CC SR 20161018 05 - Ladera Linda Park Master PlanRANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 10/18/2016
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to receive and file an update on the status of Master
Plan process for Ladera Linda Park.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Receive and file the report.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Matt Waters, Senior Administrative Analyst
REVIEWED BY: Cory Linder, Director of Recreation & Parks r (for Cory Linder)
APPROVED BY: Doug Willmore, City Manager".-"/:"_'
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. September 22, 2016, Ladera Linda Public Workshop Powerpoint (page
A-1)
B. Public Emails regarding Ladera Linda Park Master Plan September 20 -
October 7, 2016 (page B-1)
C. September 22, 2016, Ladera Linda Public Workshop Agenda
http://ca-ranchopalosverdes.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/8939
D. Ladera Linda Usage 2015 Spreadsheet
http://ca-ranchopalosverdes.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/9025
E. Professional Service Agreement with Richard Fisher Associates (RFA)
http://ca-ranchopalosverdes.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/8902
F. June 6, 2016, Ladera Linda Master Plan Professional Services Agreement
Staff Report
http://ca-ranchopalosverdes.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/8703
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
Ladera Linda Park has served the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes well since its
opening in 1983, following a long tenure as an elementary school. Generations of
residents and visitors enjoyed the site both as a school and as a park and community
center. However, the pre -fabricated buildings and infrastructure of this community jewel
have fallen into poor condition over the years. A 2013 Infrastructure Report Card
1
prepared by SA Associates, an engineering firm hired to assess the current condition of
existing public structures in the City, noted that the Ladera Linda Community Center
received an overall infrastructure score of "F" (FAIL). Attendees at two Ladera Linda
public workshops in 2014 and 2015 (part of the Parks Master Plan Update process),
expressed strong support for a new community center at Ladera Linda.
On September 1, 2015, the City Council directed Staff to issue a Request for Proposals
(RFP) for the Ladera Linda Park Master Plan. Demolition of the existing buildings and
the building of a new community center at Ladera Linda were part of the scope of the
Parks Master Plan Update that was approved by City Council on October 6, 2015. On
October 19, 2015, Staff issued RFPs to design firms for the creation of a Ladera Linda
Parks Master Plan. Richard Fisher Associates (RFA), a firm that has completed well
over a hundred park master plan and development projects, was selected by the City
Council on June 6, 2016.
The project schedule to develop the Master Plan is slated for completion within thirty-
four (34) weeks. Following formal approval of the project, RFA began work on the
Master Plan in early September 2016. Since that time, RFA has met with Staff,
conducted preliminary site and document research, held several site visits, met with a
variety of interested parties and other users of the facility, and co -hosted a community
workshop at Ladera Linda on September 22, 2016, which was attended by over 80
people. A number of concerns about the process and the Master Plan project have
been raised, both at that workshop and especially in subsequent emails. The City
Council requested that this item be brought back at a subsequent meeting to receive an
update on its status.
Adherence to City Council's "Less is More" Guidance
The City Council emphasized the importance of a "less is more" approach to Park
Planning during the Parks Master Plan Update process which was approved in October
2015. Thus, the recommendations in the Parks Master Plan for a new Ladera Linda
Community Center mirrors current uses on site. Large-scale recreation elements such
as a pool, gym, dog park and skate park were not included, and are certainly not being
considered by Staff or RFA. This was emphasized by Staff and RFA at the public
workshop. No designs have been created yet as RFA is still in an information gathering
phase, but Staff has emphasized the "less is more" philosophy with RFA from the very
start of the process. No elements that were opposed by the community during the
Parks Master Plan process were proposed to RFA to be included in the draft plans and
the project's scope has not increased in any way.
Below are the Parks Master Plan recommendations for Ladera Linda that Staff is
adhering to:
2
2015 PARK MASTER PLAN UPDATE RECOMMENDATIONS
Development of New Community Center
• Develop facilitated Master Plan and public outreach process for development of new
Ladera Linda Park Community Center.
• Incorporate expanded Nature Center/Preserve Annex and Sheriff/Ranger drop-in
office into Master Plan Process
• Upon completion of Master Plan Process, proceed with demolition of existing
buildings and construction of new Community Center
Additional Enhancements: Recommendations below should be done in
conjunction with Community Center development
• Pave access road between lower and middle parking lots
• Improve landscaping on existing multi -use playing field
• Upgrade surfacing of current asphalt play area: keep two basketball courts
• Transition to drought -tolerant landscaping where feasible
• Install interior paddle tennis fencing separating the two courts
• Replace current railroad tie stairs with concrete stairs
Staff is currently following up on City Council's approved recommendations, which were
the product of extensive community outreach during the Parks Master Plan. The
recommendations on what to include (and what not to include) were strongly influenced
by resident feedback received via survey, emails and workshops. RFA is following the
terms and project benchmarks and deliverables that are included in the Professional
Service Agreement that was approved by the City Council in June 2016.
Rebuilding is the Preferred Option
As previously mentioned, the 2013 Infrastructure Assessment gave all five buildings at
Ladera Linda Community Center an F grade, the lowest score possible. Only two other
City -owned buildings received an F grade, both maintenance outbuildings at City Hall.
The report notes that Ladera Linda buildings are prefabricated, assembled on-site,
interlocking metallic panel construction structures built in the 1960s. The report notes
that "maintenance is no longer effective", the buildings are "seismically questionable",
"not ADA compliant", with "no ventilation and no operating heating/cooling system", "no
sprinkler system", and notes the buildings are not energy efficient based on thermal
infrared testing. The report also references concerns about lead-based paint and the
presence of asbestos in floor and ceiling tiles and other building materials. The report
includes the following recommendation for four of the five buildings:
Recommendation: (1) Given the potential costs associated with
renovation, the cost of maintenance, and the fact that the building is an
energy hog, a new facility might be a better investment. (2) The
remediation of the building is unreasonable for the overall Return on
Investment. (3) For the time being, at a minimum, seismic retrofitting
should be considered.
9
For the fifth building, which consists of a classroom, two restrooms, and a janitors'
closet, the report recommends a seismic retrofitting along with renovation of the existing
restrooms "at a minimum." Based on that analysis, Staff recommended that the
buildings be demolished and rebuilt in the Parks Master Plan Update that Council
approved in 2015.
Project Size
Establishing the current and desired uses is the key first step in determining square
footage. Thanks to extensive public involvement, key park elements have already been
recommended. In more information gathering just last week, which included a review of
the original construction blueprints, Staff discovered that Ladera Linda's current five -
building footprint is approximately 13,500 square feet (SF), not 18,000 SF as was
originally thought. Including the square footage from a number of storage sheds and
storage containers on-site raises the total current square footage up to approximately
15,000 SF. It is also important to note that the design of the current buildings is for an
elementary school layout, not a community center. Most community centers are one or
two buildings at the most, which greatly reduces the overall footprint and allows for
greater security and controlled access. Since RFA has not yet created their two design
alternatives, precise square footage totals are not available, but they should be
significantly less than the existing square footage. Reducing the number of rooms and
consolidating/reducing the storage will help reduce the overall footprint of the project.
It is not within Staff's authority to arbitrarily set a limit on the square footage of the new
building(s) at this stage, as has been suggested by a few. While the new designs will
likely come in far under the existing square footage, it is not within Staff's authority to
direct the designer to an arbitrary size specified by Staff. The size will be determined by
the uses that the community has said that they wanted, and that the Council ultimately
approves. When the design alternatives come back, the community will have an
opportunity to once again weigh in, and the City Council ultimately approves whatever
moves forward.
