City of Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Agenda
for January 18, 2000

The following City Council agenda includes text only version of the staff reports associated with the business matters to be brought before for the City Council at its Regular Meeting of this date. Changes to the staff reports may be necessary prior to the actual City Council meeting. The City Council may elect to delete or continue business matters at the beginning of the City Council Meeting. Additionally, staff reports attachments, including but not limited to, pictures, plans, drawings, spreadsheet presentations, financial statements and correspondences are not included. The attachments are available for review with the official agenda package at the Reception area at City Hall as well as the Palos Verdes public libraries.

...end of disclaimer...

** CLICK HERE FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA

** CLICK HERE FOR RDA AGENDA

1. Disorderly, contemptuous or insolent behavior toward the Council or any member thereof, tending to interrupt the due and orderly course of said meeting.

2. A breach of the peace, boisterous conduct or violent disturbance, tending to interrupt the due and orderly course of said meeting.

3. Disobedience of any lawful order of the Mayor which shall include an order to be seated or to refrain from addressing the Council.

4. Any other unlawful interference with the due and orderly course of the meeting.

Recommendation: Adopt a motion to waive reading in full of all ordinances presented at this meeting with consent of the waiver of reading deemed to be given by all councilmembers after the reading of the title.

Recommendation: Approve the minutes.

Recommendation: ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 355, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 46, A CITY-INITIATED PROPOSAL TO AMEND CHAPTER 17.02 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DSITRICTS), CHAPTER 17.48 (DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS), AND CHAPTER 17.96 (DEFINITIONS) OF TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE.

Recommendation: Authorize staff to prepare a contract for services with Peri Muretta.

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2000- , A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ESTABLISHING CITY COUNCIL OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES AND RESCINDING RESOLUTIONS NOS. 93-20, 93-68 AND 94-9

Recommendation: (1) Accept the work as complete. (2) Authorize the City Clerk to record a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder; and if no claims are filed 35 days after recordation, and upon the Contractor posting an acceptable warranty bond, notify the surety company to exonerate the Payment and Performance bonds. (3) Authorize the Director of Public Works to instruct Union Bank of California to release the final retention payment to Sequel Contracts, Inc. 35 days after recordation of the Notice of Completion by the County Recorder contingent upon no clams being filed on the project and the contractor posting an acceptable warranty bond.

Recommendation: Receive and file the November 1999 Treasurer’s Report for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOL. NO. 2000-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AND SPECIFYING FUNDS FROM WHICH THE SAME ARE TO BE PAID.

Recommendation: Approve the layout and expenditures associated with establishing a monument to Dr. Perry Ehlig on Portuguese Point as a permanent symbol of his dedicated service to the City.

Recommendation: That the City Council (1) Direct staff to initiate code amendment No. 47 revising Section 17.76.050.D.3 (Signs) of Title 17 of the Municipal Code as requested by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Association of Realtors; (2) Direct staff to initiate a Code Amendment revising Section 17.86.050.A (Enforcement) of Title 17 of the Municipal Code; and, (3) Waive all filing fees associated with the code amendment requested by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Association of Realtors.

RECESS

PUBLIC COMMENTS: (at approximately 8:40 P.M.)
(This section of the agenda is for audience comments on items NOT on the agenda.)

Recommendation: Decide whether to hold the affected City Council meetings on the day following the specified elections and/or holiday or schedule the meetings for another date.

Recommendation: Set two dates in the month of February to interview the committee and commission applicants.

Recommendation: Approve correspondence to FAA Administrator objecting the dissolution of the Southern California Task Force.

14.Use of Electronic Mail by the City Council and Posting Staff Reports to the City’s Internet Web Site. (McLean)

Recommendation: Determine whether to post individual City Council e-mail addresses to the City’s web site using the recommended alternatives.

........return to top of page........

On January 4, 2000 the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 355 to approve Code Amendment No. 46 to amend the maximum structure size provisions for all single-family residential lots created prior to and after cityhood, to modify the open space criteria, and to revise the provisions prohibiting roof decks in residential zoned neighborhoods. The City Council conducted the first reading of Ordinance No. 355 at the January 4^th meeting and approved the amended language.

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 355 to enact Code Amendment No. 46.

Respectfully submitted: Joel Rojas, aicp, Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement
Reviewed:Les Evans, City Manager

........return to top of page........

Recommendation: Authorize staff to prepare a contract for services with Peri Muretta.

