CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF
THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 10, 2005
The City Council finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the local agency in the litigation.
á ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
á One case
Receipt of written communication from Counsel for Edward Snell threatening litigation.
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Borrowe called to order the Regular Meeting of the La Habra Heights City Council at 7:33 P.M. March 10, 2005 in the Multi Purpose Room at 1245 Hacienda Road.
2. ROLL CALL
Members present were Mayor Borrowe, Mayor Pro Tem Douglas, Councilmembers Carroll, Klein and Millsap. Also present: City Attorney Levin, City Manager Hendrickson, Community Development Director Massa-Lavitt, Fire Marshal Powderly, Fire Chief Nielsen, Sheriff Lieutenant Ault and City Engineer Melicher.
3. FLAG SALUTE
á Mayor Borrowe thanked the Scout Troop from La Habra for being at the meeting and noted that they came to observe City Government in action.
á Kathy Sauble, Emergency Preparedness Chairperson, to report on matters pertaining to the CommitteeÕs efforts in Emergency Preparedness.
Ms. Sauble noted that Emergency Preparedness this month is to ÒTune InÓ. This is about the systems that we have in place in case of different types of emergencies, such as acts of terrorism, 911 system failures, weather warnings, hazardous materials situations, tsunami warnings, evacuation warnings and other threats. She noted that the detailed information would be available at City Hall. She stated that resources are quickly used up and we need to prepare for emergencies and not just depend on other people to take care of us. Ms. Sauble explained that the La Habra Heights County Water District has told her that they will release information when the time comes regarding water distribution sites. Residents will need identification and go to their designated area. If you have animals be sure to have water for them, as you will have a 5-gallon limit per household from the Water Company.
Ms. Sauble noted that the City Manager was at their latest meeting and this was very helpful. She also commented that the Emergency Preparedness Committee would have their Fair at the Avocado Festival this time. It would be good to get together with other groups and Committees to get acquainted with each other and learn about what they do.
Mayor Borrowe asked City Attorney Levin if she had anything to report from the closed session.
City Attorney Levin explained that no reportable action was taken.
á Public Works Committee
Jerry Shipman, representative for the Public Works Committee, noted that many of our roads and some of our properties suffered severe damage from the recent rains. Hacienda Road is not the only road that suffered damage. Many have had temporary repairs, but we will have to do more. We had scheduled the completion of Zone 3 in June. We were also going to complete some of the berm maintenance. We will also have to refill where the banks have been washed away along the road. Altogether this will be expensive.
Mr. Shipman commented that the Hacienda Road striping has to be done. He explained that having the striping narrow the lanes to 11 feet is important to slow down the traffic for safety and no one has come up with a better idea.
Mayor Borrowe explained that the road currently does not have Cal Trans approved striping and that presents potential challenges to the City and complying with striping would partly help that situation.
City Manager Hendrickson reminded the Council that State law dictates that they must certify the results of the March 8, 2005 election no later than April 1, 2005. The Council will also reorganize prior to that time. He noted that the Council needs to agree on a date for the certification. He also commented that a Planning Commissioner should be appointed before their next meeting on March 29th.
The Council agreed to meet for the certification of the new Councilmembers at a Special Council Meeting on March 24, 2005 at 7:00 P.M. The Council did not wish to pick Planning Commissioners at that meeting. They agreed that the alternate Commissioner could take the place of the 5th Commissioner for one month.
Councilmember Klein added suggestions for handling the number of Commissioners if there were further complications.
City Attorney Levin commented that they have one additional item to deal with at tonightÕs meeting. She stated that at the last meeting the Council adopted a Resolution and notice was sent out indicating that tonight there would be the hearing for any property owners who wish to express objections regarding the proposed removal of weeds, dry grass, stubble, refuse or other flammable material. Since this item is not on the Agenda, the Council can not handle it tonight. Ms. Levin explained that since notice was sent out to the public of a Hearing on the item, she recommended that the Mayor open the Public Hearing and see if there is anyone here who would like to comment, allow them to, and at that time continue the item to the Special City Council meeting on March 24, 2005 at 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Borrowe opened the Public Hearing on Weed Abatement. Not finding anyone who wanted to comment, Mayor Borrowe continued the item to the Special Council meeting of March 24, 2005 at 7:00 P.M.
This was approved by consensus of the City Council.
There were no Public Comments and Mayor Borrowe closed the Public Comments.
5. APPROVAL OF WARRANTS – February 2005
Councilmember Klein offered a motion to approve the Warrants for February 2005 as presented in the amount of $261,744.07. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Carroll and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Douglas, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor Borrowe explained to the Boy Scout Troop what the Warrants are and that they are open to the Public to look over each month.
6. TREASURERÕS REPORT – January 31, 2005
Mayor Borrowe explained to the Boy Scout Troop what the TreasurerÕs Report is.
The TreasurerÕs Report Consists of:
á Schedule of Cash & Investments
á Schedule of LAIF Investments
á Cash With Fiscal Agent – Bank of New York
á Payments to City Engineers
á Payments to City Attorney/City Prosecutor
á Major Planning Projects
á Balance Sheet
á Monthly & Year-to-Date Revenues Compared to Annual Budget
á Monthly & Year-to-Date Expenses Compared to Annual Budget
Councilmember Klein offered a motion to receive and file the January 31, 2005 TreasurerÕs Report as presented. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Carroll and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Douglas, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
STANDARD MOTIONS
7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the City Council of February 10, 2005.
Mayor Borrowe explained to the Scout troop the reason for consideration of the Minutes and that sometimes there were corrections made.
