Loading...
19700422 LAFCO Presentation by Proponents of RPV Incorportation • IP PRESENTATION LAFCO BY THE PROPONENTS OF INCORPORATION 56:7/// OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APRIL 22, 1970 Introduction by James K. Herbert, Attorney for the Proponents. Daniel Derbes, Vice President, Palos Verdes Peninsula Advisory Council: THE HISTORY OF AND REASON FOR THE MOVEMENT TO INCORPORATE RANCHO PALOS VERDES Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. It should be recognized that the Palos Verdes Peninsula is a single economic, geographic and social entity. Thus, the speakers this morn- ing speak with one voice, in response to a clear communityconsensus which bap a developed concerning this proposed incorporation and the promise it holds for ensuring the high standards and esthetically pleasing future development of the area in question. My presentation will cover two aspects of this incorporationro osal. P P First: A brief review of the 'background of this application to confirm that it has developed as a broadly based grass-roots effort: exhaus- tively researched, thoroughly analyzed, politically sophisticated, and P deliberately pursued through several years of preparation. Second: The basic factors from the community viewpoint which motivate this proposal and therefore represent the objectives of the proponents. These objectives include an effort to optimize the quality of future development, to preserve the natural beauty of this rugged coastal peninsulaand to ensure compatibility with the other peninsula cities by providing local control and close coordination of the planning demanded by inevitable population growth. This incorporation effort has its roots in the development of the precise zoning plan for the Palos Verdes Peninsula, which dates back to 1955. At that time, the Great Lakes Carbon Company proposed open- ing a mining operation on the crest of the Peninsula, and sponsored a land use study conducted by Victor Gruen and Associates, in an attempt to show that such a mining operation could be adequately screened from the surrounding residential areas . A key aspect of this plan was the inability to define the appropriate use for the large areas of coastal property in the area. This resulted in placing large blocks of coastline in a so-called "holding zone" , C-1, which today is clearly inappropriate both from the point of view of the developer and the community. The Gruen plan was adopted in 1955 as the legal zoning for the unincorporated area. Since that time, it has been subject to wholesale modification by over 40 spot zoning changes and exceptions P which have consistently been in the direction of a more intense development and land use. For the past 10 years, the League of Women Voters has been studying the problem of appropriate land use and master planning for the unincor- porated portion of the Peninsula, in order to find a method whereby this planning could be carried out consistent with the needs and desires of the community and in concert- with the surrounding incorporated cities. . Four years ago, a growing need emerged for improved communications with the surrounding cities and with County Government. Recognizing their common objectives , residents of the unincorporated area formed the Palos Verdes Peninsula Advisory Council. This organization provides leadership and direction to 43 individual homeowners [associations and provides the area with a voice in the planning and development which has taken place. One of the first steps taken by the Advisory Council following its formation was the conversion from the negative posture of opposing spot zoning changes to the positive one of formally requesting from the Board of Supervisors a complete land use study for Palos Verdes. 410 LAmip PRESENTATION 4-22-70 Pa§Or2 This study was granted by' a board order in February 1967. In an attempt to develop a true community consensus , the Advisory Council undertook a coordinated study which included theartici ation of City P Council and planning commission Members of the three incorporated cities , representative of the Advisory Council, leaders of many civic groups, and representatives of the large land holding companies. The product of 6 months ' effort was the first formal community statement • of objectives and zoning recommendations for the key undeveloped par- cels within the unincorporated area. This position was subsequently endorsed by resolution and unanimously adopted by the city councils of the three peninsula cities and again unanimously by the member home- owners associations of the Advisory Council. The consensus was fur- ther supported by a newspaper questionnaire circulated throughout the Peninsula by the Regional Planning Commission. This questionnaire evoked responses from one out of every eleven households on the Peninsula and included several hundred personal letters directed to Supervisor Chase. The response was uniform in character, indicating an overwhelming desire to invoke standards of development which would ensure the preservation of the distinctive residential and low density character of the Peninsula. Having