MEMORANDUM

On August 28, 1999, the City Council and Planning Commission held a joint workshop to review the concept of a proposed Senior Affordable Housing project presented by a non-profit affordable housing Developer, to be constructed at the northwest corner of Crestridge Road and Crenshaw Boulevard. The Developer requested that the City contribute up to $1.9 million towards the development of the project. At the workshop, the City Council/Planning Commission gave some direction to the Developer, and indicated that the project has some merit.

On September 22, 1999, the Developer submitted information to Staff requesting that Staff make a determination as to the type of environmental documentation required to process the proposed project. On October 21, 1999, Staff sent a response letter to the Developer noting that at this time it appears that either an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Supplemental EIR to a 1989 Final EIR would be required for this project. Staff also informed the Developer that in addition to the various studies needed to prepare the environmental document, complete applications for a Conditional Use Permit and a Grading Permit were also required.

On January 6, 2000, the Developer submitted project applications for the Conditional Use Permit and Grading Permit, and submitted a Geologic/Soils Report and Traffic Study. Staff is currently reviewing these applications and documents for completeness. The proposed project consists of a two-story, 73-unit mix of one and two bedroom units (65 one-bedroom units and 8 two-bedroom units). To accommodate the residents and the Peninsula Seniors, the project also includes a 5,000 square foot Senior Center. Additionally, the proposed project includes 110 parking spaces (75 spaces in a subterranean garage and 35 spaces located at grade level), and involves 35,400 cubic yards of grading.

With project applications submitted, it is now time to begin the preparation of the environmental documentation for this project. In 1998, Peri Muretta prepared a Supplement to the original 1989 Final EIR for a proposed Marriott Lifecare Facility. This document was approved by the City Council. Since it is anticipated that the environmental document prepared for the proposed Senior Affordable Housing Project will be similar to the Supplement that Peri Muretta had prepared in 1998, and since Peri Muretta is familiar with the site and issues pertaining to the development of the site, Staff felt that Peri Muretta would be the best choice to prepare the current environmental documentation.

Peri Muretta has submitted the attached proposal for preparation of the environmental documentation for the project. The proposal’s total fee estimate is $26,050.00. The developer’s project planner, Rob Katherman, has reviewed the proposal and has notified Staff that it is an acceptable proposal.

Once the Council has authorized Staff to prepare a contract, the contract will be prepared and then signed by the Mayor. The consultant will then begin preparation of the Initial Study for the proposed project.

For the reasons noted in this report, Staff recommends that the City Council authorize Staff to prepare a contract for services with Peri Muretta.

There are no Fiscal Impacts to the City as a result of this decision as the project Developer will be required to post a Trust Deposit to cover the costs of the consultant.

........return to top of page........

MEMORANDUM

Late last year, staff reviewed the City Council Rules of Procedure and identified several sections that should be updated to reflect current practices or provide clarification of existing language. On January 4, 2000, the City Council reviewed the adopted Rules and provided staff with direction on several additional revisions, which are listed below:

1. Section 5.1, Order of Business

• Add "Announcements/Recycling Drawing" to subparagraph 2 (Proclamations)
• Place "Audience Comments" after the first recess at approximately 8:40 PM

2. Section 8.3, Public Testimony

• Change "Public Comment" to "Public Testimony"
• Add a provision that the Mayor may grant more time to a representative speaking for a group, but that this in no way should discourage anyone from addressing the City Council individually.
• Add the word "generally" to subparagraph 5 regarding the questioning of speakers by the Council.

........return to top of page........

MEMORANDUM

Each year the City implements an overlay and slurry seal program. On August 17, 1999, Council awarded a contract to Sequel Contractors Inc. for the construction of the 1999-00 program. Since that time, all work has been satisfactorily completed.

Final project cost is as follows:

Contract change orders included additional costs for rescheduling work and installing three raised medians in Miraleste Plaza as well as deductions for underruns in estimated contract quantities, and resulted in a net decrease in the contract price.

Sequel Contractors Inc. has successfully completed all work in accordance with the plans and specifications. Therefore, the work should be accepted as complete and a Notice of Completion filed.

The recommended action will have no fiscal impact. The overlay portion of the project, which is a Capital Improvement Project, was funded with General Funds. The slurry seal portion of the project, which is a Street Maintenance Project, was funded with a combination of Gas Tax and Proposition C funds.

........return to top of page........

MEMORANDUM

Government Code Section 53646 requires the City Treasurer to submit an investment report to the City Council on at least a quarterly basis. The City has elected to submit a treasurer’s report to the Council for review each month. This report summarizes the cash activity associated with all funds of the City. A separate treasurer’s report is prepared for both the Redevelopment Agency and Improvement Authority and is presented separately before their respective governing bodies. The attached treasurer's report covers the cash activities of the City for the month of November 1999.