City Attorney Levin noted a correction on Page 29 in the top paragraph, the third full sentence: the phrase Òwith prejudiceÓ should be changed to read Òwithout prejudiceÓ. In the next to the last paragraph on page 29, the first sentence should be changed to read, ÒCity Attorney Levin explained that the Council had identified the following findings: that the denial is based onÓÉÉ
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas had a follow up question on page 14 about the map being close to being completed.
City Manager Hendrickson explained that it had been completed, but there were two minor additions that needed to be added. The fully corrected maps are available at City Hall.
Councilmember Klein offered a motion to approve the February 10, 2005 minutes as amended. The motion was seconded by Mayor Borrowe and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Douglas, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
CONSENT CALENDAR
8. It is recommended that Item 8 be acted upon simultaneously by one motion of the City Council unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by a Councilmember or a member of the audience.
Councilmember Klein asked that 8.c. be pulled for discussion.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas asked that 8.b. be pulled for discussion.
8.a. HEIGHTS CHRISTIAN SCHOOL MONTHLY REPORT
Councilmember Klein offered a motion to receive and file 8.a. The motion was seconded by Mayor Borrowe and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Douglas, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
8.b. RESOLUTION WARRANTING THE PROCLAMATION OF A SECOND PUBLIC EMERGENCY
RESOLUTION 05-06 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS CONFIRMING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas noted that if the damage to Hacienda Road is a result of a failure below the roadway the cost to repair could be considerable. The time period to allow us to apply for storm related aid continues and we do not have to do anything at this point to Hacienda. We can wait until we determine what that cost would be sometime in the future.
City Manager Hendrickson explained that we need to move forward as soon as possible if we are going to be eligible for FEMA funding. He noted that once you meet with FEMA there are time limits that start running. The County will set up the meeting with FEMA for us. We will meet with FEMA along with the Office of Emergency Services and the County. Mr. Hendrickson commented that LA County is trying to get the State to declare the emergency beyond the December 27 to January 11th time that was declared by the Governor and the President. Our contention is that the first storm weakened areas and then continuing storms made the areas worse.
Mr. Hendrickson explained that the City is in the process of looking into the investigation of the failure on Hacienda Road. We have had the Geotechnical Engineer come out two times. The area will have to dry out before he can really evaluate the condition. There are several other areas that we will have to look into that have been damaged.
Councilmember Klein asked if we had any red-tagged buildings.
City Manager Hendrickson answered that we did not have any red-tags or yellow tags. He stated that there is one home that has the potential of a problem, but they have been notified.
Councilmember Klein offered a motion to adopt Resolution 05-06. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Douglas and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Douglas, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
8.c. LA HABRA HEIGHTS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION REQUEST DONATION FOR ÒMUSIC IN THE PARKÓ
City Manager Hendrickson reported the City has received a request from the LHHIA asking for a donation from the City of La Habra Heights of $1,000 for their ÒMusic in the ParkÓ program. They have expanded the program from June 22 to August 24 this year. He noted that we do charge them a $25 filing fee, but do not charge many other fees, including the $300 cleaning deposit, since it is a community event.
Claire
Spothelfer, Program Chairperson, noted that in most cities the Parks &
Recreation Department pays for such programs. La Habra Heights does not. She
stated that she thought that it would be nice if the City would join in with a
donation for the
ÒMusic in the ParkÓ. She stated that when they started the program 17 years
ago the City did share in the cost. They later had to cut out the support and
at the same time the cost has gone up and we are holding 10 concerts this
summer. Ms. Spothelfer noted that it costs the LHHIA approximately $15,000 for
the program.
Councilmember Klein offered a motion to approve the $1,000 donation for ÒMusic in the ParkÓ. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Douglas.
Mayor Borrowe commented that he acknowledged the benefit of the program, but he saw a need for criteria in such situations for any future requests for donations. He felt that before donating money, someone should review the financial statement of whatever organization is asking for support to see if there really is a need.
The motion to approve the $1,000 donation was approved as follows:
AYES: Carroll, Douglas, Klein and Millsap
NOES: Borrowe
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE REGARDING ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS
ORDINANCE NO. 257 – AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS AMENDING SECTION 8515 OF THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS.
City Manager Hendrickson asked that Item 9 be pulled from this meeting as there are some technical problems with it that are being worked out.
Councilmember Carroll asked what Item 9 was.
City Attorney Levin explained that the Council previously adopted an Urgency Ordinance, 257U that established the Building Rehabilitation Appeals Board and established the Planning Commission as that Board. She noted that the Ordinance is in place, but it is standard practice to replace the Urgency Ordinance with a standardly approved Ordinance which does the same thing, but is not adopted on an urgency basis. That is the process that was before you tonight. We will bring it back to you next month.
10. STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2004-25 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-03 AND ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING 707 DOROTHEA ROAD
RESOLUTION 05-07 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS APPROVING STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2004-25 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-03 AND ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING 707 DOROTHEA ROAD.
Community Development Director Massa-Lavitt explained that this item has been under review since 2001. There have been problems with construction of a high retaining wall, as the inspections were not properly carried out, and the amount of soil, approximately 3,000 cubic yards which was imported, considerably more than the 1,300 cubic yards shown by their haul receipts. Ms. Massa-Lavitt stated that on February 24, 2005 the Planning Commission, after several meetings, was able to recommend that the City Council approve this project.
Ms. Massa-Lavitt reviewed what the Planning Commission approved:
Architecture
The home has increased in size by 550 square feet with the February 14, 2005 plans. On the slope at the rear of the home, adjacent to Cypress Road, there was a proposed retaining wall which has now been changed to be a slope leading from Cypress Road at a l½ to l. This would also use up some of the illegal fill brought in.
