CC MINS 20040420MINUTES
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 20, 2004
The meeting was called to order at 7:18 p.m. by Mayor Gardiner at Fred Hesse
Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard, Rancho Palos Verdes.
Roll call was answered as follows:
PRESENT: Stern, Wolowicz and Mayor Gardiner
ABSENT: Long (excused)
LATE ARRIVAL: Clark @ 8:17 P.M.
Mayor Gardiner explained that Councilman Long was out of town on business, and that
Mayor pro tem Clark was delayed on a flight returning to Los Angeles from Washington,
D.C. and, if things work out, he would join the meeting in progress.
Also present were City Manager Les Evans; Assistant City Manager Carolynn Petru;
City Attorney Carol Lynch; Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Joel
Rojas; Director of Public Works Dean Allison; Director of Finance Dennis McLean;
Deputy Planning Director Gregory Pfost; City Clerk/Administrative Services Director Jo
Purcell; Senior Planner Ara Mihranian; Senior Planner Kit Fox; Senior Administrative
Analyst Lauren Ramezani; and, Minutes Reporter Debra Presutti.
The Palos Verdes High School Road Warriors led the Pledge of Allegiance.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mayor Gardiner began by reading an e-mail he recently received regarding modern day
management philosophies which included 13 points he believed worth sharing. He
stated it begins with the tribal wisdom of the Dakota Sioux and read it as follows:
"When you discover that you're riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount;
however, in government, education and in corporate America more advanced strategies
are often employed such as 1) buying a bigger whip; 2) changing riders; 3) appointing a
committee to study the horse; 4) arranging a visit to other countries to see how their
cultures ride horses; 5) lowering standards so the dead horse can be reclassified; 6)
reclassifying the dead horse as living impaired; 7) hiring outside contractors to ride the
dead horse; 8) harnessing several dead horses together to increase speed; 9) provide
additional funding and or training to increase the dead horse's performance; 10) doing a
productivity study to see if lighter riders would improve the dead horse's performance;
11) declaring that, as the dead horse does not have to be fed, it is less costly, carries
lower overhead and, therefore, contributes substantially more to the bottom line of the
economy than do some other horses; 12) rewrite the expected performance
requirement for all horses; and, of course, the thing that's most common, promote the
dead horse to a supervisory position.
The Mayor's reading was followed by a resounding peel of laughter.
CEREMONIAL MATTER:
With a declaration of extreme pleasure Mayor Gardiner introduced the members of the
Palos Verdes High School Road Warriors: Aaron Schwartz, Alexandria Schleicher,
Alex Cohen, Andy Nelson, Ashton Larson, Ben Hwung, Blessing Waung, Brett Straub,
Bob Grace, Brett Kadowaki, Chris DeBiccari, Chris Hoffman, Chris Kleinhen, Chris
Seide, Dan Jacobowitz, Dan Marino, Danko Krajisnik (from Beverly Hills High), Dean
Mraz, Elliot Wenska, Eric Gobrecht, Erica Jensen, Gina Chien, James Anderson, Jeff
Laymon, Jessica Lee, Joe Bebel, Katrina DeSimone, Katie Bayne, Kevin Webb, Nathan
Howard, Nelson Hua, Matt Thomas, Ryan Pass, Shaun Modisette, Sean Bothamley,
Scott Pholf, Tej Patel, Trey Barton, Zack Anderson (from Beverly Hills High), Zack
Ruggerri; and their science instructor, Graham Robertson. He requested they describe
their remarkable achievement.
Graham Robertson, science instructor for the group, explained a decision was made
nearly a year ago to see if the community and students would be interested in tackling
the grand challenge of designing an autonomous car that could drive 300 miles through
the desert in less than 10 hours. He indicated interest poured in and the project began.
He said they submitted a technical paper before even having a car and, out of 106
teams, they were chosen as one of the 19 who qualified, noting their main competition
came from Cal Tech Berkeley and Carnegie Mellon. He thanked everyone involved for
their support, saying the project taught the students how the corporate and business
worlds operate and illustrated for everyone who participated what community
togetherness can achieve.
Several of the students spoke, describing how enjoyable and informative the project
was, what a memorable experience it has become, and noting one of the greatest
learning experiences for them was the power of teamwork. As one student eloquently
put it: "If a group of kids can put together a car, you can basically do anything."
Mayor Gardiner inquired how many people including other high schools applied.
Mr. Robertson replied 106 applied and 19 qualified, adding on the first day only PVHS
and Cal Tech got out of the starting gate. He indicated no other high schools applied
but felt assured that would change next year since this group of students has shown
what can be achieved.
Mayor Gardiner read a letter from Councilman Long as follows: "I am delighted the City
is recognizing the team and disappointed that I could not attend the Council meeting.
The achievement of this group is extraordinary. Just reading off the list of contestants
that includes many prominent colleges and private firms shows how remarkable it is
that a high school and only one high school was involved. I fully expect that one or
more of the participants in the DARPA Project can some day invent a car that will
literally drive me to work, increasing everyone else's safety in the process. The
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 2 of 29
parents, teachers, and school administrators also deserve a lot of credit. The team is a
talented group with a bright future." He presented this letter to Mr. Robertson and
explained each student who participated will be receiving Certificates of Recognition
and letters of commendation for their extraordinary accomplishment. He also
congratulated all the parents for their support.
RECYCLE DRAWING:
Mayor Gardiner announced Director Allison would draw two names since there was no
recycle winner last month.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Councilman Wolowicz, to approve the Agenda.
Motion carried without objection.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Erin LaMonte, incoming PTA Council Executive Vice President, introduced Mary Ross
and provided a brief background on the local PTA Council.
Mary Ross, current PTA Council President, read the text of a resolution passed by the
PTA Council in February 2004 regarding the Palos Verdes landfill. She indicated as
parents they became concerned about the PV landfill proposal, did some research on
the matter, uncovered some information, and subsequently passed a resolution within
the PV School District to the County opposing any development of the PV landfill site
and affirming the rights of the community and its citizens for rigorous and
comprehensive testing of the landfill and adjacent properties until a guarantee is
provided to ensure the parents and children of PV that no exposure to any health risks
or grave environmental consequences will result from any development of the site.
Ms. LaMonte informed there is a very strong history of parents rallying around critical
local issues such as the Modernization Bond in 2000 and the Parcel Tax in 2003 and
noted they were happy to pass this resolution for the good of the children.
Lois Larue, Rancho Palos Verdes, indicated there is great concern among residents of
Lower Abalone Cove regarding Jim York's plans for Point View. She mentioned her
son discovered the Abalone Cove landslide in the mid 1970's and extended his offer
volunteering to assist the City in any decisions regarding the Point View matter.
NEW BUSINESS:
APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR:
Councilman Wolowicz requested to remove Item No. 4 from the Consent Calendar.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 3 of 29
Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Councilman Wolowicz, to approve the Consent
Calendar as amended.
The motion to approve the amended Consent Calendar carried on the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Stern, Wolowicz, Gardiner
NOES: None
ABSENT: Long and Clark
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 Council Members after
the reading of the title.
Minutes. (301)
Approved the Minutes of March 2nd Regular Meeting, March 27th Adjourned Regular
Meeting, April 3rd Adjourned Regular Meeting and April 6th Adjourned Regular Meeting.
Claim Against The City By Jean -Paul Menard. (303)
Rejected the claim and directed staff to notify the claimant.
