CC MINS 19750116 ADJ M I N U T E S
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL
Adjourned Regular Meeting
January 16, 1975
The meeting was called to order at 7:48 p.m. at Miraleste High School, 28323 Palos
Verdes Drive East, notice having been given with affidavit thereto on file. Following
the Pledge of Allegiance, roll call was answered as follows:
PRESENT: Councilmen Gunther Buerk, Ken Dyda, Robert E. Ryan, and Mayor
Marilyn Ryan
ABSENT: Councilman Francis D. Ruth
Councilman Ruth arrived at 8:30 p.m. and was present for the remainder
of the meeting.
Also present were City Manager Leonard G. Wood, Planning Director Sharon Hightower,
Administrative Services Officer George Wunderlin, Community Services Officer Tom Bandy,
and Public Works Director Dennis Pikus.
REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES A report on the development alternatives for
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes was presented
by Director of Planning Sharon Hightower,
Associate Planner Larry Davis, John Corrough,
of EDAW, Inc. and Richard McElyea of Economic Research Associates. The purpose of
this report, which is a major step in the general plan process, is to set up alter-
natives so that the members of the community can view them and furnish input as to
what kind of future they want for their community.
Following the presentation, Council members voiced their reactions to the report.
Concern was expressed with the population figures, the lack of mention of Abalone Cove,
the lack of examples of good cluster development, the lack of an agricultural land
use designation, the densities of 6 and 22 units per acre expressed in Alternate D,
and the large projected rise in administrative costs and other expenditures for the
City.
The meeting was then opened to public comment. The individuals speaking, and their
major points of concern were as follows:
Bill Petak - What is the 2 unit/acre figure based on, only the developable land, or all
vacant land in the city? Answer: All vacant land.
Ron Zinke - What costs for acquisition of land were used? Answer: $50,000/acre.
Dave Alger, President of Del Cerro Homeowners Assn. - The densities expressed in most
of the alternatives are contrary to the reason why most people move to the peninsula
and why people voted for incorporation. The Goals Committee better outlined the
feeling of the community. The two units per acre was not intended as the average
density, but was meant to be the maximum density for all new development.
Dick Grotz - It would be very helpful to the Goals Committee members if they could
have a list of the inconsistencies contained in the Goals Report so that they could
then deal with them and eliminate them from the report.
Sheila Hoff - Deeding of open space by land developers should have been considered as
an alternative to open space acquisition in this report. By developing a number of
private communities within the City, each with their own private open space etc. a
large community feeling will be lost; instead, the City will be made up of a number of
small sub-communities not concerned with what happens to the community as a whole.
Burke Belknap - He liked the large undeveloped open space in alternate D, but was con-
cerned with the degree of density that the alternate has in other areas in order to
achieve these open spaces. Cluster development could be beneficial to the community.
Charles Hunt - Expressed concern with the lack of agricultural land designation. It
was the intention of the Goals Committee that there be no future multi-family units
constructed at all. He was concerned with what the usable land will be used for; it
is not necessarily as important how many people will live here.
Council 264 January 16, 1975
Bob Mickeloff - Alternate A has many of the elements of what the City was formed
for. Alternate A does not need to cost as much as the report indicates; not enough
work has been done with the A concept to make it viable.
John Herker - The major goals of the Goals Committee was to retain the rural and
semi-rural appearance of the community. Since alternate D does not have the rural
appearance, it is the least attractive alternative.
Susie Seamens - Would like more information on Planned Unit Development. What is
an average number of dwelling units per acre in a good planned unit development?
Answer: In the past, PUDs have been generally 6 units/acre or more; however, they
could be done at lower densities.
Elza Cortes - What would the density be if you take away the unbuildable land?
Answer: 2000 acres would be left buildable. At 2 units/acre, that would generate
approximately 4000 dwelling units.
Susie Seamens - The City is NOW approaching population saturation. Is increasing
the population by 30% what the community wants? Or do they wish to try to limit the
population of the City? The City will not have a rural atmosphere if the population
grows to large. Is in favor of local neighborhood convenience centers, if they
are well done. Some mention should be made as to the percentage of the lot that can
be covered by the house.
Sheila Hoff - The Goals Report mentions several times opposition to spot zoning in
connection with commercial use.