transmitted this -consensus to the Planning Commission Staff, representatives of the community, including many of the proponents here today, met in a series of working sessions with the Regional Planning Commission Staff and representatives of the major land developers. The purpose of these meetings was to study reconciliation of the natural desires and recognized rights of large land owners to achieve a reason- able return on their investment and the community's desires to protect the quality of its environment and, in particular, to preserve the natural beauty of the area. While the dialogue was productive in fully exploring the interest of all parties, the final plan recommend- ed bythe Regional Planning Commission failed to satisfy any of the participants and has been subsequently shelved by the Board of Super- visors in order to permit Peninsula residents to determine whether or not they choose to incorporate a fourth Peninsula city. In parallel with the land use study, the Advisory Council undertook an evaluation of alternatives for achieving local control. This in- cluded a careful evaluation of the formation of a park district, support for several annexation attempts , and an investigation of the feasibility of incorporating a new city. The first official request for a study of economic feasibility was directed to the office of the city-county coordinator in April 1967 , and resulted in the first factual report produced in January 1968 . The Advisory Council simultaneously organized an incorporation Committee to explore the desirability and economic feasibility in depth. It should be noted that all these steps were taken in the aftermath of the failure of two proposed annexations of portions of the unincorporated area. The League of Women Voters initiated their own feasibility report at the same time and both informal studies were concluded in mid-1968 with an initial indication and recommendation that incorporation was feasible and desirable. At this time, funds were solicited by a mailing from the Advisory Council, raising an amount sufficient to fund a professional feasibility study to objectively confirm or refute the initial inves- tigations of both the League of Women Voters and the AdviFory Council. The firm of Bollens , Bailey and Associates was. selected and their initial report was produced in January 1970. Copies of this report have been submitted to the Commission. The conclusions of the consultant study confirmed the unusual nature of this incorporation, its strong and broad-base of support throughout the area, the financial feasibility and the general attractiveness of the proposition. The consultants have advised that this is the most promising and viable incorporation -of all of those they have previously studied throughout the State of California, of which several are today thriving cities . Based on the findings by the consultant group, the Advisory Council unanimously endorsed the decision to formally file an application for incorporation, which was done on February 9 , 1970. 410 CO 3PRESENTATION 4-22-70 e This history should confirm the methodical effort devoted to the examination of reasonable alternatives and to the purposeful manner in which this incorporation effort has been conducted, starting with the original study by the League of Women Voters over nine years ago. The proposal now enjoys a broad base of support both from individual residents, neighboring Peninsula cities, and major civic organizations. The breadth of this support and the strength of its conviction is con- firmed by over 11,000 .signatures which have been affixed to a petition requesting that this incorporation be submitted to a popular vote. Copies of these petitions are submitted for your examination. My second task this morning is to develop the basic factors from the community viewpoint, motivating the formation of Rancho Palos Verdes . As pointed out by the LAFCO staff report, the Peninsula unincorporated area is one of the fastest growing sections of Los Angeles County, having more than doubled in population in the past nine years. The large expanses of desirable raw acreage and the continued influx of population into Southern California guarantee the continuation of this trend. To date, the Peninsula has developed as a largely residential community of approximately 96% single-family residences, many on lots of generous proportion. The standards of construction and the aesthet- ics of development were initially very high and have only recently somewhat degraded in specific areas. The understandable desire of the large land holding companies to maxi, mize their return on investment and the increasing scarcity of prime coastal property bring forth the spector of intense development with resulting over-burdening of the existing road network, overcrowding of facilities planned for a lower saturation population, and general degradation of the environment. The proponents of this incorporation are confident that acceptable compromises can be reached with land- holding interests which will provide for the development of the balance of the Peninsula in a manner consistent