The City’s overall cash balance increased by nearly $1,000,000 during the month, ending with a balance of $19,918,145 at November 30, 1999. This large increase was spread over many individual funds of the City. An analysis of the funds experiencing material fluctuations follows:

........return to top of page........

........return to top of page........

MEMORANDUM

Approve a plan to honor the memory of Dr. Perry Ehlig with a monument at Portuguese Point, and by renaming the GPS point at Portuguese Point.

Dr. Perry L. Ehlig passed away on December 26, 1999. His passing causes us all to stop and reflect on his energy, devotion, enthusiasm and expertise on geologic matters. These qualities, which he gave freely to the City Rancho Palos Verdes over the many years, will be missed and difficult to replace. It was in this spirit that the City Council requested staff to propose a fitting memorial.

Staff recommends that a permanent monument be erected at Portuguese Point. The monument will consist of a rock with a plaque discussing how grateful the community is for all his efforts. The monument is proposed to be at a peaceful location among a grove of eucalyptus trees. An exhibit of the proposed monument is attached.

As an extra reminder to us all, staff will now be calling the GPS point at Portuguese Point ‘Perry’. It is fitting that this point be renamed in his honor since this point is the one on which all other GPS measurements are based.

It is estimated that the total cost for the memorial is $700. While there is certainly justification for the City paying these expenses staff has already been approached by several members of the community expressing a strong desire to contribute toward the memorial. Accordingly staff is requesting authorization for up to $700, but will attempt to fund the memorial through private contributions.

........return to top of page........

MEMORANDUM

On November 30, 1999 a member of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Association of Realtors approached Staff to discuss concerns with the current language of the Municipal Code as it pertains to the placement of real estate signs in the public right-of-way. At that time, the representative from the Realtor’s Association requested that the City consider amending the Municipal Code provisions that restrict the placement of real estate signs, so that the City’s provisions are more consistent with the requirements of adjacent jurisdictions. Staff informed the representative that pursuant to the City’s Development Code, in order to process a code amendment, an initiation application must be filed with the City for review and approval by the City Council (please see attached code section 17.68.030). Staff further explained that if the City Council approves the initiation request, then the entire code amendment process, which involves public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council, could proceed. On December 1, 1999 an application to initiate Code Amendment No. 47 was submitted by the Realtors Association to the Planning Department along with the required $330 filing fee. The applicant also submitted a request to waive the initiation fee and all other filing fees associated with the subject code amendment.

As a separate issue, Staff is also recommending initiation of a Code Amendment to address a situation that arose last year involving a City code enforcement matter. Specifically, Staff is recommending that the City Council initiate the Code Amendment process to amend existing Development Code section 17.86.050 to add View Restoration and View Preservation applications to the category of applications that cannot be processed if there is a verified code violation on the applicant’s property. The present code language is limited to development applications.

Staff is seeking Council direction on both of these Code Amendment Initiation Requests this evening.

DISCUSSION

Code Amendment Initiation Request – Real Estate signs in the public

right-of-way

On December 1, 1999 an application for Code Amendment No. 47 was submitted to the Planning Department on behalf of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Association of Realtors, requesting to modify Section 17.76.050.D.3 of the Development Code as it pertains to the type of real estate signs permitted in the public right-of-way and their permitted hours of display. According to the applicant, the current language of the Development Code does not reflect the current working patterns of realtors within the Palos Verdes Peninsula.

Pursuant to Section 17.76.050.D.3 of the Development Code, lead-in or directional signs, such as "Open House", "For Sale", "For Rent", or "For Lease" signs may only be placed in the public right-of-way between the hours of 1 p.m. and 6 p.m. Saturdays and Sundays. However, according to the applicant, the permitted hours of use of such signs are in conflict with many realtors who conduct property showings as early as noon and conclude later than 6 p.m. Therefore, the Realtors Association is requesting that the language be amended to delete this time restriction so as not to conflict with their current working patterns throughout the Peninsula.

In addition to the above modifications, the applicant is also requesting that Section 17.76.050.D.3.d of the Development Code be amended so that lead-in signs or directional signs are not required to maintain the color combination of brown and gold. According to the applicant, the reason for this change is that no other City within the Peninsula requires this color combination any longer and the color requirement limits certain real estate companies from using their standard signs which routinely incorporate the companies’ own colors and logos.

Staff believes the request by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Association of Realtors warrants consideration through the public hearing process, and therefore seeks Council direction to proceed with the processing of the requested amendments. If the Council approves initiation of this specific code amendment, the Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing to consider the actual code amendment language and the Planning Commission’s recommendations will then be forwarded to the Council for its review and eventual adoption.

