Loading...
8/22/198800 LD m a 187' MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ROLLING HI -LLS, CALIFORNIA August 22, 1988 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Murdock on Monday, August 22, 1988, in the Council Chamber at the Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, at 7:41 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Swanson, Mayor Murdock Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh (excused) Councilman Pernell (excused) Terrence L. Belanger Michael Jenkins Larry Courtright Kathy Uros Anne La Jeunesse Doug McHattie Dave Basque Carole Curto Mr. & Mrs. Yu -Ping Liu Michele Migliaccio Fanndy Siu City Manager City Attorney City Treasurer City Secretary Palos Verdes News South Bay Engineering Resident Resident Residents Resident Resident Councilwoman Swanson moved that the items on the Consent Calendar be approved and accepted as presented. Councilman Heinsheimer seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the regular City Council meeting of August 8, 1988, were approved and accepted as written. PAYMENT OF BILLS Demands Nos. 3078 through 3111, in the amount of $33,722.73, were approved for payment from the General Fund. FINANCIAL STATEMENT The Financial Statement for the month of July, 1988, was accepted as written. OLD BUSINESS There were no matters to be considered under Old Business. NEW BUSINESS There were no matters to be considered under New Business. PUBLIC HEARINGS RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FEE FOR VIEW IMPAIRMENT COMPLAINTS The City Manager explained that the proposed resolution establishes a fee for the filing of view impairment complaints,• as dictated in the recently adopted Ordinance No. 219 which regulates OW views and provides for abatement of view impairments. Staff's recommendation was that a fee of $500 be set for the filing of a view impairment complaint, which would cover the cost of processing such a complaint. Staff also recommended that a policy be established, as set forth in Ordinance No. 219, that all fees related to expert advice and assistance to the View Impairment Committee be separate and based on vendor costs and be in addition to the cost of the filing fee, and that said fees are to be paid by the complainant. A notice of public hearing for the purpose of establishing a fee was published, as required by State law. Mayor Murdock invited comments from the audience, however, there were none. Councilwoman Swanson commented that she felt that the fee should be fair and should only encompass that amount necessary to recover the costs incurred for the processing of a complaint. After reviewing the proposed resolution with the City Manager, Councilwoman Swanson was convinced that that was the case. Councilwoman Swanson moved that the proposed resolution, entitled A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTABLISHING FEES FOR FILING VIEW IMPAIRMENT COMPLAINTS" be approved and adopted as recommended by staff. The City Attorney, Mike Jenkins, suggested that the concern which was expressed by Councilwoman Swanson be transformed into a third paragraph to be included in the resolution, stating that "the $500 fee reflects and does not exceed the City's processing costs in the processing of these view impairment complaints". Mr. Larry Courtright, City Treasurer, explained that it would be very difficult to determine the costs involved in the processing of these complaints. The City Attorney stated that if simply the City Manager's salary were calculated on an hourly basis, and the Council took into consideration all the time involved by the City Manager alone in processing these complaints, e.g., acceptance of the complaint, verifying that the complaint is complete, sending the necessary letters, preparing staff reports, investigating the complaint, bringing the complaint before the Committee, and taking it through the various hoops, it could probably be determined that the cost of the City Manager's time alone will far exceed the filing fee of $500.00. Mr. Courtright pointed out that since the City staff does not keep time reports, it would not be the normal course of the accounting procedures to record separate costs of this type. Generally speaking, it is almost impossible for staff to keep a detailed time report on every function that they perform. Mayor Murdock clarified Mr. specified as a procedure that each time. The Mayor commented analysis of approximations of that reflects the actualy costs. Mr. Courtright explained fees against costs for each costs and so reflected in the not equipped to do at this time. Courtright's concern that this not be would require itemizing of every cost that it can be assumed that, given an costs, an attempt is made to set a fee that the policy of establishing user user fee, must be substantiated by the accounting records, which the City is Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that in Section 1 of the resolution, the following