Agenda 09/04/2001 RPV, City, Council, Meeting, 2001, Agenda RPV City Council Meeting Agenda for 09/04/2001 Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Agenda September 4, 2001
September 4 , 2001

DISCLAIMER

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.

...end of disclaimer...

** CLICK HERE FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
** CLICK HERE FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA
**
RANCHO PALOS VERDES IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY COMMISSION



BEGINNING OF CITY COUNCIL AGENDA

This agenda has been prepared to provide for the orderly progression of City business. Detailed staff reports on specific items are posted in the hallway for public viewing. The City Council wants to hear your comments, however, to run the meeting efficiently, please observe the following rules when you participate in the meeting.

Please try to submit your REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL form to the City Clerk prior to the start of the meeting. You will be called at the appropriate time to make your remarks.

For the sake of efficiency, the City Council agenda is divided into several sections:

Consent Calendar: This section consists of routine items which, unless a request has been received from the public, council or staff to remove a particular item for discussion, are enacted by one motion of the City Council. If you wish to speak to any Consent Calendar item(s) you will be limited to three minutes.

Public Hearings: This section is devoted to noticed hearings. Although the normal time limit is three minutes for each speaker, the Mayor may grant additional time to a representative speaking for an entire group; however, this should not discourage anyone from addressing the City Council individually.

Regular Business: This section contains items of general business and you will be allowed three minutes to speak on any item.

Public Comments: This part of the agenda is reserved for making comments on matters which are NOT on the agenda. If you have submitted a request to speak, you will be called by the City Clerk at the appropriate time and you may speak for up to three minutes. Please limit your comments to matters within the jurisdiction of the City Council. Due to State law, no action can be taken on matters brought up under Public Comments. If action by the City Council is necessary, the matter may be placed on a future agenda or referred to staff, as determined by Council.

Please make your remarks at the lectern microphone and direct your comments to the City Council and not to the staff or the public.

Conduct at the Council Meeting: The City Council has adopted a set of rules for conduct during City Council meetings. The following is an excerpt from those adopted Rules of Procedure:

Section 6.3 The Mayor shall order removed from the Council Chambers any person(s) who commits the following acts at a regular or special meeting of the City Council:

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.


RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL

SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

FRED HESSE COMMUNITY PARK, 29301 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD


 

6:00 P.M.CLOSED SESSION. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED BROWN ACT CHECKLIST FOR DETAILS.

7:00 P.M.REGULAR SESSION

CALL TO ORDER:

ROLL CALL:

FLAG SALUTE:

NEXT RESOL. NO. 2001-65

NEXT ORD. NO. 370

RECYCLE DRAWING:

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR:


1.Motion to waive full reading.

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.


2.Minutes of August 21, 2001. (Purcell)

Recommendation: Approve the Minutes.


3.Hawthorne Boulevard Beautification. (Allison)

Recommendation: (1) Approve the preliminary median and parkway landscape plan for Hawthorne Boulevard. (2) Authorize a contract amendment with Land Images, Inc., to provide professional services in an amount of up to $53,500 to prepare final construction plans for the first phase of landscape improvements for Hawthorne Boulevard. (3) Revise the expenditure plan for the Recycling Fund, to reprogram funds from the neighborhood beautification program to Hawthorne Boulevard Beautification efforts. (4) Request staff to prepare a fence/wall improvement program for Hawthorne Boulevard that establishes a fence/wall standard for Hawthorne Boulevard, and provides City funding for a portion of the cost of private fence/wall replacement.


4.Informal Bid and Pre-Ordering of HDPE Pipe for the Palos Verdes Drive South Drainage Repair Project. (Massetti)

 

Recommendation: Review and reconfirm by a four-fifths (4/5) vote, the Council’s previous action on August 21 to authorize staff to conduct an informal bid process and pre-order HDPE drainage pipe for the Palos Verdes Drive South Drainage Repair Project.


5.Informal Bid and Pre-Ordering of HDPE and RCP Pipe for the San Ramon Drainage and Landslide Stabilization Project. (Petru)

Recommendation: Review and reconfirm by a four-fifths (4/5) vote, the Council’s previous action on August 21 to authorize staff to conduct an informal bid process and pre-order HDPE and RCP drainage pipe for the San Ramon Drainage and Landscape Stabilization Project.


6.Contract Amendments for San Ramon Project. (Petru)

 

Recommendation: Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to amend the Professional Service Agreements associated with the San Ramon Project as follows: (1) Increase AMEC Earth and Environmental Inc. contract by $39,857 for a total contract amount of $84,107. (2) Increase DMC Engineering contract by $70,220 for a total contract amount of $124,610. (3) Increase Helix Environmental Planning Inc. contract by $14,500 for a total contract amount of $48,200.


7.Resolution Authorizing the City Manager, the Assistant City Manager, and the Director of Public Works to accept Easements for the San Ramon Landslide Repair and Drainage Project. (Lynch)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES WHICH AUTHORIZES THE CITY MANAGER, THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, AND THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ACCEPT EASEMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY FROM PROPERTY OWNERS.


8.Notice of Completion for Signal Modifications on Hawthorne Boulevard at Granvia Altamira/Ridgegate Drive. (Massetti)

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, notify the surety company to exonerate the payment and performance bonds. (3) Authorize the Director of Public Works to release the 10% retention payment to Steiny and Company 35 days after recordation of the Notice of Completion by the County Recorder contingent on no claims being filed on the project.


9.Comment Letter on Draft EIR/EIS for the Proposed Master Plan Improvements at Los Angeles International Airport. (Evans)

 

Recommendation: Approve the comment letter of the Draft EIR/EIS for the proposed master plan improvements at Los Angeles International Airport and authorize the Mayor to sign the letter on behalf of the City Council.


10.June Treasurer’s Report. (McLean)

Recommendation: Receive and file.


11.Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Continuing Appropriations. (Downs)

Recommendation: (1) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2001-43, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002, TO CONTINUE CERTAIN EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS FROM FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001. (2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2000-33, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO REDUCE THE BUDGET FOR CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS THAT WILL BE REBUDGETED AND INCLUDED IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 BUDGET.


12.Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Budget Adjustments. (Downs)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING RESOLUTION 2000-33, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO INCREASE BUDGETED APPROPRIATIONS IN THE GENERAL FUND AND RECYCLING FUND.


13.Register of Demands. (McLean)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, 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.

 


PUBLIC HEARING:


14.Revision to the Conditions of Approval - Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 50666 and 50667. Location: Ocean Trails. (Allison)

Recommendation: (1) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES A APPROVING ADDENDUM 13 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 36 FOR REVISION "R". (2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING REVISION "R" TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 50666. (3) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING REVISION "R" TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 50667, REVISING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO REVISE A DEADLINE FOR RECONSTRUCTING LA ROTONDA DRIVE, ADDING A NEW DEADLINE FOR RE-PAVING PORTIONS OF LA ROTONDA DRIVE, AND PLACING A NEW DEADLINE ON THE RECONSTRUCTION OF PALOS VERDES DRIVE SOUTH.


15.Tentative Tract Map No. 52666, Grading Permit No. 2282, and Environmental Assessment No. 708 (3200 Palos Verdes Drive West). (Mihranian)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ASSOCIATED MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM. (2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 52666, GRADING PERMIT NO. 2282 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 708, THEREBY ALLOWING THE LAND DIVISION OF A 3.92-ACRE LOT INTO 13 LOTS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH APPROXIMATELY 16,500 CUBIC YARDS OF EARTH MOVEMENT.


16.Proposed Amendment to Ocean Trails Development Agreement and Amendment to Declaration of Restrictions. (McLean)

Recommendation: Approve the proposed Amendment to Ocean Trails Development Agreement and the Amendment to Declaration of Restrictions regarding the determination of Ocean Trail’s golf tax liability and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the documents on behalf of the City.


RECESS:


PUBLIC COMMENTS: (at approximately 8:40 P.M.)

(This section of the agenda is for audience comments on items NOT on the agenda.)


REGULAR BUSINESS:


17.Amendment of Municipal Code - Golf Tax. (Lynch)

Recommendation: INTRODUCE NO. __ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE CITY’S GOLF TAX.


18.Fencing and Signage at Inspiration Point. (Carry over from August 21) (Petru)

Recommendation: Approve the fencing design and signage for Inspiration Point and direct staff to install said improvements.


19.Review of Large Domestic Animal Nonconformity Statement No. 8 (Sunshine, 6 Limetree Lane). (Carry over from August 21) (Fox) Recommendation: Affirm staff’s determination that the keeping of a maximum of twelve (12) large domestic animals - of which a maximum of seven (7) animals - may be boarded may be "grandfathered" for the property at 6 Limetree Lane.

20.Vallon Drive/Hawthorne Boulevard Signalization. (Allison)

 

Recommendation: Consider the recommendation from the Traffic Committee to install a signal at the intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Vallon Drive.


21.Adoption of City Council Policy on Border Issues. (Carry over from August 21). (Rojas)

Recommendation: Review and adopt City Council Policy No. 34 which establishes a policy for handling "Border Issues."


22.Border Issues Status Report. (Evans)

Recommendation: Review the current status of border issues and provide direction to the City Council Committee and staff.


23.Request for Waiver of the Penalty Fee related to Conditional Use Permit No. 230. (Requestor: James Kay, 26708 Indian Peak Road). (Fox)

 

Recommendation: Deny the requested fee waiver.


24.U-Turn Restriction at Hawthorne Boulevard and Highridge Road. (Allison)

Recommendation: Remove the U-Turn restriction at the intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Highridge Road.


25.Mobile Food Vendor Controls. (Carry over from August 21) (Evans)

Recommendation: Direct staff to prepare an amended ordinance imposing additional restrictions on mobile food vendor parking.


26.City Council Assignments. (Purcell)

Recommendation: Make Council assignments to certain delegate and alternate positions previously held by former Councilman Byrd.


CLOSED SESSION REPORT:


CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:


CITY MANAGER REPORTS:

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


CLOSED SESSION AGENDA CHECKLIST

Based on Government Code Section 54954.5

(All Statutory References are to California Government

Code Sections)

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR

G.C. 54956.8

Potential purchase of open space.

Property:Filiorum 7572-012-024, 7572-012-028, 7572-012-029,

7573-003-016, 7581-023-031, 7581-023-029, 7572-002-022

City Negotiators:City Manager; City Attorney; and, Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

Negotiating Parties:York Long Point Associates

Under Negotiation:Price and Terms of Payment

Property: APN 7564-005-001, 7572-001-001 TO 004, 06 AND 07, 7581-023-011

City Negotiators: City Manager Les Evans, City Attorney Carol Lynch, and Public Works Director Dean Allison.

Negotiating Parties: Barry Hon and Michael Walker.

Under Negotiation:Price and Terms of Payment

 

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL

Anticipated Litigation:

(G.C 54956.9(b)

A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City Council/Agency on the advice of its legal counsel, based on the below-described existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City Council/Agency.

____________1_____________

(Number of Potential Cases)

A statement (voice mail message) made by Greg Sanders representing Sprint outside an open meeting of City and a record of the statement was made by Carol Lynch, City Attorney prior to the meeting and is available for public inspection in the City Clerk's office.

 


RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL

SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

FRED HESSE COMMUNITY PARK, 29301 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD


 

6:00 P.M.CLOSED SESSION. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED BROWN ACT CHECKLIST FOR DETAILS.

7:00 P.M.REGULAR SESSION

CALL TO ORDER:

ROLL CALL:

FLAG SALUTE:

NEXT RESOL. NO. 2001-65

NEXT ORD. NO. 370

RECYCLE DRAWING:

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR:


1.Motion to waive full reading.

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.

 


2.Minutes of August 21, 2001. (Purcell)
Recommendation: Approve the Minutes.

D R A F T

M I N U T E S

RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING

AUGUST 21, 2001

The meeting was called to order at 7:32 P.M. by Mayor Lyon at Fred Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.

After the Pledge of Allegiance, roll call was answered as follows:

PRESENT:Ferraro, Gardiner, McTaggart, Stern, and Mayor Lyon

ABSENT:None

Also present were City Manager Les Evans; City Attorney Carol Lynch; Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Joel Rojas; Director of Public Works Dean Allison; Director of Finance Dennis McLean; Director of Recreation & Parks Ron Rosenfeld; Acting Principal Planner Greg Pfost; Associate Planner Eduardo Schonborn; City Clerk/Administrative Services Director Jo Purcell; and, Deputy City Clerk/Recording Secretary Jackie Drasco.

RECYCLING DRAWING:

The winner from the last drawing was Betty Harwood, who will receive a check for $250, which represents a year of free refuse service. Another card was selected.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

Councilman Stern asked that the item regarding Payment for 2001 July 4th Celebration and Extension of Contract item be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Gardiner asked that the item regarding Ordinance No. 369 - Relating to a Transient Occupancy Tax be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.

Councilwoman Ferraro moved, seconded by Councilman Stern, to approve the agenda, as amended. Motion carried.

APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR:

Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Road, spoke on the following subjects: restrictions on shooting guns in the city; vaccination of cats; her opposition to the City offering helicopter rides at the Independence Day celebration; giving credit to whomever arranged for donations to the Independence Day celebration; and, storm drain repairs at Palos Verdes Drive and Peppertree.

Councilwoman Ferraro moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart, to approve the amended Consent Calendar as follows:

Motion to waive full reading

Adopted 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.

Minutes (301)

Adopted the Minutes of August 7, 2001.

Informal Bid and Pre-Ordering of Pipe for the San Ramon Drainage and Landslide Stabilization Project (1101 x 604)

Reviewed and reconfirmed by a four-fifths (4/5) vote, the Council’s previous action of August 7, 2001 to authorize staff to conduct an informal bid process and pre-order drainage pipe for the San Ramon Drainage and Landslide Stabilization Project.

Pre-Ordering of Drainage Pipe for Immediate Storm Drain Repairs Near Palos Verdes Drive South and Peppertree Drive (1204 x 604)

Reviewed and reconfirmed by a four-fifths (4/5) vote, the Council’s previous action on August 7, 2001 to authorize staff to conduct an informal bid process and pre-order HDPE drainage pipe for the Palos Verdes Drive South Drainage Repair Project.

Notice of Completion for Bikeway Route Improvement Project (1204 x 112)

(1) Accepted the work as complete. (2) Authorized the City Clerk to record a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder; and if no claims are filed within 35 days after recordation, notify the surety company to exonerate the payment and performance bonds. (3) Authorized the Director of Public Works to release the 10% retention payment to PCI, Ltd., 35 days after recordation of the Notice of Completion by the County Recorder, contingent on no claims being filed on the project.

Resolution No. 2001-60 - Arterial Rehabilitation Program – Hawthorne & Crenshaw Boulevards (1204 x 1404)

ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2001-60, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2001-43, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002, FOR A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT TO THE CITY’S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FUND.

Gifts for Parks (1201)

Accepted the Gifts for Parks donations and directed staff to prepare letters for the Mayor’s signature expressing the Council ‘s appreciation.

Resol. No. 2001-61 - Register of Demands (602)

ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2001-61, 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.

The motion to approve the Consent Calendar carried on the following roll call vote:

AYES:Ferraro, Gardiner, McTaggart, Stern, and Mayor Lyon

NOES:None

ABSTAIN:Stern on Minutes of August 7 as he was on vacation and was absent from this meeting

############

Payment for 2001 July 4th Celebration and Extension of Contract (1201)

Staff recommendation was to (1) Authorize payment to Conte Productions for the production of the July 4th, 2001, Independence Day Celebration. (2) Accept Conte Production’s proposal to continue to produce the City’s Annual July 4th Independence Day Celebration for a period of five years, and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the proposed agreement.

Council discussion focused on modification of the contract for more security for the City and Mr. Conte in the scheduling of this event to indicate that the agreement may be terminated by either party upon 9 months (270 days) written notice rather than the 120 days indicated in the agreement presented.

Mr. Conte agreed to the suggested change.

Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Councilmember Gardiner (1) Authorized payment to Conte Productions for the production of the July 4th, 2001, Independence Day Celebration. (2) Accepted Conte Production’s proposal as amended, to continue to produce the City’s Annual July 4th Independence Day Celebration for a period of five years, and authorized the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the proposed agreement.

The motion carried on the following roll call vote:

AYES:Ferraro, Gardiner, McTaggart, Stern, and Mayor Lyon

NOES:None

Ordinance No. 369 - Relating to a Transient Occupancy Tax (501 x 1501 x 1103)

Staff recommendation was to adopt Ordinance No. 369 relating to a Transient Occupancy Tax. (This ordinance was introduced on August 7.)

City Attorney Lynch clarified that an owner of a unit (such as the villas at the proposed Long Point project) would not be subject to transient occupancy tax, nor would someone renting for longer than 30 days. She said that a developer agreement could address different types of fees but the transient occupancy tax would not apply.

Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart to ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 369 AMENDING CHAPTER 3.16.030 OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO A TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX. (This ordinance was introduced on August 7.)

The motion carried on the following roll call vote:

AYES:Ferraro, Gardiner, McTaggart, Stern, and Mayor Lyon

NOES:None


PUBLIC HEARING:

Resol. No. 2001- 62 - Conformance with the 1999 L.A. County Congestion Management Program (CMP) and Adoption of the 2001 Local Implementation Report (1203 x 1505)

Mayor Lyon opened the public hearing on this request to consider a resolution regarding conformance with the 1999 L.A. County Congestion Management Program (CMP) and adoption of the 2001 Local Implementation Report. City Clerk Purcell announced that notice had been duly published and that there were no written comments received by the City but that correspondence from Barbara Covey had been received and distributed to the Council just prior to the onset of the meeting.

Associate Planner Schonborn presented the staff report of August 21, 2001 and the recommendation to adopt the proposed resolution adopting the City’s 2001 Local Implementation Report (LIR) and Self-Certifying the City’s Conformance with the 1999 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County.

Council discussion centered on the possibility of installing a traffic signal in a location which might not meet the required criteria for traffic congestion but for which special circumstances might warrant a signal.

Ann Shaw, 30036 Via Borica, stated that the semi-rural, uncongested, peninsula with its ocean views should be preserved and special consideration based on common sense should be made to accomplish this.

Barbara Covey, 2742 San Ramon Drive, a member of the City’s Traffic Committee, said that circumstances in the City were not the same as downtown Los Angeles yet the same rules applied. She added that special circumstances like fog, steep slopes, and blind curves as well as a desire to preserve the semi-rural quality of the Peninsula indicated that sometimes a traffic signal was required even though the guidelines would not normally indicate this action. (A copy of Ms. Covey’s remarks is on file with the City Clerk’s Office)

Additional Council discussion focused on the acknowledgement of the special circumstances which existed on the Peninsula and the fact that conformance with the County program was necessary to receive funding for traffic improvements projects, however, the City had the right to impose stricter standards if so desired.

There being no further testimony, Mayor Lyon closed the public hearing.

Councilwoman Ferraro moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart to ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-62 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ADOPTING THE CITY’S 2001 LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT (LIR) AND SELF-CERTIFYING THE CITY’S CONFORMANCE WITH THE 1999 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY. Motion carried.

Resol. Nos. 2001- 63 and 64 - General Plan Amendment No. 29 – Housing Element Amendment (1203 x 701)

Mayor Lyon opened the public hearing on this request to consider General Plan Amendment No. 29 – Housing Element Amendment. City Clerk Purcell announced that notice had been duly published and that there any written comments received by the City were made a part of the agenda packet.

Acting Principal Planner Pfost presented the staff report of August 21, 2001 and the recommendation to (1) Adopt the proposed resolution certifying a Negative Declaration for the Project. (2) Adopt the proposed resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 29 for the Final Draft Housing Element.

Council discussion focused on specific aspects of the Amendment; conformance with the State mandate in order to have the Housing Element approved; and, meetings with Assemblyman Alan Lowenthal to request his assistance in the State’s developing a more regional, realistic approach to the requirements.

There being no response to the Mayor’s call for public testimony, she declared the hearing closed.

Councilwoman Ferraro moved, seconded by Councilman Stern to (1) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-63 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROJECT. (2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-64, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 29 FOR THE FINAL DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT. Motion carried.

Mayor Lyon re-opened the Public Hearing.

Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Road, asked why Greg Pfost was designated as Acting Principal Planner.

City Manager Evans explained that because of the departure of Deputy Planning Director Snow, Mr. Pfost was Acting Principal Planner on an interim basis.

There being no further testimony, Mayor Lyon closed the public hearing.

Use of Federal and State Funding for Supplemental Police Services (601 x 1206)

Mayor Lyon opened the public hearing on this request to consider Use of Federal and State Funding for Supplemental Police Services. City Clerk Purcell announced that notice had been duly published and that there were no written comments received by the City.

City Clerk Purcell presented the staff report of August 21, 2001 and the recommendation to approve the continued use of LLEBG (Local Law Enforcement Block Grant) and COPS (Citizens Option for Police Services) funds to pay for the CORE Police Team to perform enforcement and crime prevention duties at the schools in the region and in the area adjacent to and south of Crest Road.

Captain Ed Hitchcock of the L.A. County Lomita Sheriff’s Station described details, benefits, and results of the program.

There being no response to the Mayor’s call for public testimony, she declared the hearing closed.

Councilwoman Ferraro moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart, to approve the continued use of LLEBG (Local Law Enforcement Block Grant) and COPS (Citizens Option for Police Services) funds to pay for the CORE Police Team to perform enforcement and crime prevention duties at the schools in the region and in the area adjacent to and south of Crest Road. Motion carried.


PUBLIC COMMENTS:

Robert Scalfaro, 3027 Crest Road, said that he was being sued by a neighbor because of a covenant from 1990 and he asked that the City remove that covenant because he felt it sidestepped the City’s view ordinance. He cited Council action in 1997 to remove a covenant under similar circumstances and he asked that the Council review his case and remove the covenant in question. He said that he had spoken to City Planner Beilin Yu and View Restoration consultant Steven Jones and they suggested he make his request to the Council.

Council consensus was that staff prepare a memo describing the situation and place this request on a future Council agenda if appropriate.

Joseph Piccarelli, 30311 Via Borica, spoke about the proposed Long Point project and the developer’s request to use public land for a portion of the proposed golf course. He felt that the Planning Commission’s prolonged consideration of the developer’s EIR gave the appearance of tacit approval of the City Council for use of public land and he asked that the Council withdraw the permission to include public land in the Long Point proposal.


RECESS & RECONVENE:

At 8:27 P.M., Mayor Lyon declared a recess. The meeting reconvened at 8:37 P.M.


REGULAR BUSINESS:

Hawthorne Boulevard Beautification (1204 x 1404)

Director Allison presented the staff report of August 21, 2001 and the recommendation to (1) Approve the preliminary median and parkway landscape plans for Hawthorne Boulevard. (2) Authorize a contract amendment with Land Images, Inc. to provide professional services in an amount up to $53,500 to prepare final construction plans for the first phase of landscape improvements for Hawthorne Boulevard. (3) Revise the expenditure plan for Recycling Fund, by refocusing funds from the neighborhood beautification program to the Hawthorne Boulevard beautification efforts. (4) Request staff to prepare a fence/wall improvement program for Hawthorne Boulevard that establishes a single fence/wall type for Hawthorne Boulevard, and provides City funding toward fence/wall replacement. He presented a computer-generated video presentation to illustrate features and costs of the plan.

Tom Lockett of Land Images discussed issues on Hawthorne Boulevard, the process to study these issues and conclusions reached. He discussed seven sections of Hawthorne Boulevard, showed drawings in a computer-generated video presentation, discussed the image to be created, view preservation and the plan to have blooming plants at all times.

Susan Powell of Land Images showed photographs of plants and simulations of proposed completed sections of Hawthorne Boulevard in a computer-generated video presentation and discussed environmental, view, and economic issues, stating that non-invasive, native, and existing plants would be used as appropriate. She also said that screening of undesirable walls was a goal which meant some sidewalks might have to be relocated; and she discussed the total cost of the project, providing percentages of various expenses, and the budget for Phase One of the project.

Director Allison discussed funding, providing alternatives for completion of the project in 30 years or 16 years.

Jim Slayden, 37 Mela Lane, discussed smaller median beautification projects in the past in other parts of the city and felt that homeowners associations had been receiving recycling funds for several years and that they would probably cooperate with the plan to redirect these funds toward this project.

Don Shults, 2129 Velez Drive, representing Rolling Hills Riviera Homeowners Association was concerned that homeowners association and other groups would no longer be receiving recycling funds. He suggested that Western Avenue also be considered for beautification and discussed existing "stick-like" trees and unattractive walls and the benefits for travelers as well as residents.

Council discussion centered on input received by the Council Ad Hoc City Beautification Committee by staff and the public; the long-needed beautification of Hawthorne Boulevard; benefits to be received, including increased property values; the redirection of recycling funds from homeowners association to this project; the beneficial aspects of the current plan which take into consideration aesthetic, environmental, and economic issues; and, the continuity to be gained by considering a long-term plan rather than small sections of Hawthorne, one at a time. There were concerns that 30 years was too long and that additional funding, such as bonds or fundraising, should be sought to shorten the period to complete the work; and, that alternate plans should be investigated as well as additional input from the Council, staff and the public. Council suggestions included the use of large colored rocks for additional interest which would not need water or maintenance; thinning plants in the first phase of work to be used in later phases; and, looking into the possibility of charging fees for trucks traveling and possibly damaging the City’s arterials.

Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart, to continue this item to the Council meeting of September 4,2001 to provide time for additional input from Council, Staff and the public.


RECESS & RECONVENE:

At 9:58 P.M., Mayor Lyon declared a recess. The meeting reconvened at 10:08 P.M.

Zone II Geology Committee Reports (1101 x 1801)

The recommendation was to find that there are insufficient reasons to continue the distinction between lots in Zone 2 (Abalone Cove), which have been developed and those lots in Zone 2 which remain vacant. Therefore, the Council directs staff to prepare an additional exception under Municipal Code 15.020.040 allowing the construction of homes and appurtenant structures on all approved building lots in Zone 2 which meet a 1.5 local safety factor, provided the requirements of Municipal Code 15.020.050 are also met.

Mayor Lyon suggested that public testimony be taken at this time.

Speaking in support of the recommendation were: Mike Agahee, 1917 Via Tampa, Lomita, CA 90717; Dave Ruth, 74989 Havasu Court, Indian Wells, CA 92210; John Monks, 32200 Schooner Drive; Christopher Smith, 1236 Via Landeta, Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274; Steve Case, 329 South Humboldt Drive, Henderson, NV 89104; Dana Ireland, 30 Narcissa Drive; Tracey LeRoy, 7936 3rd St., Downey, CA 90241; Mike Nopper, 67 Rockinghorse Road; Mike Kiss, 2440 Gleneyre, Laguna Beach, CA 92651; and, Chris Haber, 8720 Bleriot Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90245.

These speakers focused on the following concerns: Vacant lot owners have been paying property taxes, ACLAD fees, and weed abatement costs without the ability to develop their land; two panels of experts have said that the land has not moved in 100,000 years and feel there is not risk to building on these lots, for the vacant lot owners or the current residents; installation of the sewers should actually improve land stability by removing water from the soil; applicants for building permits would have to adhere to the same standards as those for previous construction in Zone II; and, that vacant lot owners are asking only for the right to apply to build on their own lot if the required stability factor can be met, not to institute a mass grading project.

Speaking in opposition to the recommendation were: Alyda White, 32614 Coastsite, Unit "F"; Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Road; Jim Knight, 5 Cinnamon Lane; Jack Downhill, 20 Vanderlip Drive; Kim Redfield, 6 Peppertree Drive; Alfred Sattler, 1904 Avenida Aprenda; and, Barbara Sattler, 1904 Avenida Aprenda

These speakers focused on the following concerns: The League of Women Voters’ landslide position established in the 1960’s and reviewed every year since that time affirms that development on ancient or active slide areas should be disapproved entirely; the Council should not risk a lawsuit due to damage from possible land movement in the future; some felt that the geologists reviewing the current data were too close to the geologists who performed the initial studies; empathy was expressed for people who own vacant lots in Zone II but they were told that there was a building moratorium; a decision on building in Zone II should be postponed until the pending geological report is completed and submitted to the City; a decision should be postponed until the storm drain, sewer, and Altamira Canyon projects are complete; a question was raised whether current residents in Zone II had been asked about land movement they might have seen; one speaker indicated that hairline cracks had widened since the sewer installation began; it was unfair to give right to build to one property owner while risking damage to existing homes; and, could the property owners building sign an agreement that they would not sue the City should there be land movement.

At this time, Mayor Lyon and Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart discussed the details in the report in the agenda packet.

Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart felt the Council should discuss the possibility of development in Zone II at this time so that if the results of the geology study when received indicated that development would be allowed on some lots, a procedure would be in place to allow property owners to apply without further delay; and, if the report indicated that building should not be allowed, there would have been no harm in discussing the possibility. He indicated that he had received information that day from a property owner indicating that there has been movement in Zone II and that this would be investigated. Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart said that there had been no analysis of GPS data since the passing of Perry Ehlig and it was important to have such a report to indicate whether there had been land movement in this area.

Mayor Lyon acknowledged that this is a complex issue and has been a source of concern for many years. She reiterated that no approval to build was being given at this time, only the discussion of setting in motion paperwork to allow application to build. She agreed that the status of Altamira Canyon and installation of the sewers was important as well as the investigation into the recent comment that there had been movement in Zone II, including analysis of GPS data.

A lengthy Council discussion, including several questions, with the City Manager and the City Attorney ensued relative to the process that was followed in presenting this recommendation for approval of an additional exception under the Municipal Code for building in the moratorium area. Councilman Stern asserted that, in his view, it would have been preferable to wait until the Peer Review Croup had completed and presented their report to the Council before placing the item on the City Council agenda.

City Manager Evans stated that Bill Cotton had indicated that the report would be received in the first week of September which would allow the Zone II Peer Review Group to analyze the information and provide a final report at their next meeting on September 18. City Manager Evans also said that Bill Cotton had received the information mentioned by Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart regarding a report of land movement in Zone II and that analysis of GPS data would be included in the report.

Council discussion focused on consequences the City would face whether building was allowed or not; the lack of the geologist’s report; the fact that exclusion rather than an exception was being sought; statements the Mayor made to the Daily Breeze; and, comments received by property owners in other zone of the moratorium area.

Councilwoman Ferraro moved, seconded by Mayor Lyon, to continue this item to the Council meeting on September 18 when the final report from the Zone II Peer Review group is received.

Further Council discussion resulted in a suggestion to locate three of the best geologists from out of the area to provide a completely unbiased analysis of current data in order to have best information if and when there is litigation based on the City’s decision regarding development in Zone II.

Councilwoman Ferraro amended her motion, seconded by Mayor Lyon, to continue this item to the Council meeting on September 18, 2001 and to direct staff to contact the appropriate scientific body to obtain the name of three independent experts from out of the area to investigate the studies on hand and to provide an estimate of cost for this investigation. Motion carried.


RECESS & RECONVENE:

At 11:35 P.M., Mayor Lyon declared a recess. The meeting reconvened at 11:45 P.M.

Review of Large Domestic Animal Nonconformity Statement No. 8 (Sunshine, 6 Limetree Lane) (1203 x 1808)

Staff recommendation was to affirm staff’s determination that the keeping of a maximum of twelve (12) large domestic animals – of which a maximum of seven (7) animals may be boarded – may be "grandfathered" for the property at 6 Limetree Lane.

Due to the lateness of the hour, Council consensus was to carry over this item to the next meeting.

Landslide Moratorium Exception Permit No. 41 (Applicant: Miles Pritzkat, representing Landowners Jim & Susan Maniscalco) (1203 x 1801)

Director Rojas presented the staff report of August 21, 2001 and the recommendation to approve Landslide Moratorium Exception Permit No. 41 allowing the landowner to proceed with the appropriate applications to request approval for a 1,179-square foot two-story addition, including a new garage, for property located at 120 Spindrift Lane.

Topics discussed by the Council included view impact, the need for a variance and a height variation, and the legal non-conforming status of this property. It was clarified that Council approval of this item did not approve these modifications but only gave the homeowners the right to apply.

Miles Prtizkat, the homeowners’ architect, said that he and his clients concurred with the staff report and requested that the Council please grant permission for application to be made.

Councilwoman Ferraro moved, seconded by Councilmember Gardiner, to approve Landslide Moratorium Exception Permit No. 41 allowing the landowner to proceed with the appropriate applications to request approval for a 1,179-square foot two-story addition, including a new garage, for property located at 120 Spindrift Lane. Motion carried.

Fencing and Signage at Inspiration Point (1101 x 1201)

Staff recommendation was to approve the fencing design and signage for Inspiration Point and direct staff to install said improvements.

Due to the lateness of the hour, Council consensus was to carry over this item to the next meeting.

Beautification Grant for the Miraleste Recreation and Park District (1204 x 1200)

Director Allison presented the staff report of August 21, 2001 and the recommendation to award a grant in an amount up to $22,000 to the Miraleste Recreation and Park District toward neighbor improvements in the Miraleste neighborhood.

A representative from the Homeowner’s Association indicated that this request represented two years’ planning and she asked for the Council’s approval.

City Attorney Lynch noted that Councilman Stern and Mayor Lyon were not required to recuse themselves from participating in this item unless they were within 500 yards and there would be an impact of $10,000 or more on their property value. It was determined that they did not have to recuse themselves.

Councilmember Gardiner moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart, to adopt staff recommendation. Motion carried.

Additional Traffic Enforcement – Pilot Program (301 x 1206)

City Clerk Purcell presented the staff report of August 21, 2001 and the recommendation to approve the Sheriff’s proposal to conduct a three-month pilot program increasing traffic enforcement during the PM hours and during the weekends at a cost of $10,200.

Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart moved, seconded by Councilwoman Ferraro, to adopt staff recommendation.

The motion carried on the following roll call vote:

AYES:Ferraro, Gardiner, McTaggart, Stern, and Mayor Lyon

NOES:None

Adoption of City Council Policy on Border Issues (1101 x 306)

Staff recommendation was to adopt City Council Policy No. 34 which establishes a policy for handling "Border Issues."

Due to the lateness of the hour, Council consensus was to carry over this item to the next meeting.

Mobile Food Vendor Controls (1101 x 1502)

Staff recommendation was to direct staff to prepare an amended ordinance imposing additional restrictions on mobile food vendor parking.

Due to the lateness of the hour, Council consensus was to carry over this item to the next meeting.


CLOSED SESSION REPORT:

City Attorney Lynch reported that no action was taken.


CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:


CITY MANAGER REPORTS:


ADJOURNMENT: Adjourned at 1:45 A.M. on motion of Councilman Stern.

 

____________________

MAYOR

ATTEST:
______________________

CITY CLERK


3.Hawthorne Boulevard Beautification. (Allison)

Recommendation: (1) Approve the preliminary median and parkway landscape plan for Hawthorne Boulevard. (2) Authorize a contract amendment with Land Images, Inc., to provide professional services in an amount of up to $53,500 to prepare final construction plans for the first phase of landscape improvements for Hawthorne Boulevard. (3) Revise the expenditure plan for the Recycling Fund, to reprogram funds from the neighborhood beautification program to Hawthorne Boulevard Beautification efforts. (4) Request staff to prepare a fence/wall improvement program for Hawthorne Boulevard that establishes a fence/wall standard for Hawthorne Boulevard, and provides City funding for a portion of the cost of private fence/wall replacement.

 

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY

COUNCIL

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001
SUBJECT:HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD BEAUTIFICATION

RECOMMENDATIONS

1.Approve the preliminary median and parkway landscape plan for Hawthorne Boulevard.

  1. Authorize a contract amendment with Land Images Inc, to provide professional services in an amount up to $53,500 to prepare final construction plans for the first phase of landscape improvements for Hawthorne Boulevard.
  2. Revise the expenditure plan for Recycling Fund, to reprogram funds from the neighborhood beautification program to Hawthorne Boulevard beautification efforts.
  3. Request staff to prepare a fence / wall improvement program for Hawthorne Boulevard that establishes a fence / wall standard for Hawthorne Boulevard, and provides City funding for a portion of the cost of private fence/wall replacement.

BACKGROUND

This item was continued from the August 21, 2001 City Council Meeting.

The City Council established an adhoc committee to propose improvements that beautify the City. Mayor Lyon, and Mayor Pro tem McTaggart are members of that committee. Carolynn Petru and Dean Allison staff the committee. A number of potential projects were considered including undergrounding utilities along the City’s arterial roadways, increasing code enforcement activities, and constructing landscape improvements along the City’s arterial roadways. The committee concluded that constructing landscape improvements along Hawthorne Boulevard has the highest priority.