The applicant requests that the City Council waive all filing fees pertaining to the subject code amendment. Although the real estate sign code amendment is not a City initiated application, the applicant believes that the purpose of the proposed code amendment is to update the Municipal Code to accurately reflect the current condition of the real estate market, which will indirectly benefit the community at large. Furthermore, the Palos Verdes Peninsula Association of Realtors has also been working with adjacent jurisdictions to create a level of conformity between neighboring municipalities as it pertains to real estate signs and the hours of showings. Since they have been involved with similar code amendments with other jurisdictions, the applicant has indicated that other jurisdictions within the Peninsula have waived the filing fees and thus requests that the City of Rancho Palos Verdes also waive the fees.

Pursuant to the Development Code Section 17.78.010 (B), the City Council may grant a fee waiver if it is found that:

1. The applicant or the beneficiary of the use or activity proposed by the applicant is a non-profit corporation registered with the State of California; or,

2. The use or activity proposed or the activities of the beneficiaries of the use or activity proposed are charitable, educational or otherwise provide a substantial benefit to the public; or,

3. The applicant had demonstrated a financial hardship as determined by the city Council on a case-by-case basis.

Based on the above finding number 2, Staff believes that the waiver of all filing fees associated with the subject code amendment is appropriate in that the proposed amendment will benefit the general public by updating the Municipal Code to reflect the current working patterns of the real estate market.

Pursuant to Section 17.86.050.A of the Development Code, the City shall not accept or process an application to allow any improvement or development on a lot or parcel on which the Director has verified that a violation of the City’s Municipal Code exists. However, an application may be processed if the violation is removed or legalized by the property owner. Last year Staff became involved in a situation where a property owner with a confirmed code enforcement violation sought to submit a View Restoration Application for processing. Based on the strict interpretation of the above provision, the City Attorney determined that the property owner could file a View Restoration application with the City without first having to correct the violation on their lot or parcel since View Restoration Permit or View Preservation Applications are not considered "improvement or development" applications. Therefore, given this interpretation, Staff believes that in order to maintain consistency with the Enforcement Section of the Municipal Code as it pertains to development activity and other related improvements, this Section of the Municipal Code should be modified to prohibit violators of the Municipal Code from filing any application with the City, including a View Restoration and a View Preservation application. Staff believes that this was the intent of the Section and thus the language should be amended to specifically include View Restoration and View Preservation applications.

Staff seeks the Council’s direction in considering initiating a code amendment to make the above modification to Section 17.86.050.A of Title 17 of the City’s Municipal Code. If the Council approves initiation of this specific code amendment, the Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing to consider the actual code amendment language and the Planning Commission’s recommendations will then be forwarded to the Council for its review and eventual adoption.

Based on the foregoing analysis and discussion, Staff recommends that the City Council initiate the proposed Code Amendments to Section 17.76.050.D.3 (Signs) and Section 17.86.050.A (Enforcement) of Title 17 of the City Municipal Code to consider modifying the regulations for the placement of real estate lead in and/or directional signs in the public right-of-way and adding View Restoration and View Preservation Applications to the category of applications that cannot be processed if there is a verified code violation on the applicant’s property. Furthermore, Staff recommends that the City Council waive all filing fees associated with the Association of Realtors proposed code amendment request.

Staff believes that the proposed code amendments will not impact the City’s General fund. However, if the City Council grants the applicant’s request to waive the filing fees associated with the proposed code amendment, the City’s processing costs for this project will be borne by the General Fund. Such costs include a $330 initiation filing fee (already submitted) and the establishment of a trust deposit account to pay for the costs incurred by Staff for processing the code amendment application. These costs typically include all required notices, the preparation of staff reports for the Planning Commission and the City Council, and Staff’s attendance at the required public hearings (approximately $1,000). However, if the Council opts to initiate both code amendment requests, Staff intends to process both amendments under one application, thus saving Staff time by eliminating the need for separate reports, notices and ordinances.

The following alternatives are available for the City Council’s consideration in addition to Staff’s recommendation:

• Direct Staff to only modify the Signs Section; or,
• Direct Staff to only modify the Enforcement Section; or
• Direct Staff that no modifications be made to Title 17 of the Municipal Code; or,
• Identify any issues of concern with the proposed amendments and direct Staff to further investigate the Council’s concerns; or,
• Direct Staff to proceed with the modifications without waiver of the required filing fees.

........return to top of page........

MEMORANDUM

Decide whether to hold the affected City Council meetings on the day following the specified elections and/or holiday or schedule them for another date.