Parkland dedication fees for Final Parcel Map No. 27090 (Applicant: Michael J.
Tramontin. Location: Corner of Palos Verdes Drive East &Via Diamonte.) (1410)
Removed from consent calendar, see below.
Household Hazardous Waste/ Electronics Waste Round -Up Siting Liability
Agreement with Los Angeles County. (1301)
Authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the proposed Household Hazardous
Waste and Electronics Waste Collection Program Siting Liability Agreement with the
County of Los Angeles and County Sanitation District No. 2 of Los Angeles County.
City Hall Elevator Construction. (1201 x 1204)
(1) Rejected all bids received on March 8, 2004 for the construction of an elevator at
City Hall; and, (2) Requested staff to revise the project plans and re- advertise the
project.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 4 of 29
Ocean Trails —One -year extension of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50666.
(1411)
Extended Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50666 for the Ocean Trails project for one
(1) year, until April 15, 2005.
Resol. No. 2004 -25: Register of Demands.
ADOPTED RESOL. NO. 2004 -25, 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.
REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR:
Parkland dedication fees for Final Parcel Map No. 27090 (Applicant: Michael J.
Tramontin. Location: Corner of Palos Verdes Drive East &Via Diamonte.) (1410)
Councilman Wolowicz questioned how the Quimby Park Fund that inures to the benefit
of the City is being computed. He indicated, if the calculation is being based on the fair
market value of the land, the property tax statement would be examined to determine
the allocation, noting if someone purchases a parcel with a building on it and
demolishes that building, that becomes the basis of the land for tax purposes. He
queried why the calculation being utilized in this instance includes only the land portion,
adding he is not challenging the method of calculation but asking staff to examine
whether or not to include the value of the building.
City Attorney Lynch explained the reason it cannot be included is because State law
has established the methods by which this determination can be made. She indicated
when there is a large subdivision and land within that subdivision can be dedicated for
park use and park purposes, that dedication is required; whereas in this case, there are
small divisions for which there is no feasible way of requiring the land encompassed be
conveyed for park purposes. As a result, an in -lieu fee is required and that fee will
make the proportionate contribution towards park improvements. She noted the
general concept is to provide land for park use and that is why only the land component
of the calculation is considered per State law.
Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Councilman Wolowicz, to approve the Parkland
Dedication (Quimby) fees for Final Parcel Map No. 27090 pursuant to the City's
Parkland Dedication fee formula in the amount of $10,368. Motion carried without
objection.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
ORDINANCE NO. 405; RESOL. NO. 2004-26: ZON2003 -00417 (16 -FOOT HEIGHT
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 5 of 29
CODE AMENDMENT). (Continued from April 6th meeting.) (1203 x 1801)
Mayor Gardiner directed continuing public input on the 16 -foot height Code amendment
be heard.
Jon Cartwright, Rancho Palos Verdes, stating he echoes the sentiments of all the ex-
Planning Commissioners, thanked Council members for listening to his input on the
issue at the April 6 meeting and thanked staff for their excellent report and the
proposed draft language which he supports.
Councilman Stern expressed gratitude to Mr. Cartwright for an excellent presentation at
that meeting, saying he found it extremely helpful.
Councilman Wolowicz thanked Mr. Cartwright for his efforts to assist him in
understanding the issue and also for assembling a group of blue ribbon people to testify
before Council.
Mayor Gardiner applauded Mr. Cartwright for the clarity of his presentation, saying it
was pivotal in his thinking on the matter.
Frank Lyon, Rancho Palos Verdes, credited Council for making a very reasonable
decision at the previous meeting and urged approval of the excellent staff report and
ordinance prepared by Senior Planner Mihranian and City Attorney Lynch. He
expressed strong support for the decision to revise the Code as currently stated in the
staff report and acknowledged Jon Cartwright's efforts in gathering a very capable
group to address Council.
Craig Mueller, Rancho Palos Verdes, also applauded Council's decision at the prior
meeting, saying he understands the difficulty of reviewing the ordinance. He indicated
he found the testimony presented extremely clear and concise and reiterated that Mr.
Cartwright did an excellent job of illustrating the problem for Council and the public. He
opined the language of the ordinance where it states "height variation application to
build a new structure in addition to an existing structure either of which exceeds the 16-
foot height limit up to the maximum," should actually be worded, "an existing structure
that exceeds the 16 -foot height limit up to the maximum height permitted in Section 2
or ... ," saying there should be another "or" in that sentence. Otherwise, he stated all
the updates and directions appear to be in order with what was previously discussed.
Councilman Stern stated he believed the language was appropriate because the
reference to "either" on the second line was to clarify it is either the new structure or the
addition, which will create the trigger.
Mayor Gardiner queried what exactly was being referred to as exceeding the 16 -foot
limit: the addition, the structure, or both.
City Attorney Lynch responded it referred to either.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 6 of 29
Councilman Stern indicated modifications were made to the material in the Agenda
packet since its distribution. He stated, after reading it, he recommended the City
Attorney further clarify the language making clear it is either of those conditions, that is,
if either the new or the existing structure exceeds the 16 -foot limit the view analysis will
be triggered.
Councilman Wolowicz questioned if the language under "Grading View Finding" on
Circle Page 3 stating, "it should be noted that as drafted the view finding will apply when
the existing grade is raised regardless of whether the resulting structure is within the
height limit described in Section 17.020.40" suggests that something else might be
changed in the future.
City Attorney Lynch explained no further changes were being recommended, but staff
wanted to clarify if grading is performed and the grade of the pad beneath a structure is
increased that would trigger a view analysis under the grading sections of the
ordinance.
Senior Planner Mihranian clarified, even if the structure is within the 16 -foot height limit,
if grading is requested, it is a discretionary application; if it results in raising the existing
grade to a higher elevation, then the view analysis is triggered.
City Attorney Lynch indicated, if Council is inclined to adopt the resolution, staff would
make the same parallel changes to the View Guidelines and Neighborhood Capability
Handbook so all three documents are consistent.
Councilman Wolowicz inquired if the City has any existing warning requirements in
place such as a proposed notice to buyers.
City Attorney Lynch responded Councilman Long brought the matter up some time ago,
but staff did not want to draft an ordinance until Council's final action was taken, adding
an ordinance requiring notice of the 16 -foot height limit be given to prospective buyers
will be drafted if the ordinance is approved this evening.
Councilman Wolowicz asked whether the Planning Commission had been directed to
examine the Neighborhood Capability Handbook to determine if it is consistent with
other relevant Codes and documents.
Director Rojas answered the Commission does look at the various documents and, if
they find any inconsistencies, brings them to the attention of staff. He indicated the way
the documents are currently drafted captures all the thought and consensus of the last
meetings.
Mayor Gardiner noted at one time Council had a lengthy discussion about foliage and
trimming down to the ridgeline or cutting down to the profile of the building and inquired
if that has changed.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 7 of 29
City Attorney Lynch responded those requirements have not changed.
Councilman Stern indicated, while he very much appreciates the letter Jim Knight
prepared, he thought it might be valuable to give his comments on it, saying he agrees
with staff's position that when doing an analysis the real world as it exists at the
moment should be considered rather than imputing buildings onto vacant lots and trying
to ascertain what might happen in the future. He stated he does not believe it
advances any meaningful value to discuss possibilities not currently in existence.
Mayor Gardiner declared the Public Hearing closed.