wording be added at the end of the sentence: "Section 8.32.040 of the Municipal Code of the City of Rolling Hills, in order to compensate the City for its estimated administrative costs:". - 2 - J The City Attorney commented that the Council could, at this time, make a legislative determination based on their understanding of the City's finances and the City'''-s'ccists, that a filing fee of $500 is probably on the low side. It,was decided that the City Attorney would provide the City Manager with the appropriate wording. Councilwoman Swanson amended her motion to include such wording in the resolution. Councilman Heinsheimer had concerns about subparagraph 2 of the resolution, which discusses the fees for expert advice and assistance .and the payment thereof. He felt that this would effectively deter anyone, from filing a complaint since there is no limit to the amount that a consultant might charge.. It was Councilman Heinsheimer's feeling that this process should have a fixed cost and should not be open-ended. Mayor Murdock said it was her understanding, per the ordinance, that any outside advice sought by the Committee would be infrequent and only in extraordinary circumstances. co The Mayor questioned whether it was necessary to have this paragraph as part of the resolution, however, the City Attorney explained that the ordinance mandates it. (� The City Manager explained that the paragraph was included in the Q resolution because the resolution will be attached to every complaint form, thus, an individual submitting a complaint will be fully advised of their actual and potential costs. Councilman Heinsheimer proposed that a cap be set on the amount that the complainant would have to pay for any expert advice that the Committee might feel would be necessary. Then the question was raised as to who would be responsible for that amount charged by the consultant, over and above the cap. A lengthy discussion ensued among the Councilmembers, City Attorney and staff, afterwhich, Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that the complainant be given the right to refusal of incurring the estimated costs for any expert advice that may be deemed necessary by the Committee. If the complainant were to decide not to pay the estimated cost for the consultant, the complaint would be withdrawn and the complainant would loose the $500 filing fee. Following further discussion, the resolution was reworded as follows: 1. The words "A non-refundable" should be added to the beginning of subparagraph 1. 2. The end of subparagraph 2 should be changed to read as follows: "...established herein. The cost of expert advice shall be communicated to and approved by the complainant in advance of incurring the expense; if the complainant declines to pav the cost, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn." 3. Add a new subparagraph 3 as follows: "The filing fee provided for herein does not exceed the cost to the Citv of processing view impairment complaints." Councilwoman Swanson amended her original motion, moving to approve and adopt the resolution as reworded. Councilman Heinsheimer seconded the motion. There being no objections, the motion carried unanimously. ZONING CASE NO. 362, YU-PING LIU, 39 CREST ROAD WEST; VARIANCE REQUEST Zoning Case No. 362 is a request by Mr. Yu -Ping Liu for a Variance to encroach into the front yard setback for the purpose of — 3 — iso extending the roof over the main entry walkway, and for constructing a reflecting pond on Lot 240B -1 -MS, 39 Crest Road West. The City Manager briefed the Council regarding Zoning Case No. 362. The City Manager explained that this zoning case encompasses two elements. The first element is a request for an encroachment into the front yard setback for the purpose of extending the roof over the entry walkway. This element of Zoning Case No. 362 was denied by the Planning Commission. The second element is a request for an encroachment into the front yard setback to allow for the construction of two reflecting ponds, i.e., on or near grade. The Planning Commission approved this particular element of Zoning Case No. 362. In summary, the Planning Commission denied the element that would have an encroachment of a vertical projection, and approved the second element which proposes to be at ground level. The Planning Commission's action was reported to the City Council, at which time the Council voted to take jurisdiction and set this public hearing. The City Manager indicated that the applicants had provided two exhibits for 'the public hearing, showing what the two proposed ponds would look like, both from an elevation point of view and from a site point of view. Councilman Heinsheimer asked if the proposal that the Council is currently considering is the same one that the Planning Commission considered, i.e., is the Council considering both elements of this zoning case. The City Manager said that it's his understanding that the Council wished