with that which has already taken place and, in particular, with the surrounding incorporated cities. The past efforts of the Advisory Council, Leag ie of Women Voters, and the Peninsula Planning Committee, have revealed a commonality of interest among all Peninsula residents which offers the strong promise of being able to work together to establish a master plan for the development of the entire Peninsula which might ultimately lead to future consolidation. An amplification of this point will be made by the mayors of the three Peninsula cities. In conclusion, we are confident that given the opportunity, the voters of this area will overwhelmingly express a desire to secure for themselves a direct voice in the future development of their environment. Rancho Palos Verdes will provide in its birth the oppor- tunity to create a distinctive city, to preserve and enchance the natural beauty. Dorothy Le Conte, Co-chairman, Save Our Coastline (SOC) . RANCHO PALOS VERDES WILL PERMIT PRESERVATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH LOCAL CONTROL Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission: It is altogether fitting that the Save Our Coastline organization is presenting to you its views with respect to the formation of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, today, April 22 , which is being observed all over the country as Earth Day -- the occasion of calling attention to the need of greatly expanded action to end pollution and preserve the quality of our environment. It is fitting because the overall objec- tive of SOC is to protect the still relatively uncontaminated environ- mental resources of the Palos Verdes Peninsula for the benefit of the people of the Greater Los Angeles area and the generations to come. LAP PRESENTATION 4-22-70 110 Pa 4 Faced with the probability that high density development, proposed by theRegional Planning Commission, would destroy the quality of this environment, including the twelve miles of natural coastline which is the only remaining undamaged natural shoreline in a metropolitan area in the State of California, the citizens of the Peninsula last December formed the Save Our Coastline organization to combat such destruction. From a small nucleus in December, our membership has grown to thousands representing the people of the unincorporated area and all three cities on the Peninsula as well as individuals from Other areas who share our concern. Scuba divers , surfers, swimmers, fishermen, marine biologists, ocea- nographers, geologists, students of marine life, and boy and girl scouts, - to name a few - have encouraged our efforts to save our coastline. Support has come also from members of the Sierra Club, the Audubon Society and various ecological scientists who applaud our intention to retain open space and natural parkland in which rare wild grasses, animals and birds can survive in their natural habitat. Those who find renewal in the natural beauty and scenic views on the Peninsula have offered assistance. In truth, the environment of the Peninsula is a natural resource recognized widely as worthy of preservation for all the people. It became apparent to us almost immediately, that such preservation could only be obtained through the formation of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes by which local control of planning and zoning will be assured. We have confidence that local control will serve the end of environ- mental quality because the citizens of the area proposed for incor- poration are committed to this goal. To the sceptics who say that the environment cannot be saved, and that human life on this planet is doomed prematurely because of human sel- fishness, el- fishness, we say, - let the Palos Verdes Peninsula be an example of a successful human effort to preserve the environment, and thus serve as an inspiration to others engaged in the same endeavor. SOC therefore, on Earth Day, respectfully requests the commission to approve the application for incorproation of Rancho Palos Verdes. Gordon M. Curtis, Jr. , President, Palos Verdes Peninsula Advisory Council RANCHO PALOS VERDES WILL BE A STRONG AND VITAL CITY The Palos Verdes expert study contracted for by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Advisory Council was corroborated by the study made by the staff of the Local Agency Formation Commission, and I am per- fectly willing to go along with the findings made by James Mize, ;Ruth Benell and their staff. It seems to me a very simple proposition. The matter should be brought to a vote of the people. There is no question of economics. There is no question about the basic configuration of the city. No problems have come about as a result of incorporation which do not already exists and in fact may lend themselves to much better solution in terms of the future if the area is incorporated, and the matter can be con- sidered by the people most concerned. Robert Meyer, Founder and Past President, Eastview Property Owners Assoc. PENINSULA/EAST SUPPORTS RANCHO PALOS VERDES My message is short and to the point. If the Fourth City is approved without the Eastview area being included, this would result in the creation of a small island of County land surrounded by incorporated cities. I know this because an unsuccessful attempt was made to annex to the City of Los Angeles about 14 years ago when the area was developed, and again in 1969 . Both of these attempts were unsuccess- ful and future attempts would be equally unsuccessful. 