Councilman Wolowicz moved, seconded by Councilman Stern, to (1) INTRODUCE
ORDINANCE NO. 4051 A CITY INITIATED PROPOSAL TO AMEND TITLE 17 OF THE
CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE AFFIRMING THE CITY'S HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION
OF THE 16 -FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AND CLARIFYING THE "VIEW" FINDING
AS IT RELATES TO THE HEIGHT VARIATION AND GRADING APPLICATIONS; and,
(2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -26, AMENDING THE HEIGHT VARIATION
GUIDELINES AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY HANDBOOK TO MAKE
THE LANGUAGE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS.
The motion carried on the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Wolowicz, Stern & Mayor Gardiner
Noes: None
Absent: Long and Mayor Pro Tem Clark
RESOL. NOS. 2004 -279 2004 -289 2004 -299 2004 -309 AND 2004 -31: Ocean Trails -
Revision "V." Continued from March 2nd meeting.) � J)
Councilman Stern queried if anything in the present conditions dictates when the
parklands must be completed.
Director Pfost responded Ocean Trails Park must be completed before opening of the
18 -hole golf course.
Councilman Stern further inquired if there is an obligation for acceptance of the
roadway improvements prior to the opening of the golf course and if the trails are
similarly timed to open.
Director Pfost answered in the affirmative, adding there is a variety of trails scheduled
to be completed at different times but they, too, are listed in the conditions of approval.
Councilman Stern asked what the final trigger was and what would determine the
required notice of completion.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 8 of 29
Director Pfost stated the final trigger is prior to construction of the homes on Tract Map
50666, adding notice of completion will include signing off on the project and the golf
course improvements by the City's geologist as well as finalization of a variety of
building permits issued for various things throughout the golf course.
Councilman Wolowicz queried if there are different height restrictions on the various lot
types other than the height limitations Council just enacted. He asked if these
restrictions would be inserted in the terms and conditions for buyers to alert them so in
the future, they would not attempt to build over the 16 -foot limit.
City Attorney Lynch replied the conditions of approval on the tract direct any specific lot
development requirements be incorporated into the CC &R's; so, yes, there was a
requirement that notice of these restrictions be provided to buyers. She added it was a
minor revision and should not be a burden for the developer.
Councilman Wolowicz inquired if assumption of liability is also a requirement for the
developer and if that assumption of liability is passed on to any party who might take
over the land in the future, asking how the City plans to guarantee financial security in
perpetuity.
City Attorney Lynch responded most likely this entity is a sole asset corporation so the
primary source of guarantee is the value of the land itself, noting it is certainly possible
the developer may have landslide insurance as did the former developer and that would
be one way to address the issue. She stated she is unsure how a bond would be
devised that could assume the scope of repairs which might be required in the future,
adding if a small amount of cracking occurs and one trail gives way, that could cost
several hundred thousand dollars; if a huge slide occurred, that could be several million
dollars in which case the developer might decide not to make the repairs but to restore
or open a new trial further inland from any damaged area. She indicated the City's role
is to ensure the trails and park areas are available for use, and she is not comfortable
requiring the developer to have a bond in place for hundreds of thousand of dollars to
rebuild something they might relocate further inland.
Councilman Wolowicz clarified his question was not necessarily their liability but the
City's and whether someone might have action against the City.
(Mayor pro tem Clark joined the meeting at 8:17 p.m.)
City Attorney Lynch explained there is the possibility someone could file an action
against the City, adding that is the subject of the indemnity agreement currently being
negotiated. She indicated an agreement has been reached stating if there was an
order, for example, by the Coastal Commission requiring trails to be relocated,
replaced, or rebuilt the developer would assume all liability and responsibility for that
except to the extent there is any direct negligence in the demise of the trail caused by
the City. She stated she does not believe that will be a problem because the City is not
maintaining the trail nor the property, therefore, assumes no responsibility in that
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 9 of 29
regard. She indicated the current agreement being negotiated would be brought before
Council for further review.
Vincent Stellio, Executive Vice President of the Trump Organization, in response to
some of Councilman Wolowicz's concerns, explained they have already had an issue
with one of the trails located in the park, saying the Coastal Commission requested it be
left where it was but, when they were shown it was not in a safe condition, they allowed
it to be moved and that revision has been made. He indicated they are required by the
Coastal Commission to maintain the trails; so in the event of another failure they would
assume responsibility and have no issues with that. He reiterated what the City
Attorney stated that, if there was a failure and the trail could no longer be repaired, they
would work the matter out with Coastal and staff to determine the best location to place
another trail.
Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Councilman Wolowicz, to approve staff's
recommendation to (1) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -27, APPROVING
ADDENDUM NO. 17 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 36 FOR
REVISION "V"; (2) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -28, APPROVING REVISION "V"
AMENDING CUP NO. 162 AND FOR a GRADING PERMIT (CASE NO. ZON2004-
00078); (3) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -29, APPROVING REVISION "V",
AMENDING CUP NO. 163; (4) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -30, APPROVING
REVISION "V", AMENDING VTTM NO. 50666; AND, (5) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.
2004 -31, APPROVING REVISION "V", AMENDING VTTM NO. 50667.
The motion carried without objection.
Residential solid waste and recycling rate adjustments For Waste Management of
Los Angeles for FY 04 -05. (1301)
Mayor Gardiner declared the Public Hearing open.
Councilman Stern, noting staff was recommending roughly a $42,000 credit or
approximately $3.42 per household, and indicating his understanding of the restricted
nature of the funds, inquired if there is not something more appropriate the City could
utilize them for given current budgetary times.
Senior Analyst Ramezani explained, when the City's 2002 Annual Report was
submitted, revenue met the City's 50 percent mandate for the first time. She indicated
for years AB939 fees were charged to residents as part of their refuse bill to implement
programs, noting a large fund has been created which would not be depleted for many
years to come as a result of meeting the mandate.
Director Allison reiterated these points and indicated staff thought it would be a nice
way of showing appreciation to the residents, adding a little note on the billing saying
here is $4.00 a month from the City to thank you for recycling creates an impression.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 10 of 29
Mayor pro tem Clark inquired if it would be possible to channel the money into the City's
beautification program which could provide a far more significant impact to a number of
communities within the city.
Ms. Ramezani answered the fund for beautification grants cannot be sourced from
AB939 fees because they are more restricted.
Councilman Stern asked what else might be done with the money other than apply it as
refunds.
City Manager Evans responded it can be used for programs that encourage and market
recycling or the City could purchase new green bins for the residents, but it must have
something to do with refuse collection.
Councilman Wolowicz indicated it appears the City is about to give out a credit before
the funds have been collected.
Director Allison explained the checks would be written about a quarter before receiving
the revenue that generates it.
Councilman Wolowicz stated, if there appears to be some hesitancy, it is most likely
because Council just finished continuing a budget workshop and perhaps certain
members are uneasy with some of the rather large numbers they have seen. He
indicated he would like to say thank you to the City's residents but would prefer to
harbor the City's resources until he can identify all the demands.
Councilman Stern agreed, saying he, too, would like to say thank you, but difficult
financial decisions are waiting to be made.
Mayor Gardiner asked who would be writing the checks.
Ms. Ramezani replied Waste Management will bill the residents and the City will write
checks to Waste Management on a quarterly basis.
Mayor pro tem Clark suggested retaining the funds and looking for other ways to utilize
them in the future.
Mayor Gardiner declared the Public Hearing closed.
Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Councilman Wolowicz, to (1) Approve the
maximum rate that Waste Management of Los Angeles can charge single - family
customers in FY 04 -05; (2) Approve the maximum rate that Waste Management of Los
Angeles can charge multi - family customers in FY 04 -05; and (3) Increase the amount of
collector fee paid by Waste Management of Los Angeles to the City By $8,880 to reflect
the rate increases.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 11 of 29
The motion carried without objection.
Residential Solid Waste And Recycling Rate Adjustments For Universal Waste
Systems, Inc. Dba Ivy Rubbish Disposal For FY 04 -05. (1301)
Mayor Gardiner declared the Public Hearing open.
There was no response to the Mayor's call for public testimony.
Councilman Wolowicz moved, seconded by Councilman Stern, to (1) Approve the
maximum rate that Universal Waste Systems, Inc., dba Ivy Rubbish Disposal, can
charge residential customers for FY 04 -05; (2) Increase the amount of Collector Fee
paid by Universal Waste Systems, Inc., dba, Ivy Rubbish Disposal, to the City by $370
to reflect the rate increase; and, (3) Approve increasing the Senior Citizen discount from
the current 5% to 10 %.
The motion carried without objection.
ORDINANCE NOS. 406U AND 407: Code Amendment (Planning Case No.
ZON2004- 00142): Landslide Moratorium Exception Clarification and Revisions.
(1801)
Mayor Gardiner declared the Public Hearing open.
Mayor Stern inquired what staff believed were the particular equities, which lead them
to conclude this, particular project containing two 600 -foot improvements should be
approved.
Senior Planner Fox answered staff believed the current language of the Code could be
reasonably interpreted to mean the combined cumulative square footage under
categories "L" and "H" would be added together or in a manner in which they would be
calculated separately. He indicated the application submitted was based on the
interpretation they were calculated separately. He reminded Council of an urgency
ordinance in November 2002 where there was a similar condition with an application
pending that exceeded the 600 square -foot limitation and that that application was
allowed to proceed.
Councilman Stern indicated he recalled the matter but did not view it as similar, saying
the applicant in the previous case proceeded under the Code then in existence which
did not contain the same language. He stated he is not convinced the language is so
ambiguous that this applicant should get approval for something no one else will get.
Director Rojas indicated the applicant in question had notified him that if Council
excluded their application they would change their project so the matter might be a non -
issue.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 12 of 29
Councilman Wolowicz queried if the intent was to limit to a total of 600 square -feet
cumulative.
Councilman Stern responded his understanding is yes, including the garage.
Mayor pro tem Clark concurred, noting this was a moratorium area and under the Code,
in its many modifications by a succession of Councils, there has been some ability to
accommodate certain minor changes to residential structures within that area. He
opined it was legitimate for staff to bring this question before Council, saying it
appeared to be incremental in terms of increasing it beyond what has been considered
reasonable in the past, given the overarching aspect that it is in a moratorium area.
Councilman Wolowicz expressed concern that what initially appeared to be a simple
concept contains myriad small details and indicated he would accept the concept with
the assurance it will be closely examined and any inconsistencies are removed.
Senior Planner Fox mentioned staff is confident they have determined all the various
types of projects that can be accumulated in one exception category, making it much
more clear that the 600 square -foot limitation applies to all cumulative structures than
the current language.
City Attorney Lynch added they have restructured the language, placing the garage in a
separate category, which clarified that the 600 square -foot limitation applied to
everything cumulative whether attached or detached structures or additions, plus the
600 square -foot garage.
Mayor Gardiner indicated Council received an e-mail outlining 12 concerns, one of
which was equitable treatment of people with residences in varying zones, and asked if
the City should be concerned about this.
City Attorney Lynch indicated, when Council was initially addressing the moratorium
ordinance many years ago, a determination was made to regard the Seaview area
differently because it was entirely developed with the exception of one or two lots, and
Council did not feel it appropriate to penalize those remaining lots by rendering them
not developable. She noted at that time the Seaview area was the only moratorium
area that was sewered, a distinction that no longer applies, adding that Council can
certainly revisit the issue and delete the separate Seaview exception.
Mayor Gardiner queried if there are differences from zone to zone, which preclude the
same size house from adding a 600 square -foot addition.
City Attorney Lynch responded a 600 square foot addition could be made on any
developed lot in any zone.
Senior Planner Fox added it applied only when an applicant wished to go in excess of
600 square feet.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 13 of 29
Mayor Gardiner requested clarification that no one can exceed 600 square feet in any
of the zones.
Senior Planner Fox replied nowhere except the Seaview area because of the unique
exception that applies to that zone in the moratorium.
Mayor pro tern Clark queried how many lots were in that area.
Senior Planner Fox indicated there were 36 properties in Seaview within the
moratorium, of which one is undeveloped.
Mayor Gardiner asked if all 35 property owners could build more than a 600 square foot
addition.
Senior Planner Fox said yes, but they would all be subject to neighborhood
compatibility and other standards.
Mayor Gardiner queried why it makes sense that the 600 square -foot limitation feet
does not apply to Seaview and how the City is not tempting possible litigation by not
treating these 35 owners the same as everyone else in the moratorium.
City Attorney Lynch stated she believed Council's reasoning at the time was because
that area had sewers when none of the other portions of the moratorium area did. She
indicated Council has always had the ability to make reasonable distinctions between
properties, adding this Council can certainly do away with that distinction if they find it
inappropriate.
Mayor Gardiner expressed uneasiness with the concept.
Mayor pro tem Clark applauded Mayor Gardiner for his excellent line of questioning and
stated he now had trouble retaining the special exemption for Seaview. He indicated, if
the decision to consider a change was made, Council should alert that community in
advance, noting that perhaps reasons would be brought forth to persuade Council's
thinking on the matter.
Director Rojas informed the Council that in a 1993 memo from Dr. Perry Ehlig the
different zones, including the Seaview area, were described as having distinct geology.
Mayor Gardiner questioned if all the other zones were sufficiently alike and this
particular one sufficiently different to justify an exemption.
Director Rojas answered that Dr. Ehlig described the primary cause of instability in this
particular zone as a buildup of Artesian water pressure beneath the downhill portion of
the landslide. He stated the factor of safety had not been calculated because of the
slide's unconventional nature, adding Dr. Ehlig considered the area to be moving
because of the water pressure as opposed to the instability of the slide.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 14 of 29
City Manager Evans indicated that Dr. Ehlig's findings were based on his vast personal
experience rather than on borings and calculations and stated something is being
defended that was Council policy based on a geologist's recommendations 15 years
ago. He stated, if Council desired to change the policy, they could; but he envisioned it
would most likely generate some lawsuits.
Councilman Stern defended the decision made a couple years ago limiting the building
of existing homeowners in the moratorium area which basically defined that one cannot
build on a vacant lot until the geology is approved and provided a step to reasonably
accommodate people already living in the area without allowing them to build a new
house under the guise of a remodel. He stated he agreed with staff that under the
issue in the Moratorium Ordinance being addressed it was to be a cumulative 600
square feet total and the revision designed to provide that should be adopted. In
relation to Seaview, he expressed concern about changing the situation.
Mauricio Arregoces, Rancho Palos Verdes, indicated he is a resident of one of the 35
properties under discussion in Seaview, noting he purchased the property recently and
is planning to add more than the 600 square feet specified in the moratorium ordinance
based on a decision reached by reading many of the geology reports provided to him by
various brokers involved in the transaction. He commented in the last six month at
least two houses in the area have broken ground for construction and both are planning
to exceed 600 square feet. He remarked his understanding of the different zones and
particularly Seaview was the severity of the slide was less compared to other zones
within the moratorium area which is one of the points he considered when deciding
whether or not to purchase the property.