The committee utilized the City’s on-call landscape architect, Land Images Inc., to review conditions along Hawthorne Boulevard, suggest improvements, and estimate costs. This staff report presents the results of that investigation. More specifically this report presents the landscape theme proposed for Hawthorne Boulevard, proposes a funding plan for the improvements and recommends the reach of Hawthorne Boulevard that will be the first reach to be improved. The report also proposes that a fencing program be established along Hawthorne Boulevard to reconstruct the private walls and fences along the roadway, and finally the report requests funding authorization to design the first phase of landscape improvements.

If the staff recommendations are approved, landscape improvements for the first phase of Hawthorne Boulevard will be designed. The plans will be advertised and brought back to the City Council for award in early 2002, and construction can be underway by May of 2002. It will be the first step in a multi-year plan to beautify Hawthorne Boulevard, which has an estimated cost of $7.5 million.

DISCUSSION

The committee considered the following issues in the preparation of the plan:

Issue

Discussion

Resolution

Parkways

To achieve the desired level of beautification, both the parkways and medians must be landscaped

The plan proposes to landscape parkways as well as the medians. This will require portions of sidewalks to be reconstructed.

Walls and fencing along the edge of roadway

The walls and fences along Hawthorne Boulevard are private. The wall and fencing type vary, and they are unattractive. Many need to be replaced.

A fencing program will be established to replace the existing walls and fences. The program will establish a fencing/wall standard, and the City will participate in a portion of the costs.

Views from private properties must be preserved.

Trees can be installed along portions of Hawthorne Boulevard without impacting views.

The plan proposes to include trees along both medians and parkways where it is determined that they will not impact views.

Invasive Plant material

The plan must avoid the use of invasive plants when there is the possibility that the plants can spread to the native areas.

At Aqua Armaga Canyon no invasive plants will be utilized.

Maintenance costs

Plant selection should be such that maintenance costs do not become burdensome.

The plan proposes grasses and trees which require less maintenance when compared to turf, and groundcover.

Which segment of Hawthorne Boulevard should be improved first ?

The first segment to be improved should be in a high traffic area, and should create a significant visual impact.

Hawthorne Boulevard from Eddinghill Drive to Locklenna Drive will be the first segment constructed. This is because traffic volume is high, and site preparation costs are relatively low.

 

In May of 2001 the City Council established the Roadway Beautification Fund for the purposes of funding a beautification program along the City’s arterial roadways. The City Council began a program to set aside $200,000 from the City General Fund and $100,000 from recycling revenues each year for the next two years. The details of the Roadway Beautification Fund are as follows:

Roadway Beautification Fund:

Fund balance July 1, 2001

$ 0

Revenues

$ 0

Transferred from the General Fund

$ 200,000

Transferred from the Recycling Fund

$ 100,000

Interest

$ 6,000

Estimated fund balance July 1, 2002

$ 306,000

It is important to note that when the City Council established the Roadway Beautification Fund it was decided that before any Roadway Beatification Funds are spent the City Council must be comfortable that all health and public safety needs of the City are met and adequate reserves are on hand.

The Recycling Fund, which is primarily funded from the proceeds of the city’s curbside recycling program, provides funding for citywide beautification. The details of the Recycling Fund are as follows:

Recycling Fund:

Fund balance on July 1, 2001

$ 500,000

Revenues

$ 146,000

Less Neighborhood beautification

$ 96,000

Less Recycler of the month, admin, supplies, salaries

$ 7,000

Less Block grant expenditures

$13,000

Less Transferred to the Roadway Beautification Fund

$ 100,000

Estimated Fund Balance July 1, 2002

$ 430,000

Funding Plan for first phase of improvements

The estimated construction cost for the first phase of Hawthorne Boulevard is $550,000, plus the design costs of $53,500. Staff proposed the following funding plan:

From the Roadway Beautification Fund:

Transferred from the General Fund

$ 0

Transferred from the Recycling Fund

$ 100,000

Interest

$ 6,000

From the Recycling Fund:

July 1, 2002 Balance

$ 430,000

Neighborhood Beautification Funds

$ 96,000

Total Funding Available

$ 632,000

Total Funding Required

$ 603,500

Excess Funding

$ 28,500

Under this funding plan, the entire costs for the first phase of improvements will be funded with recycling funds. No General Funds are proposed.

Included in the funding plan proposed above is the reprogramming of recycling funds from the Neighborhood Beautification Program to the Roadway Beautification Fund. This recommendation is made because staff believes that the Neighborhood Beautification Program has accomplished what it was created to do, improve the appearance of residential neighborhoods. Staff believes that Hawthorne Boulevard presents a greater need for beautification than the city’s neighborhoods.

Future year costs

Future year costs can be provided with a combination of Recycling Funds and General Funds. The amount of General Fund contribution can vary based the financial condition of the City.

Staff estimates that recycling funds will be available to the City on an annual basis as follows:

Recycling Fund:

 
   

Anticipated sources of Funds:

 

Collector Fee from haulers

$ 80,000

State Block Grant

$ 13,000

Redemption value of recyclables

$ 120,000

Curbside Supplement Payment

$ 40,000

Total Funding Available

$253,000

   

Proposed uses of Funds:

 

Neighborhood Beautification

$ 0

Recycler of the Month

$ 7,000

Use of State Block Grant for litter pick up

$13,000

Roadway Beautification:

$233,000

The recycling fund provides a reliable revenue stream for the city to fund roadway beautification. Utilizing these funds alone will provide adequate funding for a significant roadway beautification project every two years. Under such a scenario it would take approximately 30 years to complete landscaping improvements of Hawthorne Boulevard. If this revenue stream were augmented with General Funds the schedule would accelerate. For example if the City Council were to annually contribute $200,000 of general funds toward beautification, a project could be completed each year, and it would take approximately fifteen years to complete landscaping improvements along Hawthorne Boulevard.

Maintenance Costs

Construction of Landscape Improvements will require funding for maintenance. Currently the costs to maintain medians citywide are as follows:

Maintenance Costs:

 

Maintenance Contractor

$ 86,000

Power

$ 8,000

Water

$ 52,000

Total

$146,000

Funding for median maintenance is provided by a combination of General Funds, Gas Tax Funds, Proposition C Funds, and Landscaping and Lighting District Funds. Any cost increases must be borne by the General Fund.

The estimated annual maintenance cost for landscape improvements along Hawthorne Boulevard is follows:

Annual Maintenance Costs:

Phase One Hawthorne

All of Hawthorne

     

Maintenance Contractor

$ 11,000

$ 102,000

Power

$ 1,000

$ 9,000

Water

$ 7,000

$ 62,000

Total

$ 19,000

$173,000

Fencing Plan

The beautification committee concluded that to achieve the desired level of beautification along Hawthorne Boulevard many of the private walls and fencing at the edges of the roadway must be replaced. Since the improvements are private, one possibility is to require property owners to reconstruct the wall or fence through code enforcement activities. The committee believed that such actions would be protracted and may not be effective. Instead the committee suggested that a fencing program be established which encouraged property owners to upgrade their fencing and walls. The program would be voluntary and would establish standards, and contribute city funding towards replacement costs. If the staff recommendations are adopted staff will bring back to City Council a fencing program that proposes a standard fencing type and identifies a funding source.

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting the staff recommendations will begin the process to significantly improve the

design of the first phase of improvements will begin. Plans for the first phase will be completed in November. A construction project will be brought back to the City Council for consideration in February 2002, and if approved construction will be underway by May 2002.

Adopting the staff recommendations will also result in staff to preparing a fencing replacement program for Hawthorne Boulevard. That plan will be brought back to the City Council in November 2001. This will allow the first phase of fencing improvements to move forward at the same time as the first phase of the landscape improvements.

FISCAL IMPACT

Adopting the staff recommendations will result in the expenditure of $53,500 for professional services to prepare final construction plans for phase one of landscape improvements for Hawthorne Boulevard. The cost of the phase one improvements are estimated at $550,000, and the cost of improvements for all Hawthorne Boulevard, from Palos Verdes Drive West to the northerly city limits is $7.5 million.

Based upon previous City Council direction, to initiate a program of beautification along the City’s arterial roadways, the City Council must be comfortable that all health and public safety needs of the City are met and adequate reserves are on hand.

Submitted by,
Dean E. Allison, Director of Public Works

Reviewed by,
Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:
Preliminary Landscape Plans
Power Point Presentation


4.Informal Bid and Pre-Ordering of HDPE Pipe for the Palos Verdes Drive South Drainage Repair Project. (Massetti)

 

Recommendation: Review and reconfirm by a four-fifths (4/5) vote, the Council’s previous action on August 21 to authorize staff to conduct an informal bid process and pre-order HDPE drainage pipe for the Palos Verdes Drive South Drainage Repair Project.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY

COUNCIL

FROM:PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:INFORMAL BID AND PRE-ORDERING OF HDPE PIPE FOR THE PALOS VERDES DRIVE SOUTH DRAINAGE REPAIR PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION

Review and reconfirm by a four/fifths (4/5) vote, the Council’s previous action on August 21, 2001 to authorize staff to conduct an informal bid process and pre-order HDPE drainage pipe for the Palos Verdes Drive South Drainage Repair Project.

BACKGROUND

On August 7, 2001, the City Council found that an emergency exists concerning the Palos Verdes Drive South Drainage Repair Project. This emergency situation will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids or the normal process of ordering the pipe. The Council authorized staff to conduct an informal bid process and to pre-order the drainage pipe that will be required for this project.

DISCUSSION

Approval of both the informal bid process and the pre-ordering of the pipe required a four-fifths (4/5) vote under Public Contract Code Section 22050(a)(1). In addition, Public Contract Code Section 22050(c)(1) requires that when a governing body takes action under Section 22050(a)(1), it must review that action and reaffirm it by a four-fifths vote at each subsequent regularly scheduled meeting until the action is terminated. Accordingly, because the informal bid process has not yet been completed, staff has placed this item on tonight’s agenda.

As Council will recall, staff proposed the use of (HDPE) pipe for this project because it is more flexible and lighter than traditional corrugated metal pipe (CMP). These characteristics are well suited for the pipe that will be laid in the canyon exposed.

Respectfully submitted:
Dean Allison, Public Works Director

Reviewed:
Les Evans, City Manager


5.Informal Bid and Pre-Ordering of HDPE and RCP Pipe for the San Ramon Drainage and Landslide Stabilization Project. (Petru)

 

Recommendation: Review and reconfirm by a four-fifths (4/5) vote, the Council’s previous action on August 21 to authorize staff to conduct an informal bid process and pre-order HDPE and RCP drainage pipe for the San Ramon Drainage and Landscape Stabilization Project.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY

COUNCIL

FROM:ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:INFORMAL BID AND PRE-ORDERING OF HDPE AND RCP PIPE FOR THE SAN RAMON DRAINAGE AND LANDSLIDE STABILIZATION PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION

Review and reconfirm by a four/fifths (4/5) vote, the Council’s previous action on August 21, 2001 to authorize staff to conduct an informal bid process and pre-order HDPE and RCP drainage pipe for the San Ramon Drainage and Landslide Stabilization Project.

BACKGROUND

On July 3, 2001, the City Council found that an emergency exists concerning the San Ramon Drainage and Landslide Stabilization Project. This emergency situation will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids or the normal process of ordering the pipe. The Council authorized staff to conduct an informal bid process and to pre-order the drainage pipe that will be required for this capital improvement project.

On July 17, August 7 and August 21, 2001, the Council reconfirmed these findings and the previous direction given to staff.

DISCUSSION

Approval of both the informal bid process and the pre-ordering of the pipe required a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Council under Public Contract Code Section 22050(a)(1). In addition, Public Contract Code Section 22050(c)(1) requires that when a governing body takes action under Section 22050(a)(1), it must review that action and reaffirm it by a four-fifths vote at each subsequent regularly scheduled meeting until the action is terminated. Accordingly, because the informal bid process has not yet been completed, staff has placed this item on tonight’s agenda.

Respectfully submitted:
Carolynn Petru, Assistant City Manager

Reviewed,
Les Evans, City Manager


6.Contract Amendments for San Ramon Project. (Petru)

Recommendation: Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to amend the Professional Service Agreements associated with the San Ramon Project as follows: (1) Increase AMEC Earth and Environmental Inc. contract by $39,857 for a total contract amount of $84,107. (2) Increase DMC Engineering contract by $70,220 for a total contract amount of $124,610. (3) Increase Helix Environmental Planning Inc. contract by $14,500 for a total contract amount of $48,200.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY

COUNCIL

FROM:ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:CONTRACT AMENDMENTS FOR SAN RAMON PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION

Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to amend the Professional Service Agreements associated with the San Ramon Project as follows:

1.Increase AMEC Earth and Environmental Inc. contract by $39,857 for a total contract amount of $84,107.

2.Increase DMC Engineering contract by $70,220 for a total contract amount of $124,610.

3.Increase Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. contract by $14,500 for a total contract amount of $48,200.

BACKGROUND

On September 5, 2000, the City Council awarded two Professional Services Agreement for the San Ramon Project:

  • AMEC Earth & Environmental, Inc. (formerly AGRA Earth & Environmental, Inc.) in the amount of $35,160 for geology and geotechnical services.
  • DMc Engineering in the amount of $51,950 for civil engineering services.

In addition, on March 6, 2001, the City Council awarded a third Professional Services Agreement:

  • Helix Environmental Planning Inc. in the amount of $33,700 to prepare the CEQA documentation and to obtain federal and state permits for the project.

Since the contracts were first awarded, staff has approved small amendments to the AMEC and DMC contracts that are reflected in the chart shown on page 2 of this report. Both of these increases were in an amount of less than $10,000, the largest of which was to allow AMEC to install and monitor an inclinometer at the project site.

DISCUSSION

When the contracts in question were first executed, the San Ramon Project was expected to be a much smaller project. The original design concept included upsizing and extending the length of the existing storm drain, constructing a new energy dissipater at the bottom of the canyon and placing approximately 4,000 cubic yards of earth in the canyon to stabilize the toe of the slope and repair erosion damage that occurred at the top of the slope.

However, as reported to the City Council on July 3, 2001, AMEC subsequently determined that, in addition to the slide plane that has already been exposed at the bottom of the canyon, there are multiple potential slide planes that progress up the hill on the east side of the canyon. Even if the toe of the landslide is buttressed, there is the possibility of movement on one or more of the upper slide planes, which would continue to threaten the City’s new drainage facility, the access road, utilities and private homes and other improvements that sit above the north and east sides of the canyon. Therefore, the scope of the project has expanded from approximately 4,000 cubic yards of fill to approximately 75,000 cubic yards in order to buttress the entire slope. With the dramatic increase in the amount of fill required for the project, the design of the new drainage pipe has also been significantly changed and the impacts of the project have also increased, requiring additional and/or more complicated mitigation measures that must be incorporated into the project.

The chart below summarizes the three contracts, their current status and the proposed amendments:

 

Consultant

Original

Contract

Staff

Approved

Amendments

Current Contract

Proposed Increase

Revised Contract Amount

AMEC Earth

$35,160

$9,090

$44,250

$39,857

$84,107

DMc Engineering

$51,950

$2,440

$54,390

$70,220

$124,610

Helix Environmental

$33,700

-0-

$33,700

$14,500

$48,200

Total:

$120,810

$11,530

$132,340

$124,577

$256,917

CONCLUSION

Due to the emergency status of the San Ramon Project, the City staff and consultants have been moving forward as quickly as possible to complete the project before the onset of the next winter rains. Based on the geologic investigation completed earlier this year, the project design has expanded and changed significantly since the contracts for professional services were first executed for this project. Although work has continued on the project unabated in order to avoid any delay in construction, the contracts with the three consulting firms assisting the City must be reviewed and amended to incorporate the changes that have occurred in the project.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

The current contracts with AMEC Earth & Environmental, DMc Engineering and Helix Environmental do not include costs for inspection services while the project is under construction. Until the contractor is selected and a final construction schedule determined for the project, there is no practical way to estimate the inspection costs at this point in time. Therefore, when staff brings the construction contract to the City Council for approval (expected to be on the October 2, 2001 agenda), staff will also bring forward additional contract amendments with these three consultants for inspection services.

FISCAL IMPACT

The original contract amounts were budgeted in FY 00-01 and have been carried forward as a continuing appropriation. In addition, the FY 01-02 budget included $2,000,000 for the San Ramon Project. The engineer’s estimate for construction of the project is $1,600,000, leaving $400,000 for related consultant costs. The proposed $124,557 in contract amendments would come out of this budgeted amount.

Respectfully submitted:
Carolynn Petru, Assistant City Manager

Reviewed:
Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:

  • Contract Amendment for AMEC Earth and Environmental Dated July 31, 2001
  • Contract Amendment for DMc Engineering dated August 9, 2001
  • Contract Amendment for Helix Environmental Planning dated July 12, 2001


7.Resolution Authorizing the City Manager, the Assistant City Manager, and the Director of Public Works to accept Easements for the San Ramon Landslide Repair and Drainage Project. (Lynch)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES WHICH AUTHORIZES THE CITY MANAGER, THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, AND THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ACCEPT EASEMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY FROM PROPERTY OWNERS.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY

COUNCIL

FROM:CITY ATTORNEY

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ACCEPT EASEMENTS FOR THE SAN RAMON LANDSLIDE REPAIR AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt the attached resolution, which authorizes the City Manager, the Assistant City Manager and the Director of Public Works to accept easements on behalf of the City from property owners.

BACKGROUND

As the Council is aware, the City has authorized the design of drainage improvements and the repair of a slope in San Ramon Canyon to stabilize a landslide and eliminate prior erosion of the slope, and license agreements have been obtained from property owners in the area. In addition, certain easements also will be required from the property owners to enable the City to maintain, repair and replace the permanent drainage improvements that are being constructed.

Government Code Section 27281 requires easements to be accepted either by action of the City Council, or the City Council can designate one or more public officials to accept easements on behalf of the City.

The attached resolution has been prepared to allow the City Manager, the Assistant City Manager, or the Director of Public Works to accept these easements on behalf of the City, to expedite the process of accepting the easements from the owners of properties where the permanent drainage improvements will be located, so that they can be recorded with the County of Los Angeles.

ALTERNATIVE

The easements can be presented to the City Council for acceptance at future City Council meetings.

FISCAL IMPACT

There is no fiscal impact to the City that will result from the adoption of the attached Resolution.

Respectfully submitted,
Carol Lynch, City Attorney

Reviewed by,
Les Evans, City Manager

RESOLUTION NO. ____

 

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ACCEPT EASEMENTS FOR THE SAN RAMON LANDSLIDE REPAIR AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes has authorized the design of drainage improvements and the repair of a slope in San Ramon Canyon to stabilize a landslide and eliminate prior erosion of the slope; and

WHEREAS, to enable the City to construct the San Ramon drainage and landslide repair project, license agreements have been obtained from property owners in the area, and certain easements also will be required from the property owners to enable the City to maintain, repair and replace the permanent drainage improvements that are being constructed; and

WHEREAS, Government Code Section 27281 allows the City to authorize by resolution one or more of its officers or agents to accept such deeds or grants on behalf of the City and consent to the recording of these documents;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1.The City Manager, the Assistant City Manager, and the Director of Public Works of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are hereby duly authorized to accept the grant of easements for the San Ramon drainage and landslide stabilization project and to consent to record said easements on behalf of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes by executing the form which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this ___ day of September, 2001.

__________________________

Mayor

 

ATTEST:________________________

City Clerk

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by this deed or grant dated _____________________, from ____________________to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, a political corporation, is hereby accepted by the undersigned agent on behalf of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes pursuant to authority conferred by Resolution No.____ of the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, adopted on September 4, 2001, and the grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized agent.

Dated: ____________________By: ________________________

_________________________

Title

Exhibit "A"


8.Notice of Completion for Signal Modifications on Hawthorne Boulevard at Granvia Altamira/Ridgegate Drive. (Massetti)

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, notify the surety company to exonerate the payment and performance bonds. (3) Authorize the Director of Public Works to release the 10% retention payment to Steiny and Company 35 days after recordation of the Notice of Completion by the County Recorder contingent on no claims being filed on the project.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS ON HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD AT GRANVIA ALTAMIRA / RIDGEGATE DR.

RECOMMENDATIONS

  1. Accept the work as complete.
  2. Authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder; and if no claims are filed 35 days after recordation, notify the surety company to exonerate the Payment and Performance bonds.
  3. Authorize the Director of Public Works to release the 10% retention payment to Steiny and Company 35 days after recordation of the Notice of Completion by the County Recorder contingent on no claims being filed on the project.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

On, January 16, 2001, City Council awarded a contract to Steiny and Company for the installation of signal modifications on Hawthorne Boulevard at Granvia Altamira / Ridgegate Drive. This work was completed on July 1, 2001.

Final project cost is as follows:

Award Amount

Authorized Change Order Budget

Total Authorized Amount

Original Contract Amount

Contract Change Orders

Final Contract Amount

$22,493.00

$3,007.00

$25,500.00

$22,493.00

$1,400.00

$23,893.00

There was one contract change order on the project. At the City’s request, one faded illuminated street name sign (ISNS) was replaced with a new ISNS. This work was outside the original scope of the project, but was deemed necessary.

CONCLUSION

Steiny and Company 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.

FISCAL IMPACT

The recommended action will have no fiscal impact. Adequate funds were provided in the Budget Resolution adopted January 16, 2001 for completion of the project. The funding source is the Gas Tax Fund.

Respectfully submitted,
Dean E. Allison, Director of Public Works

Reviewed,
Les Evans, City Manager

 


9.Comment Letter on Draft EIR/EIS for the Proposed Master Plan Improvements at Los Angeles International Airport. (Evans)

Recommendation: Approve the comment letter of the Draft EIR/EIS for the proposed master plan improvements at Los Angeles International Airport and authorize the Mayor to sign the letter on behalf of the City Council.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS

FROM:CITY MANAGER

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:COMMENT LETTER ON DRAFT EIR/EIS FOR THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN IMPROVEMENTS AT LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the Comment Letter on the Draft EIR/EIS for the Proposed Master Plan Improvements at Los Angeles International Airport and authorize the Mayor to sign the letter on behalf of the City Council.

BACKGROUND:

At their July 17, 2001 meeting the City Council directed staff to finalize a comment letter on the Draft EIR/EIS for the Proposed Master Plan Improvements at Los Angeles International Airport. The City Council further directed that the letter reference the South Bay Cities Council of Governments’ (SBCCOG) comment letter prepared by Chevalier, Allen & Lichman, reference the letter from the County of Los Angeles commenting on the DEIR/EIS and add comments suggested by City Councilmembers and speakers at the July 17, 2001 Council meeting.

DISCUSSION:

The deadline for submitting comments was extended by 60 days and is now September 24, 2001. The attached letter has been reviewed by Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart, the City Attorney and Barbara Lichman of Chevalier, Allen & Lichman. Staff believes that the letter is comprehensive and will adequately represent the City’s concerns.

Respectfully submitted,
Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:
Proposed Cover Letter

September 5, 2001

Mr. Jim Ritchie
City of Los Angeles
Los Angeles World Airports
LAX Master Plan/Room 218
P.O. Box 92216
Los Angeles, California 90009-2216

RE: Comments on the LAX Master Plan DEIR/EIS

Dear Mr. Ritchie:

At our regularly scheduled meeting of July 17, 2001 the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council discussed the LAX Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIS/EIR) and the comment letter prepared for the South Bay Cities Council of Governments by a team of consultants. Our review of these documents led to a recommendation by the City Council that Los Angeles World Airports deem the Draft EIS/EIR inadequate for certification because it fails to comply with the requirements of both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

The following issues are of particular concern to the City Council and have not been adequately addressed in the Draft EIS/EIR:

1. Regional airport expansion.

Aviation needs of the region can be better met if airport capacity is expanded by considering other airport sites. The analysis of alternatives to the proposed project is a fundamental requirement of both CEQA and NEPA. The analysis in the EIR/EIS of alternate airport sites or a regional solution that would rely on the use of several different airports to accommodate increased passenger and air cargo demand is woefully inadequate.

  1. Congestion.
  2. In 1997 LAX drew 7 MAP from outside its 60-minute access zone including many who lived closer to other airports in the Region. Dependence on LAX has increased traffic congestion. This issue has not been adequately addressed in the document.

  3. Dangerous Overcrowding.

LAX is the world’s third busiest airport, but its 3,500 acres makes it one of the smallest major international airports in size in this nation. Denver has 35,000 acres to handle less aviation. However, the joint EIS/EIR does not adequately analyze this issue.

4. Air Pollution.

LAX is already the largest stationary source of air pollution in Los Angeles and its expansion would worsen air pollution. Under current LAX expansion plans the number of tons of Nitrogen oxide (NOx) emitted would increase from 5,943 tons in 1999 to an estimated 9,044 tons by 2025. No analysis of the potential toxicity of jet fuel has been included for current and future impacts. Once again, this issue is not adequately analyzed in the document.

  1. Noise.

LAX expansion calls for lengthening a runway from 7,000 to 12,000 feet Eastward. This would push the current noise footprint from landing planes eastward into more communities. About 31,000 homes and 36 schools near LAX currently suffer from noise exceeding 65 decibel noise level at which the FAA has determined a substantial portion of the community will be adversely affected. However, the analysis of this important issue is incomplete at best and no analysis of impacts on cities such as Rancho Palos Verdes has been included.

6. "Environmental Justice"

Minority and low in-come communities already suffer adverse effects from heavy usage of LAX. According to LAX’s own draft environmental impact report, "projected future increases in aviation activity at LAX would have a disproportionate impact on minority and low-income communities East of LAX under all the proposed building alternatives." Impacts on the region, including Rancho Palos Verdes, created by expansion have not been considered. Again, the analysis that is required by CEQA and NEPA has not been performed as required by those statutes.

7. Public Safety.

LAX has been averaging 11 incursions (near misses) a year during the past three years, which is seven more than the number considered acceptable by the FAA. More flights at LAX would further endanger safety.

8. Transit/Safety Issues.

In 1993 Airport and FAA officials warned that the Green Line’s path near runways would distract pilots with its lights, befuddle radar with

electromagnetic emissions and stand in the way of low flying aircraft in emergencies. MTA officials said that construction of an airport metro station would cause major utility conflicts, disrupt air service during construction and potentially disturb two underground "contamination" areas. The analysis of this issue, including the cumulative impact of these two projects, is not adequate. Why was this FAA safety issue not addressed?

The South Bay Cities Council of Governments’ comments that are attached, as well as the A.C. Lazzaretto and Associates Report prepared for the County of Los Angeles, identify extensive omissions and deficiencies with the Draft EIS/EIR reflect the feelings of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council and more fully address the issues outlined above. In addition, as noted above, we are particularly concerned that the document omits the discussion of an alternative of a fully regional solution that more effectively utilizes other commercially viable airports in Southern California to address the anticipated growth in regional air passenger and air cargo demand.

We look forward to your response to our comments.

Sincerely,
Marilyn Lyon
Mayor

Attachment

 


10.June Treasurer’s Report. (McLean)

Recommendation: Receive and file.

TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM: FINANCE DIRECTOR

DATE: SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT: JUNE 2001 TREASURER’S REPORT

Staff Coordinator: Kathryn Downs, Financial Consultant

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive and file the June 2001 Treasurer's Report for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.

BACKGROUND:

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 monthly for both the Redevelopment Agency and Improvement Authority and is presented under separate cover before their respective governing bodies. The attached treasurer's report includes the cash activities of the City for the month of June 2001.

ANALYSIS:

The overall cash balances of the City totaled $26,577,568 at June 30, 2001. This represents a $214,538 increase during the month. The overall increase is a result of various factors in several individual funds of the City. These factors are discussed in detail below for each fund experiencing a noteworthy cash event.

Gas Tax Fund – The Gas Tax Fund cash balance increased by approximately $80,000 due to the receipt of both May and June allocations from the State.

Proposition C Fund – The cash balance in the Proposition C fund increased by more than $83,000 during the month due to the receipt of both May and June allocations from the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA).

Proposition A Fund – The cash balance in the Proposition A fund increased by more than $100,000 during the month due to the receipt of both May and June allocations from the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA).

COPS/LLES Fund – Cash increased by approximately $56,000 in this fund during the month due to reimbursement of the portion of the cost of Grant Deputies shared by neighboring cities participating in the program.

Employee Benefits Fund – Cash decreased by approximately $72,000 in this fund during the month of June. Payments were made to Southern California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (SCJPIA) for the FY 2001-02 workers compensation insurance premium, as well as the FY 2000-01 retroactive adjustments.

CIP Fund – The cash balance in the CIP fund decreased by over $55,000 during the month. Project progress payments included $320,000 to Excel Paving for Palos Verdes Drive South Roadway Repairs. These payments were offset with the monthly $291,667 transfer from the General fund.

Respectfully submitted,
Dennis McLean, Finance Director/Treasurer

Reviewed:
Les Evans, City Manager


11.Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Continuing Appropriations. (Downs)

Recommendation: (1) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2001-43, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002, TO CONTINUE CERTAIN EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS FROM FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001. (2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2000-33, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO REDUCE THE BUDGET FOR CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS THAT WILL BE REBUDGETED AND INCLUDED IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 BUDGET.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY

COUNCIL

FROM:FINANCE DIRECTOR

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:FY 2000-2001 CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS

Staff Coordinator:Kathryn Downs, Accounting Manager

 

RECOMMENDATION:

1)Adopt Resolution No. 2001- , amending Resolution No. 2001-43, the budget appropriation for FY 2001-2002, to continue certain expenditure appropriations from FY 2000-2001.

2)Adopt Resolution No. 2001- , amending Resolution No. 2000-33, the budget appropriation for FY 2000-2001, to reduce the budget for continuing appropriations that will be rebudgeted and included in the FY 2001-2002 budget.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION REGARDING CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS:

At the end of each fiscal year, it is necessary to prepare a summary of budgeted appropriations that must be carried over to the next fiscal year as continuing appropriations. The attached list of FY 2000-2001 continuing appropriations (Exhibit A) includes projects which were included in the FY 2000-2001 budget, but were not completed by the end of the fiscal year.

The majority of the continuing appropriation items relate to ongoing Public Works projects started in FY 2000-2001 (or earlier) that were not completed by June 30, 2001. Many of these Public Works projects are historically performed in the summer months to avoid the rainy season (i.e. road and sewer construction projects, recycling beautification grants) or are large projects that take several years to complete (i.e. the Point Vicente Soil Remediation Project). City staff anticipates that the majority of additional expenditures related to these projects will be incurred during FY 2001-2002. However, in some instances, especially in regards to the larger projects, completion will not necessarily occur until after June 30, 2002. In these instances it will probably be necessary to carry over amounts to FY 2002-2003 as a part of next year’s continuing appropriations.

Staff reviewed all projects budgeted in FY 2000-2001 during the course of preparing the City’s FY 2001-2002 budget. Staff also recently reviewed FY 2000-2001 expenditures and determined that some amounts previously budgeted in FY 2000-2001 (and expected to be expended prior to fiscal year end) were not actually expended prior to June 30, 2001. These unspent appropriations must be carried over to FY 2001-2002 as continuing appropriations to ensure budgetary compliance.

Staff included the entire amount of the continuing appropriation in the calculation of the "Estimate to Close" in the FY 2000-2001 column of the budget document. Therefore, the estimated beginning fund balance presented in the FY 2001-2002 budget have already been reduced by the amount of the proposed continuing appropriations. The approval of these continuing appropriations will not change estimated ending fund balances at June 30, 2002.

The attached list of FY 2000-2001 continuing appropriations (Exhibit A) itemizes each individual project for which staff recommends a continuation of the appropriation into FY 2001-2002. A brief description of each item is provided below as well as on the attached Exhibit A. Approval of the proposed resolution will allow staff to prepare the necessary budget adjustments to provide for the completion of these projects in FY 2001-2002.

DISCUSSION OF CONTINUING APPROPRIATION ITEMS:

City Attorney:

  1. Aircraft Noise Monitoring System and Legal Expense
  2. Staff expects that the aircraft route tracking/recording system will be operational during September 2001. After sufficient evidence is gathered, the legal research phase will move forward. The timeline for legal counsel’s recommendation to the participating cities is unknown at this time.

    City Administration – Community Outreach:

  3. Video Productions
  4. The FY 2000-2001 budget included $10,960 to create informational videos for public access television viewing. A few of these production videos will not be completed until sometime during FY 2001-2002.

    Information Technology:

  5. Cartegraph Software

Staff training by Cartegraph is scheduled for the middle of December 2001. Therefore, the $5,000 appropriation for user training must be carried forward to FY 2001-2002.

Public Safety:

4.Traffic Enforcement

The carryover of the FY 2000-2001 traffic enforcement appropriation will be used in FY 2001-2002 for implementation of the six-month pilot program.

Planning, Building and Code Enforcement:

5.Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) – Phases II and III

The City’s NCCP consultant is currently developing the biological and economic analysis authorized by City Council in March 2001. The conclusions of this analysis are scheduled for City Council presentation in October 2001. Once the preferred alternative has been identified, the EIR process will begin. Upon completion of the EIR, the City Council will be in a position to conduct public hearings and consider approval of the City’s NCCP. Staff estimates this process will be complete by summer 2002.

6.General Plan Housing Element

The General Plan Housing Element was approved by City Council in August 2001. Staff expects the plan to be completed in September 2001.

7.General Plan Housing Element Reproduction Costs

The appropriation for reproduction costs of the General Plan Housing Element must be carried forward to FY 2001-2002.

Recreation and Parks:

8.PVIC Special Events

The amount carried over to FY 2001-2002 will provide for grand re-opening ceremonies and celebratory banners upon the completion of the PVIC expansion project. The re-opening of the facility is undetermined at this time and the full amount will likely need to be carried over to FY 2002-2003.

  1. PVIC Annual Docent Luncheon

The date of the annual Docent luncheon has been moved from June 2001 to October 2001 (in FY 2001-2002).

Public Works Projects:

10.Hesse Park – City Council Meeting Chamber

The Multi-Purpose Room improvements, including carpeting and electrical modifications, should be completed in November 2001.

11.Sidewalk Repair Program

The grinding portion of the project has been completed. Upon completion of property notification, the remainder of the FY 2000-2001 program will be completed during FY 2001-2002.

  1. FY 2001-2002 Slurry Seal Design
  2. The design phase that began late in FY 2000-2001 was completed in August 2001.

  3. CDBG – Home Improvement Program
  4. All grants and loans approved by the City Council have been awarded. The improvement projects are in the bid phase and will be completed during FY 2001-2002.

  5. CDBG – Altamira Canyon
  6. This project has been delayed until the City obtains rights-of-entry from the homeowners in the affected project area. Staff is also in process of obtaining permits from the Resource Agencies and developing a revised plan for funding the project. It is estimated that this project will be completed during FY 2001-2002.

  7. CDBG – ADA Improvements
  8. This project will be completed in conjunction with City Hall Renovation. The Public Works department is currently reviewing project costs and funding sources.

  9. Beautification Grants – Recycling
  10. The FY 2000-2001 grants have been awarded to Homeowners’ Associations. Projects are currently in the construction phase, and will continue throughout FY 2001-2002.

  11. Bus Shelters
  12. The bus shelter appropriation will be spent for erecting additional shelters. Project design began at the end of FY 2000-2001. The project is underway and will be completed in September 2001.

  13. FY 2001-2002 Overlay Design
  14. The design phase of the FY 2001-2002 Overlay program began late in FY 2000-2001 and was completed in August 2001.

  15. FY 2000-2001 Pavement Management Study
  16. This project will be completed during FY 2001-2002.

  17. PVIC Soil Remediation
  18. Staff has determined it is probable that engineering services will be required in coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers efforts. It is expected that the project will be completed during FY 2001-2002.

  19. 25th Street Settlement
  20. Staff continues to monitor roadway settlement prior to determining a future course of action. The project will be completed in FY 2001-2002.

  21. Citywide Asset Management Plan
  22. This project will be completed during FY 2001-2002, possibly in conjunction with GASB 34 infrastructure reporting.