Staffing Levels
Ladera Linda is currently staffed by one part-time Staff member per shift who is
overseen by a full-time Recreation Supervisor. The new building would likely increase
staffing to two part-time Staff per shift with one full-time Supervisor. This is comparable
to staffing levels at Hesse Park and PVIC. A mix of 2-3 Sheriff's personnel and 6-7
Open Space Management Staff would only use their office for periodic drop-in use,
since the vast majority of their time will be spent performing public safety monitoring in
the Preserve. Open Space Staff and the Sheriff's Preserve deputies are already using
existing office space for a drop-in office. Several docents might stop by occasionally to
lead a tour of the Discovery/Nature Center room or work on artifacts, just as they do
now.
al
Project Funding
The 2015-16 Capital Improvement Plan estimated $7.2 million for design, demolition,
and construction. This was based on a 12,000 square foot building size. This estimate
includes many of the elements being discussed currently: restrooms, multi-purpose
room, classrooms, landscaping, irrigation, a Discovery/Nature Center room, and an
Open Space Staff/Sheriff drop-in office. However, it is a very generous estimate of a
building sized larger than will likely be designed, proposed, and ultimately approved.
Updated cost estimates will be developed and presented to the community and Council
as part of the Master Plan process.
Examining Alternative Storage Locations
Because of its many classrooms, Ladera Linda has been used as an informal storage
and workplace area for many years by groups such as Las Candalistas and the Los
Serenos Docents. While it does make sense to store PVIC-related artifacts at PVIC,
there is no available storage in the existing PVIC building, and expanding that building
for additional storage would be an expensive, multi-year process, particularly given the
fact that PVIC is located within the Coastal Zone. The Docents have requested
continued use of storage space at Ladera Linda, but building expensive new space for
storage would be just as expensive at Ladera Linda as it would be at PVIC. Staff is
exploring other storage options. It doesn't makes sense to build new space at Ladera
Linda to store items from other sites. The Upper Point Vicente Park/Civic Center is in
the early stages of its own Master Plan process. Large-scale elements that have been
eliminated from consideration at Ladera Linda (gym, pool, etc.) could be considered for
that location if residents and the Council wish.
Outreach Efforts to Interested Groups
Several workshop attendees and subsequent emails questioned why staff and RFA
would take the time to meet with other stakeholders, noting that the only "stakeholders"
who should have input are HOAs that are adjacent or near to Ladera Linda. Staff
regrets that the word "stakeholder" was taken to mean that these groups had a vote on
what is eventually built at Ladera Linda.
The only group with a vote on the Ladera Linda Master Plan is the City Council. That
said, Staff and RFA want to hear from as many community voices as possible,
particularly local residents. The input and involvement of HOA's, local residents and the
RPV community is of the utmost importance in the Ladera Linda Park Master Plan.
Reaching out to interested and involved parties is an accepted best practice in park
planning and design projects as part of the information gathering phase. This allows
Staff and RFA to ascertain and verify what the current use levels are at the site and to
identify any particular issues and concerns that should be taken into account early in the
planning process. For example, if the community and Council chooses to continue
YMCA programs for our youth at Ladera Linda, we would want to know the space
5
requirements for doing so. And, certainly, given the concerns raised by residents about
vandalism, traffic, graffiti and crime, we felt it was of vital importance to reach out to the
Lomita Sheriff's Department as early as possible in the process for input on how to
ensure that the future park was designed in the safest manner possible and to get their
input on possible space needs and/requests that could improve our ability to provide
public safety.
Level of Activity
While no one has a crystal ball to predict exact usage levels many years down the road,
steps have been taken to keep the types of use and the amounts very similar to current
levels. Ladera Linda has been a community park since 1983 and will continue to be so.
Below are some steps being taken to ensure that the Master Plan process is in line with
Council's direction to be respectful of park impacts on adjacent neighbors while
maintaining a low-key, community feel.
First, as mentioned before, the Master Plan will have no significant added elements: no
pool, gym, skate park, or dog park. Second, there will be a smaller community center
footprint than currently exists, which will allow for more green space and safe areas for
children to play outside. A nature center and Sheriff and Open Space Management
drop-in office are already on site and are being considered for the new site. Pending
Council approval, there will likely still be classes, HOA meetings, summer camps and
paddle tennis at Ladera Linda.
Third, park policies will be created as part of this process to effectively manage the type
and number of events that are allowed, as well as hours and noise levels. These
policies will be created with extensive feedback from local residents who are both most
knowledgeable of and most affected by park usage.
September 22nd Workshop PowerPoint
RFA's PowerPoint listed only existing elements at the park site. One slide listed "review
of current uses" while two other slides had columns for elements that are "currently on
site" and for "new master plan." The New Master Plan sections did not list any new
elements. It was intentionally left blank because those uses had not been decided.
(Attachment A, slides 17-21)
Timeline
Staff and RFA are following a 34 -week Master Plan time frame that was approved by
City Council.
Site Dimensions/Layout
No determinations have been made about the dimensions, footprint or number of
stories. This process will result in alternatives regarding those specifics that residents
Al
•
and the City Council will be able to consider. RFA is still in an information -gathering
phase and there are no conceptual designs at this time. RFA did discuss the possibility
of a two-story concept during several stakeholder meetings, but, again, no design
decisions have been made. If a two-story building is put forward as an option, it would
not mean a doubling of the square footage, but would actually reduce the building's
overall footprint, e.g., a 10,000 SF facility would potentially only have a 5,000 SF
footprint if it were two stories.
Parking, Preserve, Traffic, the Forrestal gate and Upper Soccer fields
Numerous excellent points were raised both during the September 22nd workshop and
the user meetings about the design challenges caused by the proximity to the Palos
Verdes Nature Preserve, traffic patterns, and the impact of the adjacent upper soccer
fields. RFA and Staff are well aware of these concerns and will be working on creative
and effective design solutions. Staff has promised to coordinate usage with AYSO and
the School District to mitigate parking and traffic impact during their busiest times.
Role of the Consultant
RFA was selected by the City Council on June 6, 2016, at a cost of $93,700 with an
additional not -to -exceed amount of $10,000 for reimbursable expenses. The services of
a professional design consultant is crucial in a project of this magnitude and community
importance. This is a design project, which necessitated that a professional designer be
hired. The level of attention and involvement from the community, combined with the
proximity of residences and the Forrestal Reserve, the grade differentials of the site's
multiple levels, and the complexity and number of elements on the site combine to
make the hiring of a consultant with over 40 years of experience a prudent investment.
It is important to note that RFA is facilitating, not directing the project. The final
decisions regarding RFA's design options will be up to City Council.
7
41:
N
Q
I
I
I
I
ti
Q
0
4-+
r
L
x
W
a"'
0 CL
u [4
mCL
~
0
J �
J
ii
3
CL
L
fno
■
-I�
0
SU
0
CJ
0
Al
6.
r13
■
z
0
1
Vil
o
CL
na
4
u u
En
z
4-1
A
aic
6.
6.
w
-I�
/
0
j0z
CY
■
0
1
o
En
4-1
d,
71
` QCY
#
k
kp
O
0
�
0
0
�
£
�
2
/
t
�
Q
CL
x
LU
�
�
Q
c
.0
.CL
0
0
z
0
4-J
�
O
CL
CL
:3
un
4-J
r_
O
0
�
O
CL
CL
:3
(A
0
�
�
0
O
.E
)
�CL
U
0
O
z
-
�
� :
j
4-J
_
0
< /
CL
:5
E
L/)
\
�
L
g
�
ƒLA
�
F-
0
?