Landscape Plan
The Planning Commission has requested they review a tree removal permit prior to issuance of the building and grading permit for the project. The final landscape plan would be signed off by the City Manager or his designee. It would not go back to the Planning Commission. It would have been reviewed by the CityÕs Landscape Architect prior to the Planning CommissionÕs review and all corrections would have been made. Detention Basins have been added to the Landscape Plan showing that they will have ground cover in them to keep them green and planted during the dry seasons and eliminating some of the dry scrub that might occur if it wasnÕt planted.
Grading and Drainage
Ms. Massa-Lavitt continued that modifications were made between the applicant, his Engineer, and the neighborhood. The changes were made to install two berm areas to capture slope run-off to contain water on-site, in an attempt to replicate the site condition prior to the previous grading operation. It was also decided to collect and filter all water from new impervious areas through an approved filtering device, consistent with the SUSUMP requirements. The City Engineer had reviewed these changes and believes this plan meets the CommunityÕs goals and is an acceptable grading plan.
Ms. Massa-Lavitt noted that in 2004 the applicant placed erosion control measures on the site and since then has added more and this seems to have kept the water on site. There were no slope failures or soil that left the site onto the road. She stated that the amount of illegal import could more accurately be determined at the plan check stage.
Retaining Walls
There are no longer any retaining walls in the set-back areas. The old retaining wall will be removed. There will be a retaining wall along the driveway at the two-car parking area. The neighbors have asked that the retaining wall be landscaped on the northwest side to screen the retaining wall. There will be another retaining wall to support the stairway going down to the parking apron. The wall is ten feet in height and we have asked that with some minor grading changes this wall be lowered to six or seven feet.
Ms. Massa-Lavitt commented that all of the issues raised at Planning Commission meetings have been dealt with in the current plan. The remainder of the plan is consistent with requirements of the zoning ordinance or has been handled by conditions of approval. They lowered the structure by four feet so that from Cypress Road the peak of the roof will barely be seen. She stated that in the Council packets comments from neighbors are included. There is also included an Environmental Assessment. We are recommending a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). The City must make a decision on the MND by March 24, 2005 due to the Permit Streamlining Act. This is regulated by the State. She noted that the City would have sixty days after that to make a decision on the entire project.
Staff
recommends Council approve the Conditional Use Permit and the Standards
Modification and adopt the attached Resolution with conditions of approval.
Ms. Massa-Lavitt noted that on page six of Resolution 05-07, number four,
sub-letter
ÒfÓ needs clarifying. She stated that the Planning Commission will review the
tree removal permit and the City Manager will approve the landscaping permit
when it is ready to be issued.
Mayor Borrowe opened the Public Hearing for comment.
Jessica Winship, Cypress Road, commented that she thought the house was too big and did not fit the character of the neighborhood. It seems to only get bigger. She was very concerned with the large amount of grading.
Michael Bagwell thanked the Planning Commission for their patience in this project. Mr. Bagwell stated that he disagreed with Staff, he noted that there was plenty of water and mud that came off of that property. He also noted that the General Plan states that there is going to be a limit to retaining walls height and length. Mr. Bagwell stated that he is not in support of this project. He stated that he did not feel his rights as a resident have been upheld.
Jerry Shipman stated that he is one of the neighbors and that they have worked with the developer and have now mitigated all of the concerns regarding safety and environmental impacts. Mr. Shipman noted that the plans here tonight are not the final plans. That is why you have the list of conditions. Each neighbor had a different concern. Mr. Shipman noted that all of the neighbors do not like the size of the house or think the house fits the neighborhood or meets the General Plan.
Nancy Acocks, Dorothea Road, stated her concern with the detention basins, how much water they will hold and if they will carry all of the runoff from this property. She noted her concern with the possibility of mosquitoes.
Craig Melicher, City Engineer, explained that they are giant natural swales. They will not be paved. The first ¾ inch requirement is an NPDES requirement attempting to eliminate pollution. Our only pollution in rain would be soil washed down. The swales would probably hold more than the first ¾ of an inch of soil washed downstream. He stated that he did not know how much until calculations are done at the grading plan check. The entire area is natural earth and the water will percolate into the ground. Mr. Melicher noted that mosquitoes are an issue that can be addressed when they get further along. He commented that the amount of water to meet the requirements for the detention basins would probably percolate into the ground in 24 to 36 hours.
Nancy Acocks asked what would happen during an extended storm like we have had. She noted that it would come down to her property. Ms. Acocks asked if there was anything against having a deep pit to hold more water and what would that do to the impervious coverage on the property.
The City Engineer answered that the same requirements covered whether it is a pit or a swale. There is no provision for what will happen to the remaining water after the ¾ inch requirement is met. He stated that actually the swale would trap more water. He stated that after the grading plans come in Ms. Acocks might talk to him for further information.
Ms. Acocks asked that the drainage problems be taken very seriously.
The City Engineer answered that they certainly would.
Mayor Borrowe questioned why they donÕt know the soil percolation already. He stated that in his opinion this should be known at an earlier time in the process so as to determine what to build.
City Engineer Melicher explained that the concept is that the plans should appear before the Planning Commission for a conceptual approval of the project rather than an Engineering approval. He stated that it is then up to the applicant to make it work with all of the different requirements prior to plan submittal.
Mayor Borrowe stated that in his opinion they should not rely so strongly on the applicant to work things out, especially as this applicant has proved so untrustworthy. He felt that the Engineer should rethink the present routine.
Mr. Melicher stated that it was a valid point. He noted that the present Grading Engineer the applicant has is very competent.
Jim Ulwelling, Attorney for Mr. Sussoev, explained that the plans that are up for approval tonight involve the dismantling of the Ògreat retaining wall of DorotheaÓ, the land will be returned to the maximum extent feasible to the natural land contours. The home will be heavily screened and landscaped. The home is stepped down the hill so it does not look so bulky. We have welcomed a lot of input from the neighbors. We have tried to put forth the best package we possibly can. Attorney Ulwelling explained that it is impossible to please everyone 100%. We have tried to accommodate the major concerns. He stated that the house size fits the large lot.
