Loading...
CC MINS 19750625 M I N U T E S RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL June 25, 1975 The meeting was called to order at 6:17 p.m. in the City Offices, 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard, by Mayor Ryan. Roll call was answered as follows: PRESENT: Councilmen Ken Dyda, Francis D. Ruth, Robert E. Ryan, and Mayor Marilyn Ryan ABSENT: Councilman Gunther Buerk Councilman Buerk arrived at 10:15 Also present was Sharon W. Hightower, Director of Planning. GENERAL PLAN - WORK SESSION Council reviewed and made various revisions to the Infrastructure, Fiscal, Natural Environment, Sensory, Safety, and Socio-Cultural sections of the General Plan. A list of approved changes in attached hereto and incorporated herewith as a part of these minutes. Staff reviewed several maps which are proposed to be included in the adopted General Plan. ADJOURNMENT At 12:00 a.m. it was moved, seconded and carried that the meeting be ad- journed to June 26, 1975, 7:30 p.m. at Ridgecrest Intermediate School. MAYOR LEONARD G. WOOD, CITY CLERK AND EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE COUNCIL By / 1—Q Deputy Council 349 June 25, 1975 REVISIONS APPROVED BY COUNCIL June 25, 1975 Page 33, policy 6 -- delete Incentives should be. . . . Page 33, policy 7 . . . .damaging to the marine environment, with particular concern for the marine environment, at current use levels. . . . Page 34, policy 8 . . .fire protection policies and encourage the re-establishment of appropriate native plants. Page 36, paragraph 3 : . (place in POLICIES) Page 37, paragraph 8, sentence However, because of the denstant legal challenge to zoning ordinances for the preservation of these resources, amd-tie-ether-wise-fIttetuating-nature-of-sueh era4nariees zoning control. . . . Page 38, paragraph 3, sentences 1,2, & 3 -- delete -Page 38, paragraph 3, sentence 4 . . .reports sheuId can be sent. . . . Page 38, paragraph 5, sentence 2 . . .the City should can require. . . . Page 39, policy 2 -- delete -- Replace with: Encourage the indentification of archaeologically sensitive areas and sites. Page 40, Goal ESPABESH WORK TOWARD A COORDINATED PROGRAM Fell TO AID IN MATCHING. . . . Page 40, policy 5 -- delete Page 41, goal 1 ESTABLISH-EeMPREHENSIVE ENCOURAGE PROGRAMS. . . . Page 41 goal 2 ESPABEaSH-EeMPREHENSIVE ENCOURAGE PROGRAMS. . . . Page 41 goal 3 E ABBISH ENCOURAGE A FRAMEWORK. . . . Page 41, paragraph 1, last sentence . . .these needs are satisfied considered, human factors. . . . Page 42, paragraph 6 -- delete Page 43 -- delete page Page 44, paragraphs 1,2,&3 -- delete Page 44, policy 1 . . . involved in the-peIitieal-preeess-ef the community. . . . Page 44, policy 2 Fake-all-steps-neeessary Act to enhance. . . . Page 44, policy 3 Bring human-eeneefns the residents' needs into. . .skills are utilized. to-the maximum-extent-pessible. Page 44, policy 6 . . .information service whieh-will-be-a-feeal-peis.t-fer-eemmumicating of events, issue; and services to for the citizens. Page 44, policy 7 Encourage the development of anel-take-steps-neeessary-te-provide job opportunities. . . . Page 45, policy 8 Develop leng-range recreational programs. . . . Page 45 policy 9 . . .agencies and organizations, should-define identify the major. . . Page 176, policy 2 Develop an ordinance aimed-at to controlling noise. emitted-by-residential-steady state-neise-predueers---This-erdinanee-sheuld-preseribe-setbacks-amd-q antifiable pe issible-neise-level-limits- Page 176, policies 3,4,&5 -- delete Page 176, policy 6 . . . degree of incompatible noise impact on adjacent land uses. Page 176, policy 7 . . .short-cuts so as to minimize noise. Page 176, policy 8 . . .agent to ensure compliance with the noise ordinance. Page 176, policy 9 . . .sites to minimize noise. Page 176, policy 13 -- delete Page 176, policy 14 Research Review noise attenuation. . . . Page 176, policy 15 Encourage the State Legislature and Federal governments to actively pursue-legisIa- ties.