The two major elections being held this year (Presidential Primary – March 7^th and the Presidential – November 7^th) fall on the first Tuesday of the month; additionally, the July 4^th holiday falls on the first Tuesday of July. Because certain members of Council have a conflict on the Wednesday following these events, Council will have to consider whether to deviate from the established policy of holding Council meetings on the Wednesday following such events. (See Chapter 2.04, Section 2.04.020 of the Municipal Code attached as Exhibit "A".) If Council adheres to that policy, the schedule for City Council meetings will be as follows:

First Council Meeting in March - Wednesday, March 8

First Council Meeting in July - Wednesday, July 5

First Council Meeting in November - Wednesday, Nov. 8

Certain members of Council have indicated a conflict with holding meetings on the Wednesday following the March 7^th and November 7^th elections, and the Wednesday following the July 4^th holiday. Council will have to decide whether to change the dates of those meetings or hold the meetings will less than five members present.

........return to top of page........

MEMORANDUM

The recruitment process for commission and committee members began on November 1^st. Per Council Policy, press releases were issued to the Peninsula News, the Daily Breeze and the L. A. Times. Notice was also published on the City’s website and on the Reader Board. Official postings were placed at Hesse and Ryan Parks and at the Ladera Linda Community Center. All incumbent appointees were notified that if they wished to be considered for re-appointment they should submit an application. A second notice was sent to them on December 2^nd.

As of this writing, the City Clerk’s Office is in receipt of four applications. Friday, December 17^th has been set as the closing date for submittal of applications. A packet containing these applications will be distributed to the Council the week of December 20^th.

Council needs to set two dates to interview all of the candidates for the City’s various committees and commissions.

Respectfully submitted: Jo Purcell, City Clerk, Director Admin. Services
Reviewed: Les Evans, City Manager

........return to top of page........

MEMORANDUM

The Southern California Task Force on Aircraft Noise was established in late 1997 to address excessive aircraft noise generated from LAX by reviewing current air traffic control operations/procedures and then implementing appropriate changes. The City and its residents have diligently and cooperatively worked with Task Force members (by collecting data, participating in a noise study, etc.) in hopes of a solution to reduce the excessive turbo prop aircraft noise over the City. To date, the Task Force efforts have resulted in: approximately 50% of the south and east bound turbo prop departures from LAX being directed offshore; completion of a Noise Study Analysis; completion of an Airspace Modeling Analysis; agreements with pilots and air traffic controllers to utilize a maximum rate of climb when possible; moving turbo jet aircraft routes further off shore; development and implementation of an off shore turbo prop demonstration project and refinement of departure procedures to increase the average altitude for turbo prop aircraft flying over the Peninsula by 1,000 feet.

The proposed solution of reducing turbo prop noise is to direct routes 3 miles off shore.

This proposed project requires an environmental review process which includes issues such as, the possibility of an increased noise level for communities not now affected; the impact of proposed new routes on ground operations at LAX, the possible impact upon existing routes causing possible delays, and the added complexity to the air traffic system.

The FAA Regional Administrator announced the dissolution of the Southern California Task Force in a correspondence dated December 21, 1999. This recent decision by the FAA has raised the question of the FAA’s intentions of trying to develop and implement a workable solution for the City’s aircraft noise problem. As the Council may recall, for the past several months the City has been waiting for the implementation of a new Demonstration Project of directing turbo prop routes 3 miles off shore. The project has been placed on hold until further analysis (a.k.a. Mitre Study) is completed to analyze the potential impacts of the 3-mile off shore route upon LAX ground operations and existing commercial routes. The implementation of this demonstration project hinges upon the results of the Mitre Study. If the Mitre Study states the demonstration project is not viable due to economic factors and significant time delays, it is uncertain whether any other measures or attempts will be taken up by the FAA or the new working group to resolve the City’s aircraft noise problem.

Attached is the draft correspondence addressed to Jane Garvey, FAA Administrator, for Council’s consideration to be signed by the Mayor objecting the dissolution of the Task Force.

On behalf of the City Council and residents of Rancho Palos Verdes, California, I would like to express our disappointment over the decision to disband the Southern California Task Force on Aircraft Noise prior to the implementation of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Demonstration Project.

As you may recall, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes has been burdened with excessive noise from climbing aircraft departing LAX during the past few years. Since the creation of the Task Force in 1997, the City and its residents have worked with the Task Force to reach consensus on directing turbo prop routes from LAX 3-miles off shore of the Palos Verdes Peninsula. The Demonstration Project has been delayed for the past several months and is now on-hold until the completion of the Mitre Study, which was requested by the Air Transport and Regional Airlines Associations of the Task Force.