\ \
\
q
/ 0
CL
j §
CL
_
�
�
t E
\
E
j
U
O
0
�
0
0
�
£
�
2
/
t
�
Q
CL
x
LU
�
�
Q
c
.0
.CL
0
0
z
0
4-J
�
O
CL
CL
:3
un
4-J
r_
O
0
�
O
CL
CL
:3
(A
0
N
i
Q
U
Y
C
M
m
rn
cc
cc
-4
m
rn
-4
-4
-4
rl-
cc
d'
n
o
—4
�D
co
o
rl
�D
m
rn
rn
—4
a
a
0
a
n
m
m
a
m
m
m
m
V
L
Ln
rl-
00m
rn
m
-4
-4
-4
-
c
d
ci
C
O
M
Ln
rl
N
N
—4
m
d-
V
a
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
d
rl
N
cc
—4
Ln
N
N
rl
m
N
!-I
rl
M
cc
to
—4
4cc
O
rl-
cc
cc
to
cc
rl
O
N
m
I�t
Lo
I
I n
I
r-
�
m
m
Ln
111
m
Ln
Ln
i�
V7
i�
-4
-4
-4
N
u
Co
❑
N
n
Ln
x
C
-
m
V3
Q
Z
D]
O
0
Q]
113
LL
d
t
d
U
Ln
ra
L.7
Y
7
d'
rp
C
LL
4]
C
fC
2
CV
E
•j
m
4]onm
O
06
C10
D]
Q
O
d
m
d
C
J[0
d
Z
Z
N
i
Q
c -I m Ln 0) I- 00 N IZT IZT m l0 lzt IZT
c-1
I-
N
N
ci
r -I
O
N
01
M
c -I
0)
m
'
I,
N Cy)
'
/�
m
E
O
Ov
CL
LL
4a
U
(AIi'
O
'
M
W
Q.EV
u°
0
O
N
L
O
N
L
4-
u
a
O_
:3
O
�/�
YI
H
41
N
C
LL
L
a
O
V
V)
+1
U
O
CL
—
L
a
v
LL
N
a
V)
_0
0-
LI
~
f0
N
N
Y
U
Vf
b0
C:
L
O
LL
Ln O
I- O
r I
d
O
�
d
-0Lfv
++
—
Q
v
O
O
O
~
a
H
Ln
w
Q
a
N
O
>
O
D
W
N
m
L
N
Y
L
c
t
N
c
.,
-i
LL
O
O
Sai
O
H
c6
—
Ln
a
aro
C
L
/�
(A
L
.�
ro
�
V
U
W
y�CL
j
co
O
Y
v
v
CO
O
a
+s+
C
O
a
4-1
N
CC
W
=
V)
d
S
V)
m
0_
CO
0
W
01
O
Ln
W
J
c -I m Ln 0) I- 00 N IZT IZT m l0 lzt IZT
c-1
4-1
N
A�
W
E
O
Ov
CL
LL
4a
U
(AIi'
O
'
M
W
Q.EV
u°
0
c -I m Ln 0) I- 00 N IZT IZT m l0 lzt IZT
c-1
N
O
L
O_
C
O
Z
L
O
Ln O
I- O
r I
O
Ln
i -I
N
t
+�
Y
�
d
a
uE
Ln C
u
a
d
++
—
Q
v
O
O
O
~
a
H
Ln
w
Q
a
N
O
>
O
D
O
"
4.1
N
N
u
foa
L.L.
ba0
m
Ln
L
0
m
LO
O
N
LO
i
Q
ti
i
Q
I
I
I
V -
CN
Q
CS)
w
�
�
w
»
cn
0
a.
O
x
u
J
�
CL
�
�
cn
�
�
�
�
�
CL
r -
z
�
�
Z¥■ter
=u�cz==
iE
x
���==�Q
=>w<K¥
c
E §
n >= u
>
Q
_§L§/k
2Z§ ZW Z
§
CL 2
>§§ /CL/ -
& >
§Z CL0§§
uj2.uj
§ z
_ =§$u
c §
¥
cG
\§§
CL
. _
) �
§
�§
w §
(n
CL [
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 5:35 PM
To: 'erstevens@cox.net'; Mona Dill; Ken Dyda; Jerry Duhovic
Cc: R. Gene Dewey; Emeric Rodich (mickeyrodich ; sharon yarber; Sharon and Bill Schurmer;
Gary and Shirley Kinnett; George Fink; Joyce; Tom Karen Smith; 'Ruthann Rodich'; Erika
Barber; Cory Linder; Doug Willmore; Gabriella Yap; Daniel Trautner
Subject: RE: Ladera Linda Park Master plan 09/22/16
Dear Mr. Stevens,
Thank you for your email about the Ladera Linda Park Master Plan and Thursday's Public Workshop. The Parks Master
Plan Update approved by the City Council on October 6, 2015 did not recommend either a gymnasium or swimming pool
for Ladera Linda. This decision followed two Ladera Linda workshops in 2014-2015 where there was significant
opposition to either a gym or pool. Staff and our consultant, Richard Fisher Associates are looking to the community for
site specific direction and input on a new community center and its size, location, landscaping and aesthetics, we are not
recommending either a gymnasium or a pool at Ladera Linda. This falls in line with resident feedback received to date
and the Council's "less is more" philosophy on park projects.
I welcome and encourage you to attend Thursday's meeting at Ladera Linda from 6-8pm. Please feel free to contact me
with any additional questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattes rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
From: erstevens@cox.net [mailto:erstevens@cox.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 5:03 PM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>; Ken Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Jerry
Duhovic <JerryD@rpvca.gov>
Cc: R. Gene Dewey <rgdewey@cox.net>; Emeric Rodich (mickeyrodich <mickeyrodich@yahoo.com>; sharon yarber
<momofyago@gmail.com>; Sharon and Bill Schurmer <sbschurm@yahoo.com>; Gary and Shirley Kinnett
<gandskinnett@cox.net>; George Fink <gfinkll@cox.net>; Joyce <jfinkcentral@cox.net>; Tom Karen Smith
<thomash.smith@gmail.com>; 'Ruthann Rodich' <ruthannrodich@cox.net>; Erika Barber <nbarber310@cox.net>
Subject: Ladera Linda Park Master plan 09/22/16
As
Attention Matt Waters & Mona Dill,
Subject: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan meeting 09/22/16
It has been brought to my attention that the City of RVP is resurrecting the idea of having a full service gymnasium
facility and pool on the old Ladera Linda Elementary site. This is a very expensive proposition that should be evaluated
from every angle and needs to not only have the support of the local community but the on-going financial support of
City of RPV including capital funds, maintenance funds, and staffing to make this kind of project a reality; while
realistically looking at all the shortcomings to determine if this project should even be considered.
First, this property is owned by the PVUSD and unless it has been shifted to the City of RPV it would require some form
of a joint use agreement and would mean that both parties would have to agree on the use and maintenance of said
facility as well as who would take on the full liability if someone was injured on the property. Furthermore, there is the
question of the tear -down and construction and who would have priority of use... ie the public, the school district, the
city, and or its residents. Then there is the issue of all the other PVUSD sites with gyms and recreation facilities are these
under or over utilized and would it make sense to have another site so close to the Miraleste Intermediate campus
which already has a gymnasium and pool. Is our population growing on the hill or is it in a steady state. Some research
would have to demonstrate demand for the project and would need to out way some of the more negative factors ( ie
cost, insurance, staffing, maintenance, etc). As it stands now just making observations at the many school sites and
parks throughout the city we are not at capacity nor do we need any other facility to create more financial burdens for
the city.