  23. San Ramon Drainage
  24. This project will replace an inadequate storm drain system in San Ramon Canyon and stabilize a landslide mass located in the canyon. The original scope of the project included an engineered earth buttress of 40,000 cubic yards of fill material. During the design process, the landslide mass was discovered to be much larger than previous estimates. The project scope now includes up-sizing the drainage pipe, extending the storm drain past the landslide mass, and installing an energy dissipater downstream to prevent any further erosion. An engineered earth buttress slope requiring approximately 70,000 cubic yards of fill material will be placed in the canyon to stabilize the landslide and protect surrounding residential properties. The completed buttress slope will be provided with surface and subsurface drainage devices, as well as re-vegetated with native plant materials and required fire breaks. It is anticipated that construction bids will be opened in September 19, 2001.

  25. Hawthorne/Crenshaw Road Rehabilitation
  26. The design phase of this project began at the end of FY 2000-2001. The bid process is currently open and the construction contract will be awarded September 4th.

  27. Crest Road Rehabilitation
  28. The design phase of this project began at the end of FY 2000-2001. Public Works staff expects that construction will begin during FY 2001-2002.

  29. PVDE Drainage Study
  30. The Drainage Study project will span over two fiscal years. Completion is expected during October 2001.

  31. Traffic Signal – Crest/Highridge
  32. This project is currently in the construction phase and is expected to be completed in October 2001.

  33. FY 2000-2001 Miscellaneous Drainage Improvements
  34. The carryover amount from FY 2000-2001 will provide additional funding for undesignated drainage projects in FY 2001-2002.

  35. PVE/RPV Storm Drain Improvement
  36. Due to land movement, the project scope is currently under review leading to a substantial revision of the project. Construction is scheduled to begin in Spring 2002. The timeline and cost of this project are under the control of the City of Palos Verdes Estates. The City’s share of the cost is unknown at this time.

  37. Peninsula Bikeways
  38. Construction began at the end of FY 2000-2001 and was completed in July 2001.

  39. Ladera Linda Tot Lot Play Equipment

This project is currently in the design phase. Construction is expected to occur during the December 2001.

Equipment Replacement Fund:

1,2.Public Works Vehicles

The FY 2000-2001 budget provided for the replacement of the 1991 Taurus station wagon, as well as the Stake Bed Truck. The station wagon is currently on back order with Worthington Ford.

3.Computer Equipment

The upgrade of the City Hall network to the Windows 2000 operating system as well as Office 2000 is currently underway. Staff anticipates completion prior to the end of September 2001.

4.Point Vicente Interpretive Center (PVIC) Furnishings and Equipment

The purchase of all the new interior furnishings and equipment will occur upon the completion of the PVIC expansion. The timing of the re-opening of the facility is undetermined; therefore, the appropriation should be carried over to FY 2001-2002. It is likely that the full amount will need to be carried over to FY 2002-2003.

5.Composite and Zoning Maps

The Planning Department originally sought to replace a composite map that shows topography and parcel dimensions for the entire city. After receiving bids for a replacement map, staff learned that current technology allows for a digitized aerial and topographic database, which could be used by the Public Works department. Planning staff is currently developing composite specifications. Planning staff anticipates this project will be presented to City Council in November 2001.

6.City Hall Renovation Plan

Staff anticipates the architectural design phase of City Hall Renovation will be completed during FY 2001-2002.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed recommendations will have no impact on the estimated (budgeted) fund balance at June 30, 2002 for any of the City’s funds. The first resolution merely authorizes increasing the FY 2001-2002 budget expenditures associated with each of the listed continuing appropriations discussed above. The second resolution authorizes decreasing the FY 2000-2001 budget for the same continuing appropriations.

Respectfully submitted,
Dennis McLean, Finance Director

Reviewed:
Les Evans, City Manager


 

RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS

VERDES, AMENDING RESOLUTION 2000-33, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO REDUCE THE BUDGET FOR THE APPROVED CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS

WHEREAS, Section 3.32 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code provides that all expenditures in excess of budgeted allocations must be by supplemental appropriation of the City Council: and

WHEREAS, on June 6, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution 2000-33, approving a spending plan and authorizing a budget appropriation for the 2000-2001 fiscal year: and

WHEREAS, certain projects included in the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget will be carried over as continuing appropriations to the fiscal year 2001-2002 (listed in the attached Exhibit A); and

WHEREAS, the City Council desires that the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget be reduced for each of the continuing appropriations carried over to fiscal year 2001-2002;

BE IT, THEREFORE, RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES:

The following adjustments be made to the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget per the attached Exhibits A:

Decrease the General Fund budget as follows:

 

City Attorney #001-103-40 Legal Services
$ 10,475
Community Outrch #001-105-35 Professional/technical
$ 7,210
Public Safety #001-214-35 Professional/technical
$ 19,487
Planning #001-401-35 Professional/technical
$168,616
Planning #001-401-54 Printing & Binding
$ 1,125
Recreation/Parks #001-540-50 Operating Supplies/Minor Equip
$ 10,000
Recreation/Parks# #001-560-71 Meetings & Conferences
$ 2,800
Bldg. Maintenance #001-340-30 Maintenance Services
$ 10,000
Decrease the Gas Tax Fund budget as follows:
Street Maintenance #102-302-30 Maintenance services
$ 64,503
Street Maintenance #102-302-35 Professional/technical
$ 8,000
Decrease the CDBG Fund budget as follows:
CDBG Projects #110-910-35 Professional/technical
$166,840
CDBG Projects #110-910-50 Supplies
$ 300
CDBG Projects #110-910-82 Improvements other than Bldgs.
$ 50,000

Decrease the Recycling Fund budget as follows:

Recycling #112-312-68 Grants
$ 73,031

Decrease the Proposition A Fund budget as follows:

Recycling #116-316-82 Improvements other than Bldgs.

$ 12,000

Decrease the Capital Improvement Projects Fund budget as follows:

CIP #330-930-35 Professional/technical
$ 359,096
CIP #330-930-82 Improvements other than Bldgs
$ 652,168

Decrease the Park Development (Quimby) Fund budget as follows:

Quimby #334-934-35 Professional/technical
$ 4,500
Quimby #334-934-82 Improvements other than Bldgs.
$ 25,000

Decrease the Equipment Replacement Fund budget as follows:

Internal Services #781-381-84 Vehicles $ 55,000
Internal Services #781-382-86 Computer equipment/software $ 70,289
Internal Services #781-383-85 Furniture and equipment $ 185,100

Decrease the Building Replacement Fund budget as follows:

Internal Services #786-386-35 Professional/technical $ 55,405
       

 

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001.

 

___________________________

MAYOR

ATTEST:

______________________

CITY CLERK

State of California)

County of Los Angeles)ss

City of Rancho Palos Verdes)

I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at regular meeting thereof held on September 4, 2001.

 

_____________________________

CITY CLERK

CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES


 

RESOLUTION NO. 2001-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS

VERDES, AMENDING RESOLUTION 2001-43, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002, TO INCREASE THE BUDGET FOR CERTAIN CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FROM FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001.

WHEREAS, Section 3.32 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code provides that all expenditures in excess of budgeted allocations must be by supplemental appropriation of the City Council: and

WHEREAS, on June 5, 2001, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution 2001-43, approving a spending plan and authorizing a budget appropriation for the 2001-2002 fiscal year: and

WHEREAS, certain project expenditures included in the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget were not completed by fiscal year end; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that each of these specific project expenditures (listed in the attached Exhibit A) should be completed in fiscal year 2001-2002; and

WHEREAS, the carryover of these items will not change the estimated (budgeted) ending fund balance at June 30, 2002;

BE IT, THEREFORE, RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES:

The following adjustments be made to the fiscal year 2001-2002 budget per the attached Exhibit A:

Increase the General Fund budget as follows:

City Attorney #001-103-40 Legal Services
$ 10,475
Community Outrch #001-105-35 Professional/technical
$ 7,210
Information Tech# #001-130-35 Professional/technical
$ 5,000
Public Safety #001-214-35 Professional/technical
$ 19,487
Planning #001-401-35 Professional/technical
$168,616
Planning #001-401-54 Printing & Binding
$ 1,125
Recreation/Parks #001-540-50 Operating Supplies/Minor Equip
$ 10,000
Recreation/Parks #001-560-71 Meetings & Conferences
$ 2,800
Bldg. Maintenance #001-340-30 Maintenance Services
$ 10,000

Increase the Gas Tax Fund budget as follows:

Street Maintenance #102-302-30 Maintenance services
$ 64,503
Street Maintenance #102-302-35 Professional/technical
l$ 8,000

Increase the CDBG Fund budget as follows:

CDBG Projects #110-910-35 Professional/technical
$ 197,140
CDBG Projects #110-910-82 Improvements other than Bldgs.
$ 20,000

Increase the Recycling Fund budget as follows:

Recycling #112-312-68 Grants
$ 73,031

Increase the Proposition A Fund budget as follows:

Recycling #116-316-82 Improvements other than Bldgs.
$ 12,000
Increase the Capital Improvement Projects Fund budget as follows:
CIP #330-930-35 Professional/technical
$ 359,096
CIP #330-930-82 Improvements other than Bldgs
$ 652,168

Increase the Park Development (Quimby) Fund budget as follows:

Quimby #334-934-35 Professional/technical
$ 4,500
Quimby #334-934-82 Improvements other than Bldgs
$ 25,000

Increase the Equipment Replacement Fund budget as follows:

Internal Services #781-381-84 Vehicles

$ 55,000

Internal Services #781-382-86 Computer equipment/software

$ 65,289

Internal Services #781-383-85 Furniture and equipment

$ 185,100

Increase the Building Replacement Fund budget as follows:

Internal Services #786-386-35 Professional/technical

$ 55,405

       

 

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001.

___________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:
______________________

CITY CLERK

State of California)
County of Los Angeles)ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes)

I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at regular meeting thereof held on September 4, 2001.

_____________________________

CITY CLERK


12.Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Budget Adjustments. (Downs)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING RESOLUTION 2000-33, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO INCREASE BUDGETED APPROPRIATIONS IN THE GENERAL FUND AND RECYCLING FUND.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM:FINANCE DIRECTOR

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:FY 2000-2001 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS

Staff Coordinator:Kathryn Downs, Accounting Manager

 

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. 2001- , amending Resolution 2000-33, the budget appropriation for FY 2000-2001, to increase budgeted appropriations in the General fund and Recycling fund.

BACKGROUND:

Chapter 3.32 of Title 3 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code sets forth the guidelines related to the City’s budget administration. Section 3.32.070 of the Code requires that all expenditures in excess of a program/function’s budgeted allocation must be approved by supplemental appropriation by the City Council. While compiling the FY 2000-2001 expenditures for the City, it was determined that six programs within the General fund and Recycling fund exceeded the amount budgeted. Therefore, a supplemental appropriation in each of these programs will be necessary to satisfy budgetary compliance. A discussion of the requested adjustments to the programs follows.

City Manager Program - Purchase of Residence at 30678 Palos Verdes Drive East

On January 30, 2001, the City Council authorized staff to purchase the residence at 30768 Palos Verdes Drive East. The property sustained erosion damage during a severe rainstorm in March 2000 due to an undersized City storm drain. Once the storm drain is replaced and the slope erosion is repaired, the City will immediately sell the property. Though the City Council previously approved the purchase, a budget adjustment for $611,185 is requested in the City Manager program to appropriate the purchase.

City Attorney Program

Litigation Costs

The City incurred significant legal fees while successfully defending its antenna and view ordinances. The cost of the protracted litigation necessitates a budget

adjustment for an additional $278,000. The cost of litigation in FY 2000-2001 was $479,473 or 58% of the City’s total annual legal costs.

Aircraft Noise Monitoring and Legal Expense

During the May 23, 2001 City Council Meeting, staff was directed to reclassify $75,000 budgeted for aircraft noise monitoring and legal expense from the City Council program to the City Attorney program budget. The accompanying budget adjustment merely serves to formalize the City Council’s direction.

Administrative Services Program - General Liability Insurance Deposit

The General Liability Insurance Retroactive Deposit is billed at the end of each fiscal year; therefore, staff is unable to predict the amount of the deposit during budget preparation. The City’s General Liability Insurance Deposit increased 23% during FY 2000-2001. A budget adjustment is requested for the additional $36,000 expended within the Administrative Services program budget.

Finance Program – Temporary Services During Recruitment

During FY 2000-2001, the Finance Department experienced turnover in two positions. The accountant position remained open for nine months requiring the services of a financial consultant. Therefore, a budget adjustment is requested for the Finance program budget in the amount of $19,000.

Personnel Program – Recruitment Costs

The City experienced relatively high employee turnover during FY 2000-2001. Therefore, the cost of employment advertisements exceeded the expected level. A budget adjustment is requested for the Personnel program budget, in the amount of $3,000.

Recycling Fund

Picnic tables were purchased for City parks with a beverage-container recycling grant. The purchase of these tables was originally budgeted in the General fund. However, as grant funding became available, the expenditure was incurred in the

Recycling fund. In order to match the expenditure with the funding source, a budget adjustment is requested to move $10,770 budgeted appropriation from the Parks and Trails Maintenance program budget within the General fund to the Recycling fund budget.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed budget adjustments will have no further effect on the ending fund balances of either the General or Recycling funds since these expenditures were previously incurred in FY 2000-2001. The appropriation increases merely provide official approval for accounting purposes and are prepared only to assure budgetary compliance.

Respectfully submitted,
Dennis McLean, Finance Director

Reviewed:
Les Evans, City Manager

 


RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS

VERDES, AMENDING RESOLUTION 2000-33, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO INCREASE THE BUDGET FOR THE APPROVED YEAR END BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS

WHEREAS, Section 3.32 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code provides that all expenditures in excess of budgeted allocations must be by supplemental appropriation of the City Council: and

WHEREAS, on June 6, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution 2000-33, approving a spending plan and authorizing a budget appropriation for the 2000-2001 fiscal year: and

WHEREAS, certain programs included in the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget will have expenditures in excess of the adjusted budget; and

WHEREAS, the City Council desires that the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget be increased for each of these programs to assure budgetary compliance;

BE IT, THEREFORE, RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES:

The following adjustments be made to the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget:

Increase the General Fund budget as follows:

City Manager #001-102-80 Land
$ 611,185
City Attorney #001-103-35 Professional/technical
$ 75,000
City Attorney #001-103-40 Legal Services
$ 278,000
City Clerk #001-104-74 Insurance
$ 36,000
Finance 001-120-35 Professional/technical
$ 19,000
Personnel #001-121-54 Printing & Binding
$ 3,000

Decrease the General Fund budget as follows:

City Council #001-101-35 Professional/technical
$ 75,000
Parks/Trails Maint. #001-341-50 Operating Supplies/Minor Equip.
$ 10,770

Increase the Recycling Fund budget as follows:

Recycling #112-312-50 Operating Supplies/Minor Equip. $ 10,770

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001.

 

___________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:
______________________

CITY CLERK

State of California)
County of Los Angeles)ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes)

I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at regular meeting thereof held on September 4, 2001.

_____________________________
CITY CLERK


13.Register of Demands. (McLean)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, 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.


PUBLIC HEARING:


14.Revision to the Conditions of Approval - Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 50666 and 50667. Location: Ocean Trails. (Allison)

Recommendation: (1) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES A APPROVING ADDENDUM 13 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 36 FOR REVISION "R". (2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING REVISION "R" TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 50666. (3) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING REVISION "R" TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 50667, REVISING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO REVISE A DEADLINE FOR RECONSTRUCTING LA ROTONDA DRIVE, ADDING A NEW DEADLINE FOR RE-PAVING PORTIONS OF LA ROTONDA DRIVE, AND PLACING A NEW DEADLINE ON THE RECONSTRUCTION OF PALOS VERDES DRIVE SOUTH.

TO:HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:REVISION TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACTS 50666 & 50667

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt Resolution 2001 - , approving Addendum 13 to Environmental Impact Report 36 for Revision R; and Resolution No. 2001 - , approving Revision R to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 50666; and Resolution No. 2001 - , approving Revision R to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 50667, revising the conditions of approval to revise a deadline for reconstructing La Rotonda Drive, adding a new deadline for re-paving portions of La Rotonda Drive, and placing a new deadline on the reconstruction of Palos Verdes Drive South.

BACKGROUND

On February 20, 2001 the City Council approved Addendum No. 12 to Environmental Impact Report 36, and Revision Q to the conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative Tracts 50666 and 50667. The revision combined the requirement that the Ocean Trails Company resurface two roadways – La Rotonda Drive and Palos Verdes Drive South from La Rotonda Drive to the easterly City limit – into a requirement that they reconstruct La Rotonda Drive. The revision required work to be underway by June 1, 2001. The Ocean Trails Company has indicated that due to their current bankruptcy status, funding for reconstructing La Rotonda Drive will not be available until spring 2002.

In addition to the reconstruction of La Rotonda Drive, Ocean Trails is also responsible for reconstructing Palos Verdes Drive South (PVDS), from Conqueror Drive to La Rotonda Drive. Unfortunately, the original conditions of approval for the Ocean Trails project never included a deadline for completing this work. However, a Special Use Permit (SUP) has been issued for the temporary opening of the Golf Course. Based upon Staff's concern that PVDS should be completed as soon as possible, Staff included a condition of approval with the SUP requiring Ocean Trails to submit a construction agreement identifying a secured form of funding to complete the reconstruction of PVDS and a definitive construction start date, prior to the issuance of any extensions to the SUP.

 

DISCUSSION

La Rotonda Drive

Repairs need to be made to La Rotonda prior to the upcoming winter. This is because the roadway has an uneven riding surface which delays motorists, and will result in ponding when it rains. Because the roadway has a very thin structural section, the roadway needs to be reconstructed rather than just resurfaced. The Ocean Trails Company has indicated that they currently do not have the financial resources to reconstruct the roadway, but do have the resources to resurface portions of the roadway. Moreover they will have the financial resources in the spring of 2002 to reconstruct the roadway. For these reasons, and due to the upcoming winter rains, Staff is recommending that Ocean Trails begin construction on resurfacing portions of La Rotonda Drive by October 1, 2001, and complete such repairs by November 1, 2001. Additionally, Staff is proposing that the reconstruction of La Rotonda begins by June 1, 2002 and is completed by November 1, 2002.

Palos Verdes Drive South

As noted in the Background section above, there is currently no deadline established in the existing conditions of approval requiring Ocean Trails to complete the reconstruction of Palos Verdes Drive South. Although there is no completion date, Staff feels that this roadway should be completed as soon as possible as the roadway services the increased traffic related to the golf course, recreational and future residential land uses. Although Staff has conditioned the SUP for the temporary operation of the golf course with a condition regarding the reconstruction of PVDS, there is still no confirmed start or completion date. The current proposed revision to the Vesting Tentative Tract Maps to address the reconstruction of La Rotonda Drive is an opportunity for the City to have the developer commit to a date certain in regards to the completion of PVDS. Given the upcoming rainy season, which technically runs from October 15th to April 15th, and the fact that Staff would not recommend reconstruction of this roadway during the rainy season, Staff is proposing that the reconstruction of PVDS occur at the same time as La Rotonda - beginning by June 1, 2002 and completed by November 1, 2002. The developer has agreed to these dates. If the roadway is not completed by these dates, the Conditional Use Permit for the project can be rescinded and use of the golf course ceased.

The Staff recommended actions regarding La Rotonda Drive and PVDS will make the needed repairs to La Rotonda Drive before the rainy season, and will also achieve the ultimate goal of reconstructing La Rotonda Drive and PVDS next year.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

A public hearing notice was posted in the Peninsula News, and mailed to all property owners within a 500' radius of the Ocean Trails site. On August 28, 2001, the City received the attached e-mail correspondence from Mr. Raymond Green. Mr. Green is opposed to the extension of time for the re-construction of La Rotonda. Mr. Green notes that the condition of La Rotonda is unsafe. As noted above, portions of La Rotonda will be resurfaced prior to the upcoming winter rains to ensure its safe use.

On a separate issue, Mr. Green also noted that the stockpile used for the landslide repair appears to be higher than what it was approved for. The City Geologist has also confirmed that the stockpile may be higher than approved. As of the preparation of this report Ocean Trails was preparing a survey to analyze the size of the stockpile and address any issues if it is oversized.

CONCLUSION

Adopting the staff recommendations will approve an addendum to the environmental impact report and revise the map conditions for the Ocean Trials project to extend the deadline for completing the reconstruction of La Rotonda Drive, and establishing a new deadline for the completion of PVDS. Included in the staff recommendations is the requirement that the Ocean Trails Company make temporary repairs to La Rotonda Drive by November 1, 2001 to address concerns expressed by both the Department of Public Works as well as residents of the Ocean Terraces Condominiums.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS

Deny the request to extend the deadline to reconstruct La Rotonda Drive, and request staff to begin the reconstruction project. Staff recommends against this option because the Ocean Trails Company has proposed a plan to address both the immediate goal of providing a better roadway surface along La Rotonda Drive and the ultimate goal of reconstruction the roadway. In addition it will be difficult to mobilize a construction project to reconstruct the roadway before the rainy season.

FISCAL IMPACTS

There are no fiscal impacts to the City from the recommended actions. The cost of the reconstruction of La Rotonda Drive, the reconstruction of PVDS and the proposed interim resurfacing of La Rotonda Drive is the responsibility of the Ocean Trails Company.

Respectfully Submitted,
Dean E. Allison, Director of Public Works

Reviewed by,
Les Evans, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

Resolution approving Addendum No. 13

Resolution approving Revision R to VTTM50666

Resolution approving Revision R to VTTM50667

RESOLUTION NO. 2001-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 13 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 36 IN CONNECTION WITH REVISION "R" TO THE OCEAN TRAILS PROJECT FOR A 75 LOT RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, AND 18-HOLE PUBLIC GOLF COURSE WITH RELATED FACILITIES LOCATED IN COASTAL SUBREGIONS 7 AND 8

WHEREAS, an application package was filed by the Zuckerman Building Company and Palos Verdes Land Holdings Company requesting approval of tentative parcel maps, vesting tentative tract maps, conditional use permits, a coastal permit and a grading permit to allow the construction of a Residential Planned Development of 120 single family dwelling units and for development of an 18-hole golf course, a clubhouse and parking facilities on a 258 acre site bounded by Palos Verdes Drive South on the north, Portuguese Bend Club and Community Association on the west, the Pacific Ocean on the south and Los Angeles County Shoreline Park on the east; and,

WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was prepared and circulated for 45 days from June 7, 1991 through July 22, 1991 in order to receive written comments on the adequacy of the document from responsible agencies and the public; and,

WHEREAS, subsequent to the circulation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report and preparation of written responses, the applicant revised the scope of the project and reduced the number of proposed single family residences to 40 units in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50666 and 43 in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667, and an 18 hole golf course with related facilities within the boundaries of both Vesting Tentative Tract Maps, and, due to the changes in the project, an Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (ADEIR) was prepared; and,

WHEREAS, based on review of the Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the City determined that the information submitted in the AEIR cited potential additional significant environmental impacts that would be caused by the revised project, and directed preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR). The SEIR, which incorporates information and findings set forth in the Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, was prepared and circulated for 45 days from March 19, 1992 through May 4, 1992, during which time all interested parties were notified of the circulation period and invited to present written comments to the information contained in the SEIR, in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act; and,

WHEREAS, on June 1, 1992 the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 92-53 certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 36, in connection with Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667, Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 20970 and 23004, Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, Coastal Permit No. 103, and Grading Permit No. 1541 for an 83 lot Residential Planned Development, public open space, and an 18 hole public golf course with clubhouse and related facilities on 261.4 acres in Coastal Subregions 7 and 8; and,

WHEREAS, on December 7, 1992, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 92-115 approving an Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, in connection with approving Revisions to the Ocean Trails project applications described above, in order to address concerns expressed by the California Coastal Commission with regard to adequate provisions for public open space, public access and habitat preservation; and,

WHEREAS, on October 5, 1993, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 93-89 approving a second Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, in connection with re-approval of the Ocean Trails project applications described above, in order to comply with a Court mandate to provide affordable housing in conjunction with the project, pursuant to Government Code Section 65590; and,

WHEREAS, on September 6, 1994, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 94-71 approving a third Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, in connection with approval of Revision "A" to the Ocean Trails project applications described above, in order to incorporate changes to the project made by the California Coastal Commission in April 1993, and (based on additional geologic information) relocate the golf course clubhouse, reduce the number of single family lots from 83 to 75 and approve a location for the golf course maintenance facility and on-site affordable housing units; and,

WHEREAS, on March 11, 1996, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 96-15 approving the fourth Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, in connection with approval of Revision "B" to the Ocean Trails project applications described above, in order to incorporate changes to the project made by the California Coastal Commission in January 1995 regarding the relocation of the golf course clubhouse, Paseo Del Mar roadway and public trails to accommodate a reconfiguration of the public parking facilities, as well as additional modifications to the public trails in order to provide clarification or to be consistent with the California Coastal Commission's approval and to include an 8.5 acre vacant property owned by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District into the golf course.

WHEREAS, on September 3, 1996, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 96-72 approving the fifth Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, in connection with approval of Revision "C" to the Ocean Trails project applications described above, in order to relocate two single family residential lots in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667 from the end of Street "A" to the end of Street "C," revise the boundaries of open space Lots B, C, G and H, convert the split-level lots in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667 to single-level lots, revise the golf course layout, revise the public trail system, combine parallel trail easements, construct a paved fire access road west of the Ocean Terraces Condominiums and modify several amendments to the Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures to change the required timing for compliance; and,

WHEREAS, on August 18, 1998, the City Council of the City of Rancho

Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 98-76 approving Addendum No. 6 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "G" to the Ocean Trails project, which included: 1) an 18% increase in the size of the clubhouse from 27,000 square feet to 32,927 square feet; 2) an increase in the size of the maintenance facility from 6,000 square feet to 9,504 square feet; 3) a two foot increase in the upslope height of the maintenance facility building; and, 4) relocation of the maintenance building and reconfiguration of the maintenance facility parking lot.

WHEREAS, on February 2, 1999, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 99-10 approving Addendum No. 7 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "H" to the Ocean Trails project, which included: changing 6 of the residential lots within VTTM 50667 from flat pad lots to split level lots, lowering the overall pad elevation for each lot, and lowering Street 'B' within the subdivision, and lowering the pad elevation for 6 other lots within the subdivision. Additionally, the approval included the modification of the project's mitigation measures and conditions of approval to allow the permitted construction hours for the entire Ocean Trails project to be expanded to include Sundays through March 21, 1999.

WHEREAS, on May 4, 1999, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 99-29 approving Addendum No. 8 to Environmental Impact Report No. 35 and the proposed Revision "I" to the Ocean Trails project, which included a change to the design of the storm drain facilities of the Ocean Trails project from a tunneled pipe system to the existing on-site canyons. Revision "I" only amended the drainage for the east side of the Ocean Trails project, involving La Rotonda canyon; and,

WHEREAS, on July 20, 1999, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 99-55 approving Addendum No. 9 to Environmental Impact Report No. 35 and the proposed Revision "J" to the Ocean Trails project, which included 1), the conditions requiring the establishment of a maintenance district be revised by eliminating the maintenance district and having the golf course owner be the sole responsible entity for maintenance thereby excluding the future residential homeowners; 2) withdrawn by applicant; 3), the timing of the installation of ornamental fencing on each residential lot be delayed until prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy; 4), delay the construction of two trails within VTTM 50666 from the Second Stage to the Third Stage of phasing within the Public Amenities Plan; 5), lower the approved residential building pad elevations and create split-level pads in VTTM No. 50666; 6), delay the payment of traffic impact fees to prior to Final Map No. 50666; 7), allow an increase in total building area of the clubhouse by permitting a basement space; 8), withdrawn by applicant; and 9), revise the hours permitted for golf course landscape gardening; and,

WHEREAS, on May 16, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 2000-27 approving Addendum No. 10 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "K" to the Ocean Trails project, which allowed a portion of the golf course to open for play before all of the required public amenities have been completed due to delays caused by the failure of Landslide C on June 2, 1999; and,

WHEREAS, on June 21, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 2000-38 certifying a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program, adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the proposed Revision "L" to the Ocean Trails project, for the repair of Landslide C at Ocean Trails; and,

WHEREAS, on July 18, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision M to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving an amendment to the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), an amendment to the HCP Implementing Agreement, and approval of a Conservation Easement over the lower portion of Shoreline Park; and,

WHEREAS, on September 5, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision N to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and amending the project to accommodate a change to the design of the storm drain facilities of the Ocean Trails project from a tunneled pipe system to the existing on-site canyons. Revision "N" only amended the drainage for the west side of the Ocean Trails project, involving Forrestal Canyon; and,

WHEREAS, on February 20, 2001, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision P to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving an amendment to allow Ocean Trails an extension of time to provide 4 on-site affordable housing units for rent from "prior to one year of the opening of the clubhouse" to "prior to the opening of the 18-hole golf course"; and,

WHEREAS, on February 20, 2001, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision Q to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving an amendment which allows Ocean Trails to re-construct (instead of re-pave) La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes South to the end of La Rotonda Drive, in lieu of re-paving Palos Verdes Drive South from La Rotonda Drive to the eastern City limits; and,

WHEREAS, on May 21, 2001, Ocean Trails, L.P., submitted a letter dated May 17, 2001 to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes requesting approval for Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project to revise the Conditions of Approval for VTTM No. 50666 and VTTM No. 50667, so as to adjust Condition I-3 allowing an extension to completing the reconstruction of La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes Drive South to its end; and,

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65952.5(e) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), on August 30, 2001, copies of the draft Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 were distributed to the City Council and prior to taking action on the proposed Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project, the City Council independently reviewed and considered the information and findings contained in Addendum No. 13 to EIR No. 36; and,

WHEREAS, on September 4, 2001, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Development Code, the City Council held a public hearing to consider draft Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and,

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: Amendment R to the Ocean Trails project, allows an adjustment to Condition I-3 of VTTM Nos. 50666 and 50667, for 1) allowing Ocean Trails to delay the re-construction of La Rotonda Drive from June 1, 2001 to November 1, 2002, 2) requiring Ocean Trails to re-pave portions of La Rotonda Drive prior to November 1, 2001, and 3) requiring Ocean Trails to reconstruct Palos Verdes Drive South prior to November 1, 2002. The changes to the project are located in areas of the subject property which were previously identified as part of the developed portion of the project (ie. regardless of this change, La Rotonda was to be re-paved, but not re-constructed, after construction of the Ocean Trails project to address impacts to the roadway from construction traffic). Therefore, pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, approval of Addendum No. 13 to the previously certified EIR, rather than the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, is appropriate for the consideration of the proposed revisions to the Ocean Trails project, based on the following findings:

1.That subsequent changes proposed to the project do not require important revisions to the previous EIR, since there are no new significant environmental impacts that have been identified, which were not considered in the previous EIR. This is so, since the proposed changes identified in Section 1 and attached Exhibit "A" would not result in any new or increased impacts to the environment that are not already analyzed within EIR No. 36, because

1) it merely delays the full re-construction of a roadway that would have only been re-paved anyway, from June 1, 2001 to November 1, 2002,

2) there was no timeframe addressed in the mitigation measures that identified the exact date when this roadway was to be repaired, and

3) portions of the roadway will be re-paved by November 1, 2001 to ensure safe use of the roadway. Further, the change also identifies a specific date (November 1, 2002) when the re-construction of Palos Verdes Drive shall be completed, which was never identified in the project's conditions of approval or mitigation measures. This additional change will help reduce any traffic and circulation impacts from the project's related golf course, recreational and residential land uses in a more timely manner than what currently exists.

2.That substantial changes to the project would not occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which would require important revisions to the previous EIR, since, as noted in #1 above, there are no new significant environmental impacts that were not considered in the previous EIR, Supplement and previous Addenda thereto, and the project only changes the timing of re-construction, but ensures that the roadway will still operate in a safe condition by having the developer provide re-surfacing improvements prior to the upcoming winter rains..

3.That there is no new information of substantial importance to the project which indicates that these proposed changes will have one or more significant effects not discussed previously in the EIR; that significant effects previously examined will not be substantially more severe than shown in the EIR; that no mitigation measures or alternatives, previously found not to be feasible, would now in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project; or that no mitigation measures or alternatives which were not previously considered in the EIR, would now substantially lessen one or more significant effects of the environment, because this project is only to change the date that the developer shall re-construct a roadway (La Rotonda Drive), but ensures that the roadway will continue to operate in a safe manner.

Section 2: In approving Addendum No. 10 to EIR No. 36, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Addendum No. 13 document, attached hereto and made a part thereof as Exhibit "A".

Section 3: The Addendum No. 13 to EIR No. 36 identifies no new potential significant adverse environmental impacts to the areas listed below, beyond those already identified in the Final EIR No. 36, the Supplement, Second Supplement, and Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 to EIR No. 36, as a result of the proposed revisions to the Ocean Trails project:

  • 1.Landform, Geology, and Soils
  • 2.Hydrology and Drainage
  • 3.Biological Resources
  • 4.Cultural and Scientific Resources
  • 5.Aesthetics
  • 6.Land Use and Relevant Planning
  • 7.Circulation and Traffic
  • 8.Air Resources
  • 9.Noise
  • 10.Public Services and Utilities
  • 11.Population, Employment and Housing
  • 12.Fiscal Impacts

Section 4: That implementation of the proposed changes to the project would not require additional mitigation measures or significant deletions/modifications to the mitigation measures included in the Final EIR, as well as the Supplemental, Second Supplemental, and Addends Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 to EIR No. 36.

Section 5: While the implementation of mitigation measures as discussed in Final EIR No. 36 and the Supplemental, and the Second Supplemental, and Addenda EIR Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 to EIR 36 will further reduce these impacts, it is not possible to entirely eliminate cumulative impacts to the areas of concern listed in Section 1, above. Therefore, the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, as provided in Final EIR No. 36, are hereby incorporated by reference.

Section 6: All findings, attachments and Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Resolution Nos. 92-53, 92-115, 93-89, 94-71 and 96-15, as adopted by the City Council on June 1, 1992, December 7, 1992, October 5, 1993, September 6, 1994, March 11, 1996 and September 3, 1996, respectively, are hereby incorporated by reference.

Section 7: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings contained in the staff reports, minutes, and evidence presented at the public hearings, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, based on the City Council’s determination that the document was completed in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and State and local guidelines with respect thereto.

 

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 4th day of September 2001.

_________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:
___________________________________
CITY CLERK

STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) ss
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES)

I, Jo Purcell, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on September 4, 2000.

_______________________________
Jo Purcell, City Clerk

Resolution No. 2001-
Exhibit "A"
ADDENDUM NO. 13

TO:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 36

The City Council has reviewed the proposed Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project, which would allow 1) Ocean Trails to delay the re-construction of La Rotonda Drive from June 1, 2001 to November 1, 2002, 2) require Ocean Trails to re-pave portions of La Rotonda Drive prior to November 1, 2001, and 3) require Ocean Trails to reconstruct Palos Verdes Drive South prior to November 1, 2002. The City Council has reviewed Revision "R" in conjunction with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as well as State and Local CEQA Guidelines, and find as follows:

The proposed changes to the conditions of approval found within Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50666 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667, to allow Ocean Trails to allow 1) Ocean Trails to delay the re-construction of La Rotonda Drive from June 1, 2001 to November 1, 2002, 2) require Ocean Trails to re-pave portions of La Rotonda Drive prior to November 1, 2001, and 3) require Ocean Trails to reconstruct Palos Verdes Drive South prior to November 1, 2002, would not result in any new or increased impacts to the environment that are not already analyzed within EIR No. 36, because 1) it merely delays the full re-construction of a roadway that would have only been re-paved anyway, from June 1, 2001 to November 1, 2002, 2) there was no timeframe addressed in the mitigation measures that identified the exact date when this roadway was to be repaired, and 3) portions of the roadway will be re-paved by November 1, 2001 to ensure safe use of the roadway. Further, the change also identifies a specific date (November 1, 2002) when the re-construction of Palos Verdes Drive shall be completed, which was never identified in the project's conditions of approval or mitigation measures. This additional change will help reduce any traffic and circulation impacts from the project's related golf course, recreational and residential land uses in a more timely manner than what currently exists.