-te control. . . . Page 180, policy 1 Develop strong controls teehniques-is.-ender to preserve. . . . Page 180, policy 4 . . .character of sib-eemmunities neighborhoods should follow. . ....individual sub- eemmtnity neighborhood basis. Page 180, policy 5 (Staff re-wording) Develop well located vista points to provide off-road areas where views may be enjoyed. These should have safe ingress and egress and be adequately posted . Page 180, policy 6 In-eemj.umetien-with-appropriate-agencies--the-Eity-should Develop and main- - tain. . . . Page 193, paragraph 6, sentence 2 if-a-Plan-ebj.eetive-ean-be-aehieved-through-regulation Direct City expenditure may not be required, even-th.eugh however, there are. . . . Page 193, paragraph 7 (Reorder the questions #4 to #1, #3 to #2, #2 to #3, and #1 to #4 -- remove "If not") Page 196, paragraph 1, question 2 . . .through 1990, comparing present population with that projected in the Plan. Page 198, paragraph 3, assumption 9 . . .increase from a eurrent 1974-75 level of $178,750,000 to a projected 1990 upper-I mit General Plan level of $28172967999 $232,637,475, evenly. . . . Page 198, paragraph 5, last sentence -- delete The balance achieved. . .. Page 199, text table (replacement) Base General Plan Range Population 41,700 50,275 Dwelling Units 11,600 14,128 Assessed Value ($000) $178,620 $232,637 Page 200 (replacement) POTENTIAL REVENUES AT FULL DEVELOPMENT OPERATING-GENERAL FUND Comparison of Base and General Plan Range (Figures in Thousands) General Plan Revenue Projection Factors Base Range Property Tax $0.182 per $100 $ 325.0 $ 423.4 assessed valuation Sales and Use Taxes $650 per $1 million 116.1 151.2 assessed valuation Franchise Tax $500 per $1 million 89.3 116.3 assessed valuation Real Property Transfer $1.75 per unit 20.3 24.7 Business License Tax 20% of sales tax 23.2 30.2 Vehicle and Court Fines $2.00 per capita 83.4 100.6 Interest Income 4% of fund revenues 46.2 58.7 Motor Vehicle In-Lieu $9.35 per capita 389.9 470.0 Cigarette Tax $1.80 per capita plus 89.0 108.6 12% of sales taA Other State Subventions $0.22 per capita 9.2 11.0 Environmental Service Fees $200 per new unit 10.001 33.7 Miscellaneous Revenues 0.5% of fund revenues 5.8 7.4 Total $1,207.4 $1,536.1 1/ Based on 1974-75 budget rather than new units Outlined next are anticipated patterns of expenditure of these revenues by category. Page 201, (text table replacement) POTENTIAL EXPENDITURES AT FULL DEVELOPMENT OPERATING-GENERAL FUND Comparison of Base and General Plan Range (Figures in Thousands) General Plan Expenditure Factor Base Range Administration $10 per capita $ 417.0 $ 502.8 Environmental As required 110.0 126.5 Services Public Works Added staff 45.0 54.0 Sheriff Expansion by 2 702.2 807.8 Unit over Current Level Park & Open Space RPV Park $4,500/ac 45.0 45.0 Maintenance Balance 2.000/ac Open Space Ease. None Recreation $2.00/cap 83.4 100.6 Misc. 0 .4% of Exp 6.0 6.9 TOTAL EXPENDITURE $1,500.6 $1,735.5 TOTAL REVENUES (10) 1,207.4 1,536.1 Deficit 293.2 199.4 Total Tax Rate Increase/ $ .163 $ .085 $100 AV Typical Tax Increase ($100,000 home) $ 40.75 $ 21.43 Page 30, revision to paragraph 1 revision (List 4) Due to the scale of the accompanying maps, some areas of extreme slopes may not have been plotted, just as there may be some isolated areas identified as extreme slope which are not actually 35% or greater. It is intended, however, that all slope areas will be subject to the development criteria cited for the actual slope category. Page 94, paragraph 3, sentence 3 (plus sub-sections) -- delete Futhermore, while most infrastructure systems. . . . Page 95, paragraph 5, sentence 2 . . .through sundry mitigating