Second, there is the question regarding staffing. As it is the city of RPV's role to hire and manage the parks and
recreation staff that would be true of this proposed facility. This site would require more full-time staff than any other
location throughout the recreation and parks sites. This means this site would require additional funding and new
positions that do not already exist such as life guard, security guard, grounds supervisor. In addition, because this
construction would come under the new "green building" requirements required by California the city would need to
hire someone in maintenance who was privy to the regulations and cleaning requirements to maintain the "green"
building properly. Can the city take on additional staff to perform these important functions?
Finally, this undertaking requires a new set of policies and procedures, joint -use agreement between the City and
Unified School District, and security to make sure that the residents have priority of use rather than those from
surrounding areas who might become users. Will there be a fee for use to maintain the facility? How will the facility be
paid for in the first place? Will there be enough parking? What about night use? Will this mean there will be security to
protect the facility from vandals, non-residents, and those not using it correctly?
This is a very complicated project that requires more than a vote of interest here. We deserve to know:
How much it will initial cost to tear down, to build, and to maintain? Who will oversee the use of the facility and who has
priority of use? Will this site have lights that will disrupt the surrounding neighborhoods with added traffic, noise, and
lights beyond the normal daylight hours? How much use do our current parks get and do we need a facility like this with
our current high schools all having gyms and pools including Miraleste Intermediate School. There are so many
questions here that need answers and the first and foremost is what is the utilization rate of our current parks and how
can we update Ladera Linda to make it more serviceable then to create a giant focal point without investigating its
impacts.
MAN
I would also like to bring to your attention at the present time the City does not have funds to pave the parking
area next to the paddle tennis courts or the staff to clean the courts a few time a week from all the dust, sand,
Pebbles & leaves. I have also requested more fuel modification be done to protect the neighborhoods of Ladera
Linda & Seaview from the possible fire danger to both neighborhoods & again the City is over budget. Yet the
staff has the funds to hire a consultant & to waste their time & the resident's time, when this was put to rest last
year @a the City Council meeting that the residents were not interested.
Sincerely
Edward Stevens
32418 Conqueror Dr.
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 2:56 PM
To: Cory Linder
Cc: Daniel Trautner
Subject: FW: FYI - : Ladera Linda Park Master plan 09/22/16
Attachments: Ladera Linda 09.22.16 jpg
FYI
From: erstevens@cox.net [mailto:erstevens@cox.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 2:54 PM
To: Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: FYI - : Ladera Linda Park Master plan 09/22/16
Dear Doug,
Approximately 65 — 75% of the local neighbors that I have spoken to are happy with the existing facilities that could last
another 25 — 50 years with some cosmetic repair. (The money spent on the consultant would have been better spent on
the cosmetic repairs.) The asbestos in the buildings could be encapsulated & not be any danger to anyone.
The Neighbors do not think or want a new community center that eventually leads to the upgrade in the future of the
gymnasium and pool. We live in a nice quiet neighborhood & do not need to attract more outside visitors. A new
community center would be better at Hesse park or the large Ryan park. We already attract a lot of outside visitors to
the soccer fields that are now causing a lot of problems for the City & the School district & we do not need more
problems with a community center. This problem will eventually cost the City & the School District a ton of money that
they do not have the extra funds to take care of. The Soccer fields will be a huge drain for everyone- what a total waste
of time & money that may now drag on for years.
There is very limited parking or space to enlarge the parking area as you will see at the meeting when all the Neighbors
try to find a place to park.
As I stated in my original email.
I would also like to bring to your attention at the present time the City does not have funds to pave the parking
area next to the paddle tennis courts or the staff to clean the courts a few time a week from all the dust, sand,
Pebbles & leaves. I have also requested more fuel modification be done to protect the neighborhoods of Ladera
Linda & Seaview from the possible fire danger to both neighborhoods & again the City is over budget. Yet the
staff has the funds to hire a consultant & to waste their time & the resident's time, when this was put to rest last
year @ the City Council meeting that the residents were not interested.
Hope to see you at the meeting
Edward Stevens
From: Doug Willmore fmailto:DWillmore(?i)rpvca.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:05 PM
To: erstevensC«@cox.net
Cc: CC
Subject: Re: FYI - : Ladera Linda Park Master plan 09/22/16
Mr. Stevens,
LTJ
Thank you for your email. Unfortunately, you have been misinformed or are mistaken. There is no discussion or effort by
anyone employed or contracted by the City to construct a gymnasium and/or pool at Ladera Linda. The planning process
is directly in line with the input that residents have given to staff and Council in the past.
Please continue to stay involved - we value your input.
Doug
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 20, 2016, at 5:36 PM, "erstevens@cox.net" <erstevens@cox.net> wrote:
From: erstevensC@cox.net [mailto:erstevens(a)cox.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 5:03 PM
To: mattw@rpvca.gov; monadC@rpvca.gov; ken.dyda(&rpvca.gov; jerry.duhovic@rpvca.gov
Cc: R. Gene Dewey; Emeric Rodich (mickeyrodich ; sharon yarber; Sharon and Bill Schurmer; Gary and
Shirley Kinnett; George Fink; Joyce; Tom Karen Smith; 'Ruthann Rodich'; Erika Barber
Subject: Ladera Linda Park Master plan 09/22/16
Attention Matt Waters & Mona Dill,
Subject: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan meeting 09/22/16
It has been brought to my attention that the City of RVP is resurrecting the idea of having a full service
gymnasium facility and pool on the old Ladera Linda Elementary site. This is a very expensive proposition
that should be evaluated from every angle and needs to not only have the support of the local
community but the on-going financial support of City of RPV including capital funds, maintenance funds,
and staffing to make this kind of project a reality; while realistically looking at all the shortcomings to
determine if this project should even be considered.
First, this property is owned by the PVUSD and unless it has been shifted to the City of RPV it would
require some form of a joint use agreement and would mean that both parties would have to agree on
the use and maintenance of said facility as well as who would take on the full liability if someone was
injured on the property. Furthermore, there is the question of the tear -down and construction and who
would have priority of use... ie the public, the school district, the city, and or its residents. Then there is
the issue of all the other PVUSD sites with gyms and recreation facilities are these under or over utilized
and would it make sense to have another site so close to the Miraleste Intermediate campus which
already has a gymnasium and pool. Is our population growing on the hill or is it in a steady state. Some
research would have to demonstrate demand for the project and would need to out way some of the
more negative factors ( ie cost, insurance, staffing, maintenance, etc). As it stands now just making
observations at the many school sites and parks throughout the city we are not at capacity nor do we
need any other facility to create more financial burdens for the city.
Second, there is the question regarding staffing. As it is the city of RPV's role to hire and manage the
parks and recreation staff that would be true of this proposed facility. This site would require more full-
time staff than any other location throughout the recreation and parks sites. This means this site would
require additional funding and new positions that do not already exist such as life guard, security guard,
grounds supervisor. In addition, because this construction would come under the new "green building"
requirements required by California the city would need to hire someone in maintenance who was privy
to the regulations and cleaning requirements to maintain the "green" building properly. Can the city
take on additional staff to perform these important functions?
Finally, this undertaking requires a new set of policies and procedures, joint -use agreement between the
City and Unified School District, and security to make sure that the residents have priority of use rather
than those from surrounding areas who might become users. Will there be a fee for use to maintain the
facility? How will the facility be paid for in the first place? Will there be enough parking? What about
night use? Will this mean there will be security to protect the facility from vandals, non-residents, and
those not using it correctly?