 

RESOLUTION NO. 2001-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING REVISIONS TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 50666 FOR A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON A 153.9 ACRE SITE WITH THIRTY-NINE (39) SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, A PUBLIC GOLF COURSE, AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACE IN CONNECTION WITH REVISION "R" TO THE OCEAN TRAILS PROJECT LOCATED IN COASTAL SUBREGIONS 7 AND 8

WHEREAS, an application package was filed by the Zuckerman Building Company and Palos Verdes Land Holdings Company requesting approval of tentative parcel maps, vesting tentative tract maps, conditional use permits, a coastal permit and a grading permit to allow the construction of a Residential Planned Development of 120 single family dwelling units and for development of an 18-hole golf course, a clubhouse and parking facilities on a 258 acre site bounded by Palos Verdes Drive South on the north, Portuguese Bend Club and Community Association on the west, the Pacific Ocean on the south and Los Angeles County Shoreline Park on the east; and,

WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was prepared and circulated for 45 days from June 7, 1991 through July 22, 1991 in order to receive written comments on the adequacy of the document from responsible agencies and the public; and,

WHEREAS, subsequent to the circulation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report and preparation of written responses, the applicant revised the scope of the project and reduced the number of proposed single family residences to 40 units in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50666 and 43 in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667, and an 18 hole golf course with related facilities within the boundaries of both Vesting Tentative Tract Maps, and, due to the changes in the project, an Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (ADEIR) was prepared; and,

WHEREAS, based on review of the Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the City determined that the information submitted in the AEIR cited potential additional significant environmental impacts that would be caused by the revised project, and directed preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR). The SEIR, which incorporates information and findings set forth in the Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, was prepared and circulated for 45 days from March 19, 1992 through May 4, 1992, during which time all interested parties were notified of the circulation period and invited to present written comments to the information contained in the SEIR, in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act; and,

WHEREAS, on June 1, 1992, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 92-53, certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and adopted Resolution Nos. 92-54, 92-55, 92-56 and 92-57, respectively approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667, Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 20970 and 23004, Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, Coastal Permit No. 103 and Grading Permit No. 1541 for a Residential Planned Development consisting of a total of eighty-three (83) single family dwelling units, an 18 hole public golf course and public open space on 261.4 acres in Coastal Subregion Nos. 7 and 8; and,

WHEREAS, on August 12, 1992, after finding that an appeal of the City's approval of the project raised substantial issue, the California Coastal Commission denied Coastal Permit No. 103, directed the landowners to redesign the project to address the concerns raised by the Coastal Commission Staff and remanded the project back to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for reconsideration; and,

WHEREAS, on December 7, 1992, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 92-115 approving the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and adopted Resolution Nos. 92-116, 92-117, 92-118 and 92-119 approving Revisions to Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667, Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 20970 and 23004, Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, Coastal Permit No. 103, and Grading Permit No. 1541 in order to address concerns raised by the Coastal Commission with regard to adequate provisions for public open space, public access and habitat preservation; and,

WHEREAS, on April 15, 1993, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-5 (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), subject to additional conditions of approval; and,

WHEREAS, on October 5, 1993, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 93-89 approving a second Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and adopted Resolution Nos. 93-90, 93-91, 93-92 and 93-93 respectively re-approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667, Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 20970 and 23004, Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, and Grading Permit No. 1541 in order to comply with a Court mandate to provide affordable housing in conjunction with the project, pursuant to Government Code Section 65590; and,

WHEREAS, on November 5, 1993, the California Coastal Commission adopted revised and expanded findings in conjunction with the project; and,

WHEREAS, on September 6, 1994, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 94-71 approving a third Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and Adopted Resolution Nos. 94-72, 94-73, 94-74, 94-75, 94-76 and 94-77, respectively, approving Revision "A" to the approved Ocean Trails project, including, but not limited to, relocation of the golf course clubhouse from the area southwest of the School District property to an area north of Half Way Point, locating the golf course maintenance facility and four (4) affordable housing units southeast of the corner of Palos Verdes Drive South and Paseo Del Mar, reducing the number of single family residential lots from eighty-three (83) to seventy-five (75) and increasing the height of the golf course clubhouse from thirty (30) feet to forty-eight (48) feet; and,

WHEREAS, on January 12, 1995, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), thereby approving its first amendment to the permit, subject to revised conditions of approval; and,

WHEREAS, on September 27, 1995, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), thereby approving its second amendment to the permit; and,

WHEREAS, on February 1, 1996, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), thereby approving its third amendment to the permit; and,

WHEREAS, on March 11, 1996, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 96-15 approving a fourth Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and Adopted Resolution Nos. 96-16, and 96-17, respectively, approving Revision "B" to the approved Ocean Trails project, including, but not limited to, modifying the approved alignment of Paseo del Mar ("A" Street/"J" Bluff Road), revising the Conditions of Approval regarding several public trails, and relocating the golf course clubhouse approximately 80 feet to the west of its previously approved location; and,

WHEREAS, on July 11, 1996, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), thereby approving its fourth amendment to the permit, subject to revised conditions of approval; and,

WHEREAS, on September 3, 1996, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 96-72 approving a fifth Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and Adopted Resolution Nos. 96-73, 96-74, 96-75, 96-76 and 96-77, respectively, approving Revision "C" to the approved Ocean Trails project, including, but not limited to, relocation of two single family residential lots in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667 from the end of Street "A" to the end of Street "C", revisions to the boundaries of open space Lots B, C, G and H, conversion the split-level lots in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667 to single-level lots, revisions to the golf course layout, revisions the public trail system, combination of parallel trails easements, construction of a paved fire access road west of the Ocean Terraces Condominiums and amendments to several Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures to modify the required timing for compliance; and,

WHEREAS, on September 9, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted P.C. Resolution No. 97-44 approving Revision "D" to the Ocean Trails project, which involved an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 162 (Residential Planned Development) to modify the minimum rear yard setbacks on Lot Nos. 6 through 9 to provide an adequate buffer between the proposed residences and the potential brush fires that may occur on the adjacent habitat area; and,

WHEREAS, on April 21, 1998, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 98-32 approving Revision "E" to the Ocean Trails project, which involved an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 163 (Golf Course) to modify the bonding requirements for the golf course improvements; and,

WHEREAS, on June 16, 1998, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 98-58 approving Revision "F" to the Ocean Trails project which involved and amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667 to modify the configuration of Streets "C" and "D" and Lot Nos. 1 through 13 to accommodate the final location of the Foundation Setback Line; and,

WHEREAS, on July 14, 1998, the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution Nos. 98-26 and 98-27, thereby recommending approval of Addendum No. 6 to EIR No. 36 and Revision "G" to Conditional Use Permit No. 163 to the City Council; and,

WHEREAS, on August 18, 1998, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 98-76 approving Addendum No. 6 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "G" to the Ocean Trails project, which included: 1) an 18% increase in the size of the clubhouse from 27,000 square feet to 32,927 square feet; 2) an increase in the size of the maintenance facility from 6,000 square feet to 9,504 square feet; 3) a two foot increase in the upslope height of the maintenance facility building; and, 4) relocation of the maintenance building and reconfiguration of the maintenance facility parking lot; and,

WHEREAS, on February 2, 1999, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 99-10 approving Addendum No. 7 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "H" to the Ocean Trails project, which included: changing 6 of the residential lots within VTTM 50667 from flat pad lots to split level lots, lowering the overall pad elevation for each lot, and lowering Street 'B' within the subdivision, and lowering the pad elevation for 6 other lots within the subdivision. Additionally, the approval included the modification of the project's mitigation measures and conditions of approval to allow the permitted construction hours for the entire Ocean Trails project to be expanded to include Sundays through March 21, 1999; and,

WHEREAS, on May 4, 1999, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 99-29 approving Addendum No. 8 to Environmental Impact Report No. 35 and the proposed Revision "I" to the Ocean Trails project, which included a change to the design of the storm drain facilities of the Ocean Trails project from a tunneled pipe system to the existing on-site canyons. Revision "I" only amended the drainage for the east side of the Ocean Trails project, involving La Rotonda Canyon; and,

WHEREAS, on June 2, 1999, Landslide C at the Ocean Trails site was re-activated; and,

WHEREAS, on July 20, 1999, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 99-55 approving Addendum No. 9 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "J" to the Ocean Trails project, which included 1), the conditions requiring the establishment of a maintenance district be revised by eliminating the maintenance district and having the golf course owner be the sole responsible entity for maintenance thereby excluding the future residential homeowners; 2) withdrawn by applicant; 3), the timing of the installation of ornamental fencing on each residential lot be delayed until prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy; 4), delay the construction of two trails within VTTM 50666 from the Second Stage to the Third Stage of phasing within the Public Amenities Plan; 5), lower the approved residential building pad elevations and create split-level pads in VTTM No. 50666; 6), delay the payment of traffic impact fees to prior to Final Map No. 50666; 7), allow an increase in total building area of the clubhouse by permitting a basement space; 8), withdrawn by applicant; and 9), revise the hours permitted for golf course landscape gardening; and,

WHEREAS, on May 16, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 2000-27 approving Addendum No. 10 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "K" to the Ocean Trails project, which allowed a portion of the golf course to open for play before all of the required public amenities have been completed due to delays caused by the failure of Landslide C on June 2, 1999; and,

WHEREAS, on June 21, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 2000-38 certifying a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program, adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the proposed Revision "L" to the Ocean Trails project, for the repair of Landslide C at Ocean Trails; and,

WHEREAS, on July 18, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision M to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving an amendment to the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), an amendment to the HCP Implementing Agreement, and approval of a Conservation Easement over the lower portion of Shoreline Park; and,

WHEREAS, on September 5, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision N to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and amending the project to accommodate a change to the design of the storm drain facilities of the Ocean Trails project from a tunneled pipe system to the existing on-site canyons. Revision "N" only amended the drainage for the west side of the Ocean Trails project, involving Forrestal Canyon; and,

WHEREAS, on February 20, 2001, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision P to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving an amendment to allow Ocean Trails an extension of time to provide 4 on-site affordable housing units for rent from "prior to one year of the opening of the clubhouse" to "prior to the opening of the 18-hole golf course"; and,

WHEREAS, on February 20, 2001, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision Q to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving an amendment which allows Ocean Trails to re-construct (instead of re-pave) La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes South to the end of La Rotonda Drive, in lieu of re-paving Palos Verdes Drive South from La Rotonda Drive to the eastern City limits; and,

WHEREAS, on May 21, 2001, Ocean Trails, L.P., submitted a letter dated May 17, 2001 to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes requesting approval for Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project to revise the Conditions of Approval for VTTM No. 50666 and VTTM No. 50667, so as to adjust Condition I-3 allowing an extension to completing the reconstruction of La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes Drive South to its end; and,

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65952.5(e) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), on August 30, 2001, copies of the draft Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 were distributed to the City Council and prior to taking action on the proposed Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project, the City Council independently reviewed and considered the information and findings contained in Addendum No. 13 to EIR No. 36; and,

WHEREAS, on September 4, 2001, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Development Code, the City Council held a public hearing to consider draft Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and,

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: This application would permit Amendment R to VTTM No. 50666, for 1) allowing Ocean Trails to delay the re-construction of La Rotonda Drive from June 1, 2001 to November 1, 2002, 2) requiring Ocean Trails to re-pave portions of La Rotonda Drive prior to November 1, 2001, and 3) requiring Ocean Trails to reconstruct Palos Verdes Drive South prior to November 1, 2002. .

Section 2: In considering the proposed revisions to the project, the City Council has determined that the preparation of Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 is appropriate, since the proposed changes noted in Section 1 above, will not result in any new significant environmental impacts which were not previously identified and analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 36, that the subsequent changes will not result in an increase in any previously identified significant environmental impacts, that the Addendum does not contain new information of substantial importance to the project and that only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make Environmental Impact Report adequate under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Therefore, based on the review of Draft Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 prepared in association with the proposed Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project, as conditioned, the City Council finds that the project still mitigates, or reduces to the extent feasible, significant adverse effects to adjacent properties or the permitted uses thereof. In approving the revised project, the City Council finds that social, recreational, and other benefits of the project continue to outweigh any unavoidable adverse environmental impacts that may occur and that due to overriding benefits and considerations, any unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of the project are acceptable. Accordingly, the City Council incorporate, by reference, the Final EIR No. 36, the Supplemental EIR, the second Supplemental EIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13, and Resolution No. 92-115 (which includes, without limitation, the detailed statement of overriding considerations set forth therein).

Section 3: That the creation of thirty-nine (39) single-family residential lots, golf course with related improvements and public open space, as conditioned, is consistent with the City's General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan.

The General Plan land use map designates almost the entire project site as Residential, with a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre, and designates the coastal bluffs as hazard areas. The General Plan provides for additional commercial recreational uses within the City as appropriate to a particular location, including golf, equestrian, tennis and other recreational activities, and designates the City's entire coastal area as a specific plan district.

The Coastal Specific Plan land use map shows the following general uses for the project site: (a) Residential (with a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre) for the vast majority of the property, (b) Hazard areas along the bluffs and in the westerly natural drainage course, (c) a floating Retail Commercial area, and (d) Recreational parking. The text of the Coastal Specific Plan expressly permits visitor-serving uses, such as a golf course, subject to satisfaction of the requirements for granting a conditional use permit under the Development Code.

With 39 residential units on approximately 39.6 acres, the density is slightly below one dwelling unit per acre and, therefore, consistent with the General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan.

Section 4: That the creation of thirty-nine (39) single-family residential lots, common open space, a public golf course, and public open space, as conditioned, is consistent with the City's Development Code for projects within the RS-1 zoning district under a Residential Planned Development. In addition, a minimum of 30 percent of the site will be maintained within the residential development as common open space, exclusive of the golf course. The 39-Lot Revised Site Plan does not contemplate construction of any structures on land currently zoned as Open Space Hazard.

The majority of the subject property is zoned RS-1 (Residential Planned Development) with the bluff face and the southwesterly natural drainage course (commonly known as Forrestal Canyon) being zoned as Open Space Hazard (OH). In compliance with the requirements of the OH zoning district, the applicant will not construct any permanent habitable structures on land that is zoned Open Space Hazard.

The RS-1 (RPD) zone requires a conditional use permit for any type of development (§ 17.06.050) and expressly permits single-family residential development and any other uses permitted under Chapter 17.02, including conditionally-permitted uses under Chapter 17.56, such as golf courses (§ 17.06.030). Accordingly, under Chapter 17.06 and Section 17.56.020 of the Development Code, residential development and a golf course and related facilities are permissible uses, subject to a conditional use permit. The necessary findings with respect to the conditional use permits required in connection with the Residential Planned Development and golf course are contained in Resolutions Nos. 96-75 and 96-76, respectively.

Furthermore, the residential portion of the project provides in excess of thirty percent of the Residential Planned Development as common open space, which open space is sited in a manner that is accessible for viewing and access by the general public from public roads and walkways and preserves views to the coast.

Section 5: That the provision of a continuous bluff road as provided in the Coastal Specific Plan and depicted on Figure 24 of the Coastal Specific Plan is infeasible due to geologic and geotechnical constraints affecting the property and because such a road would require substantial alteration to the natural canyon area on the western portion of the property commonly known as "Forrestal Canyon". The City geologist and geotechnical engineer have each concluded that the land upon which such a road would be built has not demonstrated sufficient stability to warrant the construction of a permanent road in that location. As an alternative, the project features the realignment of Paseo Del Mar as a bluff road cul-de-sac taking access from Palos Verdes Drive South and the vacation of the central portion of Paseo del Mar. There will be no dwelling units located seaward of this bluff road.

The combination of the vacation of the central portion of Paseo del Mar, the realignment of Paseo Del Mar as a bluff road cul-de-sac taking access from Palos Verdes Drive South, and a public access easement over the clubhouse driveway and parking facilities to Forrestal Canyon, as provided in the revised applications and conditions of approval, is consistent with Coastal Specific Plan, Subregion 7, Policy No. 16 which states that "Paseo del Mar shall be improved to provide access to residential development and consideration shall be given to relocating Paseo del Mar southward or exchanging it for another access route closer to the bluff edge."

The intent of Coastal Specific Plan, Subregion 7, Policy 19 is satisfied by the provision of an 8.9 acre Bluff Top Public Access Corridor with a minimum width of one hundred (100) feet located along the bluff top between Half Way Point Park and Shoreline Park. This Bluff Top Public Access Corridor contains a public pedestrian trail along the entire length of the corridor and an off-road bicycle trail through the central portion of the site. The City Council finds that the Bluff Top Public Access Corridor is similar in average width and area to any coastal bluff road which would otherwise be constructed, if geologically feasible, pursuant to Coastal Specific Plan, Subregion 7, Policy 19.

The City Council further finds that there shall be no road seaward of the last row of dwelling units in the residential area located on the far western portion of the property because the adverse impacts of such a road outweigh its potential benefits. A road seaward of the last row of dwelling units in this area should not be connected to the proposed bluff road because such a connection would result in substantial alteration and damage to Forrestal Canyon and the significant biological resources located therein.

Without such a connection, the City Council finds that such a road is unnecessary to provide vehicular access to the coast and the coastal bluff, adequate vehicular access having already been provided by the bluff road cul-de-sac and public access to the clubhouse driveway and parking facilities, as described above.

Section 6: That the golf course and related uses are consistent with Coastal Specific Plan, Subregion 7, Policy 7 which states: "Ensure that any proposed commercial activity responds to the needs of the coastal residents and shall not be of an intensity which would purposefully generate a service area external of the coastal region." The City Council finds that the intent of the above policy is to limit traditional commercial development (such as retail and office uses) so as not to create a service area external to the coastal region and that such policy is not intended to apply to commercial recreational uses, which are encouraged by the General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan. The City Council's interpretation of this policy is consistent with other policies in the Coastal Specific Plan and with Resolution No. 82-24, which adopted Coastal Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 and specifically authorized visitor-serving uses, such as golf, in Subregion 7.

Section 7: That the trails plan as shown in the revised "Site Plan for Conditional Use Permit Amendment Map No. 2" (dated June 19, 1996) submitted by the applicant, including the Class I Pedestrian and Bike Trail segment in the area seaward of the western residential area, is consistent with the Coastal Specific Plan requirements relating to trails. The precise alignment of this particular trail segment varies between its description in the Coastal Specific Plan, its display on Access Corridors map in the Coastal Specific Plan (Figure 24) and its location on the Coastal Specific Plan Land Use Map.

Because of these slightly different configurations, City Council finds that these descriptions and maps in the Coastal Specific Plan are intended to provide a generalized location for this trail segment. The City Council has considered these different alignments and found that the alignment of this segment as shown in the "Site Plan for Conditional Use Permit Amendment Map No. 2" (dated June 19, 1996) provides comparable public access, minimizes incompatibility with the active public recreational uses and, when connected to the bluff road cul-de-sac via a bridge over Forrestal Canyon, provides linkage to the bluff road, bluff top areas and the remainder of the site. The City Council finds that in the absence of a road seaward of the last row of dwelling units in the western residential area (as described in Section 5 hereof), this trail segment should be located as shown in the revised "Site Plan for Conditional Use Permit Amendment Map No. 2" (date June 19, 1996).

Section 8: That the golf course and related uses are consistent with Coastal Specific Plan policy and Section 17.06.040.C.8 of the Development Code, which require the area seaward of corridor improvements to be improved and either dedicated or permanently maintained through deed restriction for public use. Section 17.06.040.C.6 of the Development Code permits the preservation of open space by dedication, deed restriction or other appropriate methods approved by the City. In compliance with these provisions and policies, the East and West Bluff Preserves, Half Way Point Park, Half Way Point Preserve, the Bluff Top Public Access Corridor, the Bluff Top Wildlife Corridor (located between the West Bluff Preserve and Half Way Point Park) and the public paths, trails, parking and recreational areas associated with these public open space areas will be improved by the applicants and offered to the City for dedication. Furthermore, the golf course area will be improved by the applicants and permanently maintained through deed restriction for public use. The City Council specifically finds that the deed restriction on the golf course land constitutes permanently maintained public open space. Neither the Coastal Specific Plan nor Development Code expressly prohibit active public recreational uses, or require only passive public uses, for the area seaward of the conceptual bluff road.

Section 9: For purposes of the Subdivision Map Act, the design of the subdivision, golf course, and the related improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat based on compliance with the City's Development Code, General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan and consideration of information contained in Draft, Supplemental, and Addenda to Environmental Impact Report No. 36.

The City Council acknowledges that there is the difference between the term "significant impact" under CEQA and the term "substantial environmental damage" under the Subdivision Map Act. Draft EIR No. 36, Supplement to EIR No. 36, Second Supplement to EIR No. 36, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 to EIR No. 36 are required to base environmental findings on a "worst case" basis. As a result, the Final EIR and Addendum No. 1 conclude that significant impacts to biological resources remain after mitigation because of the loss of raptor foraging area and because of the temporal loss of Coastal Sage Scrub. Even with the 2:1 replacement of existing viable Coastal Sage Scrub and the other mitigation measures contained in the Final and Addendum No. 1 to EIR No. 36, the temporal loss of Coastal Sage Scrub, which serves as natural habitat for the California gnatcatcher, is considered significant due to the uncertainty that this species will be able to re-occupy the site after replacement of the Coastal Sage Scrub. These environmental findings are primarily the result of grading for the golf course, which itself has already been minimized through its links-type design. These specific findings and a corresponding statement of overriding considerations are contained in Resolution No. 92-115, which is hereby incorporated by reference.

With the mitigation measures adopted by the City pursuant to Resolution No. 92-115, and revised pursuant to Resolution No. 96-72, the project will not result in substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat under the Subdivision Map Act. However, even assuming that the project did result in substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, such damage or injury would be caused primarily by grading for the golf course. The elimination of the golf course is not feasible because it would not satisfy an important objective of the project: to provide visitor-serving public recreational uses, which objective is encouraged by policies in the Coastal Specific Plan. For this reason, this alternative or mitigation measure has been rejected by the City Council. Pursuant to Resolution No. 92-115, the City has made a finding of infeasibility with respect to elimination of the golf course.

Section 10: That the subject property is physically suitable to accommodate the revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50666, as conditioned, in terms of design and density.

Section 11: That the creation of the lots, single family residential dwelling units, golf course, public open space, and related improvements will not be materially detrimental to property values, nor will it jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise constitute a menace to the surrounding areas, since physical improvements, dedications and maintenance agreements are required.

Section 12: The City Council has considered the effect of the revised tract map on the housing needs of the region as set forth in the City's Housing Element, and balanced these needs against the public service needs of its residents and against available fiscal and environmental resources, and finds that the revised tract map helps to achieve those housing needs without unreasonably burdening the public service needs of existing residents and available fiscal and environmental resources.

Section 13: That the division and development of the property will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of the public entity and/or public utility rights-of-way and/or easements within the tract.

Section 14: That the discharge of sewage from this land division into the public sewer system will not violate the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000 of the Water Code).

Section 15: That the design of the residential subdivision, golf course, and associated improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems.

Section 16: That the design of the residential subdivision, golf course, and the type of improvements associated with them, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed project. Further, public trail easements which are consistent with the policies of the General Plan and the Coastal Specific Plan are required as a condition of this approval.

Section 17: That the design of the revised vesting tentative tract map provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible.

Section 18: That the revised vesting tentative tract map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965.

Section 19: That dedications required by local ordinance are shown on the tentative map and/or are set forth in the conditions of approval attached hereto in Exhibit "A".

Section 20: That the City considered the effect of approval of the residential subdivision on the housing needs of the region in which the City is situated and balanced these needs against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources.

Section 21: The time within which the judicial review of the decision reflected in this Resolution, if available, must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

Section 22: The mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Programs contained in Resolution No. 96-72, Resolution No. 2000-38, and Resolution No. 2000-58, as adopted by the City Council on September 3, 1996, June 21, 2000, and September 5, 2000, respectively, are hereby incorporated by reference into the Conditions of Approval for the revisions to VTTM No. 50666.

Section 23: The time within which the judicial review of the decision reflected in this Resolution, if available, must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

Section 24: For the forgoing reasons, and based on information and findings contained in the public record, including staff reports, minutes, records of proceedings, and evidence presented at the public hearings, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves Revision "R" to VTTM No. 50666, amending condition I-3, as shown in the attached Exhibit "A", which is necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. All other conditions of approval that have been imposed on this project shall remain in effect and are incorporated herein.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 4th day of September 2001.

_________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:
____________________________

CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES)ss
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES)

I, Jo Purcell, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2001-was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on September 4, 2001.

___________________________
Jo Purcell, City Clerk

 


RESOLUTION NO. 2001- EXHIBIT "A"

VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 50666 - REVISION "R"

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

The following conditions shall be revised to read as follows:

  1. STREETS
  2. 3.The developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of the realignment of Palos Verdes Drive South from Conqueror Drive to La Rotonda Drive. Plans for the realignment and reconstruction shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Public Works prior to issuance of grading permits or recordation of the Final Map, whichever occurs first and shall include a minimum fourteen (14) foot wide median from Conqueror Drive to Palos Verdes Drive East and a minimum ten (10) foot wide median from Palos Verdes Drive East to La Rotonda Drive. In addition, the developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of curb and gutter and full median improvements adjacent to the Portuguese Bend Club. The construction and realignment shall also include provisions for the future signalization of the intersections at Palos Verdes Drive South and Forrestal Drive and at Palos Verdes Drive South and La Rotonda Drive, including the installation of all necessary underground facilities and utilities during construction so that subsequent installation of signals at either intersection can be accomplished without requiring future road cuts. Construction on the improvements noted above shall begin no later than June 1, 2002 and shall be completed by November 1, 2002.

    Additionally, the developer shall be responsible for the design and re-construction of La Rotonda Drive, from Palos Verdes Drive South to the end of La Rotonda Drive. Prior to June 1, 2002 or in conjunction with the construction of Phase 2 of Palos Verdes Drive South, whichever occurs first, the developer shall be responsible for obtaining approval of the structural section of La Rotonda and starting re-construction. The re-construction shall be completed by November 1, 2002.

    Further, subject to review and approval by the Director of Public Works, the developer shall be responsible for resurfacing of portions of La Rotonda Road. The re-surfacing shall begin by October 1, 2001 and shall be completed by November 1, 2001.

    Nothing in this Condition I-3 shall preclude the City from requiring the Developer to contribute to the cost of reconstructing Palos Verdes Drive South (25th Street) from La Rotonda Drive to the eastern City limits pursuant to Condition I-5 of this approval, if it is determined that the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer has damaged this street segment. If the City and the Developer do not agree as to whether the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer has damaged this street segment, then they shall mutually agree upon a third party geotechnical engineer (the "Engineer") to make such determination. The Engineer shall determine, as soon as reasonably feasible after his or her appointment, as to whether, and the extent to which, the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer is responsible for having damaged such street segment. The decision of the Engineer shall be binding and non-appealable. If the Engineer determines that the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer is partially or fully responsible for damaging such street segment, then the Developer shall be responsible for making a financial contribution towards the reconstruction costs in proportion to the extent of such damage caused by the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer. Each party shall pay for the costs and expenses of its engineer, with the parties sharing equally the cost of the Engineer. Additionally, if it is determined as set forth above that the Developer is responsible for making a financial contribution towards the reconstruction costs, the Developer shall receive a credit against that cost, due to the additional amount being incurred by the Developer to reconstruct La Rotonda Drive in accordance with this amended Condition I-3. The amount of credit shall be equal to the difference between (1) the cost of resurfacing 25th Street from La Rotonda Drive to the easterly City limits plus the cost of resurfacing La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes Drive South to the Fire Access Road, and (2) the cost to reconstruct La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes Drive South to the Fire Access Road.


    RESOLUTION NO. 2001-

    A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING REVISIONS TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 50667 FOR A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON A 107.5 ACRE SITE WITH THIRTY-SIX (36) SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, A PUBLIC GOLF COURSE, AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACE IN CONNECTION WITH REVISION "R" TO THE OCEAN TRAILS PROJECT LOCATED IN COASTAL SUBREGIONS 7 AND 8

    WHEREAS, an application package was filed by the Zuckerman Building Company and Palos Verdes Land Holdings Company requesting approval of tentative parcel maps, vesting tentative tract maps, conditional use permits, a coastal permit and a grading permit to allow the construction of a Residential Planned Development of 120 single family dwelling units and for development of an 18-hole golf course, a clubhouse and parking facilities on a 258 acre site bounded by Palos Verdes Drive South on the north, Portuguese Bend Club and Community Association on the west, the Pacific Ocean on the south and Los Angeles County Shoreline Park on the east; and,

    WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was prepared and circulated for 45 days from June 7, 1991 through July 22, 1991 in order to receive written comments on the adequacy of the document from responsible agencies and the public; and,

    WHEREAS, subsequent to the circulation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report and preparation of written responses, the applicant revised the scope of the project and reduced the number of proposed single family residences to 40 units in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50666 and 43 in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667, and an 18 hole golf course with related facilities within the boundaries of both Vesting Tentative Tract Maps, and, due to the changes in the project, an Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (ADEIR) was prepared; and,

    WHEREAS, based on review of the Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the City determined that the information submitted in the AEIR cited potential additional significant environmental impacts that would be caused by the revised project, and directed preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR). The SEIR, which incorporates information and findings set forth in the Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report, was prepared and circulated for 45 days from March 19, 1992 through May 4, 1992, during which time all interested parties were notified of the circulation period and invited to present written comments to the information contained in the SEIR, in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act; and,

    WHEREAS, on June 1, 1992, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 92-53, certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and adopted Resolution Nos. 92-54, 92-55, 92-56 and 92-57, respectively approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667, Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 20970 and 23004, Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, Coastal Permit No. 103 and Grading Permit No. 1541 for a Residential Planned Development consisting of a total of eighty-three (83) single family dwelling units, an 18 hole public golf course and public open space on 261.4 acres in Coastal Subregion Nos. 7 and 8; and,

    WHEREAS, on August 12, 1992, after finding that an appeal of the City's approval of the project raised substantial issue, the California Coastal Commission denied Coastal Permit No. 103, directed the landowners to redesign the project to address the concerns raised by the Coastal Commission Staff and remanded the project back to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for reconsideration; and,

    WHEREAS, on December 7, 1992, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 92-115 approving the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and adopted Resolution Nos. 92-116, 92-117, 92-118 and 92-119 approving Revisions to Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667, Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 20970 and 23004, Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, Coastal Permit No. 103, and Grading Permit No. 1541 in order to address concerns raised by the Coastal Commission with regard to adequate provisions for public open space, public access and habitat preservation; and,

    WHEREAS, on April 15, 1993, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-5 (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), subject to additional conditions of approval; and,

    WHEREAS, on October 5, 1993, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 93-89 approving a second Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and adopted Resolution Nos. 93-90, 93-91, 93-92 and 93-93 respectively re-approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667, Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 20970 and 23004, Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, and Grading Permit No. 1541 in order to comply with a Court mandate to provide affordable housing in conjunction with the project, pursuant to Government Code Section 65590; and,

    WHEREAS, on November 5, 1993, the California Coastal Commission adopted revised and expanded findings in conjunction with the project; and,

    WHEREAS, on September 6, 1994, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 94-71 approving a third Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and Adopted Resolution Nos. 94-72, 94-73, 94-74, 94-75, 94-76 and 94-77, respectively, approving Revision "A" to the approved Ocean Trails project, including, but not limited to, relocation of the golf course clubhouse from the area southwest of the School District property to an area north of Half Way Point, locating the golf course maintenance facility and four (4) affordable housing units southeast of the corner of Palos Verdes Drive South and Paseo Del Mar, reducing the number of single family residential lots from eighty-three (83) to seventy-five (75) and increasing the height of the golf course clubhouse from thirty (30) feet to forty-eight (48) feet; and,

    WHEREAS, on January 12, 1995, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), thereby approving its first amendment to the permit, subject to revised conditions of approval; and,

    WHEREAS, on September 27, 1995, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), thereby approving its second amendment to the permit; and,

    WHEREAS, on February 1, 1996, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), thereby approving its third amendment to the permit; and,

    WHEREAS, on March 11, 1996, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 96-15 approving a fourth Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and Adopted Resolution Nos. 96-16, and 96-17, respectively, approving Revision "B" to the approved Ocean Trails project, including, but not limited to, modifying the approved alignment of Paseo del Mar ("A" Street/"J" Bluff Road), revising the Conditions of Approval regarding several public trails, and relocating the golf course clubhouse approximately 80 feet to the west of its previously approved location; and,

    WHEREAS, on July 11, 1996, the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e. Coastal Permit No. 103), thereby approving its fourth amendment to the permit, subject to revised conditions of approval; and,

    WHEREAS, on September 3, 1996, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 96-72 approving a fifth Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and Adopted Resolution Nos. 96-73, 96-74, 96-75, 96-76 and 96-77, respectively, approving Revision "C" to the approved Ocean Trails project, including, but not limited to, relocation of two single family residential lots in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667 from the end of Street "A" to the end of Street "C", revisions to the boundaries of open space Lots B, C, G and H, conversion the split-level lots in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667 to single-level lots, revisions to the golf course layout, revisions the public trail system, combination of parallel trails easements, construction of a paved fire access road west of the Ocean Terraces Condominiums and amendments to several Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures to modify the required timing for compliance; and,

    WHEREAS, on September 9, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted P.C. Resolution No. 97-44 approving Revision "D" to the Ocean Trails project, which involved an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 162 (Residential Planned Development) to modify the minimum rear yard setbacks on Lot Nos. 6 through 9 to provide an adequate buffer between the proposed residences and the potential brush fires that may occur on the adjacent habitat area; and,

    WHEREAS, on April 21, 1998, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 98-32 approving Revision "E" to the Ocean Trails project, which involved an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 163 (Golf Course) to modify the bonding requirements for the golf course improvements; and,

    WHEREAS, on June 16, 1998, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 98-58 approving Revision "F" to the Ocean Trails project which involved and amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667 to modify the configuration of Streets "C" and "D" and Lot Nos. 1 through 13 to accommodate the final location of the Foundation Setback Line; and,

    WHEREAS, on July 14, 1998, the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution Nos. 98-26 and 98-27, thereby recommending approval of Addendum No. 6 to EIR No. 36 and Revision "G" to Conditional Use Permit No. 163 to the City Council; and,

    WHEREAS, on August 18, 1998, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 98-76 approving Addendum No. 6 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "G" to the Ocean Trails project, which included: 1) an 18% increase in the size of the clubhouse from 27,000 square feet to 32,927 square feet; 2) an increase in the size of the maintenance facility from 6,000 square feet to 9,504 square feet; 3) a two foot increase in the upslope height of the maintenance facility building; and, 4) relocation of the maintenance building and reconfiguration of the maintenance facility parking lot; and,

    WHEREAS, on February 2, 1999, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 99-10 approving Addendum No. 7 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "H" to the Ocean Trails project, which included: changing 6 of the residential lots within VTTM 50667 from flat pad lots to split level lots, lowering the overall pad elevation for each lot, and lowering Street 'B' within the subdivision, and lowering the pad elevation for 6 other lots within the subdivision. Additionally, the approval included the modification of the project's mitigation measures and conditions of approval to allow the permitted construction hours for the entire Ocean Trails project to be expanded to include Sundays through March 21, 1999; and,

    WHEREAS, on May 4, 1999, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 99-29 approving Addendum No. 8 to Environmental Impact Report No. 35 and the proposed Revision "I" to the Ocean Trails project, which included a change to the design of the storm drain facilities of the Ocean Trails project from a tunneled pipe system to the existing on-site canyons. Revision "I" only amended the drainage for the east side of the Ocean Trails project, involving La Rotonda Canyon; and,

    WHEREAS, on June 2, 1999, Landslide C at the Ocean Trails site was re-activated; and,

    WHEREAS, on July 20, 1999, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 99-55 approving Addendum No. 9 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "J" to the Ocean Trails project, which included 1), the conditions requiring the establishment of a maintenance district be revised by eliminating the maintenance district and having the golf course owner be the sole responsible entity for maintenance thereby excluding the future residential homeowners; 2) withdrawn by applicant; 3), the timing of the installation of ornamental fencing on each residential lot be delayed until prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy; 4), delay the construction of two trails within VTTM 50666 from the Second Stage to the Third Stage of phasing within the Public Amenities Plan; 5), lower the approved residential building pad elevations and create split-level pads in VTTM No. 50666; 6), delay the payment of traffic impact fees to prior to Final Map No. 50666; 7), allow an increase in total building area of the clubhouse by permitting a basement space; 8), withdrawn by applicant; and 9), revise the hours permitted for golf course landscape gardening; and,

    WHEREAS, on October 12, 1999, Final Map No. 50667 was recorded with the County of Los Angeles; and,

    WHEREAS, on May 16, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 2000-27 approving Addendum No. 10 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "K" to the Ocean Trails project, which allowed a portion of the golf course to open for play before all of the required public amenities have been completed due to delays caused by the failure of Landslide C on June 2, 1999; and,

    WHEREAS, on June 21, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 2000-38 certifying a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program, adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the proposed Revision "L" to the Ocean Trails project, for the repair of Landslide C at Ocean Trails; and,

    WHEREAS, on July 18, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision M to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving an amendment to the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), an amendment to the HCP Implementing Agreement, and approval of a Conservation Easement over the lower portion of Shoreline Park; and,

    WHEREAS, on September 5, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision N to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and amending the project to accommodate a change to the design of the storm drain facilities of the Ocean Trails project from a tunneled pipe system to the existing on-site canyons. Revision "N" only amended the drainage for the west side of the Ocean Trails project, involving Forrestal Canyon; and,

    WHEREAS, on February 20, 2001, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision P to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving an amendment to allow Ocean Trails an extension of time to provide 4 on-site affordable housing units for rent from "prior to one year of the opening of the clubhouse" to "prior to the opening of the 18-hole golf course"; and,

    WHEREAS, on February 20, 2001, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Revision Q to the Ocean Trails Project, thereby approving an amendment which allows Ocean Trails to re-construct (instead of re-pave) La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes South to the end of La Rotonda Drive, in lieu of re-paving Palos Verdes Drive South from La Rotonda Drive to the eastern City limits; and,

    WHEREAS, on May 21, 2001, Ocean Trails, L.P., submitted a letter dated May 17, 2001 to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes requesting approval for Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project to revise the Conditions of Approval for VTTM No. 50666 and VTTM No. 50667, so as to adjust Condition I-3 allowing an extension to completing the reconstruction of La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes Drive South to its end; and,

    WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65952.5(e) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), on August 30, 2001, copies of the draft Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 were distributed to the City Council and prior to taking action on the proposed Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project, the City Council independently reviewed and considered the information and findings contained in Addendum No. 13 to EIR No. 36; and,

    WHEREAS, on September 4, 2001, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Development Code, the City Council held a public hearing to consider draft Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and the proposed Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and,

    NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

    Section 1: This application would permit Amendment R to VTTM No. 50667, for 1) allowing Ocean Trails to delay the re-construction of La Rotonda Drive from June 1, 2001 to November 1, 2002, 2) requiring Ocean Trails to re-pave portions of La Rotonda Drive prior to November 1, 2001, and 3) requiring Ocean Trails to reconstruct Palos Verdes Drive South prior to November 1, 2002. .