tactics. Page 121, paragraph 3 -- add new point in first position - Topographic characteristics. Page 133, goal 2 . . .FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC BRBER THROUGH Page 133, goal 4 IT SHALL BE A GOAL OF THE CITY TO STRIVE PBWARB-HIE-PROTECTION BP LIFE AND PROPERTY AND THE-REBU€TieN REDUCE ADVERSE ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIAL IMPACTS RESULTING FROM ANY GEOLOGIC ACTIVITY. Page 140, paragraph 3 . . .six thirteen other water. . . . Page 140, add to table Facility Seismic Zone Landslide Hazard #8 3M No adjacent land- slide activity #9 3M Immediately adja- cent to old land- slide #10 2M No adjacent land- slide activity #11 2M No adjacent land- slide activity #12 2M Immediately adja- cent to old land- slide #13 2M No adjacent land- slide activity #14 2M Immediately adja- cent to old land- slide Figure 17 -- will be changed to reflect all water storage facilities Page 141, paragraph 1, sentence 1 . . .each of the seven water storage. . . . Page 141, paragraph 2, sentence 1 Feur-eE-tie Seven water storage facilities. . . . Page 157, paragraph 3, sentence 2 . . .service provided by the sheriff by reducing transit time and improving the level of supervision. Page 157, new paragraph following paragraph 3 During emergency situations, back-up assistance can be provided 11 utilizing add- t .onal Sheriff units normally assigned to nearby contract cities (Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Lomita) and unincorporated areas of the County. Page 164, policy 1 Promote the public education. . . . Page 164, policy 2 Prepare Adopt and enforce. . .construction eensiderat ers standards based upon specified levels of risk and hazard. Page 164, policies 3,4, & 5 -- delete Page 164, add policy under Law Enforcement Encourage cooperation among adjacent communities to ensure back-up law enforce- ment assistance in emergency situations. Page 164, policy 7 -- delete Page 164, policy 9 . . .site design and maintenance criteria. . . . Page 164, policy 10 Standardize-tie Implement reasonable house numbering and consistent street naming systems in Rancho Palos Verdes. (Move this policy to SAFETY POLICIES) Page 164, policy 11 Coordinate with the Eeunty Fire Department to determine. . . . Page 164, policy 13 Vigereisly-enferee Ensure that local. . .laws are enforced. Page 34, add policy Encourage study of and funding to preserve unusual flora and fauna. Page 165, policy 16 Enelerse-the-seppert-eE-the-Eetnty-Pine-Bepartment Encourage the availability of paramedic rescue service. squad-and--if-Eeend-aeeessary;-pre tete-t ie-establishment e€-adeUtienai-nits. Page 165, policy 17 Prepare;-aelept;-and Be prepared to. . . . Page 165, policy 19 . . .animals and should ensure-tie balanced the interest. . . . Page 186, (replacement) TABLE 13 Capacity Residential Acreage, by Density Developed Proposed Total % Total Density Range (ac. ) (ac.) (ac.) Residential 1 d.u./ 5 ac. -0- 80 80 1.5 - 1 d.u./acre 115 1,197 1,312 24.0 - 1-2 d.u./acre 1,049 137 1,186 21.7 2-3 d.u./acre 196 192 388 7.1 3-4 d.u./acre 2,200 55 2,255 41.2 4-6 d.u./acre 35 35 70 1.3 6-12 d.u./acre 120 20 140 2.5 12-22 d.u./acre* 40 -0- 40 .7 TOTAL: 3,755 1,716 5,471 100.0 TABLE 14 Capacity Residential Swelling Units, by Type Existing* Existing Proposed Proposed Total Total (d.u.) (%) (d.u.) (%) (d.u.) (%) Single-family 8,873 76.5 2,493 91.2 11,366 79.3 III Multi-family** 2,727 23.5 240 8.8 2,967 20.7 TOTAL: 11,600 100.0 2,733 100.0 14,333 100.0 * and under construction ** Defined as more than 6 d.u./ac. , regardless of type of ownership Page 187 (replacement) TABLE 15 Land Use Acreage Developed Undeveloped Total Acreage Acreage Acreage Natural Environment Areas 1,245 Urban Land Areas Residential 3,755 1,716 5,471 Commercial 85 65 150 Institutional 269 85 354 Recreational 220 360 580 Agricultural 40 40 