This is a very complicated project that requires more than a vote of interest here. We deserve to know:
How much it will initial cost to tear down, to build, and to maintain? Who will oversee the use of the
facility and who has priority of use? Will this site have lights that will disrupt the surrounding
neighborhoods with added traffic, noise, and lights beyond the normal daylight hours? How much use
do our current parks get and do we need a facility like this with our current high schools all having gyms
and pools including Miraleste Intermediate School. There are so many questions here that need answers
and the first and foremost is what is the utilization rate of our current parks and how can we update
Ladera Linda to make it more serviceable then to create a giant focal point without investigating its
impacts.
I would also like to bring to your attention at the present time the City does not have funds to
pave the parking area next to the paddle tennis courts or the staff to clean the courts a few time a
week from all the dust, sand, Pebbles & leaves. I have also requested more fuel modification be
done to protect the neighborhoods of Ladera Linda & Seaview from the possible fire danger to
both neighborhoods & again the City is over budget. Yet the staff has the funds to hire a
consultant & to waste their time & the resident's time, when this was put to rest last year @ the
City Council meeting that the residents were not interested.
Sincerely
Edward Stevens
32418 Conqueror Dr.
<Ladera Linda (3).pdf>
M
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 1:21 PM
To: 'Gary Randall'
Cc: Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; Ron Dragoo; James Flannigan; Mona Dill
Subject: RE: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan Public Workshop 9/22/2016
Hi Gary,
I thought a lot of good questions and issues were raised last night and I really appreciate so many members of the
community getting involved; it makes for a better process.
Enjoy the weekend,
Matt
From: Gary Randall [mailto:grapecon@cox.netj
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 12:31 PM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>; Daniel Trautner <DanielT@rpvca.gov>; Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>; James
Flannigan <JamesF@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan Public Workshop 9/22/2016
Thanks, Matt. These are always tough meetings, any time you get 100 people in a room there will be 100 different
opinions, you get the lucky job of trying to sort all that out O There are some big challenges to work on here, but I look
forward to continuing to be involved in the discussions toward a successful outcome.
I will certainly pass along your response to my wife's comments.
Have a great weekend!
From: Matt Waters [ma iIto: MattWO)rpvca.gov]
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 10:54 AM
To: Gary Randall
Cc: Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; Ron Dragoo; James Flannigan; Mona Dill
Subject: RE: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan Public Workshop 9/22/2016
Hi Gary,
Thanks for coming to last night's meeting and for voicing your concerns and opinions both personally and to the whole
group. Thanks also for your follow-up emails sent this morning. I'll be reviewing the issue you raised including parking,
input from stakeholders and HOAs, storage, and the timing of the project with our team next week. We will certainly
follow up on our pledge to post detailed information about current usage at LL on the City's website within a week or
two at the latest.
Also, I appreciate you sharing the information about the large hike that took place this morning. That is a perfect
example of the type of large, unapproved usage that we are trying to address throughout the City's parks and nature
areas
Finally, below is a response to your wife's email:
Hi Teresa,
Thank you for contacting us with your thoughts on the appropriateness on contacting stakeholders during the early
stages of the Master Plan process. Several attendees at last night's meeting raised similar concerns. I absolutely agree
that the voice and opinions of residents and Ladera Linda neighbors are of primary importance in this process. That was
a point that staff and our consultant repeatedly emphasized last night. Resident opinions about elements such as a
gymnasium, pool, and dog park were heard loud and clear during the 2014 and 2015 public workshops and those
elements have been removed from consideration. The Council -approved Parks Master Plan spells out that impact on
park -adjacent residents and maintaining a low-key community feel is vital to any future park projects.
I respectfully share our consultant's belief that it is important to receive information early on from a wide range of
interested parties and groups who are currently using the facility or will likely be using the eventual new facility. It
would be a planning failure to at least not reach out to groups such as the Sheriff, YMCA, Park instructors, Docents and
the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy to ascertain what their potential needs and concerns might be early on in
their process. This is a standard best practice in park planning projects.
That said, I would like to reiterate that the thoughts, feelings, and opinions of local residents is essential to the success
and viability of this project. I encourage you and other residents in the area to stay involved in this project and continue
to offer your input. Thank you again for your comments.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattes rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
Par
0
8e l
From: Gary Randall [mailto:grapecon@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 8:35 AM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>
Subject: FW: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan Public Workshop 9/22/2016
I am forwarding this note from my wife.....
B-11
Dear Gentleman,
I was just given a brief summary on tonight's meeting by my husband. I was extremely surprised to hear that
you are giving "stakeholders" input on Ladera Linda Park's Master Plan. The YMCA, the PVPUSD, nor any
LL Community Center Instructors (to name a few), should not have any say on what goes on here. They have
no stake in our community they come work then leave. We, the LL residents should be the only ones you
should be seeking input from, we live here and will have to put up with the increased traffic, parking issues, and
noise impacts on a daily basis (something we already deal with, but will increase). That being said I hope that
you give the residents that live in LL the highest weight in making decisions.
Thank you for your consideration,
Teresa R.
Sent from my personal secretary
B-12
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 10:56 AM
To: Daniel Trautner; Mona Dill; Ron Dragoo; James Flannigan
Cc: Cory Linder; Mary Hirsch
Subject: FW: Hike this morning
Attachments: IMG_4598.JPG; IMG_4596.JPG; IMG_4603.JPG
From: Gary Randall [mailto:grapecon@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 9:00 AM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>; Vlaco Jessica <jvlaco@yahoo.com>; ed hummel <ecarloshum@gmail.com>; Mickey
Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; 'Herb Stark' <herbertstark@cox.net>
Subject: Hike this morning
Hi Matt:
Attached is a good example of a large, organized group that came and completely filled the LL Community Center
Parking lot this morning at 7:15 a.m. (and parked a fair way down Forrestal). I estimated 50-60 hikers when they finally
all assembled and headed out, and it's not even Saturday morning! I think it will be extremely important for you,
working with the consultant, to come up with good, creative solutions to ensure parking at any new facility is reserved
for actual users of the facility, not for large groups going on hikes in the preserve. I also trust that, in this process, you
will be thinking about solutions to overflow parking onto Forrestal and onto Pirate, Phantom, and Sea Raven Drives.
I have suggested in the past that Pirate, Phantom, and Sea Raven should be considered for "parking by permit only"
restrictions, and that perhaps parking along Forrestal be limited to one side only (and perhaps have time limits on it, say
2 hours maximum). I think this discussion should be occurring now, regardless of any longer term project earmarked for
the community center and park. My views and ideas for a solution may not be exactly the same as other Ladera Linda
residents, but I think the majority of residents feel something needs to be done to improve the current situation.
I am not against the general public utilizing our beautiful parks and hiking trails — after all, these are public areas. I do
not think, however, that the city has any obligation to provide unlimited, or even large amounts, of parking, nor
encourage use of these areas thru social media. It's time to get this situation under control, and also develop some very
good plans for the future community center.
Thank you for your consideration. I do have some additional comments on last night's meeting, but will include those in
a separate email.
Gary
B-13
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 10:58 AM
To: Daniel Trautner; Mona Dill; Ron Dragoo; James Flannigan
Cc: Cory Linder; 'Richard Fisher'; Mary Hirsch
Subject: FW: Comments on Ladera Linda Master plan meeting 9/23
FYI
From: Gary Randall [mailto:grapecon@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 9:38 AM
To: Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>; Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Gene Dewey <rgdewey@cox.net>; Jerry
Duhovic <JerryD@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Comments on Ladera Linda Master plan meeting 9/23
Cory, Matt:
Thank you for a very informative meeting last night. I wrote a few comments on a comment card, but after thinking
about things last night, wanted to make a few more. My comments here are as a local individual resident, I do not
represent the LLHOA in general:
Primary input should come from the 4 local HOAs. Any input from groups who rent the facilities (YMCA,
classroom instructors, etc.) should carry very low weight. The goal of this facility should not be to generate
income from renting it out. Clearly defined rules about rental of the property should be spelled out in writing
and agreed upon by the city council, with resident input in the form of a public hearing, BEFORE any finalization
of plans for a community center
2. 1 am hoping in any proposal, clear definition, consideration, and solid solutions to parking will be considered,
taking into account:
a. Proximity to the reserves and hiking trails
b. Spillover parking into residential areas
Any staff report to the city council should devote a section to this topic. It is a big concern for residents.