Councilmember Carroll questioned the statement on page one of the Resolution, which states that Premier Contracting is the owner, is this incorrect?
Attorney Ulwelling answered that this is incorrect. The owners are Mr. and Mrs. Sussoev. Premier Contracting is the Applicant.
Wayne Simonian explained that he is the applicant and General Contractor for the project and we were directed by the Planning Commission to get together with the other home owners and solve the issues. We felt that we solved most of the issues. Mr. Simonian stated that the house seemed to have grown as part of the stepping down process.
Mayor Borrowe closed the Public Comment and returned the meeting to the Council for comment and discussion.
Mayor Borrowe noted that he had a question on page four (4) of the Staff Report under Landscape Plan. Mr. Borrowe asked that in the last sentence, after ÒTree Removal PermitÓ the word ÒshouldÓ be changed to ÒwillÓ. Mr. Borrowe questioned how Item 9 on page seven (7) would be carried out.
City Engineer Melicher explained that at this time they plan to have someone on the job site that will take each trip ticket as it comes in.
The Council discussed who they would like to have for this rather than a staff member.
City Attorney Levin explained that these are conditions placed on the applicant or owner. She stated that this would not be the place to give Staff directions, however, you could add a condition that the applicant must pay for the cost of an inspector to be on site to monitor the truck trips. If you wish to give directions to Staff you would just do so, not place it in the Resolution.
Councilmember Carroll asked the City Engineer what his intention had been as far as the cost was concerned.
Mr. Melicher answered that he had not thought it through as far as compensation. He suggested that they impose a condition requiring that a City approved individual be provided and the cost be borne by the applicant.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas noted that in his opinion we are trying to do a screening plan and export at least 2500 cubic yards. We want to get that area back as near to what it looked like before as possible. He did not think we should worry about trip tickets, but that it should end up appearing like it was. Is this clear in the conditions that it should look as it began originally as far as topographical elevations?
City Attorney Levin explained that there are two protections that are in place here. One is that the project if approved includes the grading plan and there was some fairly extensive discussion at the Planning Commission meeting about how closely the finished product would have to track to an approved grading plan. She stated that in addition to that you have a protection that trip tickets should be provided and that the City have the ability to monitor the truck traffic. That provides a protection both in making sure that the trucks are following an approved route and are not working at inappropriate times and also if the project is stopped for some reason in midstream, we will have a record of what has been done. The situation we had before was caused due to not having a complete record of the work done. We also have a condition that there will be a bond so that if we have to restore the site to its prior condition, we can use the bond to do so.
Councilmember Millsap noted that on page nine (9) of the Resolution, Item 26 states that a minimum of 2500 cubic yards of fill shall be exported from the site. She asked City Engineer Melicher why we are keeping them to that number.
City Engineer Melicher stated that the number is a guess and he had reservations with putting that number in the Resolution. He stated that the applicants Engineer felt that exporting 2500 cubic yards would not be a problem.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas asked if Engineer Melicher was going to do a post grading survey to make sure the relative elevations have been achieved.
Mr. Melicher explained what the process is. The grading commences when they reach the rough pad elevation and rough slopes situation (3/10 of a foot). The Engineer of Record will then go out and survey the site then give us a certificate that he stamps indicating that those grades are in compliance with the plan as proposed or that they are plan revisions that are approved. At the end of the job, the entire site is surveyed again after all the landscaping is in and walkways just to make sure we are within 1/10 of a foot. He stated that this is a requirement of the County Grading Chapter. There is always a rough grading certificate and a finished grading certificate. He stated that the Building Inspector does not have surveying equipment so we rely on a licensed land surveyor to survey the site.
Councilmember Millsap mentioned on page six (6), item 6 of the Resolution a performance bond is mentioned. She asked how soon could the bond be issued to us and how do we know $60,000 would be enough.
City Attorney answered that we can require the issuance of the bond as soon as they avail themselves of the benefits of approval by trying to pull a permit, whichever permit is pulled first.
It was noted that they have a temporary power pole.
Community Development Director Massa-Lavitt stated that if the temporary power pole permit has expired they may need to get another. She noted that she got that figure when she asked Premier Contracting, Mr. Simonian, how much it would take to tear down the large retaining wall and export the soil and added $10,000 for a total of $60,000.
Councilmember Klein was of the opinion that $60,000 was not nearly enough.
City Engineer Melicher commented that he could easily support an increase in the amount.
City Attorney Levin explained that rather than trying to pick a certain amount for Item 6, you insert language that says that it shall be in an amount satisfactory to the City Manager. Let the City Manager consult at that time with the City Engineer or anyone else he might need to determine a reasonable amount that will protect the City. She noted that any estimate would have a safety factor built into it. The City Attorney agreed with Councilmember Carroll that Item 7 should also be handled in the same manner.
Councilmember Klein also noted that the quality of the bond should be listed.
The City Manager stated that they should also be sure that the firm issuing the bond is solvent.
Mayor Borrowe called attention to page seven (7) of the Resolution, Item 11, on indemnification. He stated that the indemnification clause is good, but the clause is only as good as the financial responsibility of the people that are involved in this. He stated that in his opinion the applicantÕs financial wellbeing should be looked into to see if they are capable of indemnifying the City. If they are not able to pay, the indemnification clause has no meaning.
Councilmember Klein noted that if we have a bond to cover things, we donÕt have to get into the applicantÕs business.
City Attorney Levin commented that she thought a bond could be required for the indemnification purpose. She stated that this was unusual and it would be difficult to estimate the amount of that bond as the indemnification covers such a wide variety of possibilities. She stated that your protection is that this obligation runs to the owner of the property, so in worst case scenario you could look to the property itself to recover if there is a problem.