    Section 2: In considering the proposed revisions to the project, the City Council has determined that the preparation of Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 is appropriate, since the proposed changes noted in Section 1 above, will not result in any new significant environmental impacts which were not previously identified and analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 36, that the subsequent changes will not result in an increase in any previously identified significant environmental impacts, that the Addendum does not contain new information of substantial importance to the project and that only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make Environmental Impact Report adequate under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

    Therefore, based on the review of Draft Addendum No. 13 to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 prepared in association with the proposed Revision "R" to the Ocean Trails project, as conditioned, the City Council finds that the project still mitigates, or reduces to the extent feasible, significant adverse effects to adjacent properties or the permitted uses thereof. In approving the revised project, the City Council finds that social, recreational, and other benefits of the project continue to outweigh any unavoidable adverse environmental impacts that may occur and that due to overriding benefits and considerations, any unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of the project are acceptable. Accordingly, the City Council incorporate, by reference, the Final EIR No. 36, the Supplemental EIR, the second Supplemental EIR, Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13, and Resolution No. 92-115 (which includes, without limitation, the detailed statement of overriding considerations set forth therein).

    Section 3: That the creation of thirty-six (36) single-family residential lots, golf course with related improvements and public open space, as conditioned, is consistent with the City's General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan.

    The General Plan land use map designates almost the entire project site as residential, with a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre, and designates the coastal bluffs as hazard areas. The General Plan provides for additional commercial recreational uses within the City as appropriate to a particular location, including golf, equestrian, tennis and other recreational activities, and designates the City's entire coastal area as a specific plan district.

    The Coastal Specific Plan land use map shows the following general uses for the project site: (a) Residential (with a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre) for the vast majority of the property, (b) Hazard areas along the bluffs, the natural drainage course and in certain portions north of Paseo del Mar with extreme slopes (greater than 35% in steepness), (c) a floating Retail Commercial area, and (d) Recreational parking. The text of the Coastal Specific Plan expressly permits visitor-serving uses, such as a golf course, subject to satisfaction of the requirements for granting a conditional use permit under the Development Code.

    With 36 residential units on approximately 37.6 acres, the density is slightly below one dwelling unit per acre and, therefore, consistent with the General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan.

    Section 4: That the creation of thirty-six (36) single-family residential lots, common open space, a public golf course, and public open space, as conditioned, is consistent with the City's Development Code for projects within the RS-1 zoning district under a Residential Planned Development. In addition, a minimum of 30 percent of the site will be maintained within the residential development as common open space, exclusive of the golf course. The 36-Lot Revised Site Plan does not contemplate construction of any structures on land with slopes in excess of 35%, or on land currently zoned Open Space Hazard.

    The majority of the subject property is zoned RS-1 (Residential Planned Development) with the bluff face and the natural drainage course and certain areas north of Paseo del Mar being zoned as Open Space Hazard (OH). In compliance with the requirements of the OH zoning district, the applicant will not construct any permanent habitable structures on land that is zoned Open Space Hazard.

    The RS-1 (RPD) zone requires a conditional use permit for any type of development (§ 17.06.050) and expressly permits single-family residential development and any other uses permitted under Chapter 17.02, including conditionally-permitted uses under Chapter 17.56, such as golf courses. (§ 17.06.030). Accordingly, under Chapter 17.06 and Section 17.56.020 of the Development Code, residential development and a golf course and related facilities are permissible uses, subject to a conditional use permit. The necessary findings with respect to the conditional use permits required in connection with the Residential Planned Development and golf course are contained in Resolutions Nos. 96-75 and 96-76 and amendments thereto, respectively.

    Furthermore, the residential portion of the project provides in excess of thirty percent of the Residential Planned Development as common open space, which open space is sited in a manner that is accessible for viewing and access by the general public from public roads and walkways and preserves views to the coast.

    Section 5: That the combination of the vacation of the central portion of Paseo del Mar and the realignment of Paseo Del Mar as a long bluff road cul-de-sac taking access off of Palos Verdes Drive South as provided in related applications is consistent with Coastal Specific Plan Subregion 7 Policy No. 16, which states that "Paseo del Mar shall be improved to provide access to residential development and consideration shall be given to relocating Paseo del Mar southward or exchanging it for another access route closer to the bluff edge."

    The intent of Coastal Specific Plan, Subregion 7, Policy 19 is further satisfied by the provision of an 8.9 acre Bluff Top Public Access Corridor with a minimum width of one hundred (100) feet located along the bluff top between Half Way Point Park and Shoreline Park. The City Council finds that the Bluff Top Public Access Corridor is similar in average width and area to any coastal bluff road which would otherwise be constructed, if geologically feasible, pursuant to Coastal Specific Plan, Subregion 7, Policy 19.

    Section 6: That the golf course and related uses are consistent with Coastal Specific Plan, Subregion 7, Policy 7 which states: "Ensure that any proposed commercial activity responds to the needs of the coastal residents and shall not be of an intensity which would purposefully generate a service area external of the coastal region." The City Council finds that the intent of the above policy is to limit traditional commercial development (such as retail and office uses) so as not to create a service area external to the coastal region and that such policy is not intended to apply to commercial recreational uses, which are encouraged by the General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan. The City Council's interpretation of this policy is consistent with other policies in the Coastal Specific Plan and with Resolution No. 82-24, which adopted Coastal Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 and specifically authorized visitor-serving uses, such as golf, in Subregion 7.

    Section 7: That the trails plan as shown in the revised "Site Plan for Conditional Use Permit Amendment Map No. 2" (dated June 19, 1996) submitted by the applicants is consistent with the Coastal Specific Plan requirements relating to trails.

    Section 8: That the golf course and related uses are consistent with Coastal Specific Plan policy and Section 17.06.040.C.8 of the Development Code, which require the area seaward of corridor improvements to be improved and either dedicated or permanently maintained through deed restriction for public use. Section 17.06.040.C.6 of the Development Code permits the preservation of open space by dedication, deed restriction or other appropriate methods approved by the City. In compliance with these provisions and policies, the East and West Bluff Preserves, Half Way Point Park, Half Way Point Preserve, the Bluff Top Public Access Corridor, the Bluff Top Wildlife Corridor (located between the West Bluff Preserve and Half Way Point Park) and the public paths, trails, parking and recreational areas associated with these public open space areas will be improved by the applicants and offered to the City for dedication. Furthermore, the golf course area will be improved by the applicants and permanently maintained through deed restriction for public use. The City Council specifically finds that the deed restriction on the golf course land constitutes permanently maintained public open space. Neither the Coastal Specific Plan nor Development Code expressly prohibit active public recreational uses, or require only passive public uses, for the area seaward of the conceptual bluff road.

    Section 9: For purposes of the Subdivision Map Act, the design of the subdivision, golf course, or the related improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat based on compliance with the City's Development Code, General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan and consideration of information contained in Draft, Supplemental, and Addenda of Environmental Impact Report No. 36.

    The City Council acknowledges that there is the difference between the term "significant impact" under CEQA and the term "substantial environmental damage" under the Subdivision Map Act. Draft EIR No. 36, Supplement to EIR No. 36, Second Supplement to EIR No. 36, and Addendum Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 to EIR No. 36 are required to base environmental findings on "worst case" basis. As a result, the Final EIR and Addendum No. 1 EIR conclude that significant impacts to biological resources remain after mitigation because of the loss of raptor foraging area and because of the temporal loss of Coastal Sage Scrub. Even with the 2:1 replacement of existing viable Coastal Sage Scrub and the other mitigation measures contained in the Final EIR and Addendum no. 1 to EIR No. 36, the temporal loss of Coastal Sage Scrub, which serves as natural habitat for the California gnatcatcher, is considered significant due to the uncertainty that this species will be able to re-occupy the site after replacement of the Coastal Sage Scrub. These environmental findings are primarily the result of grading for the golf course, which itself has already been minimized through its links-type design. These specific findings and a corresponding statement of overriding considerations are contained in Resolution No. 92-115, which is hereby incorporated by reference.

    With the mitigation measures adopted by the City pursuant to Resolution No. 92-115, and recommended to be revised pursuant to Resolution No. 96-72, the project will not result in substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat under the Subdivision Map Act. However, even assuming that the project did result in substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, such damage or injury would be caused primarily by grading for the golf course. The elimination of the golf course is not feasible because it would not satisfy an important objective of the project: to provide visitor-serving public recreational uses, which objective is encouraged by policies in the Coastal Specific Plan. For this reason, this alternative or mitigation measure has been rejected by the City Council. Pursuant to Resolution No. 92-115, the City has made a finding of infeasibility with respect to elimination of the golf course.

    Section 10: That the subject property is physically suitable to accommodate the revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50667, as conditioned, in terms of design and density.

    Section 11: That the creation of the lots, single family residential dwelling units, golf course, public open space, and related improvements will not be materially detrimental to property values, nor will it jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise constitute a menace to the surrounding areas, since physical improvements, dedications and maintenance agreements are required.

    Section 12: The City Council has considered the effect of the revised tract map on the housing needs of the region as set forth in the City's Housing Element, and balanced these needs against the public service needs of its residents and against available fiscal and environmental resources, and finds that the revised tract map help to achieve those housing needs without unreasonably burdening the public service needs of existing residents and available fiscal and environmental resources.

    Section 13: That the division and development of the property will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of the public entity and/or public utility rights-of-way and/or easements within the tract.

    Section 14: That the discharge of sewage from this land division into the public sewer system will not violate the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000 of the Water Code).

    Section 15: That the design of the residential subdivision, golf course and associated improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems.

    Section 16: That the design of the residential subdivision, golf course, and the type of improvements associated with them, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed project. Further, public trail easements which are consistent with the policies of the General Plan and the Coastal Specific Plan are required as a condition of this approval.

    Section 17: That the design of the revised vesting tentative tract map provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible.

    Section 18: That the revised vesting tentative tract map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965.

    Section 19: That dedications required by local ordinance are shown on the tentative map and/or are set forth in the conditions of approval as previously approved.

    Section 20: That the City considered the effect of approval of the residential subdivision on the housing needs of the region in which the City is situated and balanced these needs against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources.

    Section 21: That as a result of the proposed modifications to the conditions of approval shown in the attached Exhibit A, as approved by the City Council through Revision "R", there are changes in circumstances to the project which make the current conditions of VTTM No. 50667 no longer appropriate or necessary. These modifications do not impose any additional burden on the present fee owner of the property, nor do they alter any right, title or interest in the real property reflected on the recorded Map No. 50667.

    Section 22: The mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Programs contained in Resolution No. 96-72, Resolution No. 2000-38, and Resolution No. 2000-58, as adopted by the City Council on September 3, 1996, June 21, 2000, and September 5, 2000, respectively, are hereby incorporated by reference into the Conditions of Approval for the revisions to VTTM No. 50667.

    Section 23: The time within which the judicial review of the decision reflected in this Resolution, if available, must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

    Section 24: For the forgoing reasons, and based on information and findings contained in the public record, including staff reports, minutes, records of proceedings, and evidence presented at the public hearings, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves Revision "R" to VTTM No. 50667, amending condition I-3, as shown in the attached Exhibit "A", which is necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. All other conditions of approval that have been imposed on this project shall remain in effect and are incorporated herein.

    PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 4th day of September 2001.

    _________________________
    MAYOR

     

    ATTEST:
    _____________________________

    CITY CLERK

    STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
    COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES)ss
    CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES)

    I, Jo Purcell, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2001-was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on September 4, 2001.

    ___________________________

    Jo Purcell, City Clerk


    RESOLUTION NO. 2001- EXHIBIT "A"

    VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 50667 - REVISION "R"

    CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

    The following conditions shall be revised to read as follows:

  3. STREETS

3.The developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of the realignment of Palos Verdes Drive South from Conqueror Drive to La Rotonda Drive. Plans for the realignment and reconstruction shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Public Works prior to issuance of grading permits or recordation of the Final Map, whichever occurs first and shall include a minimum fourteen (14) foot wide median from Conqueror Drive to Palos Verdes Drive East and a minimum ten (10) foot wide median from Palos Verdes Drive East to La Rotonda Drive. In addition, the developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of curb and gutter and full median improvements adjacent to the Portuguese Bend Club. The construction and realignment shall also include provisions for the future signalization of the intersections at Palos Verdes Drive South and Forrestal Drive and at Palos Verdes Drive South and La Rotonda Drive, including the installation of all necessary underground facilities and utilities during construction so that subsequent installation of signals at either intersection can be accomplished without requiring future road cuts. Construction on the improvements noted above shall begin no later than June 1, 2002 and shall be completed by November 1, 2002.

Additionally, the developer shall be responsible for the design and re-construction of La Rotonda Drive, from Palos Verdes Drive South to the end of La Rotonda Drive. Prior to June 1, 2002 or in conjunction with the construction of Phase 2 of Palos Verdes Drive South, whichever occurs first, the developer shall be responsible for obtaining approval of the structural section of La Rotonda and starting re-construction. The re-construction shall be completed by November 1, 2002.

Further, subject to review and approval by the Director of Public Works, the developer shall be responsible for resurfacing of portions of La Rotonda Road. The re-surfacing shall begin by October 1, 2001 and shall be completed by November 1, 2001.

Nothing in this Condition I-3 shall preclude the City from requiring the Developer to contribute to the cost of reconstructing Palos Verdes Drive South (25th Street) from La Rotonda Drive to the eastern City limits pursuant to Condition I-5 of this approval, if it is determined that the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer has damaged this street segment. If the City and the Developer do not agree as to whether the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer has damaged this street segment, then they shall mutually agree upon a third party geotechnical engineer (the "Engineer") to make such determination. The Engineer shall determine, as soon as reasonably feasible after his or her appointment, as to whether, and the extent to which, the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer is responsible for having damaged such street segment. The decision of the Engineer shall be binding and non-appealable. If the Engineer determines that the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer is partially or fully responsible for damaging such street segment, then the Developer shall be responsible for making a financial contribution towards the reconstruction costs in proportion to the extent of such damage caused by the construction of the Ocean Trails project by the Developer. Each party shall pay for the costs and expenses of its engineer, with the parties sharing equally the cost of the Engineer. Additionally, if it is determined as set forth above that the Developer is responsible for making a financial contribution towards the reconstruction costs, the Developer shall receive a credit against that cost, due to the additional amount being incurred by the Developer to reconstruct La Rotonda Drive in accordance with this amended Condition I-3. The amount of credit shall be equal to the difference between (1) the cost of resurfacing 25th Street from La Rotonda Drive to the easterly City limits plus the cost of resurfacing La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes Drive South to the Fire Access Road, and (2) the cost to reconstruct La Rotonda Drive from Palos Verdes Drive South to the Fire Access Road.


15.Tentative Tract Map No. 52666, Grading Permit No. 2282, and Environmental Assessment No. 708 (3200 Palos Verdes Drive West). (Mihranian)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ASSOCIATED MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM. (2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 52666, GRADING PERMIT NO. 2282 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 708, THEREBY ALLOWING THE LAND DIVISION OF A 3.92-ACRE LOT INTO 13 LOTS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH APPROXIMATELY 16,500 CUBIC YARDS OF EARTH MOVEMENT.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 52666, GRADING PERMIT NO. 2282 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 708 (3200 PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST)

Staff Coordinator:Ara Michael Mihranian, Acting Senior Planner

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt Resolution No. 2001-___, adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program; and, adopt Resolution No. 2001-___; approving, with conditions, Tentative Tract Map No. 52666, Grading Permit No. 2282 and Environmental Assessment No. 708, thereby allowing the land division of a 3.92 acre lot into 13 lots for single-family residential development with approximately 16,500 cubic yards of earth movement.

BACKGROUND

The project applicant, Marshall Esfahani of 3200 Palos Verdes Drive West LLC, submitted the subject applications listed above to allow the land division of a 3.92 acre lot into thirteen (13) lots for residential development. The public hearing was initially opened at the Planning Commission’s June 26th regularly scheduled meeting. After hearing public testimony, the proposed map was tabled by the Commission so that the applicant could work with Staff to consider alternatives to the proposed tract design to address potential density concerns and help reduce or minimize view impairment from the residences along Via Victoria, as identified by the Commission. At that time, the Commission also directed Staff and the applicant to conduct a meeting with the neighbors to discuss view impairment concerns, neighborhood compatibility, and site design issues with the surrounding property owners residing off Via Victoria, adjacent to the subject property.

As such, on July 12, 2001, Staff and the applicant met with the surrounding neighbors to discuss their issues at large. Of the six (6) neighbors contacted by Staff, five (5) attended the meeting at City Hall. As a result of the meeting, the applicant and the neighbors were able to resolve all of the outstanding concerns raised at the June 26th Planning Commission meeting. The tract map was revised accordingly and presented to the Planning Commission at their August 14th meeting.

At their August 14th meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the revised map, and after hearing public testimony that revealed full support of the map from those who previously opposed the project, the Commission unanimously adopted a motion to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council. The Commission’s adopted motion included minor revisions to the conditions of approval, which will be discussed later in this report.

On August 17, 2001 a public hearing notice was sent to property owner’s within a 500 foot radius of the subject property and all other interested parties, informing them of the upcoming City Council meeting on the proposed tract map. Furthermore, a notice was published in the Peninsula News on August 18, 2001. To date, City Staff has not received any verbal or written public comments as a result of the notice.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Staff has determined that this project has the potential to adversely impact the surrounding environment. Therefore, an Initial Study was completed, which determined that the appropriate environmental document for the project is a Mitigated Negative Declaration.

In compliance with CEQA, the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and distributed on May 26, 2001 for a 20 day review period commencing on May 26, 2001 and concluding on June 15, 2001. During the circulation period, three (3) written comments pertaining to the Mitigated Negative Declaration were submitted to the City from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Department, the Los Angeles County Fire Department and the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, requesting additional conditions (see June 26th Planning Commission Staff Report attachment).

The completed Initial Study determined that the project may create potential impacts to geology, water, air quality, transportation/circulation, noise and aesthetics. However, as noted in the Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Program, these potential impacts are either insignificant or can be mitigated to a level of insignificance provided that the appropriate mitigation measures are imposed on the project. It should be noted that although revisions have been made to the proposed map since the Initial Study comment period concluded, the revisions equate to similar or less than significant impacts, thereby not requiring additional circulation. Therefore, Staff recommends that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted for this project (see attachment).

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

At the time the proposed map was initially submitted to the Planning Department, the applicant was requesting to divide a 3.92 acre lot into fourteen (14) lots for residential development with approximately 21,000 cubic yards of earth movement. After further review by Staff and the applicant, the map was subsequently revised by eliminating one (1) lot from the original proposal resulting in a thirteen (13) lot subdivision with approximately 18,400 cubic yards of earth movement. This proposal was originally presented to the Planning Commission at their June 26th meeting. As previously stated, the Commission, as well as surrounding neighbors, expressed concern with the proposed map, and the Commission directed the applicant to consider revising the map according to the comments made at the public hearing.

In response to the Commission’s direction, revised plans were submitted to the Planning Department. Although the revised map continues to propose subdividing the existing 3.92 acre lot into thirteen (13) lots, the tract map has been modified so that Lots 9, 10 and 13, located on Via Victoria, would be accessed from a shared driveway serving Lot 12 along the rear portion of the property. By eliminating the direct access from Via Victoria to these lots, the building pads for Lots 9 and 10 are proposed to be located substantially below the grade elevation of Via Victoria. Upon further review of the map at the August 14th meeting, the Commission also directed the applicant to lower the building pad elevation of Lot 13 to a similar elevation to that of Lots 9 and 10, as part of their recommendation to the City Council.

As such, the map before the City Council has been further augmented as directed by the Planning Commission. By incorporating the Commission’s recommendations, the current tract map results in a slight increase to the grading quantities. The applicant is now requesting to conduct 16,500 cubic yards of associated grading, which is approximately 1,500 cubic yards more than the earth movement proposed at the August 14th Planning Commission meeting, but is still approximately 1,900 cubic yards less than the applicant’s original proposal of 18,400 cubic yards of earth movement (This calculation was analyzed as part of the project’s environmental review). Of the proposed 16,500 cubic yards of earth movement, 7,500 cubic yards will consist of cut and 9,000 cubic yards will consist of fill, of which 1,500 cubic yards will be imported to the project site. It should be noted that the original grading proposal reviewed by the Planning Commission required 7,600 cubic yards of imported earth, which is 6,100 cubic yards more than the current proposal. The reduction in import is a result of the reduced building pads for Lots 9, 10 and 13. The maximum height of proposed cut is now 20 feet and the maximum height of proposed fill is 14 feet. The depth of cut has increased by approximately 10 feet in height from the original proposal which proposed a 10 foot depth of cut.

DISCUSSION

At the time the Planning Commission first reviewed the tract map, concerns were raised with regard to the proposed lot density, future residential development standards, and view impairment. The Commission’s concerns were addressed at their August 14th meeting and can be reviewed in detail by referring to the attached August 14th Staff Report and associated minutes. Although the Commission felt that their concerns were adequately addressed by the redesigned project, the Commission added some Conditions of Approval to further minimize impacts to the existing neighborhood. The following discussion briefly describes the Commission’s modifications to the Conditions of Approval.

Liability Insurance Policy

Due to the significant amount of earth movement proposed, the Commission identified a concern with potential impacts to surrounding properties. Although the City’s Building and Safety Division, as well as the City’s Geotechnical Engineer, reviews all grading, geology and soils reports for compliance with the City’s safety standards prior to issuance of grading permits, the Commission requested that a condition be added to the project that requires the applicant obtain general liability insurance. The Commission’s intent in requiring this condition is to protect surrounding property owners from injury, loss and/or damage, arising from grading or construction of this project by the applicant. A Condition of Approval, under the grading subsection, has been added to reflect the Commission’s direction.

Maximum Height Limit on Foliage

During the Commission’s discussion on the project, it was recognized that with all efforts to protect ocean views from the existing residences along Via Victoria, the Conditions of Approval did not adequately address the maximum height of permitted foliage on private lots. Therefore, the Commission included a condition that requires all private lots within the project tract to adhere to the City’s restriction on foliage heights, as stated in Section 17.02.040 of the Municipal Code. Furthermore, a clause was added to this condition that further restricts the height of foliage on Lots 9, 10 and 13, along Via Victoria, to maximum elevation height of 400 feet, similar to the street elevation. This condition will prevent future foliage from growing above the street elevation and creating potential future view impacts from the existing residences on the inland side of Via Victoria.

Lot 13

According to the revised map presented to the Planning Commission at their August 14th meeting, the building pads for Lots 9 and 10 were lowered to an elevation of 374 feet (above sea level), so that when these lots are potentially developed with a two-story residence (maximum height of 16 feet), the maximum roof ridgeline would not exceed the street’s (Via Victoria) elevation of 400 feet (above sea level). By lowering the building pad elevation for Lots 9 and 10, unobstructed views of the ocean from the existing residence across Via Victoria can be maintained. In regards to Lot 13, the developer did not propose to lower the building pad of this lot because he envisioned developing this lot with a single-story structure, at the City’s maximum "by right" height limit of 16 feet, with minimal site grading. The neighbor at 7231 Rue Godbout had expressed concern that when Lot 13 is developed with a single-story residence, at the "by right" height limit of 16 feet, the structure will impair his ocean views. As such, the developer agreed to further grade Lot 13 by lowering the building pad to an elevation similar to Lots 9 and 10. This enables the applicant to potentially develop the lot with a two-story structure, at a height of 26 feet, without exceeding the height of the street elevation. The Commission directed Staff to modify the Conditions of Approval accordingly.

Use of Palos Verdes Drive West in the City of Palos Verdes Estates

On the afternoon of August 14th, Staff was informed by a representative from the City of Palos Verdes Estates that their City may not allow the use of their public streets for the project’s construction vehicles. Although the City of Palos Verdes Estates was notified of the proposed project during the environmental comment period, the City was not made aware of any potential concerns this project may have on the City of Palos Verdes Estates at that time, especially since the project’s location abuts the City boundary line. However, as a result of the late information, Staff modified the Conditions of Approval prior to the Planning Commission meeting so that in the event the City of Palos Verdes Estates prohibits the applicant from using their streets for the proposed project, that the applicant obtain approvals from the City of Rancho Palos Verdes’ Public Works Director to allow a break in the roadway median so that construction vehicles can exit the site and head south on Palos Verdes Drive West. A condition was also added that requires the applicant to cover all costs associated with the repair of the median, including landscaping, as deemed appropriate by the City’s Public Works Director. The applicant has indicated that he is currently working with the City of Palos Verdes Estates and the City of Rancho Palos Verdes’ Public Works Director to address this concern.

Findings

In order to accept the proposed map, the City Council is required to make necessary findings for the Tentative Tract Map, the Grading Permit, and the Mitigated Negative Declaration. All the necessary findings have been reviewed by the Planning Commission and are incorporated into the attached Resolutions for consideration by the City Council. The discussion on the necessary findings is contained in the attached Planning Commission Staff Reports. It should be noted that no new issues and no new revisions that create new impacts have been made to the project since the Commission’s review on August 14th. Therefore, based on the aforementioned information, Staff believes that the required findings can be made to accept the proposed tract map.

ALTERNATIVES

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

  1. Identify any issues of concern with the proposed map amendments, and provide Staff with direction, and continue the public hearing to a date certain; or,
  2. Deny Tentative Tract Map No. 52666, Grading Permit No. 2282 and Environmental Assessment No. 708 and direct Staff to prepare the appropriate Resolutions.

FISCAL IMPACT

If the City Council approves the proposed tract map, pursuant to Section 16.20.100 of the Development Code, the applicant will be required to either dedicate parkland, pay an in lieu fee, or a combination of both at the time and according to the standards and formulas set forth in the Municipal Code. Staff believes that the dedication of parkland is not practical and believes that the applicant should be required to pay in lieu fees based on the creation of thirteen lots, since the existing residence will be demolished. Furthermore, pursuant to Section 17.11.010 of the City’s Development Code, any application requesting the creation of five or more dwelling units shall comply with the City’s Affordable Housing requirements. According to the Development Code, new residential development of five or more dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing units (up to five (5) percent of all proposed units) that are affordable to very low income households or affordable housing units (up to ten (10) percent of all proposed units) that are affordable to low income households. Upon City Council approval, in-lieu fees may be provided as an alternative to actual units required by the Development Code. The fee per affordable unit shall be established by City Council Resolution, which at this time is $1.10 per square foot of structure.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing analysis and discussion, Staff recommends that the City Council approve, with conditions, Tentative Tract Map No. 52666, Grading Permit No. 2282 and Environmental Assessment No. 708 to allow the land division of a 3.92 acre lot into thirteen (13) lots for residential development with approximately 16,500 cubs yards of earth movement.

Respectfully submitted:

Joel Rojas, aicp, Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

Reviewed,

Les Evans, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

  • Draft Resolution No. 2001-__ (Environmental)
  • Exhibit "A" – Mitigation Monitoring Program
  • Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
  • Draft Resolution No. 2001-__ (Project)
  • Exhibit "A" – Draft Conditions of Approval
  • August 14th P.C. Minutes
  • August 14th Staff Report with Attachments
  • June 26th P.C. Minutes
  • June 26th Staff Report with Attachments

RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__

 

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION THUS MAKING CERTAIN ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS IN ASSOCIATION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 708, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 52666 AND GRADING PERMIT NO, 2282 TO ALLOW THE LAND DIVISION OF A 3.92 ACRE LOT INTO THIRTEEN (13) RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITHIN THE CITY’S DESIGNATED RS-4 ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE 16,500 CUBIC YARDS OF ASSOCIATED GRADING ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3200 PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST.

 

WHEREAS, on January 28, 1999, applications for Tentative Tract Map No. 52666, Grading Permit No. 2282 and Environmental Assessment No. 708 were submitted to the Planning Department on behalf of the property owner, 3200 Palos Verde Drive West LLC., to allow the division of a 3.92 acre lot into thirteen (13) residential lots within the City’s designated RS-4 zoning district; and,

WHEREAS, Staff completed an initial review of the applications and plans submitted to the Planning Department and determined that additional information was needed in order to continue processing the request. Furthermore, the applicant was informed of some potential Staff concerns pertaining to views, noise, lighting, circulation, and aesthetics, thus recommending that an environmental consultant prepare the necessary environmental documents to determine the project’s impact on the surrounding environment. Subsequently, Staff deemed the subject applications incomplete on February 22, 1999; and,

WHEREAS, on January 3, 2000 a request for proposal was submitted to P&D Environmental Services seeking a cost and time line proposal to prepare the appropriate environmental documents; and,

WHEREAS, on March 22, 2000 an official proposal was submitted to the City by P&D Environmental Services which was subsequently accepted by the City to complete said documents; and,

WHEREAS, on April 18, 2001 the augmented project applications and revised plans, were reviewed by Staff and deemed complete for processing pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act; and,

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provision of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et.seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulation, Title 14, Section 15000 et.seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65962.5(F) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), the City of Rancho Palos Verdes prepared an Initial Study and determined that, by incorporating mitigation measures into the Negative Declaration, there is no substantial evidence that the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 52666 and Grading Permit No. 2282 would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and notice of that fact was given in the manner required by law; and,

WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study was prepared on May 26, 2001 and circulated for public review between May 26, 2001 through June 15, 2001; and,

WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, a Mitigation Monitoring program has been prepared, and is attached to the Environmental Assessment No. 708 and Resolution as Exhibit "A"; and,

WHEREAS, after issuing notices pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code and the State CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on June 26, 2001, at which time all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and,

WHEREAS, at the June 26th meeting, the Commission directed Staff to further investigate design alternatives that address concerns pertaining to density and view impacts with the applicant and the surrounding neighbors. A unanimous motion to table action on the proposed tract map was passed by the Commission; and,

WHEREAS, on July 12, 2001 Staff met with the applicant and surrounding neighbors to address the concerns identified at the June 26th Planning Commission meeting. At that time revised plans were presented to Staff as well as the neighbors, who collectively addressed the concerns pertaining to density and potential view impacts; and,

WHEREAS, after issuing a new notice pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on August 14, 2001, at which time all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and,

WHEREAS, at its August 14, 2001 meting, after hearing public testimony, the Planning Commission adopted, with an unanimous motion, P.C. Resolution No. 2001-23 making certain findings related to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and recommend that the City Council adopt a Mitigation Monitoring Program and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project; and,

WHEREAS, at its August 14 meeting, after hearing public testimony the Planning Commission adopted, with an unanimous motion, P.C. Resolution No. 2001-24, forwarding a recommendation of approval, pursuant to amendments to the conditions of approval, to the City Council; and,

WHEREAS, on August 17, 2000, the required notices were mailed out to property owners within a 500’ radius of the subject property and all interested parties informing them of the proposed project and the scheduled City Council public hearing on September 4, 2001. Furthermore, a notice was published in the Peninsula News on August 18, 2001; and,

WHEREAS, after notices issued pursuant to the requirements of Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on September 4, 2001, at which time all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard and present evidence.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1:The subject applications would permit the division of a 3.92 acre lot into thirteen (13) residential lots. The proposed lots will maintain a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet and a minimum contiguous lot area of 3,300 square feet, as required by the City’s Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance for lots located within the designated RS-4 (Single-Family Residential) zoning district. As proposed, nine (9) of the lots will maintain access off Palos Verdes Drive West via a new publicly dedicated street, and the remaining four (4) lots will be accessed off Via Victoria, an existing public street. The subject property is currently improved with an existing single-family residence and detached garage that will be demolished prior to recording the final tract. Furthermore, the proposed subdivision requires 16,500 cubic yards of associated grading, consisting of 7,500 cubic yards of cut and 9,000 cubic yards of fill, of which 1,500 cubic yards will be imported onto the site. The City Council finds that the proposed project is permitted within the RS-4 zoning district, and would not result in significant adverse environmental impacts. In making this finding, the City Council considered the project's mitigation measures that address the issues of Aesthetics, Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Geology, Noise, Traffic/Circulation, Utilities, and Water Quality.

Section 2:That the creation of thirteen (13) single-family residential lots is consistent with the type of land use and density identified in the City’s General Plan, Residential / 2-4 Dwelling Units per Acre; and, as conditioned, is consistent with the City’s Development Code for projects within the RS-4 zoning district, and will not significantly impact the required land use.

Section 3:The proposed project will create thirteen (13) single-family residential lots that when developed will not alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population in the area above what is forecast in adopted City plans and policies, nor will the project affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing beyond what will developed. The project will not create a significant additional demand for fire or police protection, or other governmental services.

Section 4:That the division and development of the property will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of the public entity and/or public utility rights-of-way and/or easements within the tract; and that the dedications required by local ordinance are shown on the Tentative Tract Map and/or are set forth in the attached conditions of approval.

Section 5:That the discharge of sewage from this land division into the public sewer system will not violate the requirements of the California Regional Quality Control Board.

Section 6:The project requires 16,500 cubic yards of associated grading to prepare the site for residential development. As such, the City Council finds that the proposed project will not result in significant adverse affects to topography; destruction, covering, or modification of unique geologic or physical features; impacts to archeological or paleontological resources; or expose persons to seismic ground failure, landslides, or other known hazards; affect any plant or animal species or result in the removal of any sensitive Plant Life or Animal Life; or create a wasteful or inefficient use of the energy already being consumed on the site. Although on-site grading is proposed, a Geotechnical Report addressing the scope of the project grading has been conceptually approved by the City’s Geotechnical Engineer in the Planning Stage, further reports will be required to be reviewed and approved by the City’s Building Official and the City’s Geotechnical Consultant prior to issuance of grading or building permits. Furthermore, the Geotechnical Report shall provide the developer with applicable conditions for which the project shall be constructed, along with other conditions that the City’s Building Official and City’s Geotechnical Consultant find necessary to ensure the project is constructed in a manner that does not jeopardize the public’s health, safety and welfare. As such, the mitigation measures will ensure that the proposed project will not cause any significant geological impacts.

Section 7:The proposed project will not change the current, the course or the direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters, since the project site is not located in such a setting. Although there may be slight changes in the absorption rates, drainage patterns, and surface run-off on the subject site as a result of the proposed project. A proposed drainage plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval pertaining to the implementation of mitigation measures that address potential impacts to water patterns. Furthermore, in compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act, an Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan shall be submitted to City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, as it pertains to implementation strategies that reduce stormwater runoff. As such, the City Council finds that such conditions will ensure that water patterns will not significantly impact the surrounding environment.