3. Any areas designated for storage need to be clearly identified (for whom, for what purpose), and, should be
maintained as storage areas. Any change in usage in the future should be decided by the City Council in a duly
noticed public hearing.
4. As discussed, I am looking forward to some specific detail about current usage of the facilities, including days,
times, what groups, and amount of square feet, whether these groups pay rent or not, etc. It is very important
that the 4 local HOAs and residents know exactly what the current usage is. This critical information will help
the HOAs render informed feedback. I believe ultimately this will also be very important information to include
in a staff report going to the City Council, when it gets to that stage.
5. There seemed to be some eagerness on the part of the Parks Department to move relatively quickly on this
project.... conceptual work completed by next spring and "ribbon cutting" in about 2 years. I say there is no need
to rush .... if it takes a few months longer, with some additional community meetings showing interim or
preliminary concepts and thinking, then it is worth it. Going to the City Council with no additional community
meetings is, in my mind, a recipe for a disastrous and contentious City Council meeting.
6. Speaking of ribbon cutting, when we get to that point, please please please don't have some big deal event with
food trucks, beer and wine garden, social media publications, etc. etc. The residents do NOT want that! Keep
everything low key, including the opening of the park. If, after a couple of years of construction the park gate
simply starts getting unlocked for usage with no announcement at all, I would be completely happy with
that. Believe me, local residents will know about it without the city saying a word....
Regards
Gary Randall
B-15
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 1:44 PM
To: 'Gary Randall'
Cc: Cory Linder; Doug Willmore; 'Herb Stark'; Gene Dewey; Ron Dragoo; Mona Dill; Daniel
Trautner; Leslie Williamson; Mary Hirsch; Matt Waters
Subject: RE: Ladera Linda meeting tonight
Hi Gary,
Good to hear from you and thanks for your email. You raise a number of good points that will certainly be discussed
tonight. I also anticipate significant input from the audience, so our intent is to move quickly through our presentations,
so there'll be ample time for public discussion and questions.
The Powerpoint does broadly outline current uses at Hesse Park during the RFA section of the report (slides 20 and 21).
Ladera Linda currently hosts a wide range of ongoing classes, seasonal camps, a YMCA summer camp, community
meetings, workshops as well as drop in -sports and casual use. Besides classrooms of varying sizes and an MPR, Ladera
Linda also hosts a Discovery Room, and Sheriff/Open Space Management (Preserve Ranger) drop-in offices. Typically,
new community centers are not built with sufficient storage (e.g. Hesse and PVIC) which is an issue to consider early on
in this process. LL is also a designated American Red Cross Evacuation and General Shelter location as well.
Now you are certainly correct that all 18,000 sq feet of LL is likely not ever used at the same time. Based on community
input that has already been received, along with input from tonight's workshop and the professional expertise of our
consultant, it is likely that the two alternative designs will be less than the current 18,000 square feet. That size (and
layout) was intended for an elementary school, not a park and community center. 18,000 is listed as a maximum, not as
a target size. The identified elements of the site, along with topography and other factors, should drive the square
footage, not the other way around.
We will certainly discuss current usage in general terms tonight as you suggested and follow-up with more detail going
forward. Current usage may not be the best barometer given the condition of the facility, but it certainly is a factor
worth considering.
Hope that was helpful and I look forward to seeing you at tonight's meeting.
Take Care,
Matt
From: Gary Randall [mailto:grapecon@cox.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 11:13 AM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>; Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>; 'Herb Stark' <herbertstark@cox.net>;
Gene Dewey <rgdewey@cox.net>
Subject: Ladera Linda meeting tonight
Hi Matt:
I am looking forward to tonight's meeting regarding the master plan for the Ladera Linda Community Center. Thank
you, also, for publishing the Powerpoint presentation ahead of that meeting.
In looking thru the Powerpoint presentation, I did not see any information about current actual usage of the 18,000
square foot community center in its current state. Perhaps I missed it — it I did, please let me know where that
information is in the reports.
Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much of, and how often, the current 18,000 square foot is being
utilized. Do YMCA day camps use all of the classrooms? Do Fall/Spring rec classes use all of the 18,000 square feet? If
the entire 18,000 square feet is not currently being utilized, or only utilized on very rare occasions, I would think that
would be important information to present so that those in attendance can make informed comments about their
wishes and input for the size of any new community center. For instance, if only 5000 square feet is being utilized, I
would likely be in favor of a community center that has similar square footage to what is currently being utilized (i.e.
5000 square feet), and likely not in favor of an 18,000 square foot facility. Of course, this is just an example, but I think
you can appreciate how current usage information is very important to the residents making informed comments.
I realize this is late input, and that it might be difficult to present specific numbers at tonight's meeting. If you cannot
present specific numbers and statistics, could you at least do the following:
1. Perhaps generally comment on current usage, and commit to getting specific numbers put together in a specific
timeframe to help in the decision process
2. Commit to, once you have those details, provide the detail to at least everyone who signed in at the meeting
and gave an email address, and solicit their feedback based on that information when it is published?
Thank you for your consideration of this aspect.
I would anticipate a LOT of input from the audience tonight. I am very hopeful that you, Cory, and the consultant will be
given a chance by the audience to get through your presentations first, without interruption, and then that you would
allow a generous amount of time for audience comments. You might even start your presentations by asking the
audience to hold all questions and comments until the end of the presentation and that there will be ample time for
discussion after the presentations.
Again, I look forward to seeing you at tonight's meeting.
Regards
Gary Randall
B-17
Matt Waters
From: edmundo hummel <ecarloshum@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 1:44 PM
To: Matt Waters
Subject: Re: Hike this morning
Thanks Matt!
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Matt Waters <MattW e rpvca.gov> wrote:
Hi Ed,
Thanks for your email and for attending last Thursday's meeting. Very productive meeting with a lot of good insights
and ideas. Appreciate your comments on parking and square footage which are both of tremendous importance. I will
definitely share your email with our consultant and keep them in mind as the process moves forward.
Much appreciated.
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattw(d-)rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
1 B-18
Pa rks
100
M
From: edmundo hummel [mailto:ecarloshum@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2016 5:39 AM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Cory Linder <CorvL@rpvca.gov>; Vlaco Jessica <ivlaco@vahoo.com>; Herb Stark <herbertstark@cox.net>; Gary
Randall <grapecon@cox.net>; Amanda Wong <kiwi esq@hotmail.com>; Tom Smith <thomas.smith2@gmail.com>; Jim
Lehman <iimlehman@mac.com>
Subject: Re: Hike this morning
Hi Matt. I was at the mtg. on Thurs. also. Thank you (and Cory) for being so gracious acting as human
punching bags for the various gripes. The new community center is shaping up to be a VERY contentious
project with some in the neighborhood pushing for a refurbishment of the current center instead of a
replacement (I'm not in that group). As you saw from the turnout, there's a LOT of concern about the project.