Eleanore Wiedmann - The report is a useful tool in that it elicits input from the
community. However, those who worked for incorporation would be aghast to see a
figure of 6 units/acre emerge from this kind of a technical study. There is one di-
mension missing, and that is the quality of life here on the peninsula. The City
should limit the use of the land. That land which is visually an asset should es-
pecially be used to its very best advantage.
Lou Rosenberg - The alternatives presented are not compatible with what the Goals
Committee and the Planning Advisory Committee have been trying to accomplish and main-
tain over the past year. He questioned the figures used as a standard amount of parks
and recreation. 6 acres/1000 for regional and 4 acres/1000 for local parks are not
applicable to this community. The conventional types of parks do not fit the needs
of this community. The types of recreation needed by the community should be looked
at very closely, and an independent set of figures in terms of acreage per thousand
population should be arrived at.
Bill Petak - It is time now for the Goals Committee to work to put this information
in the proper perspective. The alternatives are the basis for more refined discus-
sions - the Committee can get down to specifics. The alternatives are sufficient as
"straw men" for the Goals Committee to address.
John Corrough, speaking as a resident of the City - Goals are idealized things to
be achieved. The degree of satisfaction of the most goals is what makes an alter-
native really work. The City may not be able to realize all of their goals, if they
cannot get the funds for them. But, if the community is willing to pay the price,
it can have anything it wants.
John McTaggart - What is the figure of $800/mile for landscaping for? Answer:
maintenance.
Dena Friedson, resident of Palos Verdes Estates - re acquiring open space: the City
of Palos Verdes Estates requires that one-half of all land developed must be do-
nated to the city as open space or park land.
Mike Houston - Acquiring great amounts of open space will represent a loss of reve-
nue to the City. It is conceivable that the City could tax itself out of existence.
Barbara Hein - Expressed concern that there was nothing in the report as to how the
various alternatives would affect the school system.
Bryan Hardwick - Sea Ranch is a good example of Planned Unit Development. The Pre-
liminary Goals Report did not have to consider the matter of economic feasibility;
this report did, and it is clear that alternative A is economically infeasible.
Council 265 January 16, 1975
Cleve Stoskopf - One of the purposes of incorporation was the community's dislike of
high density complexes.
Byron Blue - In the interest of quality and stability, it might be well to develop a
means whereby all changes to the General Plan are made through the referendum process.
Sheila Hoff - The City of Palo Alto found that it was more economical to buy open space
than to develop it.
Mike Kochan, General Manager of Palos Verdes Properties - Agrees with the approach and
methodology, but disagrees with some of the assumptions made. Was concerned that
only 2 units/acre was considered. Higher densities would lead to lower taxes for the
community. Palos Verdes Properties would be willing to pay for ERA to do another study
of the fiscal impacts of 2.5 - 2.7 units/acre, and would accept the findings of that
study. He does not think the EDAW report is reliable and it is not a report on which
to base a general plan. He would like an opportunity to correct the EDAW report,
particularly with regard to constraints 7 and 8, and with regard to the geology.
Elza Cortes - In the Miraleste area unbuildable lands have been donated to the Parks
and Recreation District by the developers. It might be well for the City to consider
not buying certain parcels, but waiting for the developers to donate them.
Following the comments from members of the community, members of the Council made the
following comments: The means of getting feedback from the Goals Committee was dis-
cussed. Mrs. Hightower indicated it was hoped that within a month the Goals Committee
would submit specific reactions and recommendations. It was suggested that perhaps
the Planning Advisory Committee should also make recommendations. It was suggested
that the job of the Goals Committee is two-fold: to get the Goals Report finalized and
resubmitted to Council, and to continually provide feedback to the Council. It was
further suggested that the Goals Committee somehow try to determine how much the citi-
zens of the City are willing to pay for what they want.
Bill Petak, Chairman of the Goals Committee, indicated his Committee would try to have
something back to the Council within a month.
ADJOURNMENT At 11:00 p.m. it was moved, seconded and
carried that the meeting be adjourned.
,`71,-eln ;7,_ I-(fz --
YOR
LEONARD G. WOOD, C ITY CLERK AND
EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE COUNCIL
By
Deputy
III
Council 266 January 16, 1975