Mayor Borrowe reiterated that the indemnification is meaningless unless there is something to back it up.
The City Attorney explained that most of the risk for exposure has passed by the time the construction is completed. The applicant and the owner have a very strong incentive to comply with this condition during the time you have the most exposure.
Councilmember Carroll asked how Section 1 on page one (1) should be changed where it calls Premier Contracting, Inc. the owner.
City Attorney Levin explained that it should be changed to read ÒPremier Contracting, Inc., the Applicant on behalf of the ownerÓ.
Mayor Borrowe commented that he would like to have someone on the site to check trip tickets since we have this problem because the applicant did some illegal things and the Staff didnÕt check on it for too long. He stated that he doesnÕt trust either the Applicant or the City. He noted that he would like the City Council to consider that the City Engineer have someone on site controlling the trip tickets to be paid for by the Applicant.
The City Attorney noted that if three or more of the Councilmembers wanted this she has language that can be turned into a condition.
Councilmember Klein suggested that we hold that until we have more items to cover. He asked how that would be done because we donÕt want to tie up one of our Staff.
City Engineer Melicher noted that we would estimate the hours and collect the money ahead of time. The City would retain the money and pay the invoices as they come in. If we need more we would collect more in advance. We would be verifying the trips, where they are traveling and the condition of the roads.
Ms. Massa-Lavitt commented that on this project we are not allowing 18-wheelers. It will have to be in single trucks.
Councilmember Klein suggested that they videotape the roads for their condition before the trucks start their trips.
Ms. Massa-Lavitt explained that they will be meeting with the Applicant and the owner before the grading permits are issued to make sure that the haul routes are designated, where they are going, and what size trucks they can bring. We will also know the hours they will be coming through the City so they donÕt conflict with the school buses.
Councilmember Klein commented that even though the house is large it all fits into the allowed envelope. There doesnÕt seem to be any view issues.
Councilmember Carroll asked about the screening and masking that several were concerned about.
Ms. Massa-Lavitt commented that the owner has added trees and shrubs and some of the species have been changed. There is still some work to be done. She also stated that with the appropriate planting and the appropriate species of trees it will mitigate some of the bulk of the house over time, approximately three years.
Councilmember Carroll asked about the slope slippage that some are concerned about.
City Engineer Melicher noted the similar problem in Anaheim Hills that caused a disaster. This was partly caused by improperly installed fill. He stated that in our case, a large part of the excess fill brought in will be removed when the wall is taken down and the land will be brought back to as near original conditions as possible. There will still be some fill around Cypress Road to buttress the street. A pad is being created but the majority of the site will be at or as close to the conditions that existed prior to the start of this project. Mr. Melicher stated that we have contour maps of the sides of the lot and we can reasonably estimate how they follow across the property. There should not be significant amounts of fill to cause the problems that happened at Anaheim Hills. Mr. Melicher added that there will also be a soils report that will core down through the soil at various sites. We will later talk about how many places to core. He stated that the soil has to be suitable to build on.
Councilmember Klein confirmed that the landscaping plan was continuing.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas commented that landscaping is the best opportunity to break up the mass and provide the screening of a large home. The General Plan asks that the house fit the neighborhood, but as yet there is no answer on how to do this. Mr. Douglas noted on page 6, Item 4.a. states that the applicant submits three sets of landscape/irrigation plans for review by the CityÕs Landscape Architect. Mr. Douglas asked if this could be tightened up a little as to what is wanted by the City.
City Attorney Levin explained that there is more detail on what is needed in conditions 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas asked if the Landscape Architect (Purkis-Rose) has this detail of what is wanted including Code 9206.9.
Community Development Director Massa-Lavitt commented that they send him a cover letter explaining particular issues with the plan. If there is a Resolution that goes with the project it should be sent with the cover letter.
Councilmember Carroll noted a mistake on page eight (8), Item 22. He stated that in the second line there are two phrases saying Òthe life ofÓ. Mr. Carroll also noted that after the word SUSUMP in the phrase Òstormwater and runoffÓ delete the word ÒandÓ.
City Attorney Levin stated that she would rather leave the ÒandÓ in the sentence. Ms. Levin also noted that there were incorrect numbers on page eight (8) that would be corrected.
Councilmember Carroll corrected a typo on page eight (8), Item 23 in the first line, change the word ÒtheeÓ to ÒthereÓ.
Councilmember Millsap asked Mr. Melicher if he has a copy of Mr. BagwellÕs letter. She stated that she does understand that these are conceptual plans, but in his letter on page 4 he mentions that in a letter that you wrote you directed the Applicant to have the plans signed.
City Engineer Melicher explained that originally there were grading plans coming in that appeared to be prepared by an unlicensed individual that were not addressing the issues of the City. This was before the Applicant hired the current Grading Engineer, which corrected the matter.
Councilmember Millsap asked what the rules are about signing or not signing plans.
City Engineer Melicher explained that the rules are set up by the State of California.
Community Development Director Massa-Lavitt stated that all plans should be stamped. When these plans are submitted for Plan Check they will have a wet stamp.
Mayor Borrowe asked who is going to see that all of these conditions are met. Who is responsible for this and how often is the site visited to see that these conditions are met.
Ms. Massa-Lavitt explained that the Community Development Director is responsible for these conditions. Some of the conditions are promulgated from Planning, Engineering, Public Works and the Fire Department, they will all be responsible for their part. The Building Inspector will go to the site when called. The Planning Department will periodically visit the site. It will not be a regular scheduled visit. If we have a complaint or concern from anyone, we will respond immediately. While the truck trips are going on the Transtech person will be there to monitor.
City Engineer Melicher commented that following the earlier problems with the truck trips, the Building Inspector would be required to check daily that everything is proper while the Grading is going on whether he is called out or not.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas noted that the whole neighborhood will be watching to make sure things are being done correctly.