Mayor Gardiner declared the Public Hearing closed.
Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Mayor Gardiner, to (1) ADOPT ORDINANCE
NO. 406U, AS AMENDED, ADOPTING REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 15.20
(MORATORIUM ON LAND USE PERMITS) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE AND
DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF; and (2) INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NO. 407
AS AMENDED TO ADOPT REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 15.20 (MORATORIUM ON
LAND USE PERMITS) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE; (3) Staff to advise any existing
applicant of the interpretation of the existing ordinance and that only one addition of
600 square feet is allowable; and (4) within a reasonable length of time Staff to review
the Seaview exemption and bring back results of such review and make a
recommendation to Council with the notion of reaffirming current practices unless there
is a compelling reason not to.
The motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Stern, Clark, Wolowicz, Gardiner
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Long
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 15 of 29
Mayor pro tem Clark suggested remanding to staff and the Planning Commission a
review of the Seaview exemption with information to be brought back to Council in a
reasonable period of time for further consideration, saying his intention was not to
change it but to clarify a number of questions that have been raised which he believed
had not been satisfactorily answered.
Mayor Gardiner recommended reaffirming the City's current practices in the interim
unless reason is shown not to.
City Attorney Lynch indicated the Planning Commission does not typically consider
changes to the Moratorium Ordinance.
Councilman Stern stated it does not make sense to give the matter to the Planning
Commission since it relates to what Council has previously determined when
addressing the landslide moratorium, adding it comes down to a policy request unless
the City Attorney advises otherwise in terms of an inequity.
Mayor pro tem Clark agreed but requested staff revisit the topic and bring it back to
Council for further consideration.
Mayor Gardiner indicated support for the motion with the understanding that Council
receive a specific opinion from the City Attorney on letterhead.
CITY COUNCIL ORAL REPORTS:
Councilman Stern chaired the Open Space Recreation Task Force meeting April 7th and
stated two meetings have been scheduled in May to bring reports before the
Committee. On April 16th he attended, on behalf of the City, a dinner hosted by the City
of Lakewood in celebration of their 50th anniversary. April 19th he attended a meeting of
the combined Chambers of Commerce of the South Bay, the Peninsula, and San Pedro
where Congresswoman Harmon was the guest speaker.
Mayor pro tem Clark attended the 5th annual Aerospace Outlook Conference for the
South Bay at El Camino College on April 14th, saying the conference focused on
encouraging the vitality of small businesses working at the vendor and second -, third -,
and fourth -tier subcontractor level for major aerospace in the South Bay. He indicated
it was a very worthwhile event which illustrated there is clearly a great deal of concern
with respect to the L.A. Air Force Base's possible change of location.
Councilman Wolowicz also attended the Aerospace Outlook Conference which he said
underscored the importance of aerospace to the entire South Bay region. On April 17th
he and Councilman Long attended the Lomita Sheriff's Station's Volunteer Recognition
Luncheon which he described as a heartwarming and worthwhile event in recognition of
the large number of people who volunteer many hours to the benefit of RPV and
several other communities. He indicated it was highly appropriate that elected officials
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 16 of 29
attended this function to express personal thanks and the gratitude of the entire
community.
Mayor Gardiner commented to those residents who have fully memorized the logo on
Channel 33 that progress is expected in the coming months and eventually the City will
have an RPV Channel 33.
Recess and Reconvene:
Mayor Gardiner recessed the meeting at 9:00 P.M. and reconvened the meeting at 9:08
P.M.
REGULAR NEW BUSINESS:
Residential Undergrounding Program. (901 x 1203)
Director Allison presented the staff memorandum of April 20, 2004.
Mayor pro tem Clark said there had been some coverage in the press recently
regarding two successful undergrounding districts being formed in a sister city in the
South Bay and queried if staff has gleaned any information by looking at programs in
other local cities.
Director Allison indicated he spoke with his counterparts in Manhattan Beach and
Hermosa Beach when -the City initially formed the program, saying, since the rules are
very similar in Manhattan Beach, many of their guidelines have been incorporated into
the City's program.
Mayor pro tem Clark, noting perhaps it is the topography, stated their cost per property
owner seemed substantially less than that being estimated in RPV.
Director Allison explained the lots in Manhattan Beach are generally smaller so the
length of underground is divided among more property owners, hence the difference in
the figures. He indicated the City has perhaps estimated high but it would be far worse
to recommend bringing people into a program that turns out to be a great deal more
expensive than anticipated. He stated after carefully scrutinizing the numbers he would
not change the estimate or the guidelines.
Mayor Gardiner said he is in favor of undergrounding utilities but he complained the
current documents are confusing and ambiguous, noting It would be better to have
important statements such as the estimated acquisition cost for each parcel up front
rather than buried in the text. He illustrated statements such as "the estimated
acquisition cost of the approved financial assessment district for each parcel is $20- to
$25,000" were not nearly as obvious to the average reader as saying, "I understand I
may have to pay $20- to $25,000.))
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 17 of 29
Councilman Stern stated the only reason he disagreed was because this was not the
type of petition where one merely signs their name but it requires information be filled
out in addition to a signature, adding he agreed the information should be prominent but
did not believe it is difficult to find.
Councilman Wolowicz, referencing the engineering plans and costs, queried if entities
that might have equipment hung on the poles are coordinating with Southern California
Edison on the project.
Director Allison explained Edison takes the lead role, generally building a joint trench
which allowed the phone and cable companies to utilize the conduits underground.
Mayor Gardiner said he understood the undergrounding of cable and electric but
inquired how pole- mounted cell phone antennas could be placed underground.
Director Allison that replied not all of the poles would be eliminated, saying generally it
is the wires that are more obtrusive than the poles. He illustrated the utility
undergrounding program on Silver Spur where the poles accommodated utilities as well
as street lights, explaining the wires went underground but the poles with street lights
remained and are part of the normal "street furniture" people are accustomed to.
Mayor pro tem Clark indicated the resolution for undergrounding utilities sponsored by
the City a couple years ago advocated pressure be placed on the California Utilities
Commission and the utility providers to find economic and innovative methods of
undergrounding that would not create such a financial burden on property owners and
inquired if any progress has been made in that area either with the C.U.C. or the
League of California Cities.
Director Allison stated he has not monitored whether any progress has been made but
will take the matter as an action item and follow up on it.
Evelyn Dow, Rancho Palos Verdes, indicated she is the original owner of her property
which she has occupied for 42 years, and requested in all fairness that a petition for
those against the project be authorized and circulated, opining it would be cost effective
for the City because the matter would be dropped and no more time and money would
be spent if enough signatures are procured. She said she is unsure how much longer
she will be able to live in her home and believes it unfair that she or her heirs should be
responsible to assume a financial burden to improve someone else's view when there
will be no benefit to them. She noted if the utility companies and the City are in favor of
this, they should find other methods of financing rather than placing the burden on
property owners.