Terminating the Task Force at this time and replacing it with bi-annual public forums deprives us of a significant voice in the process. If the Mitre Study finds that the Demonstration Project is not viable, what other avenues will the FAA take? The dissolution of the Task Force leaves no assurance that alternative measures will be considered or that our issue of excessive aircraft noise will remain a priority with the FAA.

Please consider re-activating the Task Force for an extended period, until a viable solution for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes is authorized for implementation.

........return to top of page........

Recommendation: Determine whether to post individual City Council e-mail addresses to the City’s web site using the recommended alternatives.

MEMORANDUM

During the City Council meeting on January 4^th, the City Council discussed a proposal that the City’s Internet web site contain an electronic mail (email) link to each City Council member. Doing so will enable the public to email each City Council member directly, even from the City’s web site. During its discussion, the City Council directed staff to offer some ideas about the use of email at its next meeting.

The City Council also discussed the possibility of posting staff reports to the City’s Internet web site prior to each meeting. At the conclusion of its discussion, the City Council directed staff to investigate the technical issues and costs associated with posting staff reports to the City’s web site prior to City council meetings.

Staff and Palos Verdes on the Net (PVNET) have conducted a "pilot test" of the entire process leading to posting staff reports associated with this meeting of January 18^th to the City’s web site. If the pilot test is successful, the staff reports associated with the agenda for this City Council meeting (including this staff report) will be posted to the City’s web site prior to this January 18^th meeting. Staff will report its findings about the pilot test, present the issues associated with posting staff reports to the web site and offer a recommendation to the City Council at the February 1^st City Council meeting.

The Main Page of the City’s web site currently has an icon that enables a user to email the City Council. If a user clicks the email icon, the web browser will open an email page from which the user can compose and send an email message. The City Manager, rather than any of the City Council members currently receive these email messages. The City Manager then copies and distributes the email messages to the City Council members with other letter correspondences received.

The City could provide each City Council member with an individual email account (and email address). The individual email address could be posted to the City’s web site. If the City Council member wishes, every email message could be automatically forwarded to their designated personal computer. If email forwarding is used, the email messages will never be saved on the City’s email system.

If the City Council member chooses, email messages could be opened and read by the Council member at a designated workstation at City Hall. If a City Council member elects this choice: (1) the email message would be temporarily saved on the City’s email server until it is read; and (2) the City’s network administrator could view unread or saved email messages (only) at the designated City Hall workstation while performing routine network maintenance.

This alternative offers the City Council member the choice to post either their personal email address or the "@rpv.com" address (as described in Alternative #1 above) to the City’s web site. With this alternative, a Council member may elect to use (or continue to use) their personal email address for email communication with the public. Email messages sent to a Council member’s personal email address would not pass through the email system at City Hall.

The email system at City Hall and the email software residing on their designated personal computer could be configured so that every email message sent to the "citycouncil@rpv.com" address would be forwarded to their designated personal computer. Every email message sent to the citycouncil@rpv.com address would be available to be read by every City Council member. If the City Council elects this alternative, it should consider whether it desires the City Manager to continue to be copied with every email message sent to this address. As described previously in this report, email messages currently sent to citycouncil@rpv.com are received by the City Manager, printed and distributed with other correspondences to the City Council.

The City Council should determine whether to post its individual email addresses to the City’s web site. If it chooses to do so, the City Council should determine which alternative described above it prefers to use (or any other functional variation thereof).

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA JANUARY 18, 2000 FRED HESSE COMMUNITY PARK, 29301 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD

CALL TO ORDER

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR:

A. Minutes of December 21, 1999 and January 4, 2000. (Purcell)

B. November 1999 Treasurer’s Report. (Burton)

REGULAR BUSINESS:

C. Abalone Cove Neighborhood Improvements. (Allison)

D. Senior Affordable Housing Proposal – Exclusive Negotiating Agreement. (Pfost)

PUBLIC TESTIMONY

This section of the agenda is for audience comments on items NOT on the agenda: each speaker is limited to three minutes

ADJOURNMENT

Adjourn to a time and place certain only if you wish to meet prior to the next regular Redevelopment Agency meeting.

B. November 1999 Treasurer’s Report. (Burton)

Receive and file the November 1999 Treasurer's Report for the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency.

Government Code Section 53646 requires all government entities to submit an investment report to the governing board on at least a quarterly basis. The City has elected to present these reports before the respective boards monthly. Staff prepares a separate Treasurer’s report for each of the three component units (City, Redevelopment Agency, Improvement Authority) of the City. This report summarizes all cash and investment activities for the month, as well as documenting each fund’s cash balances at month end. The attached treasurer's report covers the month of November 1999 for the Redevelopment Agency.