Utility 32 32 TABLE 16 Projected New Residential Units and Population Units Undeveloped Generated Persons/ Density Ranges Acreage (at top of range) Unit* Population 1 d.u./5 acre 80 16 3.5 56 1 d.u./acre** 1,197 1,197 3.5 4,190 1-2 d.u./acre** 137 274 3.5 959 2-3 d.u./acre 192 576 3.5 2,016 3-4 d.u./acre 55 220 3.5 770 4-6 d.u./acre 35 210 3.0 630 6-12 d.u./acre 20 240 2.8 672 12-22 d.u./acre 0 0 2.6 0 TOTAL: 1,716 2,733 9,293 III * Based on estimates by Environmental Services Department ** These categories include acreage in the coastal and one other area designated for Specific Plan District, and therefore subject to change in residential density and/ or land use. Page 202, table Heading -- Upper-Level General Plan Range Page 203, table ewe NIKE (rifle range) Page 204, paragraph 2 . . .the City has eemmitted-itself initiated steps to the purchase of two surplus. . . . Page 205, paragraph 3, add sentence . . .per acre basis. These are assumed costs for comparison purposes only. Page 206, paragraph 7, sentence 1 . . .use would require am dedication or expenditure. Page 211, Table 18 POTENTIAL EXPENDITURES AT FULL DEVELOPMENT IN 1990 Under "Projection Factor" add (Population) . Base* A B C D (40,000) (43,970) (51,100) (57,220) (55,080) Footnote: *Base is defined as present population maintaining current effective service levels and commitments already made. Base population was estimated at 40,000 when this study was completed. Page 212, Table 19 Total Tax Rate Increase/$100 AV Page 213, paragraph 3, sentence 5 . . .contract to contract with a public Or private ergarizatiea agencies. Page 213, paragraph 3, last sentence . . . Police and Fire, and Recreation. Page 219, paragraph 3, sentence 1 . . .work better if bemuses-aid incentives. . . . Page 220, paragraph 1, last sentence -- delete An even further extension. . . . Page 130, policy 1 . . .designed to 1,imit control non-local traffic. Page 131, policy 11 Further investigate eutside possible funding sources for acquisition, development. . . . Page 33, policy 1 -- delete -- replace with the followina policies -Permit development within the Sea Cliff Erosion Area (RM 1) only if demon- strated, through detailed geologic analysis, that the design and setbacks are adequate to insure public safety and to maintain physical, biologic, and scenic resources. Due to the sensitive nature of RM 1, this area is included as an integral part of a Specific Plan Distric and should be more fully defined. -Allow only low intensity activities within Resource Management Districts of extreme slopes (RM 2) . -Require any development within the Resource Management Districts of high slopes (RM 3) and old landslide area (RM 5) to perform at least one, and preferably two, independent engineering studies concerning the geo-technical, soils, and other stability factors (including seismic considerations) affecting the site. -Allow no further development involving any human occupancy within the active landslide area (RM 4) . -Prohibit activities which create excessive silt, pollutant run-off, increase canyon-wall erosion, or potential for landslide, within Resource Manage- ment Districts containing Hydrologic Factors (RM 6) . -Encourage establishment of the rocky intertidal areas as a marine reserve and strict enforcement be applied to all regulations concerning marine resources (Resource Management Districts containing Marine Resources RM 7) . -Encourage developments within or adjacent to wildlife habitats (RM 8) to describe the nature of the impact upon the wildlife habitat and provide mitigation measures to fully offset the impact. -Encourage developments within Resource, Management Districts containing Natural Vegetation (RM 9) to revegetate with native material wherever clearing of vegetation is required. Page 56, paragraph 1, sentence 1 change $70,000 to $75,000