Louise Shipman, Rancho Palos Verdes, expressed concern on behalf of herself and
many of her neighbors regarding the utility undergrounding project, saying there needs
to be assurance that everyone who signs a petition under the current proposal is fully
cognizant of the possible consequences. She indicated in addition to having the
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 18 of 29
highest average cost per lot they have ever heard of there will be much argument on
subjective guidelines since there seems to be no clear picture of the guidelines that
would be used to establish cost for specific lots. She asked who would decide what the
will criteria be, saying it is not surprising some residents on the view side initiated this
project since they are looking at many more poles than most residents in Seaview are.
She remarked there is also the very real possibility a homeowner who did not sign the
petition and does not wish to have such an expensive lien on their property will find they
are in the position of having the votes of surrounding residents imposed on their
property along with the misfortune of still having poles to look at.
Ms. Shipman stated many people she has spoken to believe the program involves all of
Seaview or none of it, saying that is not her understanding of what she has read. She
requested clarification of the percentages required to permit or halt the project. She
wholeheartedly agreed the guidelines are confusing and ambiguous and indicated due
to the puzzling nature of the petition two thirds of the residents have signed it without
being fully aware of the facts.
Mauricio Arregoces, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated he currently has no position either for
or against the proposed undergrounding, adding, despite the fact his view will not be
improved dramatically as a result, he can see the benefits. He indicated he, too, is
having difficulty understanding the guidelines, saying he has heard conflicting stories
regarding what constitutes a neighborhood, whether it is all or a portion of the Seaview
area, whether the requirement is 66 percent or two thirds, or whether a petition reduces
the number from two thirds to fifty percent. He commented he has not found one
person who can answer the process of the petition, adding it has become clear to him
there is not a clear course to follow in either achieving the goal or understanding the
process.
Lois Larue, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated she has lived in Abalone Cove since 1963 at
which time the residents decided the area needed to be under grounded so it was.
Mayor pro tem Clark requested a response to the concerns voiced by the residents.
Director Allison explained the project area would be determined by the residents in
conjunction with SCE, saying most likely that it will be a subset of the Seaview
community. To clarify the issue regarding removal of the poles, he indicated they would
be removed unless they support a streetlight or cellular antenna in which case they can
be modified to make them more aesthetically pleasing. As far as the issue of
determining cost, he indicated not everyone will pay the same amount, saying the
design engineers will determine what needs to be done, the total project cost, and how
that will be distributed. He indicated an assessment district would be created and
individual cost would be based on the benefit each property receives from the project.
He explained there would be a general benefit to the entire neighborhood, but, if a
resident had a view that is vastly improved, their cost would be higher than that of
someone who did not have a view or has one that is not impacted. He stated the
process seems rather subjective but is based on industry standards for the assessment
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 19 of 29
process which will come before Council to be scrutinized before any further action is
taken.
Director Allison further explained the rules governing how an assessment district
proceeds may be responsible for much of the confusion, noting there are two
thresholds, fifty percent and 67 percent, adding the City's current guidelines require a
66- to 67 percent approval rating in the community before the City invests any money
into the design of the undergrounding program or any money is advanced by the City
for the assessment district process. He indicated a public hearing would be held at the
end of the process before any determination is made regarding individual cost, at which
time Council will decide if the assessment district will be formed. He explained there
would be a 50 percent requirement by the public to form the district which means if 51
percent of the rated votes (those people required to pay more, will have more votes) are
in favor of the district, Council may approve it.
In response to the suggestion of circulating a petition for those opposed to the project,
Director Allison stated he viewed that as being problematic because a great deal would
depend on how a community is finally defined, adding anyone who does not sign the
current petition is already presumed to be a no vote.
Mayor pro tern Clark, in response to the comment that many people signed the petition
without understanding it, said he had serious doubts anyone would read through a
petition, sign it, and pay $100 without thoroughly understanding it since not too many
people are inclined to sign petitions with a monetary fee without comprehending what
they are signing.
Mayor Gardiner indicated his main concern rested with people who could not afford the
cost, saying they are going to be put in the embarrassing position of appearing at a
public meeting to voice the plea of not having adequate resources. He stated he would
support a negative petition because the topic is so complex and controversial and
suggested sending the petition to the Council of Homeowners Association to see if they
can provide any recommendations on the wording.
Mayor Gardiner said he fundamentally objected to property owners paying to improve
public utilities and opined, unless there was something built in requiring the project be
sent out for competitive bidding, the provider is at liberty to choose their own
contractors and drive up the base price in order to make a profit. He explained the
utility company pays a relatively small amount, property owners pay a staggering
amount, and the majority of benefits accrue to the utility company in terms of an
upgraded facility and lower maintenance.
Councilman Stern agreed with Director Allison on the idea of a negative petition, saying
he saw no value in circulating one. He indicated he supported allowing the residents to
move forward if they so choose and are willing to bear the financial burden, saying he
believed the program was reasonable and well thought out. He stated he shared the
Mayor's concerns about the benefit to the public utilities, saying, unfortunately, that is a
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 20 of 29
battle Council has no authority over since the rules are dictated by State law. He noted
he was in favor of doing anything possible to help minimize the cost to residents.
Councilman Wolowicz stated there were some facts in the follow -on memo not included
in the guidelines and recommended incorporating those along with some of the
comments made at the meeting into the booklet. He noted while he thought the booklet
was very good, it is the duty of Council and staff to eliminate any confusion that might
arise and inquired if the residents of Seaview have received anything from the City to
explain things.
Director Allison indicated staff was fully engaged in assisting the community through the
process, noting the petition Council previously approved is currently circulating and staff
shared the draft guidelines with the residents at their annual homeowners association
meeting.
Councilman Wolowicz indicated he had been approached by people on both sides of
the issue, although mostly by those in favor, saying they would like to take action within
their own segment of the neighborhood in order to move more quickly through the
process without being encumbered by the entire neighborhood's approval.
Director Allison remarked, after listening to the discussion, the following three topics
would be very constructive to add to the guidelines: (1) Explain that the project area is
defined by the neighborhood, not the City; (2) Clarify if there are streetlights or cellular
lines on utility poles they will not be eliminated but could be changed in character to
make them more aesthetically pleasing; and, (3) embellish the fact not everyone in the
assessment district will pay the same amount.
City Attorney Lynch clarified the assessment engineer would make the final decision on
the benefit area; so, while the City would attempt to honor residents' requests regarding
segmenting, the engineer must concur with any segmentation selected and would
determine the ultimate benefit spread.
Mayor Gardiner indicated he was not prepared to support the matter until the Council of
Homeowners Associations reviewed it and they determined that it was clear,
comprehensive, and addressed any concerns they might have.
Mayor pro tem Clark stated Council is sensitive to the concerns voiced by residents
about the possibility of undergrounding and the associated cost. He opined the issue is
really one of economics and inquired how it could be made more palatable to those
concerned about the financial burden, saying he believed everyone would agree to
have undergrounding if it cost nothing because unsightly poles would be removed and
studies have shown that real estate values are enhanced as a result. He concurred the
plan is well though out but stated he, too, would be interested in having the Council of
Homeowners review the documents and provide their input. He indicated it is important
for the City's communities to understand this is an exercise in self - governance for which
the ground rules are being set up.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 21 of 29
Scott Gobble, representing Southern California Edison, explained questions tend to
arise when a neighborhood is looking at undergrounding certain portions rather than the
entire community. He suggested it would be appropriate to include language in the
documentation saying if a smaller portion of the community is interested in
undergrounding 600 feet or more of the main line that SCE, the phone company, and
other utilities are consulted to determine if engineering requirements are met and the
work can physically be performed, saying it is important to get the utilities involved
before the boundaries are actually established. He stated there is no charge for this
consulting service which provides an opportunity to meet with City staff, determine the
boundaries, and move forward from there.