to review only the second element of this zoning case. Staff's recommendation would be that when the City Council makes its decision, both elements be dealt with. At their August 8 meeting, the City Council accepted the decision of the Planning Commission regarding the first portion of this zoning case, and only took jurisdiction of the second element, i.e., the ponds. Councilman Heinsheimer asked if the denial of the roof extension by the Planning Commission had been appealed by the applicants, and the City Manager verified that it had not been appealed. Therefore, the roof extension element of this zoning case, which was denied by the Planning Commission, is not at issue. Mayor Murdock invited comments from the audience. Mr. Doug McHattie, South Bay Engineering, addressed the Council. Mr. McHattie explained that the reason for requesting the roof extension and the ponds was to distinguish the front entrance of the house. Historically, visitors have tended to wander around to the back of the house. Mr. McHattie stated that the applicants accepted the Planning Commission's decision regarding the roof extension, but are still requesting the Variance for the ponds as a means of defining the entrance to the house. The proposed plans for the ponds have been submitted to the Architectural Committee, and there are other similar ponds in the City. Mr. McHattie explained that the two ponds which are being requested would be at grade level. There would be no fountains in the ponds, but there would need to be some kind of recirculation of the water to prohibit the growth of algae, e.g., a small recirculatory pump which recirculates and filters the water contained within the pond. Councilman Heinsheimer verified with Mr. McHattie that the plans for the proposed ponds, being reviewed by the City Council, are the same plans that the Planning Commission approved. Mayor Murdock indicated that the Members of the City Council that were unable to attend this meeting had expressed an interest in being a part of the discussion and decision making process. Therefore, the Mayor suggested that a field trip to the site be scheduled to give all the Councilmembers an opportunity to view the site and proposed project. - 4 - At the request of the applicants, this matter was continued to the City Council meeting on Monday, September 26, 1988, and a field trip was scheduled for Saturday,_.September 24, at 9:00 a.m. Mayor Murdock confirmed with Mr. McHattie that the proposed project would be properly staked for the field trip. OPEN AGENDA Mayor Murdock invited comments from the audience on any topic not on the agenda. There were no comments from the audience. MATTERS FROM MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ANONYMOUS LETTER FROM "CONCERNED CITIZENS OF ROLLING HILLS", Councilman Heinsheimer expressed concern that the citizens of the community feel that they have to hide behind anonymous titles and groups, and that they don't feel free to stand up and express their opinions. He was concerned that perhaps the residents felt that the Council was unapproachable, and asked Mr. McHattie, as a 00 representative of the industry, if he was aware of anything that the T -i Council is doing to discourage people who have opinions on matters LO from freely expressing their opinions. Councilman Heinsheimer commented that he is concerned about any kind of a trend which causes m people to take positions without openly stating what they believe. Q He asked Mr. McHattie if the Council is creating an atmosphere which is fostering these types of anonymous groups. Mr. McHattie stated that he was not aware of this particular group. Mayor Murdock commented that so many times the content of such anonymous letters is so terribly inaccurate. Often times, these types of letters and groups fosters further misunderstanding. Councilman Heinsheimer remarked that perhaps it could be communicated to the residents that as a Council, as a City and as citizens involved in a political discussion, it would be nice if people would speak up for what they believe in so that a dialogue could be established. It's impossible to establish any kind of a dialogue with an anonymous group. WEED ABATEMENT Councilwoman Swanson expressed great concern about the weed abatement, and the lack thereof, in the community. She has noticed many violations while riding on the trails. This is particularly dangerous due to the very dry season and high fire hazard. She suggested _that the Fire Department be requested to conduct follow-up inspections. Mayor Murdock asked the City Manager to follow-up on this matter, and the City Manager assured the Mayor that he would request the Fire Department to follow-up on the second inspections. The City Manager commented that there has been a turnover in personnel, which may be part of the problem. Councilwoman Swanson also pointed out that many people dispose of manure on the side of their property and in the canyons, which is also very flammable, and the Fire Department should investigate this. The City's refuse company will pick it up for a fee, and residents should be encouraged to dispose of manure by this means instead of dumping it in the canyons. Councilwoman Swanson was generally concerned about the level of inspection that the Fire Department is providing. Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that after the field trip on September 24, the Members of the City Council drop by the fire station to meet the new staff and to pass along any comments. - 5 - 192 In the meantime, staff will follow-up with the Fire Department regarding the concerns that have been expressed. SCAG TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION MEETING Councilwoman Swanson announced that she attended the SCAG Transportation and Communication meeting the other day. At that meeting an Air Quality Management Plan Commitment schedule was distributed. SCAG has been asked to review it, comment on it, and to return it to the next meeting so that it can be approved by the Executive Committee of SCAG, on September 9. Councilwoman Swanson was concerned about measure 11B, which talks about unpaved roads and parking lots. There are tiers in which this is to be accomplished and, basically, talks about requiring the paving of all areas where cars are being parked. Councilwoman Swanson discussed this matter with the Committee, and explained that in a rural community, such as ours, paving everything would not be acceptable. The Committee was interested in putting in an advisory wording rather than "shall". The Committee asked that the cities submit their comments in writing, either to SCAG or directly to the Air Quality Management District. Councilwoman Swanson suggested that a letter be sent to the AQMD regarding this particular item, and that the Mayor be authorized to make any other comments, as deemed appropriate, regarding the various measures. Mayor Murdock suggested that the Councilmembers review the document, and pass along their comments to staff, afterwhich, staff could incorporate the comments into a letter to the AQMD. Councilwoman Swanson also suggested that perhaps other cities should be contacted and persuaded to take action on this matter. Mayor Murdock asked the.City Manager to contact the neighboring cities. The City Manager stated that he would also contact staff at SCAG. ANONYMOUS LETTER Mr. Migliaccio addressed the Council regarding the "Concerned Citizens of Rolling Hills" anonymous letter. He commented that there were many people at the Planning Commission meeting who attended to express their opinions and who were not anonymous. Mr. Migliaccio also asked for an explanation of what was inaccurate in the anonymous letter. He cited some of the statements in the letter, which the Mayor explained to Mr. Migliaccio were incorrect. Councilman Heinsheimer commented that his intention was not to debate the contents of the letter, but was simply to suggest that people be willing to sign their names supporting a particular point of view so that the Council knows who they are communicating with. HAZARDOUS WASTE DAY Mayor Murdock announced that at the Sanitation District meeting it was announced that Saturday, October 8, has been designated as the day for the Recycling Center to accommodate household hazardous waste disposal for the South Bay area. Any hazardous waste, other than paint, can be taken to the Recycling Center on that day and they will dispose of it free of charge. The City Manager has been requested to look into this matter. Councilwoman Swanson suggested that a notice be published in the newsletter regarding this matter. 1 193 MATTERS FROM STAFF VIEW COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS The City Manager announced that applications for the View Committee have been received, copies of which have been distributed to the Councilmembers. He stated that interviews of the prospective candidates would be conducted in the near future with the appropriate Council sub -committee. SANITARY SEWER ADVISORY COMMITTEE Mayor Murdock remarked that staff also needs to begin thinking about forming and activating a Sanitary Sewer Advisory Committee. VIEW IMPAIRMENT COMPLAINT FEES Mr. Larry Courtright, City Treasurer, stated that the $500 filing fee for view impairment complaints would be included in the category "Building and Other Permit Fees". The other outside costs, over and 00 above the $500 fee, will not appear in "Income" or "Expense" at all; 7-1 they will be treated as "Accounts Receivable". U) D LIU CASE m The City Manager reminded the Council that September 13, 1988, Q will be the date of the hearing on the Liu matter. That record is reviewed by the court in Torrance, without testimony. CLOSED SESSION A Closed Session was not necessary. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Murdock adjourned the meeting at September 12, 1988, at 8:00 a.m. APPROVED: Mayor 8:52 p.m., to Monday, - 7 - City Cl