Mayor Borrowe asked that Ms. Massa-Lavitt put up a picture of the front of the building.
Not finding a picture on the current disk, Ms. Massa-Lavitt noted that in the plans on A-6 there is a drawing of the front of the house.
Mayor Borrowe noted the goals and policies that this project violates. He noted numbers 7, 3, 4, 8, and number 13 of the Land Use Policies that have been violated by this home. He also noted that the house is much too large. He stated that in his opinion this project is being accomplished at the expense of the neighborhood and the Community. He stated that if we approve this to move on we are ignoring our General Plan goals and policies that we just spent three years in developing. He stated that he would deny this Application without prejudice until it comes back to meet our General Plan goals. He also noted that screening helps, but it is transitory.
Mayor Borrowe offered a motion to deny the application without prejudice so the Applicant can come back at any time with a better plan.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Mr. Simonian showed on a model the main changes that were made on the front of the house. He also noted that he offered to have Jerry Shipman come over when they are ready to place the trees in front and let him help with the placement.
Councilmember Klein noted that since the house has been stepped down the house does not seem so massive.
Councilmember Millsap asked if the wall was not taken down, where it would be in relation to the front of the house.
Mr. Melicher answered that if you walked out of the house you would be almost on top of the wall. He estimated that the top of the wall would be close to the top of the roof.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to adopt Resolution No. 05-07 as amended.
City Attorney Levin listed the amendments that the Council has made on page one (1), Section 1., after Premier Contracting, Inc., insert Òthe Applicant on behalf ofÓ.
On page six (6), Item 6, delete the words Òin the amount of $60,000Ó and change to Òthe satisfaction of the CityÓ. Add another sentence at the end of that sentence that reads ÒThe bond shall be of an amount and quality satisfactory to the City Manager and sufficient to accomplish the purpose of the bond.Ó
A similar change will be made in Item 7, delete the words Òin the amount of $22,000Ó and add after that sentence, ÒThe bond shall be of an amount and quality satisfactory to the City Manager and sufficient to accomplish the purpose of the bond.Ó
Ms. Levin noted that on Item 9 they should add language that says ÒOwner shall reimburse the City for the cost of an inspector to be present on site and monitor the truck traffic and operations.Ó In the first sentence it should say from the ÒsiteÓ, not ÒCityÓ.
Mr. Melicher asked if we are clear on when the Inspector is required to be there and when the condition terminates, during grading or just during export.
Councilmember Klein noted that he would like them there during grading and export. He noted that he would like the route the trucks take through the City videotaped. This would provide a way to check for road damage.
Ms. Levin noted that road damage should be covered by the bond and the Indemnity clause.
Councilmember Klein noted that the City Manager needs to take that into consideration when he sets the amount for the bond.
Ms. Levin noted that from the discussion they have just had, she understood that they would like to add Òduring grading and exportÓ, to Item 9.
Councilmember Millsap asked if City Engineer Melicher had decided to use a Transtech person to be the Inspector. She noted that our Staff is not available on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday so this would possibly require overtime.
City Manager Hendrickson stated that they would work this out with Transtech. We will cover whenever the trucks work.
Mr. Melicher had Item 9 changed to read Òduring export and until certification of rough grading.Ó
City Attorney Levin continued with the changes the Council made on Item 22. deleting extra words in line two Òof the lifeÓ and correct the numbers beginning with number 16 under Fire.
She noted that currently numbered Item 23 on page eight (8), change ÒtheeÓ in the first line to ÒthereÓ.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas commented that on page six (6), Item 4 in its introduction states that landscape plans will be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission after review by the CityÕs Landscape Architect. He noted that on 4.f. it says the plans shall be approved and reviewed by the City Manager or his designee. They seem to disagree.
City Attorney Levin explained that there are two issues there, one is a wordsmithing issue and one is a policy issue. The policy issue is whether you want the City Manager or the Planning Commission to sign off on this.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas asked if anyone remembers what the Planning Commission intended when they proposed this condition.
Community Development Director noted that the majority of the Planning Commission did not want to see the Landscape Plan.
Councilmember Klein seconded Councilmember CarrollÕs motion to adopt Resolution 05-07 with the corrections just reviewed and approved as follows:
AYES: Carroll, Douglas, Klein and Millsap
NOES: Borrowe
ABSENT: None
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas thanked the neighbors and the new team and Staff that worked so hard to come together so this could be approved.
City Manager Hendrickson noted that Sheriff Lieutenant Ault would like to leave early tonight and asked if any of the Council has any questions or comments for her.
Councilmember Carroll commented that he has spoken to a number of residents on East and West Roads who are concerned with speeders they have noticed. They were wondering if it is possible for a Deputy to patrol the area and talk to a few people who are speeding.
Lieutenant Ault asked what time of day they would want this.
Councilmember Carroll answered that it is probably commuting time.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas noted that between 7-8 A.M. very often speeders come up Fullerton Road to East Road and West Road.
Councilmember Millsap stated that there still is a problem at Avocado Crest and Citrus Road. She asked if there is a possibility of having a radar trailer at that point to remind people how fast they are going.
Lieutenant Ault stated that she was not sure if there was room for a radar trailer at that point.
Councilmember Millsap asked the City Manager if there was a possibility of getting guardrails there.
City Manager Hendrickson noted that it will not qualify for Prop C funds. We would have to find different funding.
NEW BUSINESS
11. PROPOSED CHANGES TO AGREEMENT WITH PUENTE HILLS LANDFILL NATIVE HABITAT PRESERVATION AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION 05-08 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE JUNE 24, 1999 AGREEMENT WITH PUENTE HILLS LANDFILL NATIVE HABITAT PRESERVATION AUTHORITY REGARDING THE USE AND MAINTENANCE OF OPEN SPACE/HABITAT PRESERVATION FACILITY IN THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS.