Mayor Gardiner inquired if Mr. Gobble was aware of any problem with sending the
undergrounding project out for competitive bidding.
Mr. Gobble answered it was perfectly acceptable under the Public Utilities Code and
SCE encourages competition.
Mayor pro tem Clark inquired why there is such a vast difference in the median cost per
house between RPV and Manhattan Beach.
Mr. Gobble responded he has worked on the Manhattan Beach project and explained
the lots there are generally 40 feet wide, making the footage of the trench considerably
less per house. He indicated the main line trench is much longer for quarter- and third -
acre lots, saying that affects the cost as well as the rocky soils present in the area
which are not found in Manhattan Beach. He stated the figures of $275 to $300 a lineal
foot are fairly accurate, noting the good news is it costs less to underground today than
it did a year- and -a -half ago because the Public Utilities Commission changed the tariff
slightly in November 2002 giving SCE a greater dollar credit for underground projects
enabling them to pass that savings on.
Councilman Wolowicz thanked Mr. Gobble for attending the meeting and inquired about
exemptions for residents, asking if he is aware of any alternatives besides the State
deferral program.
Mr. Gobble indicated in other communities that have taken on successful
undergrounding projects, people generally know who their neighbors are, where the
widows and widowers live, and who is perhaps a little more financially strapped, saying
those neighbors in a better position to pay will offer financial incentives or assistance to
those who are less able. He stated another option is the $24,000 per year income limit
devised by the City's treasurer, noting this is more difficult because it must be
reassessed yearly and since the life of the bonds is either 10, 15, or 20 years many
people are reluctant to enter into these types of arrangements.
Councilman Wolowicz recommended including a paragraph regarding competitive
bidding and perhaps one relating to the type of neighborhood participation referred to
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 22 of 29
by Mr. Gobble, saying residents may want to consider that as part of their deliberations.
Mayor pro tem Clark suggested including an appendix to the guidelines with Council's
League- adopted resolution, outlining some of the steps taken by the League of
California Cities with the P.U.C. to deal with some of the issues residents have voiced
concern over.
Mayor pro tem Clark moved, seconded by Councilman Stern, to (1) Direct staff to find
out the status of the League resolution sent to the Public Utilities Commissions
regarding innovative ways to underground. (2) Adopt Draft Guidelines for
undergrounding utilities in residential neighborhoods amended by comments made at
the meeting: Define project area for undergrounding; clarify what poles will be
removed, which will stay, and why; add discussion re assessment; and, get the utilities
involved early on in the project. (3) Add competitive bidding and neighborhood
participation. (4) Request the Council of Homeowners Association to review and, if they
have any substantive value to add, bring to staff's attention. Final language to be
brought back to the City Council. (5) Add appendix to guidelines, i.e., resolution and
other attempts.
In response to the Mayor's request for clarification of the motion, Mayor pro tern Clark
stated his motion is to approve the draft in concept as modified by a few of the
comments made during the discussion with the final language to be brought back for
review; and, also, for it to be sent to the Council of Homeowners Association for their
review.
Councilman Stern opined the motion made a great deal of sense since it allowed
people already moving forward to know the basic rules have been laid out and in all
likelihood are not going to change and, if there are ways things can be embellished
and /or elucidated in response to public comments and any that might come from the
Council of Homeowners Association, could be included.
Mayor Gardiner opposed the motion, saying in his opinion Council is dealing with an
unfinished document that raised serious questions which have yet to be addressed and
clarified. He remarked he has witnessed many cases where groups have passed broad
principles and, when it comes to implementing the details, things become entangled,
and firmly indicated he has no intention of supporting such a document.
Mayor Gardiner opposed the motion. Motion carried 3 -1 -1 (Long absent).
Status of City Council Goals. (1101)
City Manager Evans presented the staff memorandum of April 20, 2004 and indicated
the milestones set for the first three goals, Infrastructure Renewal and Maintenance,
Action Plan for City Traffic and Parking, and Completion of the Open Space Park and
Recreation Plan are proceeding essentially on schedule. He suggested modifying
some of the milestones for the open space acquisition in Portuguese Bend by changing
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 23 of 29
the date for the $17 million State Funds commitment from October 1, 2004 to
December 1St and adjusting all the subsequent dates accordingly. He explained the
Wildlife Conservation Board does not meet until November 18 , making it impossible to
meet the October deadline. He stated the Land Conservancy has also requested to
revise the language of the July 1St milestone to read, "By the transaction date the PVP
Land Conservancy will have a local commitment of $6 million."
Councilman Wolowicz inquired if a monitoring process should be instituted.
City Manager Evans indicated the City Council Ad Hoc Committee following this
purchase meets weekly by conference call, saying they are abreast of the situation and
can keep Council informed if things appear to be going awry.
Councilman Stern and Mayor pro tem Clark assured they are involved in the weekly
conversations and will provide Council with necessary updates on the project's status.
Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Mayor Gardiner, to receive the report on the
status of the City Council Goals for 2004 -2005 with changes noted by the City Manager.
Motion carried without objection.
City Foundation. (Carryover from April 6th meeting.) (1101)
Councilman Wolowicz explained his experience with foundations and fundraising has
indicated people are inclined to give to a foundation especially if they are looking at
specific tasks they wish to be accomplished or as long -term gifts or endowments, noting
the City may find this beneficial. He indicated staff has concluded Council should
decide on the specific purpose of the foundation before directing staff to proceed with
the process and mentioned several specific areas where people might wish to
contribute such as open space, Upper Point Vicente, youth centers and gymnasiums,
or emergency preparedness equipment.
Councilman Stern remarked he was not particularly eager to put government in the
business of becoming a charity. He indicated he was not in favor of the City's setting
up its own foundation since RPV has a vast network of support organizations such as
the Land Conservancy and the Norris Foundation and he would prefer to let those
interested groups do the fundraising and provide associated benefits to the community.
Mayor pro tem Clark applauded Councilman Wolowicz for bringing the matter forward
but noted there does not appear to be any specificity of purpose for the foundation,
noting staff has indicated individuals already have the ability to gift to the City for
specific purposes. He indicated he is not convinced there is a compelling distinct need
for the foundation, noting, otherwise, he would support it.
Councilman Stern concurred, saying he is not sure people are aware they can make
tax - deductible donations to the City.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 24 of 29
Mayor Gardiner said he does not feel strongly one way or the other but would be
inclined to support the effort if it encouraged people who otherwise would not gift to the
City, noting it provided an opportunity for volunteers to coalesce around something
which absent such a vehicle would not exist.
Councilman Wolowicz indicated the point about the foundation's not having a specific
focus is well taken but noted his experience is people are inclined to give once a certain
amount of forward motion is created.
Mayor Gardiner said there are a number of things the City might allocate funds for such
as RPV's Channel 33, Shakespeare by the Sea, the symphony, et cetera, saying he
would not want to restrict how the funds could be used. He indicated there are a
number of people in the community who could be of enormous benefit to the City and
noted he cannot see any negative to providing a vehicle for this.
Mayor pro tem Clark remarked his mind has just been changed on the matter.
Councilman Wolowicz moved, seconded by Mayor Gardiner, to conceptually approve
the concept and direct staff to explore further in detail a City non - profit Foundation to
receive donations.