The combined ending cash balances of Redevelopment Agency funds held steady during November, decreasing by only $1,600, ending with an overall balance of $7,553,834. The Agency experienced very little cash activity during the month, with current month expenditures limited to payments made for auditing services and a consultant’s review of the housing element

Recommendation: (1) Increase the authorized expenditure limit in a professional services contract with SA Associates by $25,000 for additional required services for the design of the sewer improvements. (2) Increase the authorized expenditure limit in a professional services contract with Chicago Title Insurance Company by $22,000 for additional required services related to the acquisition of easements. (3) Increase the authorized expenditure limit for a professional services contract with Charles Abbott Associates, Inc., by $15,000 for additional required services for required revisions to the storm drain plans. (4) Increase the authorized expenditure limit for a professional services contract with Consoer Townsend Environdyne, Inc., by $15,000 for additional required services for required revisions to the sewer improvement plans.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Increase the authorized expenditure limit for a professional services contract with SA Associates Inc., by $25,000 for additional required services for the design of the sewer improvements.
2. Increase the authorized expenditure limit for a professional services contract with Chicago Title Insurance Company Inc., by $22,000 for additional required services related to the acquisition of right of way.
3. Increase the authorized expenditure limit for a professional services contact with Charles Abbott Associates Inc., by $15,000 for additional required services for revisions to the storm drain plans.
4. Increase the authorized expenditure limit for a professional services contract with Consoer Townsend Environdyne Inc., by $15,000 for additional required services for revisions to the sewer improvement plans.

SA Associates is providing services to design the sewer laterals on private properties. This firm is also assisting staff respond to questions from property owners. This increase brings the total authorization for this firm since FY 1998 – 99 to $55,000.

Chicago Title Insurance Company Inc.

Additional services from Chicago Title Insurance Company will be required to complete the right of way acquisition. This increase brings the total authorization for this firm since FY 1998 –99 to $88,000.

Charles Abbott Associates Inc.

Charles Abbott Associates is the design engineer for the storm drain project. Revisions to the plans and specifications are necessary to advertise the project as currently proposed. In addition it is important that a representative from this firm attend certain pre-construction meetings. This brings the total authorization for this firm since FY 1998 –99 to $185,000.

Consoer Townsend Environdyne Inc.

Consoer Townsend Environdyne is the design engineer for the sewer project. As the project plans are finalized and final discussions occur with property owners staff is finding it necessary to make minor revisions to the plans. In addition it is important that a representative from this firm attend certain pre-construction meetings. This brings the total authorization for this firm since FY 1998 –99 to $203,000.

Approve the attached Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency and Indian Ridge Crest Gardens, LP.

On August 28, 1999, the City Council and Planning Commission held a joint workshop to review the concept of a proposed Senior Affordable Housing project presented by a non-profit affordable housing Developer. The Developer requested that the City contribute up to $1.9 million towards the development of the project. At the workshop, the City Council/Planning Commission gave some direction to the Developer, and indicated that the project has some merit.

On September 22, 1999, the Developer submitted information to Staff requesting that Staff make a determination as to the type of environmental documentation required to process the proposed project. On October 21, 1999, Staff sent a response letter to the Developer noting that at this time it appears that either an Environmental Impact Report or a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report would be required for this project. Staff also informed the Developer that in addition to the various studies needed to prepare the environmental document, complete applications for a Conditional Use Permit and a Grading Permit were also required. On January 6, 2000, the Developer submitted project applications for the Conditional Use Permit and Grading Permit, and submitted a Geologic/Soils Report and Traffic Study. Staff is currently reviewing these applications and documents for completeness.

At the October 19, 1999 City Council meeting, Staff presented a report to the City Council noting that the City’s assigned "Total Construction Need", from SCAG’s Draft Regional Housing Needs Assessment, was most likely going to be reduced. Subsequently, at the October 19^th meeting, Staff sought direction from the Council as to whether or not the Council thought that the project’s proposed number of housing units should also be reduced. In response, then Mayor Hollingsworth appointed then Mayor pro-tem Byrd and Councilwoman Ferraro to a sub-committee that was to meet with Staff, the Developer, the Peninsula Seniors group, and the other three Peninsula cities to address design issues.