110 LAFCO PRESENTATION 4-22-70 Page 5 The people do not want Los Angeles to annex because this means the irrevocable loss of local control of the area to downtown Los Angeles and permanent inclusion in the Los Angeles City School District. Many residents are unhappy with the Los Angeles City School District and would like to get out. The boundaries of the Los Angeles councilmanic district to which annexation would apply are ridiculous, irregular and unhomogeneous. Scare tactics have been used by the opposition to incorporation by cynical groups who tried to make the residents believe that their inclusion in the fourth city would mean a significant and automatic increase in their property tax burden, because these groups say the Fourth City is not financially sound. These misstatements and others are set in their true prospective by the LAFCO survey of April 22, and the public. deserves the opportunity to hear the true facts stated in this report. The response will, without question, be resounding endorsement for Fourth City incorporation. Mayor Joseph T. Barnett, City of Palos Verdes Estates: Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission Previous correspondence from my City to your Commission should have left no doubt regarding our whole-hearted support for the incorpora- tion of Rancho Palos Verdes. With 4-1/2 miles of the Peninsula shoreline within our City, we think it makes sense to plan and develop the shoreline outside our City in a manner that would be compatible and would provide similar open space for both visual and physical access to one of the most beautiful and valuable resources of the Coutny and State. I would propose and would welcome the opportunity to participate in a Peninsula-wide planning effort in cooperation with Rancho Palos Verdes and the other Cities on the Peninsula to provide a coordinated approach to retaining and en- hancing the quality of the environment of the greater Peninsula Community. We hope you will permit this planning to take place. Mayor Ernie Howlett, City of Rolling Hills Estates Mr. Chairman and Honorable Commissioners: This application has my city's unqualified support. As an important part of this support, we are taking steps now to work out joint ser- vices arrangements with our neighbor communities on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. Together we have begun formal studies which will lead to recommendations, decisions, and action this year. The first such area of action will be Peninsula police protection, including traffic safety. We probably will do this by a contractual agreement among the cities , but in any case, what will give us the kind of service we need, and what will give us the most economical operation, is the fact that we will be doing this together. Mayor Frederick W. Hesse, City of Rolling Hills. Mr. Chairman and Distinguished Commissioners: As Mrs. Benell has indicated, my city joins its neighbor cities of the Peninsula in full support of this application. We think this is an extraordinary opportunity: for the people of several munici- palities to look at themselves as part of a single broader community. With incorporation of Rancho Palos Verdes, the Peninsula communities can consider how best to translate today's vision into practical long term commitments and results, by use of mutual resources to meet mutual needs. We'll carefully explore many alternative vehicles for doing this , from intercity joint-powers agreements, to borough-type charter city arrangements for pooling those kinds of activities which we might effectively share, while retaining those individual controls which each city needs to protect its own individual character and require- ments. 410 LAFCO PRESENTATION 4-22-70 Page 6 Mrs. James A. Ryan, President, Palos Verdes Peninsula, League of Women Voters: Gentlemen: I wonder if we all realize what has happened here? This may well be the beginning of a new era in local government in California. The neighboring cities have told us that they not only welcome Rancho Palos Verdes as an equal partner in Peninsula government, but that %It is an essential partner if we are all to realize our potential. By this. means, each area within the Peninsula will be able to define and establish the environment and the services that it wants, and the residents will be able to control the price they are willing to pay for it. This is because we as neighbors will work to achieve these ends. The League applauds and supports this commitment of all the prople of the Peninsula, and we strongly endorse the incorporation of Rancho Palos Verdes and the ensuing intergovernmental cooperation as an example of the kind of forward thinking which will open new possi- bilities for attainment of broad and positive community goals.