Councilman Stern opposed the motion which carried 3 -1 -1 (Long absent).
The Residential Development Standards Steering Committee. (1203)
Councilman Stern indicated Councilman Long had submitted a memo on the matter
and suggested it be continued to allow him to be present for discussion.
Mayor pro tem Clark said he would agree to continue the item since Councilman Long
was on of the co- Chairs. He disagreed with Councilman Long's opinion that
committees larger than seven are too unwieldy to function properly, indicating the
Neighborhood Compatibility Subcommittee's membership was in that range and
functioned quite effectively with much value being gained by the synergy between
electeds, Planning Commissioners, and very capable community volunteers.
Mayor Gardiner stated he, too, does not share Councilman Long's opinion about the
number of Committee members nor his concern about the appointment of two Council
members since there is a precedent for that. In response to his opinion Committee
members should be disinterested in the subject matter, he disagreed, saying they most
definitely should be interested.
Councilman Stern clarified he believed Councilman Long's reference was to members
not having hidden agendas, which might skew things in a direction to obtain a private
result. He explained his suggestion to continue the matter was not necessarily because
he agreed with the substance of Councilman Long's memo but as a courtesy to him
since he apparently felt strongly enough about the item to send a memo.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 25 of 29
Mayor Gardiner inquired if Councilman Long indicated he would like to postpone the
matter or if he was simply requesting clarification.
City Manager Evans answered Councilman Long wanted to raise these points but said
he trusted Council to take the matter up without his presence.
Councilman Stern agreed fundamentally with Mayor pro tern Clark's position on the size
of the committees but stated a couple mistakes have been made in the past by creating
committees that were too large. He indicated he does not view the issue of the
Committee's independence as a problem, saying he believed there is value in the way it
has been engineered to provide a connection between Council and the Commissioners.
Mayor Gardiner opined it is more often the makeup of the committee rather than the
size that causes the difficulty, saying given who is conducting the meetings and the
character of this Committee he does not anticipate any problems arising.
Councilman Stern moved, seconded by Councilman Wolowicz, to Review and approve
the scope of the Committee's work. The motion carried without objection.
Recess and Reconvene:
Mayor Gardiner recessed the meeting at 10:36 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at
10:39 p.m.
MAX Transit Policy Steering Committee Appointment. (106)
City Manager Evans indicated the need for this appointment has been created because
the Committee has had difficulty getting a quorum and suggested Council appoint him
or another staff person to attend the meetings if there is no Council member wishing to
volunteer.
Mayor pro tern Clark inquired if there is actually still a need for this Committee which
was originally created around 1991 to provide a forum for commuter related
transportation issues in the El Segundo area.
City Manager Evans explained MTA is currently removing some of its LAX area routes
and the agencies operating MAX are under some pressure to expand their routes to
compensate for those lost MTA routes servicing the airport.
Councilman Wolowicz moved, seconded by Councilman Stern, to appoint the City
Manager as representative to the MAX Transit Policy Steering Committee. The motion
passed without objection.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 26 of 29
Joint meeting with School Board. (1101)
City Manager Evans explained Council last met with the School District nearly two years
ago and Mayor pro tem Clark has suggested inviting them to meet in a joint session to
discuss topics such as the status of athletic fields in the Eastview area.
Councilman Wolowicz moved, seconded by pro tem Clark, to extend an invitation to the
Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District Board of Education to meet in a Joint
Session; and request the City Manager and Superintendent of the District to propose an
agenda for the meeting.
Councilman Stern indicated he would prefer that staff confer with the School Board
Superintendent to explore whether there are items that warrant holding a joint meeting.
Mayor Gardiner supported Councilman Stern's idea, opining there should be a specific
well thought out and well researched set of outcomes desired before bringing elected
officials together. He indicated he does believe in encouraging interdepartmental
assemblies to explore if there is sufficient reason to hold a meeting.
Councilman Wolowicz remarked there are some very significant topics these two
entities could address, one being the Eastview school situation. He stated each time
he meets with groups or individuals there is a continuing level of frustration on this
subject and, although the answer may not be within Council's grasp, he believed it
would be appropriate to meet with the School Board to discuss the matter.
Mayor pro tem Clark indicated a great deal of value came out of the July 2002 joint
meeting, saying virtually every member of both elected bodies in attendance thought
there was much constructive interaction on a number of fronts. He opined the meeting
ultimately is needed and suggested the City Manager in conjunction with the
Superintendent and two subcommittees from each body perform the preparatory
groundwork. He stated he believed there are issues being grappled with which these
two bodies should address together such as the challenge of providing youth
recreational facilities. He also mentioned the possibility of the School District's
relocating its offices and perhaps aligning with the City as they look toward a vision for
Upper Point Vicente and a new Civic Center that might conceptually include new
School District offices.
Mayor Gardiner reiterated his opinion that a meeting should consist of action items that
can be implemented upon the meeting's conclusion.
Councilman Wolowicz, amending his previous motion, moved, seconded by Mayor
Gardiner, to express an intent to have a meeting; City Manager to meet with School
Superintendent to develop an agenda of actionable items; and, Bring these items back
to the City Council and to the School Board.
The amended motion passed without objection.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 27 of 29
Agenda format and procedures issues. (Continued from April 6t ".) (307)
City Manager Evans described this continued item as one which was described in the
newspapers as "an hour - and -a -half of discussing how to make the meeting shorter,"
and candidly proposed discussing for the next hour how Council can adjourn by 11:00
p.m.
Councilman Stern indicated he would like the rule regarding staff reports to be staff
reports are received unless Council directs otherwise.
Mayor Gardiner argued against the idea, saying there were 20 items on the agenda
and, if staff had made a mere three - minute presentation of each, an hour would have
been added to the meeting. He opined Council and staff attend the meetings having
read the Agenda which is published on the Web for interested parties and said the
default should be they are not read unless specifically requested.
Mayor pro tem Clark moved, seconded by Councilman Stern, to consider City Council
agenda format at a Team Building workshop.
The motion passed without objection.
Councilman Wolowicz indicated he was disappointed by the newspaper coverage this
item received, believing it to be a mischaracterization of what was actually done. He
stated none of the Mayor's ideas were discarded, noting one was slightly altered but still
maintained the intent expressed by the Mayor.
Councilman Wolowicz questioned the continuing appearance of time estimates on the
agenda.
City Manager Evans explained that in the future they would appear on the front page at
the end of the third paragraph where it will say, "An estimated time for presentation,
public input, and discussion of each agenda item is shown to the left of the item
number. These estimated items are included to predict the overall length of each City
Council meeting and are not intended to preclude public input, full discussion, and
thoughtful deliberation of each item."
Councilman Wolowicz also observed, under the item regarding unfinished business, it
is stated interested persons can track unfinished business items on the City's website,
saying he could not find that information on the website.
Mayor Gardiner requested correcting the URL, or website address, so individuals can
type the entire address and be taken directly to the page and section where that
specific information is presented.
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 28 of 29
REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION:
City Attorney Lynch reported that no action was taken on the matter of negotiations with
the City's cable franchise company; that with regard to the City Manager's performance
evaluation, that matter had been continued.
ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Gardiner adjourned the meeting at 11:10 p.m. to 6:00 p. . on May 4, 2004, for a
budget work session to be held in Council Chamb a# �se/�ark.
,/ Mayor
WA2004 City Council Minutes \04202004 CC MINS.doc
City Council Minutes
April 20, 2004
Page 29 of 29