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