Gary is absolutely right about the parking. The immediate and intuitive thought is to provide enough parking
for the largest gatherings/events, but this is exactly what we don't want. I'm currently involved in a large
project for the County (replacement of Men's Central Jail) and parking (4000-5000 spaces) is a costly and
problematic issue. There is a philosophy that says limiting or reducing parking capacity forces car pooling,
public tranportation etc. Basically, if you build it, ....you know the rest.
I would suggest REDUCING the square footage of the new center (achieved, in part, through multi-purpose
spaces) if that is the driving force behind the required number of parking spots. If the number is 18,000 sq. ft.
(as I think I heard), it's WAY to big. We should be looking at 10,000 or smaller, instead. The current center
is seldom used and then, only a small portion at a time. There should not be an INCREASE in the current
number of parking spots. If you increase the number, you will increase the number of people visiting.... period.
Using Gary's suggestions to deal with the overflow into Ladera Linda and on Forrestal, we could restrict
parking there also. Parking here IS the limiting factor and should remain so.
Like our National Parks, which are currently experiencing an increasing crush of visitors, the Ladera Linda
area is being "loved" to death. Trails are overrun, there's increasing trash and crime and our neighborhood is
bearing the brunt of it.
Thanks,
Ed Hummel
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Gary Randall <grapecon(&cox.net> wrote:
Hi Matt:
Attached is a good example of a large, organized group that came and completely filled the LL Community
Center Parking lot this morning at 7:15 a.m. (and parked a fair way down Forrestal). I estimated 50-60 hikers
when they finally all assembled and headed out, and it's not even Saturday morning! I think it will be
extremely important for you, working with the consultant, to come up with good, creative solutions to ensure
parking at any new facility is reserved for actual users of the facility, not for large groups going on hikes in
the preserve. I also trust that, in this process, you will be thinking about solutions to overflow parking onto
Forrestal and onto Pirate, Phantom, and Sea Raven Drives.
I have suggested in the past that Pirate, Phantom, and Sea Raven should be considered for "parking by permit
only" restrictions, and that perhaps parking along Forrestal be limited to one side only (and perhaps have time
limits on it, say 2 hours maximum). I think this discussion should be occurring now, regardless of any longer
term project earmarked for the community center and park. My views and ideas for a solution may not be
exactly the same as other Ladera Linda residents, but I think the majority of residents feel something needs to
be done to improve the current situation.
I am not against the general public utilizing our beautiful parks and hiking trails — after all, these are public
areas. I do not think, however, that the city has any obligation to provide unlimited, or even large amounts, of
parking, nor encourage use of these areas thru social media. It's time to get this situation under control, and
also develop some very good plans for the future community center.
Thank you for your consideration. I do have some additional comments on last night's meeting, but will
include those in a separate email.
Gary
Matt Waters
From: R. Gene Dewey <rgdewey@cox.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 12:28 PM
To: Herb Stark
Cc: Matt Waters
Subject: Monday Sept 26, 2016 Meeting with P & R Staff Minutes
Attachments: P & R Meeting LL Community Center 9-26-16.docx
Herb,
Would you send the attached document out to all of our residents. Thanks Gene
1 B-21
Meeting with P & R Mon 1:30 to 3 PM
LL Community Center
For LL Gene Dewey/Mickey Rodich For Seaview Ali Derek President
For P & R Matt Watters, Mona Dill, Dan Trauner and David For the contractor, Dick Fisher
Matt opened the meeting by saying they wanted our input. Dick said they wanted ideas on parking.
Mickey open for LL and said that after the Sept 22, 2016 P & R workshop, the Ladera Linda residents had
a change in our community feelings about the Community Center after several outspoken members of LL
spoke to keep things the same with upgrades as necessary to the existing facilities.
Gene read the questioner he sent out by e-mail on Sunday 9-26, 2016
Ladera Linda Residents:
A number of our residents were in attendance at the P & R workshop on Thursday Oct 22, 2016. Nearly
everyone who spoke wanted to keep whatever was done to a minimum. They were concerned about the
negative impacts of a new center, traffic, noise, etc. Several years ago we were told by the city that the
buildings were unsafe and the utilities needed to be replaced or upgraded. The city however continues
to use these facilities as is with little or no maintenance being done while at the same time spending over
$ 90 K to develop a Master Plan and a design concept study for a new facility. This amount of money
would have gone a long way to improve some of the conditions needing repair. We were told a new
center was the preferred choice as opposed to repairing the existing facilities.
There were several people who spoke out against the new facility and preferred to keep the Ladera Linda
complex as it is with necessary repairs, rather than tear up the entire park, build new structures, spending
millions of dollars on something most of the residents don't want. Concerns were expressed that creating
a new facility will attract a whole new level of use and additional traffic to our neighborhood. Homeowner
Marty Foster points out in an e-mail to CC that the 50 year old homes in our neighborhood have been
repaired rebuilt, etc by the home owners. They dealt with the asbestos, up graded the plumbing,
electrical, etc. It may be possible to raze half of the structures, keep a couple of walls up and rebuild
about 10,000 sq feet of the current complex that is being used.
I would ask you to respond to two questions and I will publish the results.
Would you like to see a new facility, with walking trails, relocated
buildings, roads, trees removed to improve views, etc. or if you had
you say rebuild the existing necessary structures with upgrades and
minimize the disturbance to the park as it now is?
Even though the train is out of the station, this neighborhood has been instrumental in getting our
neighbors elected to the council in the past and we have had some success in helping to get some of the
current council members elected. If we prefer to keep things as they are with necessary improvements,
perhaps we can convince the council to rethink this project.
Please respond to me as soon as possible. r9dewey(a)-cox.net
B-22
At the time of the meeting on Monday there were 29 responses so far; 25 to keep existing buildings and
upgrade as necessary, 3 responses for New and one response that didn't have enough information to
make a decision. We discussed keeping the building on the present foot print with only the necessary
square footage, etc.
Dan said they need room for as many as 15 employees using various offices in the new building, 2
Sheriff Park Rangers, 2-3 Direct Staff for management, 6 to 7 open space management employees, 2 to 3
museum and interpretive center personal. They have identified the "Stake Holders" as The Land
Conservancy/Docents/Enforcement staff/Mommy and me classes/yoga/ YMCA/ Los Serranos and all
four surrounding HOA's. The Sheriff Park rangers need space to store and charge their electric vehicles.
They need space for the ranger's pickups, etc. There is a need for considerable storage for the
Interpretive Center and other organizations that currently store material and artifacts in the existing
buildings. Mickey suggested storage be relocated to other sites closer to the user.
We spent considerable time talking about parking. The staff wants a control point where they can
monitor all the traffic in and out. This will all result in a major increase in P & R staff, expenses, etc. One
idea was to open the Forrestal Gate and allow parking on the City right of way for the reserve as well as
AYSO at the same time. That will generate more traffic, but it would separate Community Center Traffic
from Reserve Traffic. Under this scenario the P & R Staff would open and close the gate.