Based upon the work of the sub-committee, the preliminary project design has changed slightly from the initial August 28^th meeting. The project now consists of a two-story, 73-unit mix of one and two bedroom units (65 one bedroom units and 8 two bedroom units) instead of the previously presented 84 units (all one bedroom units). To accommodate the residents and the Peninsula Seniors, the project also includes a 5,000 square foot Senior Center. Additionally, the proposed project now includes 110 parking spaces (75 spaces in a subterranean garage and 35 spaces located at grade level) instead of the previous 94 parking spaces (60 spaces in a subterranean garage and 34 spaces located at grade level). The proposal involves 35,400 cubic yards of grading, would still have the apartments leased at a Very Low to Low rental rate (approximately $400 to $600 per month), and is still a joint effort that includes the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency, the non-profit Developer, the County and other financial contributors. The combined amount of investment from the City and the Redevelopment Agency is still proposed to be approximately $1.9 million. Other funds would be obtained from the County and other sources.

As shown in the attached letter dated January 7, 2000, the Peninsula Seniors support the proposed project as described above. With the favorable response by the Peninsula Seniors and the general support of the City, in order to proceed with the project, the Developer now needs a more formal agreement with the Redevelopment Agency. Subsequently, at the December 21, 1999 meeting of the Agency, Staff presented an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) for the Agency’s review and approval.

The ENA guarantees both parties that during the next 9 months, both parties will negotiate the terms of a Development and Disposition Agreement (DDA) which will establish the project description, the cost, the source of financing, schedules, warrantees, etc. During the 9-month period, the Redevelopment Agency would not be able to negotiate with any other developers regarding this site. Additionally, the 9-month period will provide a chance for our consultant to review the Developer’s pro forma, and the time to address other issues which may arise. The ENA will also provide for one 3-month extension that may be granted at the discretion of the Agency’s Executive Director.

At the December 21^st meeting, the Agency continued review of the ENA to the January 18^th Meeting so as to allow Staff time to negotiate with the Developer on proposed revisions to the ENA that were requested by the Developer. Since the December 21^st meeting, Staff has met with the Developer and negotiated revisions to the ENA. Attached is the revised ENA that both the Developer and Staff support.

Processing a project, which involves the use of various public funds, is quite complicated. Staff foresees the process as such:

1. After the ENA is approved, the Developer will assign the right to purchase the subject property to the Agency

2. After completion of the Appraisal, the Agency will purchase the property. An agreement will be made with the Developer that will grant the Developer an option to purchase the property back within 18 months if the project fails to happen.

3. Once the City has approved the entitlements (Conditional Use Permit, Grading Permit and Environmental Document), the Development and Disposition Agreement (DDA) can be approved. In addition to the refinement of the project’s details, including costs, schedules, sources of financing, etc., the DDA will give the rights to purchase the property back to the Developer. Of course, there would be various stipulations within the DDA that would secure the Agency’s interests.

4. Tax Credits. The reason why the Developer needs the rights to the property back (see 3 above) is because of the Tax Credit Allocation process. It is a statewide competitive process between various non-profit and public agencies. If the Developer has secured the entitlements, DDA and the property, the chances of obtaining the Tax Credit Allocation are very high. Without receiving the Tax Credit Allocation, the project will fail.

Timing of this project is also very complicated and may be quite lengthy. There are two periods within each year for the State to accept applications for Tax Credits. The Developer cannot apply for the Tax Credits until the entitlements and DDA have been secured. Since the project will most likely include the preparation of at least a Supplement to the existing Environmental Impact Report for the 1991 Marriott project, Staff would expect the processing of this document and the other entitlements to take at least 9 months. Since the State has not indicated when the dates of the application periods for the Tax Credits will be, at this time Staff is not even sure that the Developer will be able to obtain Tax Credits within the year 2000.

For the reasons noted above, Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached ENA between the Redevelopment Agency and Indian Ridge Crest Gardens, LP.

Staff estimates that the City and Redevelopment Agency, combined, will be able to contribute approximately $1.9 million towards the development of this project. These funds will come from:

A. Redevelopment Agency funds from the Agency’s Housing Set-Aside Program. This Program has a current balance of approximately $943,000. This balance has been accumulating from annual increments since adoption of the Redevelopment Plan. Staff estimates that during year 2000-2001, the annual increment that will be contributed to this Program will be approximately $94,000; and

B. The City’s In-lieu Affordable Housing Fund Program. This Program has a current balance of approximately $275,000 (contributed by the Seabreeze residential development project). Within the next year, Staff estimates that the City will receive an additional $600,000 from the In-lieu Affordable Housing Fee obligations of the Subregion One residential development project, plus interest on its existing fund balance.

Exclusive Negotiating Agreement – Strikeout Copy and Final Copy

Letter from Peninsula Seniors dated January 7, 2000