Section 8:That the proposed land division will not generate traffic volumes that create substantial impacts to circulation patterns, parking capacity, or traffic congestion, as discussed in the Initial Study.

Section 9:Although the construction of the proposed project is anticipated to generate noise levels uncommon to the surrounding environment, such noise will be temporary in nature and that the City has imposed conditions, in accordance with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes’ Municipal Code, that limits construction between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Mondays through Saturdays, with no construction permitted on Sundays and legal holidays (as identified in the City’s Municipal Code). Furthermore, mitigation measures require that all construction equipment engines be equipped with standard noise insulating features and are tuned to the manufacturer’s recommendations. As such, the City Council finds that the mitigation measures imposed will ensure that noise levels do not adversely impact surrounding properties.

Section 10:In regards to aesthetics, the City’s Development Code requires new residential construction be developed in a manner that is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, as it pertains to size, mass and bulk, architectural style and front yard setbacks, in order to preserve the character of established neighborhoods. As such, conditions require that the design of the future residences be reviewed under the City’s "Neighborhood Compatibility" analysis. As proposed, the project will not affect a scenic highway in that ocean views are oriented in the opposite direction from the subject site. However, in regards to a scenic vista from surrounding properties, conditions have been incorporated into the project that require the structures to be constructed at a maximum roof ridgeline height, as measured from the finished pad elevations, and that the new structures be designed in a manner that maintain views laterally over the newly created lots, thereby preventing a significant impairment of ocean views. As such, the City Council finds that the proposed conditions will protect partial views of the Pacific Ocean from surrounding properties.

Section 11:Grading of the site may cause some impacts to air quality as a result of air-borne dust particles. However, to ensure that there will be no significant impacts, mitigation measures have been added that require the applicant take specific actions to control air-borne dust particles.

 

Section 12:For reasons discussed in the Initial Study, which is incorporated herein by reference, the project will not have any potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals, nor would the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.

Section 13:The applicant has consulted the lists prepared pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and has submitted a signed statement indicating whether the project and any alternatives are located on a site which is included on any such list, and has specified any such list. The Lead Agency has consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, and has certified that the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not included in these lists of known Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites as compiled by the California Environmental Protection Agency.

Section 14:The mitigation measures set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, Exhibit "A", attached hereto, are incorporated into the scope of the proposed project. These measures will reduce potential significant impacts identified in the Initial Study to a less than significant level.

Section 15:For the foregoing reasons and based on its independent review and evaluation of the information and findings contained in the Initial Study, Staff Reports, minutes, and records of the proceedings, the City Council has determined that the project as conditioned and mitigated will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment and hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration making certain environmental findings in association with Environmental Assessment No. 708 to allow the land division of a 3.92 acre lot into thirteen (13) residential lots at a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet within the RS-4 zoning district and to allow 16,500 cubic yards of associated grading on property located at 3200 Palos Verdes Drive West.

 

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 4th day of September, 2001.

________________________________

Mayor

ATTEST:

_________________________________

City Clerk
State of California)
County of Los Angeles) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes)

I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, do hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2001-__ was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at regular meeting thereof held on September 4, 2001.

__________________________

City Clerk

 


RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__

 

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 52666 AND GRADING PERMIT NO. 2282 IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 708, TO ALLOW THE LAND DIVISION OF A 3.92 ACRE LOT INTO THIRTEEN (13) RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITHIN THE CITY’S DESIGNATED RS-4 ZONING DISTRICT. FURTHERMORE, THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL REQUIRE 16,500 CUBIC YARDS OF ASSOCIATED GRADING ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3200 PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST.

 

WHEREAS, on January 28, 1999, applications for Tentative Tract Map No. 52666, Grading Permit No. 2282 and Environmental Assessment No. 708 were submitted to the Planning Department on behalf of the property owner, 3200 Palos Verde Drive West LLC., to allow the division of a 3.92 acre lot into thirteen (13) residential lots within the City’s designated RS-4 zoning district; and,

WHEREAS, Staff completed an initial review of the applications and plans submitted to the Planning Department and determined that additional information was needed in order to continue processing the request. Furthermore, the applicant was informed of some potential Staff concerns pertaining to views, noise, lighting, circulation, and aesthetics, thus recommending that an environmental consultant prepare the necessary environmental documents to determine the project’s impact on the surrounding environment. Subsequently, Staff deemed the subject applications incomplete on February 22, 1999; and,

WHEREAS, on April 18, 2001 the augmented project applications and revised plans, were reviewed by Staff and deemed complete for processing pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act; and,

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provision of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et.seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulation, Title 14, Section 15000 et.seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65962.5(F) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), the City of Rancho Palos Verdes prepared an Initial Study and determined that, by incorporating mitigation measures into the Negative Declaration, there is no substantial evidence that the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 52666 and Grading Permit No. 2282 would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated for public review for twenty (20) days between May 26, 2001 and June 15, 2001, and notice of that fact was given in the manner required by law; and,

WHEREAS, after issuing notices pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code and the State CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on June 26, 2001 at which time all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and,

WHEREAS, at the June 26th meeting, the Commission directed Staff to further investigate design alternatives that address concerns pertaining to density and view impacts with the applicant and the surrounding neighbors. A unanimous motion to table action on the proposed tract map and Mitigated Negative Declaration was passed by the Commission; and,

WHEREAS, on July 12, 2001 Staff met with the applicant and surrounding neighbors to address the concerns identified at the June 26th Planning Commission meeting. At that time revised plans were presented to Staff as well as the neighbors, who collectively addressed the concerns pertaining to density and potential view impacts; and,

WHEREAS, after issuing a new notice pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on August 14, 2001, at which time all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and,

WHEREAS, at its August 14, 2001 meting, after hearing public testimony, the Planning Commission adopted, with an unanimous motion, P.C. Resolution No. 2001-23 making certain findings related to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and recommend that the City Council adopt a Mitigation Monitoring Program and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project; and,

WHEREAS, at its August 14 meeting, after hearing public testimony the Planning Commission adopted, with an unanimous motion, P.C. Resolution No. 2001-24, forwarding a recommendation of approval, pursuant to amendments to the conditions of approval, to the City Council; and,

WHEREAS, on August 17, 2000, the required notices were mailed out to property owners within a 500’ radius of the subject property and all interested parties informing them of the proposed project and the scheduled City Council public hearing on September 4, 2001. Furthermore, a notice was published in the Peninsula News on August 18, 2001; and,

WHEREAS, after notices issued pursuant to the requirements of Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on September 4, 2001, at which time all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard and present evidence.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1:The subject applications would permit the division of a 3.92 acre lot into thirteen (13) residential lots. The proposed lots will maintain a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet and a minimum contiguous lot area of 3,300 square feet, as required by the City’s Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance for lots located within the designated RS-4 (Single-Family Residential) zoning district. As proposed, nine (9) of the lots will maintain access off Palos Verdes Drive West via a new publicly dedicated street, and the remaining four (4) lots will be accessed off Via Victoria, an existing public street. The subject property is currently improved with an existing single-family residence and detached garage that will be demolished prior to the recordation of the final tract map. Furthermore, the proposed subdivision requires 16,500 cubic yards of associated grading, consisting of 7,500 cubic yards of cut and 9,000 cubic yards of fill, of which 1,500 cubic yards will be imported onto the site. The City Council finds that the proposed project is permitted within the RS-4 zoning district, and would not result in significant adverse environmental impacts. In making this finding, the City Council considered the project's mitigation measures that address the issues of Aesthetics, Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Geology, Noise, Traffic/Circulation, Utilities, and Water Quality.

Section 2:That the creation of thirteen (13) single-family residential lots is consistent with the provisions of the General Plan and the type of land use and density identified in the City’s General Plan, Residential / 2-4 Dwelling Units per Acre; and, as conditioned, is consistent with the City’s Development Code for projects within the RS-4 zoning district, and will not significantly impact the required land use.

Section 3:That the creation of thirteen (13) single-family residential lots is designed to comply with the minimum 10,000 square foot lot area requirement and the minimum 3,300 square foot contiguous lot area requirement for newly created lots in the City’s RS-4 zoning district; and that the newly created lots comply with the minimum lot width and depth standards required for the RS-4 zoning district.

Section 4:That the division and development of the property will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of the public entity and/or public utility rights-of-way and/or easements within the tract; and that the dedications required by local ordinance are shown on the Tentative Tract Map and/or are set forth in the attached conditions of approval.

Section 5:That the subject use, as conditioned, mitigates or reduces significant adverse effects to adjacent properties or the permitted uses thereof and will create a project that will be sensitive and harmonious with the surrounding area.

Section 6:The project will not result in significant adverse affects to topography; destruction, covering, or modification of unique geologic or physical features; impacts to archeological or paleontological resources; or expose persons to seismic ground failure, landslides, or other known hazards; affect any plant or animal species or result in the removal of any sensitive Plant Life or Animal Life. Although on-site grading is proposed, a Geotechnical Report addressing the scope of the project grading has been conceptually approved by the City’s Geotechnical Engineer in the Planning Stage, further reports will be required to be reviewed and approved by the City’s Building Official and the City’s Geotechnical Consultant prior to issuance of grading or building permits. Furthermore, the Geotechnical Report shall provide the developer with applicable conditions for which the project shall be constructed, along with other conditions that the City’s Building Official and City’s Geotechnical Consultant find necessary to ensure the project is constructed in a manner that does not jeopardize the public’s health, safety and welfare. As such, conditions will ensure that the proposed project will not cause any significant geological impacts.

Section 7:That the grading is not excessive beyond that necessary for the primary residential use since the earthwork is necessary to mitigate the issues of view impairment from within the tract as well as outside the tract, to create development that is harmonious with the surrounding neighborhoods, and, in part, is necessary to improve access and drainage on the site.

Section 8:That the grading and/or construction does not significantly adversely affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from, neighboring sites since the grading will create building pads that allow view corridors of the ocean laterally over the lots and future residences. The manufactured 2:1 transitional slopes will be vegetated in a manner that protects the slopes from erosion and slippage, while minimizing the visual effects of the proposed earth movement.

Section 9:That the proposed grading does not significantly alter the natural contours since the site was previously disturbed at the time the existing residence on the subject property was developed and the surrounding residential tracts were developed. The proposed earth movement is designed in a manner to resemble the site’s existing contours by integrating the man-made features, consisting of transitional slopes, into the building pads that gradually ascend from the western property line to the eastern property line.

Section 10:That the proposed public street is designed to resemble the existing contours of the site, originating off Palos Verdes Drive West and terminating at a cul-de-sac near the upper portion of the subject property. The proposed street will commence at a slope of approximately 7% for the first 180 feet and will reach a maximum gradient of 15%. The proposed street requires improvements that will be reviewed and approved by the City’s Public Works Director, the City’s Building Official and the Los Angeles County Fire Department prior to issuance of grading permits.

Section 11:Pursuant to the City’s Development Code, new residential construction shall be developed in a manner that is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, as it pertains to size, mass and bulk, architectural style and front yard setbacks, in order to preserve the character of established neighborhoods. As such, conditions will require that the design of the future residences be reviewed under the City’s "Neighborhood Compatibility" analysis through a Site Plan Review application, unless otherwise noted.

Section 12:The applicant has consulted the lists prepared pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and has submitted a signed statement indicating whether the project and any alternatives are located on a site which is included on any such list, and has specified any such list. The Lead Agency has consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, and has certified that the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not included in these lists of known Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites as compiled by the California Environmental Protection Agency.

Section 13:For the foregoing reasons and based on its independent review and evaluation of the information and findings contained in the Initial Study, Staff Reports, minutes, and records of the proceedings, the City Council has determined that the project as conditioned and mitigated will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment. Therefore, the City Council hereby approves, with conditions, Tentative Tract Map No. 52666 and Grading Permit No. 2282, in association with certain environmental findings for Environmental Assessment No. 708 to allow the land division of a 3.92 acre lot into thirteen (13) residential lots at a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet within the RS-4 zoning district and to allow 16,500 cubic yards of associated grading on property located at 3200 Palos Verdes Drive West.

 

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 4th day of September, 2001.

________________________________

Mayor

ATTEST:_________________________________

City Clerk
State of California)
County of Los Angeles) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes)

I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, do hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2001-__ was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at regular meeting thereof held on September 4, 2001.

__________________________

City Clerk


EXHIBIT "A"

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 52666, GRADING PERMIT NO. 2282

AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 708

GENERAL

  1. Within ninety (90) days of this approval, the applicant and/or property owner shall submit to the City a statement, in writing, that they have read, understand and agree to all conditions of approval contained in this approval. Failure to provide said written statement within ninety (90) days following the date of this approval shall render this approval null and void.
  2. The developer shall supply the City with one mylar and copies of the map after the final map has been filed with the Los Angeles County Recorders Office.
  3. This approval expires twenty-four (24) months from the date of approval of the tentative tract map by the City Council, unless extended per Section 66452.6 of the Subdivision Map Act and Section 16.16.040 of the Development Code. Any request for extension shall be submitted to the Planning Department in writing prior to the expiration of the map.
  4. All existing structures, including but not limited to the existing single-family residence and detached garage, shall be demolished prior to recording the final tract map. A demolition permit shall be obtained by the City’s Building and Safety division prior to any demolition activity.
  5. All lots shall comply with the lot criteria required by the Development Code for a RS-4 Zoning District, including the 10,000 square foot minimum lot area and the 3,300 square foot minimum contiguous lot area.
  6. Unless specific development standards for the development of the lots are contained in these conditions of approval, the development of the lots shall comply with the requirements of Title 17 of the City’s Municipal Code.

SUBDIVISION MAP ACT

  1. Prior to submitting the Final Map for recording pursuant to Section 66442 of the Government Code, the subdivider shall obtain clearances from affected departments and divisions, including a clearance from the City’s Engineer for the following items: mathematical accuracy, survey analysis, correctness of certificates and signatures, etc.

COUNTY RECORDER

  1. If signatures of record title interests appear on the final map, the developer shall submit a preliminary guarantee. A final guarantee will be required at the time of filing of the final map with the County Recorder. If said signatures do not appear on the final map, a preliminary title report/guarantee is needed that covers the area showing all fee owners and interest holders. The account for this preliminary title report guarantee shall remain open until the final map is filed with the County Recorder.

ARCHAEOLOGY

  1. A qualified archaeologist shall make frequent periodic grading inspections to evaluate cultural resources on the site. If archaeological resources are found, all work in the immediate area shall stop and the resources shall be removed or preserved. All "finds" shall be reported to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement immediately.
  2. A qualified paleontologist shall be present during all rough grading operations. If paleontological resources are found, the paleontologist shall stop all work in the affected area and all resources shall be excavated or preserved. All "finds" shall be reported to the Director Planning, Building and Code Enforcement immediately.

SEWERS

  1. A bond, cash deposit, or other City approved security, shall be posted prior to recordation of the Final Map or start of work, whichever occurs first, to cover costs for construction of a sanitary sewer system, in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works.
  2. Prior to approval of the final map, the subdivider shall submit to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement a written statement from the County Sanitation District approving the design of the tract with regard to the existing trunk line sewer. Said approval shall state all conditions of approval, if any, and state that the County is willing to maintain all connections to said trunk lines.
  3. Approval of this subdivision of land is contingent upon the installation, dedication and use of local main line sewer and separate house laterals to serve each lot of the land division.
  4. Sewer easements are required, subject to review by the City Engineer, to determine the final locations and requirements.
  5. Prior to construction, the subdivider shall obtain approval of the sewer improvement plans from the County Engineer Sewer Design and Maintenance Division.

WATER

  1. There shall be filled with the City Engineer a "will serve" statement from the water purveyor indicating that water service can be provided to meet the demands of the proposed development. Said statement shall be dated no more than six (6) months prior to issuance of the building permits.
  2. Prior to recordation of the Final Map or prior to commencement of work, whichever comes first, the subdivider must submit a labor and materials bond in addition to either:

    1. An agreement and a faithful performance bond in the amount estimated by the City Engineer and guaranteeing the installation of the water system; or
    2. An agreement and other evidence satisfactory to the City Engineer indicating that the subdivider has entered into a contract with the serving water utility to construct the water system, as required, and has deposited with such water utility security guaranteeing payment for the installation of the water system.

  1. There shall be filed with the City Engineer a statement from the water purveyor indicating that the proposed water mains and any other required facilities will be operated by the water purveyor and that, under normal operating conditions, the system will meet the needs of the developed tract.
  2. At the time the final land division map is submitted for checking, plans and specifications for the water systems facilities shall be submitted to the City Engineer for checking and approval, and shall comply with the City Engineer’s standards. Approval for filing of the land division is contingent upon approval of plans and specifications mentioned above.
  3. All lots shall be served by adequately sized water system facilities that shall include fire hydrants of the size and type and location as determined by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The water mains shall be of sufficient size to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows required for the land division. The City Engineer shall determine domestic flow requirements. Fire flow requirements shall be determined by the Fire Department and evidence of approval by the Fire Chief is required.
  4. Framing of structures shall not begin until after the Los Angeles County Fire Department has determined that there is adequate fire fighting water and access available to said structures.

DRAINAGE

  1. A bond, cash deposit, or combination thereof shall be posted to cover costs of construction in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer.
  2. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the developer shall submit a hydrology study to the City Engineer to determine any adverse impacts to existing flood control facilities generated by this project. Should the City Engineer determine that adverse impacts will result, the developer will be required to post a cash deposit or bond or combination thereof in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works, which will be based on the project’s share of the necessary improvements.
  3. Drainage plans and necessary support documents to comply with the following requirements must be approved prior to the recordation of the Final Map or commencement of work, whichever comes first:

    1. Provide drainage facilities to remove the flood hazard to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and dedicate and show easements on the final map.
    2. Eliminate the sheet overflow and ponding or elevate the floors of the buildings with no openings in the foundation walls to at least twelve inches above the finished pad grade.
    3. Provide drainage facilities to protect the lots from high velocity scouring action.
    4. Provide for contributory drainage from adjoining properties.

  1. In accordance with Section 1601 and 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, the State Department of Fish and Game, 350 Golden Shore, Long Beach, California 90802, 562-435-7741, shall be notified prior to commencement of work within any natural drainage courses affected by this project.
  2. All drainage swales and any other on-grade drainage facilities, including gunite, shall be of an earth tone color and shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement.

STREETS

  1. Prior to recordation of the Final Map or the commencement of work, whichever occurs first, a bond, cash deposit, or combination thereof shall be posted to cover costs for the full improvement of all proposed public streets and related improvements, in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works.
  2. The developer shall post an additional cash deposit, letter of credit, or combination thereof in an amount sufficient to cover the cost of full improvements of all facilities within the right-of-way of Palos Verdes Drive West and Via Victoria adjacent to the Tract. Said improvements may include, but are not limited to, A. C. paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, drainage improvements, bikeways, bus stop improvements, medians and landscaping. The design of such improvements shall be subject to the adopted street standards and the approval of the Director of Public Works.
  3. The proposed streets shall be "public" and designed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, pursuant to the following specifications:

    1. All proposed streets shall be thirty (30) feet in width, measured from flow-line. Right-of-way shall be a minimum of forty (40) feet. Parkway easement width shall be a minimum of four (4) feet on both sides. Parkway easement to be relatively flat and level with the curb. Planting and/or trees in the parkway easement shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Works prior to planting.
    2. Cul-de-sacs shall be designed to the specifications of the Director of Public Works.
    3. Street and traffic signs shall be placed at all intersections and/or corners, as specified by the Director of Public Works, and shall meet City standards.
    4. No improvements for the individual lots will be permitted within the street parkway easement without prior approval of the Director of Public Works. This includes, but is not limited to, grading, masonry, mailboxes, fences, walls and other types of structures.
    5. All proposed streets shall be designed in substantially the same alignment, as shown on the approved tentative tract map, and to the above conditions.
    6. Any raised and landscaped medians and textured surfaces shall be designed to standards as approved by the Director of Public Works prior to construction. The developer shall provide maintenance of such improvements.
    7. No street lights

  1. The contractor shall be responsible for repairs to any neighboring streets (those streets to be determined by the Director of Public Works) which may be damaged during development of the tract. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer shall post a bond, cash deposit or City approved security, in an amount sufficient to cover the costs to repair any damage to streets or appurtenant structures as a result of this development.
  2. The applicant shall obtain approvals from the City of Palos Verdes Estates to allow the use of public streets for project related construction vehicles. In the event that the City of Palos Verdes Estates prohibits the use of public streets for project related construction vehicles, the applicant shall secure approvals from the City of Rancho Palos Verdes’ Public Works Director to allow a temporary break in the roadway median for use by construction vehicles only. The applicant shall be required to post a bond in an amount deemed acceptable by the City’s Public Works Director to repair the street median to its original condition, including landscaping.
  3. The City, at its discretion, may permit the developer to make said improvements or use the above payments to make said improvements by the City, as determined by the Director of Public Works.
  4. The developer shall pay traffic impact fees in an amount determined by the Director of Public Works upon acceptance of all public works improvements by the Director of Public Works.

UTILITIES

  1. All utilities to and on the lots shall be provided underground, including cable television, telephone, electrical, gas and water. All necessary permits shall be obtained for their installation. Cable television shall connect to the nearest trunk line at the developer’s expense.

GEOLOGY

  1. Prior to recordation of the Final Map or commencement of work, whichever occurs first, a bond, cash deposit, or combination thereof shall be posted to cover costs for any geologic hazard abatement in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer.
  2. All geologic hazards associated with this proposed development shall be eliminated or the City Geologist shall designate a restricted use area in which the erection of buildings or other structures shall be prohibited.
  3. Prior to issuance of grading or building permits, the developer shall submit a Geology and/or Soils Engineer’s report on the expansive properties of soils on all building sites in the proposed subdivision. Such soils are defined by Building Code Section 2904 (b).
  4. An as-built geological report shall be submitted for structures founded on bedrock. An as-built soils and compaction report shall be submitted for structures founded on fill as well as for all engineered fill areas.

EASEMENTS

  1. Easements shall not be granted or recorded within areas proposed to be granted, dedicated, or offered for dedication for public streets or highway access rights, building restriction rights, or other easements until after the final tract map is filed with the County Recorder, unless such easements are subordinated to the proposed grant or dedication. If easements are granted after the date of tentative approval, a subordination must be executed by the easement holder prior to the filing of the Final Tract Map.
  2. A driveway easement, prepared to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, shall be recorded against Lots 10 and 12 allowing egress and ingress rights to Lots 9, 10 and 13.
  3. Easements are required, subject to review by the City Engineer, to determine the final locations and requirements.
  4. The existing 25 foot wide easements along the northern, southern and eastern property lines for road purposes, public utilities and bridle trails shall be abandoned by the developer upon a request to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement who shall set the matter for consideration by the City Council.

SURVEY MONUMENTATION

  1. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a bond, cash deposit, or combination thereof shall be posted to cover costs to establish survey monumentation in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer.
  2. Within twenty-four (24) months from the date of filing the Final Map, the developer shall set survey monuments and tie points and furnish the tie notes to the City Engineer.
  3. All lot corners shall be referenced with permanent survey markers in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code.
  4. All tract corners shall be referenced with permanent survey markers in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act.

STREET NAMES AND NUMBERING

1.Any street names and/or house numbering by the developer must be approved by the City Engineer.

PARK DEDICATION

  1. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the developer shall pay to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes a Parkland Dedication in lieu fee which is to be calculated pursuant to the City’s Development Code.

GRADING

  1. Prior to recordation of the Final Map or the commencement of work, whichever occurs first, a bond, cash deposit, or combination thereof, shall be posted to cover the costs of grading in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer.
  2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit by Building and Safety, the applicant shall submit to the City a Certificate of Insurance demonstrating that the applicant has obtained a general liability insurance policy in an amount not less than 5 million dollars per occurrence and in the aggregate to cover awards for any death, injury, loss or damage, arising out of the grading or construction of this project by the applicant. Said insurance policy must be issued by an insurer admitted to do business in the State of California with a minimum rating of A-VII by Best’s Insurance Guide. Said insurance shall not be canceled or reduced during the grading or construction work and shall be maintained in effect for a minimum period of one (1) year following the final inspection and approval of said work by the City, and without providing at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City.
  3. Said approval shall allow a total of 16,500 cubic yards of earth movement, consisting of 7,500 cubic yards of cut and 9,000 cubic yards of fill, of which 1,500 cubic yards will be imported onto the site. The maximum height of cut is 20 feet and the maximum height of fill is 14 feet. Any revisions that result in a substantial increase to the aforementioned grading quantities shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission as a revision to the grading application.
  4. A construction plan shall be submitted to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement prior to issuance of grading permits. Said plan shall include but not be limited to: limits of grading, estimated length of time for rough grading and improvements, location of construction trailer, location and type of temporary utilities. The use of rock crushers shall be prohibited.
  5. Prior to filing the Final Map, a grading plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and City Geologist. This grading plan shall include a detailed engineering, geology and/or soils engineering report and shall specifically be approved by the geologist and/or soils engineer and show all recommendations submitted by them. It shall also be consistent with the tentative map and conditions, as approved by the City.
  6. A note shall be placed on the approved grading plan that requires the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement to approve rough grading prior to final clearance. The Director (or a designated staff member) shall inspect the graded site for accuracy of pad elevations, created slope gradients, and pad size by requiring the applicant to provide survey certifications of the pad elevations, slope gradients, and pad sizes.
  7. Grading shall conform to Chapter 29, "Excavations, Foundations, and Retaining Walls", and Chapter 70, "Excavation and Grading of the Uniform Building Code".
  8. Prior to issuance of grading permits, methods of control to prevent dust and windblown earth problems shall be approved by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. Such methods may include, but not be limited to, requiring truck covers, on-site truck wash down, street sweeping and on-site grade watering. The approved methods shall be implemented by the developer during the grading and construction activities.
  9. Graded slope tops shall be rounded, slope gradients shall be varied, and no significant abrupt changes between natural and graded slopes will be permitted. All created slopes shall not be greater than 2:1. Slopes may be split between adjacent lots.

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR INDIVIDUAL LOTS

  1. The Final Map shall be in conformance with the lot sizes and configurations shown on the Tentative Map for the RS-4 zoning district. All lots shall maintain a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet, a minimum contiguous lot area of 3,300 square feet, which excludes setback areas and extreme slopes areas, and a minimum width of 75 feet and minimum depth of 100 feet, as defined by the Development Code.
  2. No siting or grading for homes shall occur on existing extreme slopes (greater
  3. than 35%), unless otherwise permitted by criteria set forth in the Development Code. Driveway slopes to individual homes shall conform to the standards set forth in the Development Code.

  4. The private driveways shall meet Fire Department standards, including any painting or stenciling of curbs denoting its existence as a Fire Lane and turn-arounds.
  5. Final building and site plans, including but not limited to grading, setbacks, elevations, lot coverage calculations, landscaping, and lighting shall be submitted to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement for review and approval to determine conformance with the Development Code. The site plan shall clearly show all pad and ridgeline elevations. All residential development shall require the "Neighborhood Compatibility" analysis under a Site Plan Review application, or other appropriate applications.
  6. The maximum building pad elevations and building heights for all main structures are limited as follows and shall be certified prior to issuance of final building permits:
  7. LOT #

    PAD ELEVATION

    MAXIMUM HEIGHT

    MAXIMUM RIDGE ELEVATION

    1

    276’

    26’

    302’

    2

    287’

    26’

    313’

    3

    298’

    26’

    324’

    4

    309’

    26’

    335’

    5

    320’

    26’

    346’

    6

    340’

    26’

    366’

    7

    345’

    16’

    361’

    8

    345’

    26’

    371’

    9

    374’

    26’

    400’

    10

    374’

    26’

    400’

    11

    350’

    26’

    376’

    12

    370’

    26’

    396’

    13

    374’

    26’

    400’

  8. Lot 7 shall not exceed a maximum height of 16 feet and no more than one-story, as defined by the City’s Development Code, unless a Height Variation application is approved by the City.
  9. All heights shall be measured pursuant to Section 17.02.040 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code.
  10. The minimum roof pitch shall be of 3:12. No flat roofs shall be permitted, except as architectural features as permitted by the Director of Planning Building and Code Enforcement.
  11. Accessory Structures shall not exceed a height of twelve (12) feet, as measured from the lowest pre-construction grade adjacent to the foundation wall to the top of the highest roof ridgeline.
  12. The following table lists the maximum total structure size permitted for the primary residence, including habitable and non-habitable (garage included) floor area, for all of the homes on Lots 1 through 13:
  13.  

    LOT #

    MAXIMUM TOTAL STRUCTURE SIZE

    1

    4,800 square feet

    2

    5,600 square feet

    3

    5,600 square feet

    4

    5,600 square feet

    5

    4,800 square feet

    6

    5,450 square feet

    7

    5,600 square feet

    8

    5,600 square feet

    9

    5,450 square feet

    10

    5,450 square feet

    11

    4,800 square feet

    12

    6,000 square feet

    13

    5,450 square feet

  14. In all residences of the tract, the second story floor area shall not exceed 75% the first floor area including the attached garage. Furthermore, no more than 60% of the garage footprint shall be covered by the permitted second story floor area.
  15. For Lot 1, the building facade facing Palos Verdes Drive West shall incorporate architectural features between the first and second floors that articulate the street facing elevation to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement.
  16. For Lots 9, 10 and 13, fences along Via Victoria shall not exceed 42" in height (including decorative features and light fixtures) and shall be of wrought iron material that is at least 80% permeable/open to light and air.
  17. All foliage on private lots shall be maintained so not to create a significant view impairment from surrounding properties in accordance to Section 17.02.040 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. Furthermore, in no case shall foliage on Lots 9, 10 and 13 exceed an elevation of 400 feet (above sea level).
  18. Unless otherwise noted herein, the proposed residences shall be subject to review and approval by the City for compliance with the standards set forth in the City’s Development Code under a Site Plan Review application, or other appropriate application.

 


16.Proposed Amendment to Ocean Trails Development Agreement and Amendment to Declaration of Restrictions. (McLean)

Recommendation: Approve the proposed Amendment to Ocean Trails Development Agreement and the Amendment to Declaration of Restrictions regarding the determination of Ocean Trail’s golf tax liability and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the documents on behalf of the City.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM:DENNIS McLEAN, FINANCE DIRECTOR

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO OCEAN TRAILS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF RESTRICTION

RECOMMENDATION:

To approve the proposed Amendment To Ocean Trails Development Agreement and the Amendment To Declaration Of Restrictions regarding the determination of Ocean Trail’s golf tax liability and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the documents on behalf of the City.

BACKGROUND:

Events Leading To Proposed Amendment To The Development Agreement

Section 03.40.030 of the Municipal Code of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes imposes a ten (10%) percent golf tax for the opportunity of playing golf in the city. Accordingly, the golf fees assessed by Ocean Trails Golf Course are subject to the golf tax.

Ocean Trails Golf Course began its golf operation near the end of the year 2000. Shortly afterwards, Finance staff met with the management of Ocean Trails to institute a golf tax reporting system agreeable to both Ocean Trails and the City. During the discussion, Ocean Trail’s questioned whether golf cart rental fees were exempt from the tax. The economic significance resulting from the exemption of cart rental fees is demonstrated by the following example:

Ocean Trails Reconstruction Special rates (per Ocean Trails web site, August 28, 2001):

Golf rate Monday through Friday
$115.00
Golf rate Friday through Sunday
$145.00
Cart fee included in golf rate
$75.00

 

In the event the cart rental fee posted on the Ocean Trails web site is deemed the fair rental value, the net golf fee subject to the golf tax would be $40.00 ($115.00 less the $75.00 cart fee) during the week and $70.00 ($145.00 less the $75.00 cart fee) on the weekend.

The City Attorney reviewed the question of whether the cart fee is exempt from the golf fee subject to the City’s 10% golf tax when the Ordinance was adopted in 1993. Based upon that review, the City Attorney determined that cart rentals appear to be exempt from the golf tax under California law. In light of the long-range economic impact to both parties, Ocean Trails and staff entered into a protracted negotiation regarding the determination of fair rental value of Ocean Trail’s golf carts. During the negotiations, Ocean Trails provided the following arguments supporting a $75.00 per round cart rental value:

    • Each golf cart has a ParView computer processor with global positioning system (hereafter referred to as "GPS") capable of measuring the exact distance to the green from any location on a golf hole. The computer processor also can be used to: maintains golf scores and USGA official averages, order food and beverages from the restaurant for consumption after a round of golf, as well as ordering beverages for hydration during a round of golf. Each golf cart includes several non-standard amenities, including a ball washer, club head washer and golf shoe brush. In light of the non-standard amenities included in each golf cart, Ocean Trails believes that the fair rental value of each golf cart is proportionately greater than a standard golf cart.
    • Because the cost of each golf cart with the GPS processor is substantially greater than a standard golf cart, its recovery of its golf cart investment requires a $75.00 cart fee to enable amortization of its investment over five years.
    • The disproportional difference between the current $145.00/$99.00 golf fee and the $75.00 cart rate results from abnormally reduced demand while only 15 holes are available to play.

Staff conducted phone interviews with nine California championship caliber golf courses to inquire about cart rental rates. Only two of the nine courses interviewed separate the golf cart fee from the green fee. The cart rental charge reported by the two courses was $17.00 (Ojai Valley) and $25.00 (Pebble Beach) respectively. Both golf courses are open to the public, with weekend/weekday rates of $135.00 and $350.00 respectively. As a result of its informal survey, Staff’s concluded that: (1) few championship caliber golf courses separate their cart fee from total golf fees; and (2) comparability is not practical among similar golf courses using a standard golf cart vs. golf courses using carts with GPS. Only one of the survey respondents, Pelican Hills, provide golf carts with GPS. Pelican Hills does not separate the cart fee from the entire golf fee. Based upon staff’s discussions with Ocean Trails, few championship caliber golf courses separate their cart fee from total golf fees.

During the course of negotiating the amount of the cart fee exemption from the golf tax, staff suggested the exclusion of 25% of total golf fees. The proposed 25% exclusion would be in lieu of any statutory exemption (e.g. exempt cart rental and caddie services). Establishing the proposed 25% exclusion would avoid any further question whether or not a new service or use is exempt from the golf tax during the remaining term of the development agreement. An analysis of the economic impact from use of the proposed 25% exclusion compared with $75.00 cart fee and a $25.00 cart fee follows:

 

Staff feels that it is noteworthy that the estimated golf tax per revenue based upon the proposed exclusion of 25% of golf fees, compared with a standard $25.00 cart fee, are fairly similar.

Proposed Amendment to the Development Agreement

The Development Agreement contains many Recitals for mutual benefit, including the statement:

"H.Due to the potential cost to the City of maintaining the habitat conservation areas and other public improvements which will be dedicated to the City, after construction of the (Ocean Trails) Project is completed and the inability of the City to rely on traditional methods for obtaining financing to maintain these improvements, such as taxes and assessment districts, and the uncertainty, because of the adoption of proposition 62 ands 218 concerning the validity of the City’s golf tax …City and Developer wish to enter into a development agreement related to the Project".

Section 3.1 (b) of the Agreement includes the following provision:

"a guaranty, which shall be set forth in this agreement referred to in paragraph © of this Section 3.1, guarateeing payment to the City of the revenue that would have been generated from the golf course by virtue of the City’s golf tax, regardless whether the golf tax…. is found by a court of law to be invalid."

The guaranty of the golf tax shall terminate at the same time as all other provisions of the Development Agreement, ten years after the effective date, November 20, 2007.

Staff proposes that the following revisions be made to the Agreements as follows:

Within 15 days after execution of the amendment to the development agreement, Ocean Trails Golf Course will pay $38,919.73 full satisfaction of its golf tax liability through April 30, 2001, as well as any and all unpaid tax due from May 1, 2001 through August 31, 2001.

Additionally, the provisions contained in Sections 1. B., C. and D. as follows:

B.The parties hereby agree that Ocean Trails ("Owner") may include within the golf fees that are charged for the use of the golf course fees for other services or goods that are required to be used or rented in order to use the golf course, such as a golf cart or caddy. In no event shall Owner include within the golf fees charges for any other items or services that are not required to be used to play golf, such as the purchase of items at the pro shop, the purchase of food at the restaurant, or the use of the catering facility.