City Manager Hendrickson reported that in 1999, subsequent to the PHLNHPA purchase of the Diaz Ranch, the City Council entered into certain agreements with the Authority. One agreement was that the Authority would have responsibility for weed abatement on the properties. However the Council being unsure of the Authority providing timely abatement, required in that agreement that the City have the responsibility to contract for weed abatement services and that the Authority would then reimburse the City.
The usual role of the Fire Department was one of inspection and enforcement, not providing the service itself. Mr. Hendrickson explained that after discussion with both the Fire Department and the Authority, Staff feels that the Authority and the Fire Department are ready to return to the traditional role of the Fire Department inspecting and enforcing and the Authority will provide the abatement including the bidding out for it. Mr. Hendrickson stated that he does agree with that assessment.
Mr. Hendrickson noted that the Resolution does provide a way for the City if they do not perform to take it back. Mr. Hendrickson stated that he recommends that the Council approve Resolution 05-08.
Councilmember Klein stated that after he had a long talk with Bob Henderson he felt more comfortable that we would not have the problems we had before.
Councilmember Klein offered a motion to adopt Resolution 05-08. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Douglas.
Councilmember Millsap commented that on page 1 of the Resolution 05-08, Item 2 it speaks of the ÒAnnual Brush ClearanceÓ (once a year) and we know that it is actually an ÒOngoing Brush ClearanceÓ.
Councilmember Klein stated that if there is any problem, all that will have to be done is for the City Manager to call the Authority and it will get results.
City Attorney Levin noted that the Agreement notes the corrective actions that can be taken if they do not follow our City Ordinance on the brush clearance.
Councilmember Millsap noted that in the same paragraph it goes on to state that Òthe City may take corrective action or hire a contractor take corrective actionÓ and she asked that the second Òtake corrective actionÓ be removed.
Ms. Levin explained that after Òhire a contractorÓ the word ÒtoÓ should be added.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas commented that although he does not think this is a problem, maybe the Fire Chief in future documents can change the wording to make clear what is meant by the word ÒannualÓ.
City Manager Hendrickson noted that we should also check to see if the Ordinance needs amending.
Ms. Levin commented that she thinks the Ordinance says Òin your Brush Clearance ProgramÓ. The program would go on all year long. She stated that they would look at the Ordinance to make sure that it is as clear as we would like it to be.
Mayor Borrowe stated that his concern was that he was against giving anyone else control over such an important item as brush control due to the importance of fire prevention in our City. He stated that he felt we should have the responsibility and the control. Even though we have remedies, this takes time to handle if there is a problem and during this time the weeds grow.
City Manager Hendrickson stated that he appreciated the MayorÕs concern. He commented that he talked to the Fire Marshal and the Assistant Fire Marshall and that they have the areas pretty well clarified.
Councilmember Millsap commented that the Fire Marshal and the Habitat Authority people will have a walk through with the people bidding on the work so they know exactly what they are expected to do and where.
The motion to adopt Resolution 05-08 was approved as follows:
AYES: Carroll, Douglas, Klein and Millsap
NOES: Borrowe
ABSENT: None
Mayor Borrowe called an intermission for a tape change at 10:21 P.M.
Mayor Borrowe called the Council meeting back to order at 10:33 P.M.
12. RESOLUTION TO PERFORM AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THE SHERIFF AUDIT STUDY
RESOLUTION 05-09 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS REQUESTING THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO UNDERTAKE A FAIR AND NON-ARBITRARY AUDIT OF SHERIFFÕS COSTS CHARGED TO THE TAXPAYERS OF THE CONTRACT CITIES
City Manager Hendrickson reported that for several years the Auditor of the County has felt that in some areas the Cities were being undercharged for the services of the Sheriffs Department, so certain members of the Board advised the Auditor to undertake a study along with the Chief Administrative Office (CAO). He stated that the Contract Cities has reviewed the progress of that study and feels that it has extended its original meaning of what they understood was going to be the study. They are recommending to their members (we are a member) to send a Resolution to ask the Board of Supervisors to have a third party independent review the Auditors study of whether or not it is in conformance with the Gonsalves Act. Another part of the study, Phase II, that would look at possibly increasing the cost to the extent that it might double is extremely bothersome and this is why we would like a third party independent review of the Auditors study. The Sheriff is not happy with this either.
Mr. Hendrickson recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution 05-09 to have a third party review of the Audit study. He noted that our Supervisor, Mr. Knabe does not support such a large increase.
Mayor Borrowe commented that he supports this Resolution, but he also thinks this is a good time to look into an alternative police service. Just so there is another alternative if it is necessary.
Councilmember Carroll stated that he also agreed that they should look into alternatives.
Mayor Borrowe also noted that he did not like negotiating for services through a third party such as the Contract Cities. In his opinion we should negotiate in person.
Mr. Hendrickson commented that he felt that in this case we are better off negotiating with a large organization through the Contract Cities. It gives us a stronger position with 39 other cities. He noted that there is a group of City Managers that has been asked to look into alternatives that might be made.
Councilmember Carroll stated that he knew Mr. Hendrickson had made contact with Whittier but he would like to see a firm price quoted and what sort of services would be provided for that price.
City Manager Hendrickson noted that this was one of the goals we wanted accomplished this year.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to adopt Resolution 05-09. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Douglas.
Councilmember Millsap commented that the California Contract Cities are having their meeting this Wednesday March 16, 2005 at Downey. One of the items on the program is the City-County Services and it will be an update on the Countywide Services increase.
