Mr. Bennett asked if it is possible to use sonar to determine
if the water table is building up and where. Mr. Bennett also asked
about the density of the City. He remarked that our City is
relatively rural and doesn't seem to have the density to warrant a
sewer system.
Mr. Bennett also wanted to know if surface watering, such as
watering lawns and shrubs, is a threat to the water table.
Also, Mr. Bennett asked if it is possible or feasible to have
some kind of annual certification of the septic tanks to ensure that
they are properly maintained.
Mr. Zeiser said that in terms of determining the level of
ground water probably the best method is to drill borings down and
take samples. Sonar might not be reliable because of the different
densities in the bedrock material.
Regarding the density of the community, Mr. Zeiser stated that
the community as it was 30 years ago is not the community it is
today, nor will it be the same community 10 years from now. He
believes that the projection indicates more water going into he
ground instead of less.
Mr. Zeiser commented on the question of watering vegetation,
and said it does contribute to underground water storage. How much
depends on how one waters and what kind of vegetation they have.
Mr. Don Gales
19 Middleridge Lane North
Mr. Gales said it is his understanding that flushing of
toilets uses approximately 4 or 5 gallons of water with each flush,
and accounts for a major portion of the water usage. Mr. Tedesco
said that is a large percentage of the water usage but not most.
Mr. Gales said that he has heard of a new technology in
toilets that uses about one-half the amount of water as the
traditional toilet.
Mr. Bennett said anything that anyone can do to minimize the
amount of water introduced into the ground would be a good idea,
whatever that might be.
Mr. Howroyd
7 Maverick Lane
Mr. Howroyd wanted to know what the annual cost will be for
maintenance and continuation of the system once it has been accepted
by the County. He remarked that he doesn't feel that sewers are an
advantage for him, it is a burden that would be placed upon him.
Also, he feels everyone should be responsible for their own systems.
He does not mind taking care of his cesspool when necessary, but he
does not feel that he should be obligated because someone else is
having a problem. He expressed his skepticism that the project would
be able to be constructed for the estimated cost, and believes it is
likely that it will be overrun.
Mr. Tedesco stated that the annual cost, at this time, is $31,
which partially is .distributed to the Los Angeles County Engineers'
Office and partially to the County Sanitation District. He has no
way of predicting what the fee might be in the future.
Mr. Shurl Curci
85 Saddleback Road
Mr. Curci wanted to know if the costs that were quoted for a
new septic tank system and for the one-time only price for the sewer
0
0
M
system, were both cash prices or if they included a finance charge.
Mr. Curci also asked if there has been an estimate calculated for
possibly installing sewers in phases. He also wondered whether the
City has considered doing districts within the City without doing the
whole City in its entirety.
The Mayor commented that the City has not considered anything
specific as of yet, however, they will look at all possibilities.
The City Manager responded to the question regarding comparison of
costs, and stated that the $16,000 figure for a septic tank was a
cash price, and the $25,000 estimate for the sewer system included a
finance charge. A cash price for the sewer system would be
approximately $23,000 ($18.1 million - $1.9 million divided by 710).
Mr. Vic Martinov
33 Chuckwagon
Mr. Martinov commented that, recently, he got two estimates
for a new septic tank system and cesspool installation, one from
Atlas and one from Hoffman & Sons. The estimates ranged from $14,000
to $16,000. He said that he would be happy to double that figure and
pay for installation of sewers. Mr. Martinov also remarked that
everyone should keep in mind the property values in relation to the
cost of a sewer system.
Mayor Swanson recapped the highlights of the meeting.
Basically, the following were items of concern or interest:
1. Most people are concerned with the high cost of the
project.
2. Everyone learned that many people have not maintained
their septic tank systems the way that they should.
3. There are people that are concerned with the ground
stability relative to the sewer construction; if it were
to be installed what effect would it have on the
stability of the land.
4. Concerned with the stability of the ground if effluent is
allowed to continue to be ejected into the ground
indefinitely.
5. Concern expressed with the protection of property values.
6. Discussed mechanical management of septic tanks.
7. Concern expressed about the increase of risk with the
passage of time.
The Mayor commented that the Council would take all the
concerns and comments under discussion. The Council's hope for this
meeting was to raise the awareness of both the residents and the
Councilmembers regarding this issue. The Council tried very hard,
and hopefully was successful, not to take one position or another;
they tried to remain neutral. The Council wanted to keep the
discussion on a scientific level and not on an emotional level.
Mayor Swanson stated that the Council will look both at the sewer
system as it has been proposed and at the present septic tank
system. They will consider whether or not there needs to be some
control over the wastewater as it is now introduced into the ground.
There being no
meeting at 10:13 p.m.
APPROVED:
Mayor
further comments, Mayor Swanson.adjourned the
City Clerk