C.When Owner includes fees and charges for additional services or items that are required to use the golf course, such as a golf cart or a caddy, within the golf fees that are charged to use the golf course, the amount of the golf fees to which the City’s ten percent tax is applied is hereby reduced by twenty-five percent.

D.If Owner, does not include within a fee that is charged to use the golf course all additional fees or charges for items that are required to play golf at Ocean Trails, and those items are charged separately to the user of the golf course, then the provisions of this Amendment are not applicable to that fee, and Owner shall collect and pay to the City the full amount the ten percent golf tax without the twenty-five percent reduction.

Ocean Trails has prepared calculations of the golf tax liability since the inception of golf operations through the month of July 2001. During the month of May 2001, Staff conducted a limited audit of the accounting system and verified the accuracy of the golf tax calculation through the end of April 2001. Subject to the approval of the City Council, Ocean Trails has agreed to pay the outstanding golf tax liability (subject to audit of accounting records and golf tax calculations) within 15 days after the execution of this Amendment as follows:

May 2001
$17,148
June 2001
$19,491
July 2001
$22,352
3 Month Total  
$58,991
plus an amount of $38,919.73 for the golf tax collected from inception through April 2001 (using the 25% exclusion of golf fees).

 

Because the proposed Amendment is the result of extensive negotiations over a period of time, Staff does not propose the assessment of penalties and/or interest at this time.


FISCAL IMPACT:

The General fund budget for FY 00-01 did not include any expected golf tax revenue. The FY 01-02 General fund budget includes $100,000 of estimated golf tax revenue. The tax revenue will exceed the FY 01-02 budget.

Respectively submitted,
Dennis McLean, Finance Director

Reviewed by,
Les Evans, City Manager


RECESS:


PUBLIC COMMENTS: (at approximately 8:40 P.M.)

(This section of the agenda is for audience comments on items NOT on the agenda.)


REGULAR BUSINESS:


17.Amendment of Municipal Code - Golf Tax. (Lynch)

Recommendation: INTRODUCE NO. __ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE CITY’S GOLF TAX.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS

FROM:CITY ATTORNEY

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:AMENDMENT OF MUNICIPAL CODE – GOLF TAX

RECOMMENDATION

Introduce the attached ordinance, which makes a few minor amendments to the City’s golf tax. It should be noted that the revisions contained in the attached ordinance do not address the amount of the golf tax or the issue of approval of the tax by the voters; those issues have been addressed in the ordinance that the City Council directed be submitted to the voters at the upcoming election in November.

DISCUSSION

1.EXEMPTION FOR COURSES OWNED OR OPERATED BY GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES.

In 1993, the City Council adopted the City’s ten percent golf tax. Currently, there is only one golf course in the City that is required to pay the tax, the Ocean Trails course. Los Verdes is not required to pay the golf tax because paragraph B of Section 3.40.130 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code exempts golf courses that are owned or operated by a governmental entity from the payment of the tax.

That exemption was included within the ordinance adopting the golf tax at the request of the County of Los Angeles. At the time the City was considering adopting the golf tax in 1993, the County asserted that Los Verdes was exempt from any such tax because the County-owned course was being operated as one of the County’s many recreational areas that is available to everyone to use at rates that are far more reasonable than the rates that are charged to play on privately owned golf courses. The then-City Council agreed with the County’s position and included the exemption within Ordinance 291.

As everyone knows, the Long Point Project proposes to locate a portion of a nine-hole golf course on City property. The current exemption contained in the golf tax for golf courses that are owned or operated by a governmental entity could be read to exempt the Long Point Project from the payment of the golf tax, even if only one or two golf holes were located on City-owned property. To eliminate any ambiguity over that issue, a minor modification to this exemption is included in the attached ordinance. The modification to Section 3.40.130 B clarifies that only golf courses that are owned or operated entirely by a governmental entity will be exempt from the payment of the golf tax.

2.CALCULATION OF THE AMOUNT OF GOLF TAX THAT IS OWED TO THE CITY

One of the issues that staff has encountered in connection with administering the golf tax is the issue of various amenities that may or may not be included within the greens fee that a golfer is required to pay in order to play a round of golf. For example, many golf courses require a golfer to rent a golf cart to play a round of golf. Some courses include mandatory golf cart rentals as part of the total greens fee that is charged; other courses separate out the golf cart rental from the greens fee, even though the golf must pay both fees to play a round of golf. This same scenario can apply to other types of goods and services that are required to be rented or used to play a round of golf, such as the use of a caddy, locker facilities, etc.

The State Revenue and Taxation Code establishes the categories of items that are subject to sales tax and various exemptions from items that otherwise would be taxable. Suffice it to say that sales tax can be charged on leases or rentals of most tangible personal property. However, the State Board Equalization has held that no sales tax is applicable to fees that are charged for the use of a driving range because the patron is paying for the use of the facility and not for the use of tangible personal property. (See Ca.Bd.Eq.Annot. No. 330-2160.) This reasoning applies equally to greens fees that are paid to use a golf course.

Because it is impossible to determine in advance all of the items that may or may not be required to be used to play a round of golf and which of those items can or cannot be taxed by the City, in 1993, the City Council elected to require payment of the City’s golf tax only in connection with the use of driving ranges or golf courses.

Staff has been advised that golf course operators would like the maximum flexibility in determining how to package or market various items in connection with golf course play. (In other words, the issue concerns, which items will be, included as part of the greens fees and which items will be charged separately from the greens fees.) However, the more flexibility that is afforded to the golf course operator(s) as to which items can be included within or excluded from the greens fees, the more difficult it will be for staff to determine how much of the greens fees to which to apply the City’s golf tax. Staff has made two proposed revisions to the golf tax in an attempt to address this issue.

The first amendment is to Section 3.40.040. That section has been divided into several different lettered sub-sections so that the separate provisions will be easier to follow. The more substantive amendment is the addition of the new language that is contained in sub-section C, which requires the golf course operator to list separately from the golf fees any items or services that are required to be used in order to play a round of golf, but which the operator contends are exempt from the payment of the golf tax. That section states:

"C.Any good(s) or service(s) that the operator requires any user to rent or purchase in order to use the golf course, which the operator contends is (are) exempt from the golf tax, shall be separately stated from the amount of the golf fees charged on the invoice or receipt that is provided to the user."

Making this change will make it easier for staff to verify which items will be included within the golf fees and are properly subject to the tax and which will not.

The second amendment is the addition of sub-section F to Section 3.40.060. That sub-section states adds a new rebuttable presumption to the golf tax, which states:

"F.Presumption. It shall be presumed that if the cost of all of the goods and services that the operator requires any user to rent or purchase in order to use the golf course, which the operator contends are exempt from the golf tax, exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the total charge that the user is required to pay to the operator for said use, that the operator is attempting to prevent the City from receiving the full amount of the tax to which the City is entitled pursuant to this chapter. This presumption may be rebutted by the operator, if the operator presents contrary documentation that is satisfactory to the tax administrator that the charges are reasonable and are standard practices in the golf course industry."

Including this rebuttable presumption will enable the City to review any required charges that must be paid to play golf or to use a driving range that exceed 25% of the total charges that are required to be paid to determine if the operator of the golf course is attempting to prevent the City from collecting the full amount of the golf tax to which the City is entitled. However, if the golf course operator presents evidence that is satisfactory to the City tax administrator (the Director of Finance) that the charges are reasonable or are typical in that industry, then the tax administrator may find that the presumption has been rebutted. Similar to any other decision of the tax administrator that is made in implementing the golf tax chapter, this decision would be appeal able to the City Council pursuant to Section 3.40.080.

It should be noted that although this provision is not exactly the same as the amendment to the Ocean Trails development agreement, which is a separate item on the agenda, it is consistent with that revision.

CONCLUSION

These revisions clarify Chapter 3.40. However, they do not affect the major issue regarding the golf tax, which is the imposition of the ten percent tax that was adopted by the City Council in 1993. That issue has been addressed by the ordinance that the Council has placed before the voters in the upcoming November election. Accordingly, it is recommended that the City Council introduce the attached ordinance for first reading.

ALTERNATIVES

The City Council could determine not to exempt users of golf courses or driving ranges that are owned or operated entirely by a governmental agency and delete paragraph B of Section 3.40.130. This alternative is likely to be opposed by Los Angeles County, if the County continues to advance the arguments that it made in 1993.

Respectfully submitted,
Carol Lynch, City Attorney

Reviewed by,
Les Evans, City Manager

ORDINANCE NO. ___

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE CITY’S GOLF TAX

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Section 3.40.40 of Chapter 3.40 of Title 3 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

"3.40.040Tax collection.

"A.Each operator shall collect the tax imposed by this chapter to the same extent and at the same time as the golf fees are collected from every user.

"B.The amount of tax shall be separately stated from the amount of the golf fees charged, and each user shall receive a receipt for payment from the operator.

"C.Any good(s) or service(s) that the operator requires any user to rent or purchase in order to use the golf course, which the operator contends is (are) exempt from the golf tax, shall be separately stated from the amount of the golf fees charged on the invoice or receipt that is provided to the user.

"D.If the golf fees are paid in installments, a proportionate share of the tax shall be paid with each installment; any unpaid tax shall be due upon the user’s ceasing use of the golf course.

"E.If golf fees are paid as part of any membership fee or dues, the operator shall collect a tax on an amount thereof that is fairly allocable to the golf fees or number of rounds the person paying such membership fee or dues is entitled to play under the terms of the membership, or the average number of rounds played by persons paying such membership fees or dues, whichever is greater."

Section 2.Section 3.40.060 of Chapter 3.40 of Title 3 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding new paragraph F thereof to read as follows:

"F.Presumption. It shall be presumed that if the cost of all of the goods and services that the operator requires any user to rent or purchase in order to use the golf course, which the operator contends are exempt from the golf tax, exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the total charge that the user is required to pay to the operator for said use, that the operator is attempting to prevent the City from receiving the full amount of the tax to which the City is entitled pursuant to this chapter. This presumption may be rebutted by the operator, if the operator presents contrary documentation that is satisfactory to the tax administrator that the charges are reasonable and are standard practices in the golf course industry."

Section 3.Section 3.40.130 of Chapter 3.40 of Title 3 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code is hereby amended by amending paragraph B thereof to read as follows:

"B.No tax shall be imposed upon any user of a golf course that is that is entirely owned and/or operated by a governmental entity."

Section 4.Savings Clause. The provisions of this ordinance are substantially the same as those originally set forth in Ordinance No. 291, as adopted in 1993. Therefore, this ordinance is to be construed as a restatement and continuation of this earlier ordinance, as previously codified, and not as a new enactment. Nothing contained in this ordinance shall be interpreted or enforced in any manner as to constitute an increase in the amount of the tax imposed by Ordinance No. 291.

Section 5.Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this Ordinance shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. The City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions of this Ordinance be declared invalid or unenforceable.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this ___ day of September, 2001.

 

_________________________

Mayor

ATTEST:
___________________________

City Clerk


18.Fencing and Signage at Inspiration Point. (Carry over from August 21) (Petru)

Recommendation: Approve the fencing design and signage for Inspiration Point and direct staff to install said improvements.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY

COUNCIL

FROM:ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:FENCING AND SIGNAGE AT INSPIRATION POINT

RECOMMENDATION

Approve the fencing design and signage for Inspiration Point and direct staff to install said improvements.

INTRODUCTION

This item was previously scheduled for the August 21st City Council meeting. Due to the lateness of the hour and the fact that Ms. Key-Marer had to leave the meeting before the item came up, the Council continued the matter to tonight’s meeting.

BACKGROUND

At the February 20, 2001 City Council meeting, Sarah Key-Marer addressed the Council regarding the death of her four-year old daughter, Lauren Key, at Inspiration Point on November 8, 2000. She noted that Portuguese Point has fencing along the bluff edge and warning signage, but that Inspiration Point, which is immediately adjacent, is not similarly improved. Ms. Key-Marer requested that the City take measures to prevent future tragedies on City-owned coastal property.

In response to the issues raised by Ms. Key-Marer, staff visited each City-owned coastal property to determine which areas might need safety improvements. The results of staff’s study were considered by the City Council at the April 21 and May 1, 2001 Budget Policy Workshops. At that time, Council directed staff to include $45,000 in the FY 01-02 Budget to install the following bluff top improvements:

Location

Improvements

Ocean Front Estates

Warning Signage

Inspiration Point

Warning Signage and Limited Fencing

Archery Range

Warning Signage

Shoreline Park

Bluff Top Fencing and Warning Signage

 

With the adoption of the City Budget on June 5, 2001 and the start of the new fiscal year on July 1, 2001, staff is proceeding with the installation of bluff top fencing at Shoreline Park. Standard warning signage will be installed at Ocean Front Estates, the Archery Range and Shoreline Park later in the year. The remaining issue is Council approval of the final design of the fencing and signage at Inspiration Point.

DISCUSSION

Despite its relatively remote location (the closest public parking is located a ½ mile away at Abalone Cove Beach), Inspiration Point is an attractive destination to hikers in the area due to its scenic beauty and unique vistas. Although there are a number of small interconnecting trails between Palos Verdes Drive South and Inspiration Point, the most obvious access onto the point is available from two footpaths. One footpath begins on Palos Verdes Drive South, just east of Peppertree Drive. The second trail comes up from Sacred Cove on the west side of Inspiration Point. The two trails converge just before the promontory juts out to sea.

Unlike Portuguese Point, which has a level area on top that is approximately 200 to 400 feet wide, the flat portion of Inspiration Point is only 20 to 40 feet wide. Installing fencing along the top of Inspiration Point would be particularly challenging because of this point’s narrow aspect, as well as the fact that the area between Palos Verdes Drive South and where the point extends into the ocean experiences nearly constant landslide movement. Rather than fencing Inspiration Point in a manner similar to Portuguese Point, staff recommends that a section of fence be installed parallel to the roadway in the area where the point first narrows and extends out to sea. The proposed location of the fence is shown as a white line on the aerial photograph on Figure 1 attached to this report. Staff has also marked the location of the fence on the property using wooden stakes and yellow plastic tape, as shown in the attached photographs. The fence construction would be similar to the fence at Portuguese Point, which consists of 48" high wooden posts set approximately 10’6" apart and connected by three galvanized metal crossbars. This same style of fencing is also used at Abalone Cove, Vanderlip Park and the Point Vicente Interpretive Center.

The fence would be equipped with swing gates in the locations where the fence intersects the two existing footpaths described above. In order to pass through, a hiker would be required to unlatch the gate and pull it open. The gate would automatically close behind the hiker by way of a spring mechanism. Ocean Trails is required to have three similar swing gates located at the top of steep and narrow trails leading from the bluff top down to the beach 150 to 200 feet below. Staff recommends that both the east and west swing gates be equipped with warning signs that state:

WARNING!

BEYOND THIS POINT ARE UNSTABLE CLIFFS AND STEEP DROP-OFFS.

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR CHILDREN OR INEXPERIENCED HIKERS.

PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK!

These signs would be approximately 3’ wide by 2’ high and could either be attached to the swing gate itself or to the fence adjacent to the gate. The sign would have a yellow background and black lettering. Exact placement would be determined at the time of installation in order to provide the best visibility to hikers.

CONCLUSION

As part of this year’s Budget Workshops, the City Council included funds in the FY 01-02 Budget to install fencing and signage improvements at Inspiration Point. Staff is now seeking Council approval for the final location, configuration and design of the proposed fencing and signage.

FISCAL IMPACT

The total cost for the project, including the other signage and fencing referred to on page 1 of this report, would be $45,000. This amount includes $30,000 for fencing, $10,000 for warning signage and $5,000 for engineering services. The source of funds for the project would be the General fund. Staff is still investigating whether there may be some residual Measure A funds available for this type of park improvement project.

Respectfully submitted:
Carolynn Petru, Assistant City Manager

Reviewed,
Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:

Photographs

 


19.Review of Large Domestic Animal Nonconformity Statement No. 8 (Sunshine, 6 Limetree Lane). (Carry over from August 21) (Fox) Recommendation: Affirm staff’s determination that the keeping of a maximum of twelve (12) large domestic animals - of which a maximum of seven (7) animals may be boarded - may be "grandfathered" for the property at 6 Limetree Lane.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE

ENFORCEMENT

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:REVIEW OF LARGE DOMESTIC ANIMAL NONCONFORMITY STATEMENT NO. 8 (SUNSHINE, 6 LIMETREE LANE)

Staff Coordinator:Kit Fox, aicp, Senior Planner

RECOMMENDATION

Affirm Staff’s determination that the keeping of a maximum twelve (12) large domestic animals—of which a maximum of seven (7) animals may be boarded—may be "grandfathered" for the property at 6 Limetree Lane.

BACKGROUND

Section 17.46.080 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code (RPVDC) provides for the filing of nonconformity statements related to the keeping of large domestic animals in the City. Pursuant to this Code section, the final determination on these statements was to be made by Staff. However, in the course of reviewing the statements submitted to the City, it became clear that Staff’s determination on some of these statements might be disputed, either by the party who filed the statement or by another interested party. Therefore, in 1999 Staff sought direction from the City Council regarding the final disposition on any disputed nonconformity statements, and the Council determined that it would make the final determination on any disputed statements. Of the twenty-six (26) nonconformity statements submitted, Staff identified seven (7) that were likely to be disputed. This is the third of the disputed statements to be presented to the City Council for a final determination.

Staff has reviewed Nonconformity Statement No. 8, filed by Sunshine for the property at 6 Limetree Lane. Based upon this statement and a site inspection, Staff determined that a maximum of twelve (12) large domestic animals could be kept, of which a maximum of seven (7) animals could be boarded. Sunshine has not disputed Staff’s determination on Nonconformity Statement No. 8, but written objections to Staff’s determination have been raised by Toni Deeble, Betty Strauss and Jeanne Smolley.

DISCUSSION

Sunshine’s property consists of a developed 26,400-square-foot lot and two (2) vacant, contiguous lots of 19,800 square feet and 22,120 square feet, respectively. Under the "old" provisions of the Development Code, up to five (5) animals could have been kept on the developed lot, and up to six (6) animals could have been kept on each of the vacant, contiguous lots, for a total of seventeen (17) animals on all the lots combined. Any or all of these animals could have been "boarded," meaning that they are not owned and/or maintained by the property owner. Under the current Development Code, a total of up to four (4) animals could be kept and/or boarded on all of the lots combined without the approval of a large domestic animal permit or conditional large domestic animal permit.

RPVDC Section 17.46.080 begins as follows:

Except as provided in this Section, all existing buildings, structures, fences, enclosures and uses of land, including the number of animals allowed by this Chapter, which do not conform to the provisions of this Chapter, but were existing as legal conforming uses or structures on February 1, 1997, shall be considered legal nonconforming uses and/or structures for purposes of this Chapter. The owner of a parcel or use which has been rendered nonconforming by the provisions of this Chapter shall file a written nonconformity statement with the Director in order to establish a record of the nonconforming use or structure. The written statement shall be filed with the Director by October 3, 1997. [emphasis added]

According to Nonconformity Statement No. 8 (attached), there were twelve (12) large domestic animals kept on Sunshine’s property as of February 1, 1997. This was verified during a subsequent inspection of the property. Seven of these animals are boarded, based upon information provided by Sunshine. Since the keeping and/or boarding of up to seventeen (17) animals was permitted by right under the "old" Development Code provisions and this was more than the number of animals observed by Staff on the site, Staff determined that the number of animals requested by Sunshine (i.e., twelve) could be "grandfathered" for the property.

Mrs. Deeble and Mrs. Strauss assert that no number of animals should be "grandfathered" for this property because (they allege) the property does not comply with basic City standards for the keeping of large domestic animals. This may or may not be the case. However, pursuant to the Development Code, the relevant issue for the approval of this nonconformity statement is whether the number of animals kept and/or boarded on the property was legal on February 1, 1997, but was subsequently rendered nonconforming by the enactment of revisions to the City’s Development Code in May of 1997. As discussed above, Staff believes that the number of animals requested by Sunshine qualifies for "grandfathering." However, it should be noted that, with the exception of specific structures and/or numbers of animals covered by the nonconformity statement, the approval of a nonconformity statement does not give any property owner the right to violate or deviate from the City’s standards for keeping large domestic animals. Accordingly, Mrs. Deeble’s and Mrs. Strauss’ concerns about issues of property maintenance, public health and aesthetics have been referred to the City’s Code Enforcement Division.

Mrs. Smolley asserts that two (2) of the horses listed on Sunshine’s nonconformity statement were moved to her property prior to February 1, 1997, and should not have been listed as being present on Sunshine’s property on that date. Sunshine does not dispute Mrs. Smolley’s assertion, but she also believes that there were at least twelve—and perhaps more—horses present on her property on February 1, 1997. However, since Sunshine’s statement only listed twelve (12) horses, Staff is only prepared to recommend that this number of horses be "grandfathered" for the property.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

The property owner and the interested parties have been advised of the City Council’s consideration of this matter. Based upon the City Council’s determination, Staff will prepare a final nonconformity statement for recordation to the title of Sunshine’s property. It should also be noted that the City Council’s determination does not preclude Sunshine from applying for a large domestic animal permit in order to change the number of animals permitted on the property or to add or modify structures on the property.

CONCLUSION

Based upon the available evidence, Staff concluded that there were twelve (12) animals kept on the subject property as of February 1, 1997, of which seven (7) animals were boarded. Since this number of animals was permitted to be kept by right under the "old" Development Code, Staff determined that this is the number of animals to be "grandfathered" for the property at 6 Limetree Lane. It should be noted, however, that the boarding of seven (7) animals will not be "grandfathered" in perpetuity. By February 1, 2007, or if and when the property is sold or transferred—whichever occurs later—the number of boarded animals must be reduced to four (4). However, the total number of animals that may be kept on the combined lots (i.e., twelve) will not change.

FISCAL IMPACT

The subject matter of this item will have no fiscal impact upon the City, regardless of the action taken.

ALTERNATIVES

The alternatives available for the City Council’s consideration include:

  1. Grant the property owner’s request to "grandfather" twelve (12) animals for the subject property.
  2. Determine a different number of animals to "grandfather" for the subject property.

 

Respectfully submitted:
Joel Rojas, aicp, Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

Reviewed by:
Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:

  • Draft covenant
  • Nonconformity Statement No. 8
  • Letters from Toni Deeble and Betty Strauss and Jeanne Smolley
  • E-mail response from Sunshine
  • Nonconformity Statement flowchart

RECORDING REQUESTED BY:

City of Rancho Palos Verdes

WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:

City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Planning, Building and Code Enforcement
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275

NO RECORDING FEE PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27383

COVENANT PERTAINING TO THE USE OF PROPERTY

FOR THE KEEPING OF LARGE DOMESTIC ANIMALS

(NONCONFORMITY STATEMENT)

On July 14, 1997, the owner(s) of the subject property described below submitted a Large Domestic Animal Nonconformity Statement to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, in accordance with the provisions of Section 17.46.080 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code:

Property Address:6 Limetree Lane

Property Owner(s):Sunshine

Legal Description:Lots 25, 26 and 27 in Block 1 of Tract No. 14118 in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, County of Los Angeles, State of California, as per map filed in Book 306, Pages 34 and 35 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County.

On December 6, 1999, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes reviewed and verified the nonconforming use(s) and/or structure(s) described in the Large Domestic Animal Nonconformity Statement, and determined that the following nonconforming use(s) and/or structure(s) shall be allowed to continue on the subject property for the length(s) of time specified below:

    1. The use of property for the keeping of a maximum of twelve (12) large domestic animals, provided that they belong to the property owner(s), may continue in perpetuity, subject to the provisions of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code.
    2. The use of the property for the boarding of a maximum of seven (7) of the twelve (12) large domestic animals described above may continue until February 1, 2007, or until the property is sold or transferred, whichever time period is longer. Sale or transfer of the property does not include interspousal transfers in cases of divorce, transfers of property to the transferor’s children, or inheritance by a spouse or child.

This determination is based upon the submittal of a Large Domestic Animal Nonconformity Statement and supporting evidence consisting of a list of boarded and kept animals. The Large Domestic Animal Nonconformity Statement and supporting evidence submitted by the property owner, along with the documentation of the City’s review and analysis of the same, shall remain on file with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes in the address file for the subject property.

CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES:

______________________________

Joel Rojas
Director of Planning, Building And Code Enforcement

_____________________________

Date

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )ss
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )ss

On _________________ before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared _________________________________________, personally known to me or proved on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

___________________________

Notary Public


20.Vallon Drive/Hawthorne Boulevard Signalization. (Allison)

 

Recommendation: Consider the recommendation from the Traffic Committee to install a signal at the intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Vallon Drive.

TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:VALLON DRIVE / HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD SIGNALIZATION

RECOMMENDATION

Consider the recommendation from the Traffic Committee to install a traffic signal on Hawthorne Boulevard at Vallon Drive.

BACKGROUND

The City’s Public Works Department and Traffic Committee have been working with the residents of the La Cresta Homeowners’ Association for approximately 14 months to address traffic safety concerns at the intersection of Vallon Drive and Hawthorne Boulevard. The focus of resident concerns is their ability to safely access Hawthorne Boulevard from Vallon Drive. The factors that contribute to resident concerns are as follows:

  • The speed of motorist on both northbound and southbound Hawthorne Boulevard.
  • The curvature of Hawthorne Boulevard at Vallon Drive.
  • The lack of grouping or ‘platooning’ of vehicles on Hawthorne Boulevard at Vallon Drive.

A brief chronology of actions is as follows:

Date

Action

June 2000

Traffic Committee reviewed concerns of residents

June 2000

Traffic Committee recommended modification to the signal on Hawthorne Boulevard at Dupre Drive.

October 2000

Study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of the signal modification.

December 2000

Staff determined that the study was ineffective. Signal on Hawthorne Boulevard at Dupre Drive was returned to normal operations.

February 2001

Staff met with residents to discuss options to address concerns.

June 2001

Residents write the committee to express concern that signalization is the only acceptable solution.

July 2001

Traffic Committee hears testimony and recommends that a signal be installed.

 

At the July 23, 2001 Traffic Committee meeting the committee heard considerable testimony from the community and voted 5 – 1 to recommend that the City Council authorize a new traffic signal at the intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Vallon Drive.

DISCUSSION

The neighborhood, the Traffic Committee, and staff worked together to identify possible solutions to the neighborhood’s concerns. The following options were considered:

Action

Remark

Modify the signal at Hawthorne Boulevard / Dupre Drive to make a continuous false call during the AM and PM peaks. This would provide breaks in traffic assisting motorists to enter Hawthorne Boulevard from Vallon Drive.

Recommended by the neighborhood, and the Traffic Committee. This action was found to be ineffective by staff. The neighborhood reported some benefit. Staff also had concerns over the unnecessary delays to motorists on Hawthorne Boulevard

Provide a higher level of enforcement of existing speed limits by the Sheriff’s Department.

Implemented.

Construct a new U-turn opportunity along Hawthorne Boulevard just southerly of Vallon Drive. This would allow motorist wishing to access northbound Hawthorne Boulevard from Vallon to make a right out of their neighborhood and make a U-turn on Hawthorne Boulevard.

Not acceptable by neighborhood

Install a sensor for the Hawthorne Boulevard / Dupre signal on Vallon Drive to interrupt traffic and provide a break in traffic to assist motorists enter Hawthorne Boulevard from Vallon Drive.

Suggested by the neighborhood. Not recommended by the Traffic Committee or staff.

Install ‘Cross Traffic Ahead’ sign along southbound Hawthorne Boulevard in advance of Vallon Drive.

Implemented

Modify the nose of the Hawthorne Boulevard median at Vallon Drive to allow a smoother transition from onto Hawthorne Boulevard.

Implemented

Re-paint existing curb and roadway markings in the vicinity of the Hawthorne Boulevard / Vallon Drive intersection.

Implemented

Remove vegetation along Hawthorne Boulevard that limits site distance.

Implemented

 

Staff does not recommend installing a new signal because the intersection does not meet signal warrants. Like most Cities throughout the State of California, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes utilizes a standard analysis procedure to determine if a signal is justified at a given location. The analysis – generally called a warrant analysis – determines if any of 11 criteria, or warrants, is met. The warrants include such intersection characteristics as traffic volumes, accident history, and pedestrian volumes. None of the 11 warrants are met for the intersection. A copy of the warrant analysis is attached.

Among the warrants evaluated is accident history. The accident warrant is met if five or more accidents, susceptible to correction by a signal, occur in a given year.

The history of reported accidents at this intersection is as follows:

Year

Total Accidents

Type of Accident

Accidents susceptible to correction by a signal

through 7/2001

0

N/A

0

2000

1

Failure to yield

1

1999

1

Failure to set parking brake

0

1998

0

N/A

0

 

 

Given the curvature of Hawthorne Boulevard, the Traffic Committee discussed at length the visibility of a new signal. It was concluded that elements could be included in the design to make it sufficiently visible to southbound motorists. Advanced warning signs would be required. One of the new signs would be placed on the existing flashing beacon. In addition the new signal would likely have an extra long mast arm to improve visibility. One final aspect of the design, the signal would be designed to cycle only when a vehicle is waiting to access Hawthorne Boulevard.

CONCLUSIONS

The Traffic Committee recommends that a new traffic signal be installed on Hawthorne Boulevard at Vallon Drive. Staff does not recommend the installation because signal warrants are not met.

The installation of a traffic signal at this location will assist motorists to safely access Hawthorne Boulevard from Vallon Drive. A new signal, however, will have two undesirable effects. It is likely that rear-end traffic collisions at this location will increase. In addition the intersection will operate less efficiently, and motorist on Hawthorne Boulevard will be subject to unnecessary delays.

One additional factor that should be considered is that there are several other non-signalized intersections along Hawthorne Boulevard that have characteristics similar to the Vallon Drive intersection. Via Rivera, Los Verdes Drive, Ravenspur Road and Locklenna Lane are examples. If a signal is approved at Vallon Drive, residents who access Hawthorne Boulevard at these other intersections will likely request that their access point to Hawthorne Boulevard be signalized.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS

Deny the request for a signal and request that staff, the committee, and the neighborhood continue to work together on solutions other than a signal.

FISCAL IMPACTS

Installing a new signal will cost approximately $135,000. Funds are not available in the adopted budget. If the signal is approved staff will bring back to the City Council the necessary budget adjustments to provide funding for the design and construction of the project. The project would be added to the current capital projects. The design and construction of the signal will take approximately one year.

Possible funding sources include the Gas Tax Fund, and the Proposition C Fund. These funds are currently fully programmed for the next several years for roadway maintenance and the residential and arterial overlay programs.

The annual maintenance costs for the new signal would be approximately $5,000 per year.

Respectfully submitted,
Dean Allison, Director of Public Works

Reviewed,
Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:

  • Warrant Analysis
  • Staff Report to the July 23, 2001 Traffic Committee
  • June 27, 2001 correspondence from Loretta Westlund, President of the La Cresta HOA
  • June 15, 2001 correspondence from Jerome Kaliser


21.Adoption of City Council Policy on Border Issues. (Carry over from August 21). (Rojas)

Recommendation: Review and adopt City Council Policy No. 34 which establishes a policy for handling "Border Issues."

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:ADOPTION OF CITY COUNCIL POLICY ISSUE ON BORDER ISSUES

 

RECOMMENDATION:

Review and adopt City Council Policy Issue No. 34, which establishes a policy for handling "Border Issues".

DISCUSSION:

At the August 7, 2001 City Council meeting, the Council directed Staff to prepare a draft City Council policy for handling "Border Issues". Attached is the draft policy for the Council’s review and consideration.

In summary, the policy creates a procedure where the City Council can address potential "Border Issue" projects in neighboring communities on a monthly basis and refer such issues to the "Border Issues" ad hoc sub-committee for further investigation. The ad-hoc subcommittee, composed of Mayor Lyon and Mayor Pro tem McTaggart, would then have the responsibility to monitor the proposed projects, coordinate with other local agencies, if necessary, and provide status reports to the City Council.

As pointed out at the last meeting, the present sub-committee has a finite life and is set to expire on December 3, 2001. In addition, minutes will be taken at any meeting of the sub-committee and provided to all Councilmembers.

Staff is recommending that the Council review the draft policy, provide staff with any suggested changes, and adopt the policy.

ALTERNATIVES:

  1. Direct Staff to make specific revisions to the draft policy and to bring back the revised policy at a future City Council meeting for adoption.
  2. Direct Staff to propose a different method for monitoring Border Issues.

Respectfully submitted,

Joel Rojas, Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

Reviewed by:

Les Evans, City Manager

Attachment:

  • Draft City Council Policy No. 34
  • Correspondence

CITY COUNCIL POLICY

NUMBER: 34

DATE ADOPTED: August 21, 2001

SUBJECT: Border Issues

 

POLICY:

It shall be the policy of the City Council that at least once a month, the City Council agenda shall contain an item to discuss "Border Issues" that have the potential to adversely impact residents of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. "Border Issues" consist of individual projects that are likely to have direct adverse impacts on City residents on their own, as well as projects that, together with other projects, could create cumulative impacts to City residents. The procedure for addressing such issues shall be as follows, which is summarized in the attached flow chart:

  1. When City Staff receives notices or other information regarding proposed projects that are located outside of the City’s borders but with the potential to impact City residents, City Staff shall report such information to the City Council as part of the Council’s monthly "Border Issues" agenda item. Such proposed projects shall include, but not be limited to, proposed land use development projects, events, or special uses in the neighboring cities and communities of Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Palos Verdes Estates, San Pedro, Lomita and unincorporated LA County.
  2. The Staff Report to the City Council on any such "Border Issue" proposed project shall include a description of the proposed project and the current status of the proposed project.
  3. A copy of the Staff Report on such proposed projects shall be mailed to the Council of Homeowners Associations and any Homeowners Associations on file with the City that are located in the proximity of the proposed project.
  4. Upon receipt of the Staff Report, the City Council shall consider any public testimony and take one of the following actions:
    1. Determine that no potential adverse impacts would result to City residents and direct that no further action be taken on the item;
    2. Determine that potential adverse impacts may result to City residents and direct the Border Issues sub-committee to monitor the proposed project and make a recommendation to the City Council as to what, if any, position the City should take on the project.
    3. Determine that adverse impacts will result to City residents and establish a City position on the proposed project and give specific direction to the sub-committee and/or Staff.
  1. Unless otherwise directed by the City Council, when a project is referred to the sub-committee for monitoring, the sub-committee will have the ability to take one or more of the following actions:
    1. Direct Staff to respond to any CEQA notices:
    2. Direct Staff to draft a letter to the lead agency stating the City’s position on the project;
    3. Attend or direct Staff to attend any public hearings, workshops or any other informational meetings on the proposed project;
    4. Meet with representatives of the lead agency proposing the project.

The sub-committee shall monitor projects, when directed to do so by the City Council, until the City Council deems otherwise. Unless otherwise directed by the City Council, monitoring reports shall be submitted to the City Council as part of the monthly "Border Issues" agenda item and may be accompanied by oral reports from the sub-committee members.


22.Border Issues Status Report. (Evans)

Recommendation: Review the current status of border issues and provide direction to the City Council Committee and staff.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS

FROM:CITY MANAGER

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:"BORDER ISSUES" STATUS REPORT

RECOMMENDATION:

Review the current status of border issues and provide direction to the City Council Committee and staff.

BACKGROUND:

At their meeting of April 17, 2001 the City Council established an Ad Hoc Committee for dealing with "border issues." The committee is composed of Mayor Lyon and Mayor Pro Tem John McTaggart. The committee is charged with monitoring the activities of neighboring jurisdictions to determine whether or not the City Council should take positions on proposed developments (or events or uses) that may adversely affect the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.

Border issues are those proposed land developments, events or special uses proposed for approval in adjacent communities that may impact the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes. Recent border issues have included approval by the City of Los Angeles of a Home Depot and a Senior Housing project in San Pedro and approval of a housing project at the intersection of Hawthorne Blvd and Crest Road by Rolling Hills Estates.

The City Council is presently considering the adoption of a policy on how to process "border issues."

DISCUSSION:

No new issues have been added to the report during this period. However, we have been advised that Assemblymember Lowenthal will be hosting a workshop to discuss the ‘Diesel Plume" reported to be affecting the Long Beach-San Pedro area and portions of the Peninsula cities. The meeting is tentatively set for October 8, 2001. Staff will keep the Council advised as the date and time of the workshop are firmed up.