The motion to adopt Resolution 05-09 was approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Douglas, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
13. CITY MANAGERÕS REPORT
City Manager Hendrickson reported that we have just concluded the elections with an approximate 50% turnout. He noted that they would conclude the final count of the ballots and prepare the special documents for the Special City Council Meeting. The apparent winners were returning Councilmembers Carroll and Millsap and new member Brian Bergman who is now serving as Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission. He also noted that Measure A and Measure B passed. He thanked the people for keeping the Fire Suppression, Paramedic and Life Safety in a healthy condition. He noted that it was about an 80/20 percentage. About 30% were absentee ballots.
Mr. Hendrickson noted that the Lowell Joint School District measure was defeated 52 to 48 because they needed a 2/3 vote.
Mr. Hendrickson acknowledged Ruth Ann Paczkowski, from Staff, who was in charge of the details of this election. She did an exceptional job. He also thanked all of his Staff and congratulated the winners.
Mr. Hendrickson reported on the storm damage. We still do not have a date for meeting with the FEMA organization. We are trying to extend the date that is covered from January 11 to the 26th or 27th of February. A lot of the damage did not show until after January 11th due to the saturation of the ground. We have catalogued everything.
Mr. Hendrickson reported on the situation with Prop C funds. He noted that it is difficult to get MTA to agree to our using Prop C funds other than for vehicles or dial-a-ride. Other Cities are able to use Prop C funds to repair roads that they have fixed routes that buses travel on. There is a caveat that states if you have no fixed routes but can show that your dial-a-ride will use certain roads on a continual basis and can show this by documentation you may claim those roads for assistance. We have done this and we have gone back to the MTA with this information and in their opinion we have been able to demonstrate that the roads most commonly used in our dial-a-ride system are Hacienda Road, East Road and West Road. We may be able to use Prop C money for repair of those roads regardless of how they were damaged. We have about $300,000 in that fund that has been difficult to use.
14. CITY ATTORNEYÕS REPORT
City Attorney Levin commented that as a result of TuesdayÕs elections in other Cities there are some opportunities that may come up in the leadership of the Gateway Cities Council of Governments and they will play an important role in the determination of the housing needs numbers. Anyone on the Council that is interested in participating in the leadership of Gateway Cities should take advantage of these opportunities as they come up.
15. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORÕS REPORT
City Manager Hendrickson noted that they had one intern leave to go to a new job. We have another intern that had Assistant Fire Chief Hyslop as Professor for a class at Pomona.
16. CITY ENGINEERÕS REPORT
City Engineer Melicher thanked Mayor Borrowe for the effort he has put forth on the Council.
17. FIRE CHIEFÕS REPORT
Fire Chief Nielsen thanked the residents for the support they gave the Fire Department at the election by voting for Measures A and B. He also invited everyone to the Fire Academy graduation of class 36 on Saturday, March 26, 2005 at 11:00 A.M. in the Multi Purpose room. He stated that there are 13 members graduating.
There were 61 calls in February, 45 were public assists due to the rain.
Councilmember Carroll asked how many of the medical calls were paramedic calls.
Fire Chief Nielsen answered that paramedics go on all of the medical calls. We would determine when we get on scene if paramedics are actually needed.
Councilmember Carroll asked if he could break out paramedic calls in the future.
Fire Chief Nielsen answered that he could do that.
18. SHERIFFÕS DEPARTMENT REPORT
Lieutenant AultÕs comments were taken out of order earlier after Item 10.
19. COMMISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS
City Manager Hendrickson commented that Senior Management Analyst Orchanian asked him to tell the Council that they had been waiting to see if the one Contractor would honor his bid from some time ago on the Kitchen Project. It had been long enough ago that he did not have to honor his bid, and he told her that he would not honor that bid. We will probably talk with the City Attorney about what we will do next.
Mayor Borrowe asked if there were any Council comments.
Councilmember Carroll thanked the residents for their interest in the issues that affect our City and for the politeness with which they received the candidates when they came to their doors. He noted that many were concerned with the restriping of Hacienda Road. The other big concern was that we review the Planning and Building process.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas noted the large volume of applications that move through the Planning Department all of the time. He stated that he likes the Code enforcement reports and the Public Works Reports and the work being done to keep brush and mud out of the road. He stated that it looks like the City is doing very well. He noted that in his opinion a lot of misinformation has been spread around.
Councilmember Klein spoke on impervious coverage. He asked when the best time to discuss this would be. If not at the time they discuss Ordinances, then he would like to see it placed on the Agenda. He commented that he thought the Planning Commission was wrong to pass a project that went 4000 feet over their 20,000 limit of impervious coverage. He thought they were being far too lenient. Mr. Klein stated that in his opinion the reason we have not had the big disasters that Anaheim Hills had, was because of our Ordinances and following them. If we arenÕt going to follow them we need to change them.
Councilmember Carroll noted that he thought the time to review this is at the time we review the Ordinances.
City Manager Hendrickson commented that they are very close to completing that process and we should be sending those specific sections to the Planning Commission in the next 30 to 60 days. He stated that he thought it should go to the Planning Commission to review and let them give their perspective and then this Council can take it up with that perspective in mind. This would follow our usual process.
Mayor Pro Tem Douglas stated that in his opinion the reason we havenÕt fallen down the hills was because we havenÕt had mass grading. Anaheim Hills would have been more stable if they had more impervious coverage. Mr. Douglas noted that he felt Mr. Klein was disrespectful to say that the Commission and Engineering is wrong in their evaluation.
Councilmember Klein stated that he did not think it was disrespectful, but was bringing it out for discussion. He stated that if any of us thinks an Ordinance does not fit the Community it should be discussed and possibly changed.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Borrowe adjourned the City Council meeting at 11:08 P.M. to the Special City Council Meeting on March 24, 2005.
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
CITY CLERK, JOHN F. HENDRICKSON