Respectfully submitted,
Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments: Border Issues Status Report


BORDER ISSUES STATUS REPORT

September 4, 2001

CONSTRUCTION OF A RECREATION FACILITY AT HARBOR HILLS

(LOS ANGELES COUNTY)

The County has proposed construction of a 12,650 square foot recreation facility for the Harbor Hills Housing area. The $2.3 million project will consist of a gym, two multi-purpose rooms, a recreation office, sports equipment storage, a child care area for 36 pre-school children, a sheriff’s patrol office, a full service kitchen, restrooms and locker rooms.

Homeowners in Peninsula Verde were not offered adequate opportunity to comment on the project and have turned to the City to intercede on their behalf. Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart feels the environmental process (CEQA) for the project was flawed and has requested the records documenting the environmental review. A community meeting took place at the Harbor Hills Community Center on August 27, 2001 and was attended by Mayor Lyon and Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart as well as homeowners from Peninsula Verde. In addition to strong objections to the County’s notification process for the project, the homeowners expressed concerns about lighting intensity, times of operation, children crossing PVDN, traffic, unsavory activities near the Lomita water tower and location of the recreation facility. Another meeting is planned for next week to allow the County Regional Planning Department to go over the environmental approval process conducted for this project.

The County has not yet awarded a construction contract for the project. We were advised that the project would remain on hold until the community issues could be addressed.

Mayor Lyon has addressed a letter to Supervisor Knabe to insure he is fully briefed on the issues surrounding the Harbor Hills proposal.


RE-VITALIZATION OF THE GARDEN VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER ON WESTERN AVENUE AT WESTMONT (CITY OF LOS ANGELES)

The Garden Village revitalization project was approved by the Los Angeles City Council on June 8, 2001. The project, located on Western Avenue north of Westmont , will add 2000 square feet of retail space to a reconfigured shopping center to be anchored by a "super" Albertson’s.

The Border Issues Committee was particularly concerned about the underlying soils and drainage conditions in the project area that includes both the City of Los Angeles and the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. Therefore, at the meeting of June 16, 2001 the ad hoc committee recommended that the City Council authorize a study of these geologic conditions and whether or not the Gardens Village revitalization project will have any adverse impacts on existing properties in our City. The Council authorized the study and funding of $10,000.

In addition, the issue of the adequacy of the environmental process for the project was researched by City Staff.

The statute of limitations has run on the environmental documentation prepared for the Garden Village project. The City Attorney advises us that we have no recourse from that avenue. Bill Cotton, the geologist who is reviewing the geology and soils information provided as part of the project design, has advised me he will have a report for us prior to the September 4, 2001 City Council meeting. Mayor Lyon is working on setting up a meeting with Councilwoman Hahn to discuss "border issues."

 


EXPANSION OF THE COVENANT CHURCH ON PALOS VERDES DRIVE NORTH (CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES)

The project is still in the informational gathering phase. It seems that the applicant has been making changes to the project so the exact proposal has not been finalized. Generally, the project involves the construction of a new sanctuary building that would accommodate 2,050 seats, along with a new 3-5 level parking structure with 500 parking spaces. The Church also proposes to convert the existing sanctuary to a gymnasium/multi-purpose room for events such as wedding receptions. The preparation of the Initial Study is still underway which will determine whether the project will necessitate an EIR or Negative Declaration. We will receive a notice when either document is prepared and circulated to the public.

 


CHADWICK SCHOOL EXPANSION (LOS ANGELES COUNTY)

The Chadwick School is a private school (Kindergarten through 12th grade) located on a 45.2 acre site in an island of unincorporated L.A. County near the intersection of Crenshaw Blvd. and PVDN. The School is requesting a CUP from the L.A. County Department of Regional Planning to authorize the continuance and expansion of the school facilities. Approximately 216,759 sq. ft. of new construction is proposed which includes a 76,500 sq. ft., 3-level parking structure and 10,871 sq. ft. for other school structures, with the reconstruction of existing structures making up the remaining 129,388 sq. ft. The school is also seeking to increase enrollment from 725 to 980 students with the expansion plan.

According to L.A. County Department of Regional Planning Staff, the CUP was approved by the L.A. County Planning Commission earlier this year and the decision has been appealed by local L.A. County residents to the L.A. County Board of Supervisors. No appeal hearing date has been set.

Back in March of this year, before the Planning Commission acted on the proposed CUP, our Department was contacted by an Academy Hill resident (the unincorporated LA County neighborhood adjacent to the school) concerned that RPV residents living on Blackhorse and Browndeer Drives may not be aware of the proposed expansion. According to the CUP Staff Report, all residents living within a 500 foot radius of the project, including some residents living in RPV, were invited to an informational meeting about the project. In addition, our Department sent copies of the CUP application to the adjacent Homeowner Associations in RPV. I am not aware of any RPV resident contacting our Department with a concern about the project.

 


23.Request for Waiver of the Penalty Fee related to Conditional Use Permit No. 230. (Requestor: James Kay, 26708 Indian Peak Road). (Fox)

Recommendation: Deny the requested fee waiver.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE

ENFORCEMENT

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF THE PENALTY FEE RELATED TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 230 [REQUESTOR: JAMES KAY, 26708 INDIAN PEAK ROAD]

Staff Coordinator:Kit Fox, aicp, Senior Planner

RECOMMENDATION

Deny the requested fee waiver.

BACKGROUND

On June 21, 2001, Mr. James A. Kay, Jr. submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit No. 230 and Environmental Assessment No. 744 to the Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Department. The purpose of the application is to attempt to legally establish an existing antenna support structure and array at Mr. Kay’s property in the Grandview community as a commercial antenna site. An application fee of $2,400.00 accompanied Mr. Kay’s application. However, because the City had evidence that the existing antennae on the property were used for commercial purposes prior to the filing of Mr. Kay’s application, Staff determined that this was an "after-the-fact" application and, therefore, subject to a penalty fee of $2,400.00. Mr. Kay paid the penalty on August 15, 2001, and simultaneously requested a waiver of the penalty fee (see attached letter).

DISCUSSION

Pursuant to Section 17.78.010(B) of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code (RPVDC), the City Council may grant a request to waive the fees associated with a development application if it finds that:

  1. The applicant or the beneficiary of the use or activity proposed by the applicant is a nonprofit corporation registered with the State of California; or,
  2. The use or activity proposed or the activities of the beneficiary of the use or activity proposed are charitable, educational or otherwise provide a substantial benefit to the public; or,
  3. The applicant has demonstrated a financial hardship, as determined by the City Council, on a case-by-case basis.

Mr. Kay asserts that his application is not "after-the-fact" and should not be subject to the penalty fee because he claims that the antennae and transmitters have not been and are not being used for commercial purposes. However, the City has evidence—through direct monitoring of frequencies and review of Federal Communications Commission (FCC) licensing records—of at least three (3) active commercial radio services currently licensed to Mr. Kay’s property. Pursuant to RPVDC Section 17.86.080, "[the] fees and charges made pursuant to Title 16 [Subdivision] and Title 17 [Zoning] of this Code and other policies of the City shall be doubled, when work requiring a permit has been started or carried on prior to obtaining said permit." Staff believes that the operation of commercial antennae and transmitters at this site constitutes "work requiring a permit…carried on prior to obtaining said permit" under RPVDC Section 17.86.080. In addition, Mr. Kay has provided no evidence that this request is warranted under any of the three (3) criteria discussed in RPVDC Section 17.78.010(B) above. Therefore, Staff believes that the assessment of the penalty fee is applicable to this case and should not be waived.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Mr. Kay has been advised of the City Council’s consideration of this request at tonight’s meeting, and has been provided with a copy of the Staff report.

CONCLUSION

Staff does not believe that Mr. Kay’s request for a waiver of the penalty fee associated with Conditional Use Permit No. 230 is warranted, based upon the required findings under RPVDC Section 17.78.010(B). Therefore, Staff recommends that the City Council deny Mr. Kay’s request.

FISCAL IMPACT

The denial of the requested fee waiver will result in the City retaining the $2,400.00 penalty fee that was paid by Mr. Kay on August 15, 2001. If the penalty fee for Conditional Use Permit No. 230 is waived, the City’s costs associated with the processing of this application will still be partially offset by the $2,400.00 application fee that was paid (and for which Mr. Kay is not requesting a waiver).

ALTERNATIVES

In addition to Staff’s recommendation, the alternatives available for the City Council’s consideration include:

  1. Grant the requested waiver of the penalty fee.
  2. Grant a reduction in the penalty fee, in an amount to be determined by the City Council.

Respectfully submitted:

Joel Rojas, aicp, Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

Reviewed by:

Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:

Fee waiver request from Mr. Kay


24.U-Turn Restriction at Hawthorne Boulevard and Highridge Road. (Allison)

Recommendation: Remove the U-Turn restriction at the intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Highridge Road.

TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:U-TURN RESTRICTION ON SOUTHBOUND HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD AT HIGHRIDGE ROAD.

RECOMMENDATION

Remove the U-turn restriction on southbound Hawthorne Boulevard at Highridge Road.

BACKGROUND

This item is brought to the City Council at the request of Councilmember Ferraro.

U-turns are currently not permitted on southbound Hawthorne Boulevard at Highridge Road. It is unclear as to when the restriction was established but it is likely that it has been in place for more than ten years. The owner of the Chevron car wash has recently requested that the U – Turn restriction be removed. The merchant believes that the restriction makes it difficult for motorists on southbound Hawthorne Boulevard to access his business. In addition to the U-turn restriction at the intersection, U-turns are not permitted at the first median break along eastbound Highridge Road. See attached exhibit.

The Traffic Committee considered this item at their July 9, 2001 meeting, and denied the request. The vote was five in favor of denial, one opposed. Attached is a copy of the draft minutes to the meeting.

DISCUSSION

The intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Highridge Road is a signalized intersection, and one of the busiest in the City. It is the one intersection along Hawthorne Boulevard where U-turns are prohibited. The intersection is orthogonal, grades along Hawthorne Boulevard are slight, and sight distance for motorists on Hawthorne Boulevard is unrestricted. U-turns are permitted at this intersection for motorists northbound on Hawthorne Boulevard.

The signal has a protected/permission phase for motorist turning left from Hawthorne Boulevard. This means that motorists stopped at the signal wishing to turn left first receive a green arrow, after which they receive a green light during which they may turn left when traffic conditions permit.

Over the past three years there have been an average of two reported traffic collisions at this intersection involving vehicles turning from southbound Hawthorne Boulevard to eastbound Highridge Road.

A history of reported traffic collisions at the Hawthorne Boulevard / Highridge Road intersection is as follows:

Year

Total Accidents

Left Turning from south bound Hawthorne Blvd

2001Thru 8/1/2001

3

2

2000

11

2

1999

5

1

1998

8

2

Upon review of the intersection and accident history staff can see no justification for the restriction of U-turns. Therefore staff recommends that the U-turn restriction be removed.

If U-turns are permitted at the intersection, the signal must be modified to remove a signal phase which provides a green arrow to motorists westbound on Highridge Road. This revision will make the intersection less efficient, but only slightly.

The accident history at the City’s other four-way intersections along Hawthorne Boulevard is as follows:

Year

Hawthorne Boulevard / Crest

Hawthorne Boulevard / Dupre Drive

Hawthorne Boulevard/ Eddinghill Drive

Hawthorne Boulevard / Granvia Altamira

Hawthorne Boulevard / Highridge

2001

2 total /0 left turn

0 / 0

0 / 0

2 / 1

3 / 2

2000

3 / 0

0 / 0

4 / 4

6 / 3

11 / 2

1999

1 / 0

2 / 0

1 / 0

11 / 7

5 / 1

1998

3 / 0

0 / 0

2 / 1

5 / 2

8 / 2

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting the staff recommendation will remove the U-turn restriction for southbound Hawthorne Boulevard. If adopted staff will modify the signal and remove the ‘No U-turn’ sign. These revisions can be in place within one month.

ALTERNATIVES

  1. Deny the request.
  2. Approve the request but only after the signal phasing is revised to protected only. This would mean that motorist turning left or making a U-turn from Hawthorne Boulevard could only do so with a green arrow. Estimated Cost: $15,000. Estimated time to complete: Four months.
  3. Deny the request, and request that the Public Works Department modify the Highridge Road median to permit U-turns for eastbound Highridge Road at Ridgegate Drive. See attached Exhibit A. Estimated costs: $12,000. Estimated time to complete: Four months.

 

FISCAL IMPACTS

Adopting the staff recommendation will require removal of the No U-Turn sign, and modification to the signal to delete the right turn phase. These modifications will cost approximately $3,000. Adequate funding is available in the adopted budget.

Respectfully submitted,
Dean Allison, Director of Public Works

Reviewed,Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:

  • Exhibit A
  • Draft Minutes to the July 9, 2001 Traffic Committee meeting


25.Mobile Food Vendor Controls. (Carry over from August 21) (Evans)

Recommendation: Direct staff to prepare an amended ordinance imposing additional restrictions on mobile food vendor parking.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS

FROM:CITY MANAGER

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:MOBILE FOOD VENDOR CONTROLS

RECOMMENDATION:

Direct staff to prepare an amended ordinance imposing additional restrictions on mobile food vendor parking.

BACKGROUND:

Mayor Pro Tem McTaggart has asked that the matter of regulating mobile food vending trucks be placed on the City Council agenda. The issue is not a new one, but until this year had been quiet since 1997. Recently the owner of the Mobil Station complained that mobile vendors are unfair competition since he paid $1.5 million for his store and their investment in a truck is considerably less. On the other hand the vendors have complained to City Hall that they are ticketed if they park on Granvia Altamira for more than 15 minutes and do we know how many sandwiches they have to sell to pay off a ticket?

The facts are that the City cannot prohibit the mobile vending trucks, but we can limit the time they are allowed to stop in one place. Since the problem of the vending trucks seemed to be only on Granvia Altamira, in 1997 the City Council decided to restrict parking on the entire length of this street between Hawthorne Blvd and our City limits with PVE. Adjacent to the Mobil Station, and also adjacent to the 7-11 Market on the northwest corner, the curb is painted red (no parking) except for a small loading zone requested by the 7-11. The remainder of the curb on both sides of Granvia Altamira is painted green and signed for 15-minute parking.

DISCUSSION:

At the time the parking restrictions were established, the City Manager noted that the Council could always elect to adopt a stricter ordinance governing mobile vending trucks if the parking limits didn’t work. For example an ordinance could limit vending trucks to 15-20 minutes in any location with a prohibition on returning to anywhere within a 500-foot radius for two hours (City of Los Angeles ordinance). Our current ordinance allows parking by itinerant vendors "for a period of time not to exceed fifteen minutes at any one location." We may also be able to impose some penalties for repeated violations of the parking ordinance. Vehicle Code Section 22455 (b) allows local agencies to impose additional requirements "for the public safety" on vehicles that are vending upon public streets. Thus, any additional requirement that is imposed must be to address a public safety issue.

The City Council should determine what additional restrictions they feel are appropriate and direct staff to bring back an ordinance for introduction. The Council may wish to consult with Palos Verdes Estates and Rolling Hills Estates before adopting an amended ordinance to insure we are all consistent in how we are regulating mobile vendor parking.

Respectfully submitted,
Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments: City Code Section 10.04.060


26.City Council Assignments. (Purcell)

Recommendation: Make Council assignments to certain delegate and alternate positions previously held by former Councilman Byrd.

TO:HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL

FROM:ADMIN. SERVICES DIRECTOR/CITY CLERK

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:CITY COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS

RECOMMENDATION

Make Council assignments to certain delegate and alternate positions previously held by former Councilman Byrd.

BACKGROUND

With the resignation of Councilman Byrd on July 3rd, the City lacks either a delegate or alternate to several organizations: California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) (Alternate), Contract Cities (Alternate), Palos Verdes Transit Authority (Delegate), and the West Basin Water District (Alternate).

Following is a brief description of those organizations:

California Joint Powers Insurance Authority: The CJPIA Board of Directors, comprised of one council member from each member city, meets once a year in July. The Executive Committee, which is selected by the Board of Directors, meets the fourth Wednesday of every month at the Authority’s headquarters in La Palma. The City is self-insured through an insurance pool administered by the CJPIA for general liability, property, special events, blanket bonding, and workers' compensation.

California Contract Cities Association: This organization meets the third Wednesday of the month at 6:30 PM for a dinner meeting hosted by member cities (location varies). As the name suggests, issues addressed by the organization generally are narrower than the League of California Cities' issues in that they tend to impact only contract cities. In addition to monthly meetings, the Association has an annual Sacramento Legislative Conference in January and a Palm Springs Conference in May.

PV Transit Authority JPA: The cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills Estates and Palos Verdes Estates are members of this agency. Its charter is to manage both the Dial-A-Ride and the Palos Verdes Transit systems. The meetings are conducted every other month (on odd months) on the third Thursday at 9:15 AM at Rolling Hills Estates City Hall.

West Basin Municipal Water District: This organization is comprised five divisions; Rancho Palos Verdes is in Division 1: there are a total of 17 South Bay Cities in the District. The District’s mission is to obtain and provide a safe and adequate supplemental supply of high-quality water to member agencies, including the communities, businesses and residents of the area in an efficient, effective and economical manner. This committee meets quarterly for dinner at the Alpine Village.

CONCLUSION

Certain assignments need to be made to fill either the delegate or alternate positions previously held by former Councilman Byrd.

Respectfully submitted,
Jo Purcell

Reviewed:
Les Evans


CLOSED SESSION REPORT:


CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:


CITY MANAGER REPORTS:


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

CLOSED SESSION AGENDA CHECKLIST

Based on Government Code Section 54954.5

(All Statutory References are to California Government

Code Sections)


CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR

G.C. 54956.8

Potential purchase of open space.

Property:Filiorum 7572-012-024, 7572-012-028, 7572-012-029,

7573-003-016, 7581-023-031, 7581-023-029, 7572-002-022

City Negotiators:City Manager; City Attorney; and, Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

Negotiating Parties:York Long Point Associates

Under Negotiation:Price and Terms of Payment

Property: APN 7564-005-001, 7572-001-001 TO 004, 06 AND 07, 7581-023-011

City Negotiators: City Manager Les Evans, City Attorney Carol Lynch, and Public Works Director Dean Allison.

Negotiating Parties: Barry Hon and Michael Walker.

Under Negotiation:Price and Terms of Payment


CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL

Anticipated Litigation:

(G.C 54956.9(b)

A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City Council/Agency on the advice of its legal counsel, based on the below-described existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City Council/Agency.

____________1_____________

(Number of Potential Cases)

A statement (voice mail message) made by Greg Sanders representing Sprint outside an open meeting of City and a record of the statement was made by Carol Lynch, City Attorney prior to the meeting and is available for public inspection in the City Clerk's office.


 

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING

SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

FRED HESSE COMMUNITY PARK, 29301 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD

 

CALL TO ORDERNEXT RESOL. NO. RDA 2001-11

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR:


A.Continuing Appropriations – Fiscal Year 2000-2001. (Downs)

Recommendation: (1) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2001-07, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002, TO CONTINUE CERTAIN EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS FROM FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001. (2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2001-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2000-07, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO REDUCE THE BUDGET FOR CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS.

TO:HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD

FROM:FINANCE DIRECTOR

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS – FY 2000-2001

Staff Coordinator: Kathryn Downs, Accounting Manager

RECOMMENDATION:

1)Adopt Resolution No. RDA 2001- , amending Resolution No. RDA 2001-07, the budget appropriation for FY 2001-2002, to continue certain expenditure appropriations from FY 2000-2001.

2)Adopt Resolution No. RDA 2001- , amending Resolution No. RDA 2000-07, the budget appropriation for FY 2000-2001, to reduce the budget for continuing appropriations.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION REGARDING CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS:

At the end of each fiscal year, it is necessary to prepare a summary of budgeted appropriations that must be carried over to the next fiscal year as continuing appropriations. The attached list of continuing appropriations (Exhibit A) includes projects which were included in the FY 2000-2001 RDA budget, but were not completed by the end of the fiscal year.

Staff recently reviewed FY 2000-2001 expenditures and determined that certain amounts previously budgeted for the Abalone Cove Sewer System project were not expended prior to June 30, 2001. Therefore, to ensure budgetary compliance, the unspent appropriation must be carried over to FY 2001-2002 as continuing appropriation. Approval of the proposed resolution will allow staff to prepare the necessary budget adjustment to provide for the completion of the Abalone Cove Sewer Project in FY 2001-2002, subject to Public Works Staff’s request for a budget transfer (and/or increase) presented in a separate report tonight. There are no FY 2000-2001 continuing appropriations in the Portuguese Bend fund of the RDA.

Staff included the entire amount of the continuing appropriation in the calculation of the "Estimate to Close" in the FY 2000-2001 column of the budget document. Therefore, the estimated beginning Abalone Cove fund balance presented in the FY 2001-2002 budget has already been reduced by the amount of the proposed continuing appropriation. The approval of the continuing appropriation will not change estimated ending Abalone Cove fund balance at June 30, 2002.

DISCUSSION OF FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001 BUDGET REDUCTIONS

Staff recommends reducing the FY 2000-2001 budget for the same amount carried forward as continuing appropriation to FY 2001-2002. The approval of the budget reduction for FY 2000-2001 will have no effect on the estimated ending fund balances of the Abalone Cove fund as of June 30, 2002.

FISCAL IMPACT:

As described previously, the proposed recommendation will have no impact on the estimated fund balance as of June 30, 2002 for the Abalone Cove fund. The first resolution merely authorizes increasing the expenditure line item in the FY 2001-2002 budget for the continuing appropriation. The second resolution authorizes decreasing the FY 2000-2001 budget for the same continuing appropriation item. As described previously, there are no FY 2000-2001 continuing appropriations in the Portuguese Bend fund of the RDA.

Respectfully submitted,
Dennis McLean, Finance Director

Reviewed:
Les Evans, Executive Director

 


RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2001-

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AMENDING RESOLUTION 2000-07, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO REDUCE THE BUDGET FOR APPROVED CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS

WHEREAS, Section 3.32 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code provides that all expenditures in excess of budgeted allocations must be by supplemental appropriation of the Agency Board: and

WHEREAS, on June 6, 2000, the Board of the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency adopted Resolution 2000-07, approving a spending plan and authorizing a budget appropriation for the 2000-2001 fiscal year: and

WHEREAS, certain projects included in the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget will be carried over as continuing appropriations to the fiscal year 2001-2002 (listed in the attached Exhibit A); and

WHEREAS, the Agency Board desires that the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget be reduced for each of these specific projects that were rebudgeted as part of the continuing appropriations carried over to fiscal year 2001-2002;

BE IT, THEREFORE, RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY:

The following adjustments be made to the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget per the attached Exhibit A:

Decrease the Abalone Cove Fund budget as follows:

Capital Projects#380-735-82Capital Outlay$ 1,768,075

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001.

 

___________________________

AGENCY CHAIRPERSON

ATTEST:

___________________________

AGENCY SECRETARY

 

State of California)
County of Los Angeles)ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes)

I, JO PURCELL, Agency Secretary of the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. RDA 2001- was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said Board at regular meeting thereof held on September 4, 2001.

_____________________________

AGENCY SECRETARY

 


RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2001-

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AMENDING RESOLUTION 2001-07, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002, TO INCREASE THE BUDGET FOR CERTAIN CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FROM FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001.

WHEREAS, Section 3.32 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code provides that all expenditures in excess of budgeted allocations must be by supplemental appropriation of the Agency Board: and

WHEREAS, on June 5, 2001, the Board of the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency adopted Resolution 2001-07, approving a spending plan and authorizing a budget appropriation for the 2001-2002 fiscal year: and

WHEREAS, certain project expenditures included in the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget were not completed by fiscal year end; and

WHEREAS, the Agency Board has determined that each of these specific project expenditures (listed in the attached Exhibit A) should be completed in fiscal year 2001-2002; and

WHEREAS, the carryover of these items will not change the estimated (budgeted) ending fund balance at June 30, 2002;

BE IT, THEREFORE, RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY:

The following adjustments be made to the fiscal year 2001-2002 budget per the attached Exhibit A:

Increase the Abalone Cove Fund budget as follows:

Captial Projects#380-735-82Impr. Other Than Bldgs.$ 1,768,075

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001.

___________________________

AGENCY CHAIRPERSON

ATTEST:

__________________________

AGENCY SECRETARY

State of California)
County of Los Angeles)ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes)

I, JO PURCELL, Agency Secretary of the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. RDA 2001- was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said Agency Board at regular meeting thereof held on September 4, 2001.

_____________________________

AGENCY SECRETARY

 


B.Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Budget Adjustments. (Downs)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2000-07, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO INCREASE BUDGETED APPROPRIATIONS IN THE DEBT SERVICE FUND.

TO:HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD

FROM:FINANCE DIRECTOR

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:FY 2000-2001 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS

Staff Coordinator:Kathryn Downs, Accounting Manager

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. RDA 2001- , amending Resolution No. RDA 2000-07, the budget appropriation for FY 2000-2001, to increase budgeted appropriations in the Debt Service fund.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION REGARDING BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS:

Chapter 3.32 of Title 3 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code sets forth the guidelines related to budget administration of the City and its component units (i.e. Redevelopment Agency and Improvement Authority). Section 3.32.070 of the Code requires that all expenditures in excess of a fund’s budgeted allocation must be approved by supplemental appropriation by the Agency Board. While compiling the FY 2000-2001 expenditures for the City, RDA, and Authority, it was determined that expenditures in the RDA Debt Service fund exceeded the amount budgeted. Therefore, a supplemental appropriation is necessary to satisfy budgetary compliance.

The City and the Agency previously entered into a Loan Agreement when the City advanced $1,279,152 to the Portuguese Bend fund of the Agency in 1990. In conjunction with the 1997 re-structuring of the original 1991 County Bonds, the City loaned $1,545,000 to the Abalone Cove fund of the RDA. The original loan agreement has been amended annually to consolidate the loan for additional advances and accrued (unpaid) interest. With accrued interest of $4,392,108 through June 30, 2001, the total amount owed to the City by the Agency is $10,257,660 as of June 30, 2001. If interest rates are consistent with the prior year, total accrued interest will be $5,366,586 at June 30, 2002, and the total amount owed the City by the Agency will be $11,232,138 at June 30, 2002.

Though cash resources do not currently exist in RDA to repay the City’s General fund, the loan documentation establishes a basis for re-payment. In the event a future windfall of tax increment revenue is received by the Agency, payments to the City are possible after complete payment of the 1997 RDA bonds owed the County.

The loan between the City and the Redevelopment Agency includes a provision for interest expense based upon the City’s Local Agency Investment Fund ("LAIF") rate plus three (3%) percent. The FY 2000-2001 budget was budgeted based upon an assumed interest rate of 8.7%. The actual variable interest rate for FY 2000-2001 was an average of 9.134%. A budget adjustment is requested in the amount of $32,000, the excess of the actual interest expense over the amount budgeted. In light of the fact that no interest or loan principal is currently paid the City by the RDA, the accrued interest is simply added to loan principal.

As part of the 1991 loan agreement with the County of Los Angeles, the Agency is required to transfer 17% of the gross tax increment revenue to the Los Angeles County Consolidated Fire Protection District. During FY 2000-2001, the Agency experienced a 7% increase of RDA tax increment over the previous year. As a result of the significant revenue increase, the proportionate increase of the 17% transfer to the Fire District also exceeded the budgeted amount. A budget adjustment is requested in the amount of $18,000 to ensure budgetary compliance.

Respectfully submitted,
Dennis McLean, Finance Director

Reviewed:
Les Evans, Executive Director


RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2001-

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AMENDING RESOLUTION 2000-07, THE BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001, TO INCREASE THE BUDGET FOR APPROVED YEAR END BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS

WHEREAS, Section 3.32 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code provides that all expenditures in excess of budgeted allocations must be by supplemental appropriation of the Agency Board: and

WHEREAS, on June 6, 2000, the Board of the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency adopted Resolution 2000-07, approving a spending plan and authorizing a budget appropriation for the 2000-2001 fiscal year: and

WHEREAS, certain projects included in the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget will have expenditures in excess of the adjusted budget; and

WHEREAS, the Agency Board desires that the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget be increased for each of these programs to assure budgetary compliance;

BE IT, THEREFORE, RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY:

The following adjustments be made to the fiscal year 2000-2001 budget:

Increase the Debt Service Fund budget as follows:

Debt Service#210-610-91Interest$ 32,000

Debt Service#210-610-92Pass Thru to Other Agncy$ 18,000

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001.

___________________________

AGENCY CHAIRPERSON

ATTEST:

___________________________

AGENCY SECRETARY

State of California)
County of Los Angeles)ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes)

I, JO PURCELL, Agency Secretary of the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. RDA 2001- was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said Board at regular meeting thereof held on September 4, 2001.

 

_____________________________

AGENCY SECRETARY


C.June Treasurer’s Report. (McLean)

Recommendation: Receive and file.

TO:HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD

FROM:FINANCE DIRECTOR/AGENCY TREASURER

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:JUNE 2001 TREASURER’S REPORT

 

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive and file the June 2001 Treasurer's Report for the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency.

BACKGROUND:

Government Code Section 53646 requires all government entities to submit an investment report to the governing board on at least a quarterly basis. Staff has elected to separately prepare a monthly Treasurer’s report for each of the three components (City, Redevelopment Agency, Improvement Authority) of the City. The three reports summarize the monthly cash and investment activities for each of the entities, in addition to documenting individual fund cash balances at month end. The attached treasurer's report covers the month of June 2001 for the Redevelopment Agency.

ANALYSIS:

The cash balances of the Redevelopment Agency decreased by $464,076 during the month, ending with an overall balance of $3,726,243 at June 30, 2001. The majority of the month’s expenditures were related to ongoing progress payments for the construction of the Abalone Cove Sanitary Sewer Project. It is expected that the Agency will continue to experience large monthly decreases in cash until the completion of the Abalone Cove Sanitary Sewer Project.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis McLean, Finance Director/Agency Treasurer

Reviewed:
Les Evans, Executive Director


D.Register of Demands. (McLean)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AND SPECIFYING FUNDS FROM WHICH THE SAME ARE TO BE PAID.

############


REGULAR BUSINESS:


E.Abalone Cove Sewer Improvements. (Allison)

Recommendation: Increase the authorization limit for the construction contract for the Abalone Sewer Improvements by $150,000 for a total authorization of $5,260,000.

TO:HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE

BOARD

FROM:DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:ABALONE COVE SEWER IMPROVEMENTS

RECOMMENDATION

Increase the authorization limit in the construction contract for the Abalone Cove Sewer Improvements by $135,000, for a total authorization of $5,245,000.

BACKGROUND

On August 1, 2000, the Board awarded a construction contract with an expenditure limit of $5,110,000 and professional service contracts totaling $270,000. Construction began in October 2000 and continues to this date. Construction will be completed by the end of October 2001.

On August 7, 2001 the Board authorized the expenditure of an additional $100,000 for construction management services. This action was taken because the construction schedule will be longer than originally expected. At this time staff anticipates exceeding the construction authorization limit and is requesting additional funding.

DISCUSSION

When the construction contract was awarded the contract amount was $4,775,926, and staff was authorized to spend an additional $334,074 for anticipated change orders, for a total authorization of $5,110,000. As of August 1, 2001 payments to the contractor total $3,824,622.40 or 75% of the contract. As of August 1, 2001 additional items of work totaling $315,727, have been requested, some of which has been paid. Staff anticipates that the total authorized expenditure limit will be exceeded during the time remaining in the contract.

The principal reason for the greater than expected cost is the addition of items of work. Six sewer laterals were added to the contract after it was awarded. The laterals were not a part of the original contract because staff was unable to meet with these property owners during the design phase. In addition one lateral was added as a result of a court settlement. A second reason for the greater than anticipated cost is that the construction contract underestimated the number of grinder pumps by 14.

A summary of additional costs is as follows:

Additional Items of work and overages

$ 66,079

Addition of Laterals ( already authorized )

$ 84,142

Addition of Laterals including grinder pumps( anticipated)

$ 165,506

Total

$ 315,727

CONCLUSIONS

The anticipated construction expenditures are approaching the authorization limit established by the Board. To provide staff with the flexibility of adding additional needed items of work, and to allow the construction to continue in an efficient manner, a higher expenditure limit is requested.

Adopting the staff recommendation will increase the expenditure limit by $135,000. This will increase the construction authorization from $5,110,000 to $5,245,000.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS

Deny the request and request staff to come back to the Board if and when the spending authorization limit is reached. Staff recommends against this alternative because this may require construction to be stopped to permit staff time to obtain the necessary authorizations.

FISCAL IMPACTS

The funding source for this action is the Landslide Settlement Fund. The current fund balance is $135,000, which has been programmed for the Alta Mira Canyon project. The action will reprogram funds from the Alta Mira Canyon project to the sewer project.

Respectfully Submitted,
Dean E. Allison

Director of Public Works
Reviewed by,
Les Evans, Executive Director


PUBLIC COMMENTS: 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 meeting.

IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY

AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING

SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

FRED HESSE COMMUNITY PARK, 29301 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD

 

CALL TO ORDER:NEXT RESOL. NO. IA 2001-10

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR:


1.Minutes of August 7, 2001. (Purcell)

Recommendation: Approve the Minutes.

D R A F T

M I N U T E S

RANCHO PALOS VERDES IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY COMMISSION

REGULAR MEETING

AUGUST 7, 2001

 

The meeting was called to order at 9:59 P.M. by Chair Lyon at Fred Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.

PRESENT:Ferraro, Gardiner, McTaggart, and Chair Lyon

ABSENT:Stern

Also present were Chief Administrative Officer Les Evans; Assistant Chief Administrative Officer Carolyn Petru, Commission Attorney Carol Lynch; Director of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement Joel Rojas; Director of Public Works Dean Allison; Accounting Manager Kathryn Downs; Commission Secretary Jo Purcell; and, Recording Secretary Jackie Drasco.


APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Commissioner Ferraro moved, seconded by Commissioner McTaggart, to approve the Agenda as presented. Motion carried.


APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR

Commissioner Ferraro moved, seconded by Commissioner Gardiner, to approve the amended consent calendar as follows:

Minutes (301)

Approved the minutes of July 3, 2001.

April and May 2001 Treasurer’s Report (602)

Ordered received and filed.

Resol. No IA 2001-08 - Register of Demands (602 x 2200)

ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. IA 2001-08, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AND SPECIFYING FUNDS FROM WHICH THE SAME ARE TO BE PAID.

The motion to approve the Consent Calendar carried on the following roll call vote:

AYES:Ferraro, Gardiner, McTaggart, and Chair Lyon

NOES:None

ABSENT:Stern


PUBLIC COMMENTS:

Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Road, expressed her opposition to Councilmembers participating in CMANC activities.


ADJOURNMENT:

At 10:14 P.M. the meeting was adjourned on motion of Chair Lyon.

_____________________
Chair

ATTEST:
________________________
Commission Secretary


2.June Treasurer’s Report. (McLean)

Recommendation: Receive and file.

TO:HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

FROM:FINANCE DIRECTOR/AUTHORITY TREASURER

DATE:SEPTEMBER 4, 2001

SUBJECT:JUNE 2001 TREASURER’S REPORT

Staff Coordinator: Kathryn Downs, Accounting Manager

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive and file the June 2001 Treasurer's Report for the Rancho Palos Verdes Improvement Authority.

BACKGROUND:

Government Code Section 53646 requires all government entities to submit an investment report to the governing board on at least a quarterly basis. Staff has elected to separately prepare a monthly Treasurer’s report for each of the three components (City, Redevelopment Agency, Improvement Authority) of the City. The three reports summarize the monthly cash and investment activities for each of the entities, in addition to documenting individual fund cash balances at month end. The attached treasurer's report covers the month of June 2001 for the Improvement Authority.

ANALYSIS:

The Improvement Authority’s cash increased by $5,349 during the past month, ending with an overall balance of $1,581,249 at June 30, 2001. Cash activity during June 2001 was limited to the receipt of the $7,917 monthly transfer from the City’s General fund and approximately $2,600 of cash outlays for routine dewatering well maintenance activities.

Respectfully submitted, Dennis McLean,
Finance Director/Authority Treasurer

Reviewed:
Les Evans, Chief Administrative Officer


3.Register of Demands. (McLean)

Recommendation: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. IA 2001-__, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AND SPECIFYING FUNDS FROM WHICH THE SAME ARE TO BE PAID.

############


PUBLIC COMMENTS: For items NOT on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three minutes.


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