Matt Waters said that as a result of input from the Sept 22, 2016 Workshop they will bring the final
suggested designs back to the community to review before they take it to the city council
B-23
Matt Waters
From: Gabriella Yap
Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2016 9:05 AM
To: Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; Matt Waters
Cc: Kit Fox; Doug Willmore
Subject: Fwd: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan
Sent from my Samsung device
-------- Original message --------
From: Bill Schurmer <sbschurm@yahoo.com>
Date: 10/1/2016 8:55 AM (GMT -08:00)
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Edmundo Hummel <ecarloshum@gmail.com>, Gary Randall <grapecon@cox.net>, Lisa Lehman
<lisadoll@mac.com>, EZStevens <erstevens@cox.net>, "R. Gene Dewey" <rgdewey@cox.net>,
martycrna@cox.net, "Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>" <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>, Bill Foster
<bfos@cox.net>, Herb Stark <herbertstark@cox.net>, Joe Tetherow <j.tetherow@cox.net>, Barry Hildebrand
<bjhilde@aol.com>, Richard Stark <dimarstark@cox.net>, Jack Fleming <Jfleming2000@yahoo.com>,
Thomas Smith <thomash.smith@gmail.com>, Donald Bell <dwbrpv@gmail.com>, Jessica Vlaco
<vlaco5@cox.net>, Mike Hansen <cfink@cfid.net>, "Judy Youssef:" <julysa@aol.com>, Charles Agnew
<cvagnew@cox.net>, Erika Barber <nbarber310@cox.net>, Paul Barrett <revpaullyb@gmail.com>
Subject: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan
City Council Members,
Its been a long time since I have written the City Council and I rarely do, but in the case of the Ladera Linda Park Master Plan, I will make an
exception. I'll keep it brief as I have learned to do after sitting for a number of years on a city committee/commission.
In my 45 years of living in the Ladera Linda neighborhood, I have never seen a reaction such as this. Call it an attitude centered around the concern
that our community center will expand into an attraction that will draw unnecessary and unwanted attention to our neighborhood.
Citizens we never hear from have come out of the woodwork to express their strong opinions, this is something rarely witnessed. No matter where
you go, this is a hot topic of conversation .Our neighbor Seaview is also involved in this effort.
This correspondence is not about the details, you have already been hit from all sides. It's about the strong human reaction that decidedly reflects that
what they are hearing and what appears to be reality aren't matching.
Please step back and take a look at what is taking place. Ask yourselves questions such as, Why is the threat (or even just the thought) of extending
the community center receiving the negative reaction that it has? Where is the breakdown in communications between staff and the citizens? Lastly,
what in earth is wrong with this picture?
This is of great importance to our neighborhood, so please handle it with great care.
Regards,
Bill Schurmer
I
Matt Waters
From: R. Gene Dewey <rgdewey@cox.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 6:18 PM
To: Matt Waters
Cc: herbertstark@cox.net; Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; James Flannigan; Mona Dill; CC;
Mary Hirsch
Subject: RE: Monday Sept 26, 2016 Meeting with P & R Staff Minutes
Hi Matt,
I have been out of town for a couple of days and will be leaving again later this week. As I mentioned in the meeting
we had with you and staff on Monday, September 26, 2016. That during the work shop on September 22, several
residents spoke out against anything other than an upgrade to the existing buildings, regardless of what the results of
the previous workshop's indicated. Several of the outspoken residents have been active in our community since its
inception and have served many terms on the LLHOA board and volunteer on several committees, such as
Neighborhood Watch, Emergency Preparedness, etc. The residents of the community respect their input.
I sent out a survey after getting numerous e-mails shortly after the Sept 22 workshop. Of the many residents that have
weighed in on this issue all except three are for rebuilding the existing facilities. , are two who responded in favor of a
new small community center and one with not enough information to make a decision.
I suggested at the meeting with you on Monday, Sept 26 that a third alternative be considered, a building with a
footprint equal to what is being utilized now, located close to the existing buildings, but taking advantage of the view of
the ocean and Catalina. I had a call the next day and was told when you and your staff were meeting with another "
Stake Holder" on Tuesday a two story building was mentioned. I am sure you will hear from more Ladera Linda Stake
holders on this matter.
In an e-mail you sent out, in response to one of our residents, you stated there would be one to two part time
employees. At the meeting on Monday Sept 26, the staff was talking about storage for Electric ATV vehicles that could
be recharged, parking for enforcement pickups, offices for several others that will drop in from time to time to do
paperwork. Staff also mentioned that they were considering a gate keeper to monitor traffic in and out of the
complex. That doesn't sound like part time help. I think this has taken on a new complexion after the February 22, work
shop and it may be a good idea to hold another work shop before going much further with the study to see if you can
get some sort of consensus on what our residents desire.
Thanks,
Gene
From: Matt Waters [mailto:MattW@rpvca.gov]
Sent: Monday, October 3, 2016 5:35 PM
To: R. Gene Dewey
Cc: herbertstark@cox.net; Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; James Flannigan; Mona Dill; CC; Mary Hirsch
Subject: RE: Monday Sept 26, 2016 Meeting with P & R Staff Minutes
Hi Gene,
B-25
Hope you're doing well. I think you were cc'd on recent responses to emails from Eric Stevens and Marty Foster. I
believe my responses touched on many of the points you raised in your email so I won't bother repeating them here. I
understand there are significant concerns about the project and I want to assure you that we are committed to working
with the adjacent HOAs and local residents to ensure that this process moves forward efficiently and with maximum
transparency. From the early workshops in 2014 and 2015, staff has done its best to be up front about the details and
timeline of this project. We are as dedicated as you are to bringing Council's directives to reality, namely to see Ladera
Linda be a low-key, neighborhood friendly park that the community can be justly proud of. I worked at Ladera Linda for
over 10 years as a part-time staff and supervisor, so I know just how cherished and wonderful a park it is. Staff is ready
and willing to meet with you to discuss this project in more detail.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattwCab-rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
Pit
e teer!
From: R. Gene Dewey [mailto:rgdewev@cox.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 12:28 PM
To: Herb Stark <stearman@iuno.com>
Cc: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Monday Sept 26, 2016 Meeting with P & R Staff Minutes
Herb,
Would you send the attached document out to all of our residents. Thanks Gene
a
Matt Waters
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Mr. Stevens.
Matt Waters
Monday, October 03, 2016 5:22 PM
erstevens@cox.net; cprotem73@cox.ne; tjduhovic@hotmail.com; mizie@cox.net;
briancampbell@gmail.com; susanbrooks0l@yahoo.com; CC; Mona Dill
martycrna@cox.net; ': "R. Gene Dewey'; 'edmundo hummel'; 'Jim Lehman'; 'Gary
Randall'; 'barry hildebrand'; 'Bill Foster'; 'Richard Stark'; 'Donald Bell'; 'George Fink';
Jessica Vlaco; 'bill schurmer'; 'Sam Rubino'; j.tetherow@cox.net; 'Tom Smith'; 'Angelows
Angelow'; 'Mike Hansen'; 'Judy Youssef:'; 'Youseff Aelony'; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com;
'Paul Henrikson'; 'Bob Klatt'; 'Herb Stark'; latterpeg@cox.net; 'Chuck Agnew'; 'Amanda
Wong'; Erika Barber; Emeric Rodich (mickeyrodich ; Lenee Bilski; George Fink; Joyce;
jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; Emily McKean; Cory Linder; Mona Dill; James Flannigan; Ron
Dragoo; Mary Hirsch; Daniel Trautner
RE: New Ladera Linda Community Center
I am responding to your email about the Ladera Linda Park project. This project has been conducted in an inclusive
manner involving significant and ongoing input from the adjacent HOAs and local residents. Public workshops were
conducted in 2014 and 2015 regarding Ladera Linda as part of the Parks Master Plan Update that was approved by the
City Council in October 2015. That plan included the demolition and redesign of Ladera Linda. Because of the strength
and clarity of community involvement and feedback, a gymnasium, pool, dog park and skate park are not being
considered. The improvements you refer to in your email mirror the community response and Council direction to
maintain a "less is more" approach and keep a low -ley community feel.
In advance of the September 22, 2016 Parks Master Plan workshop, we contacted all adjacent HOAs and mailed flyers to
every resident within a 1000 foot radius of the park, in addition to banners, listsery messages etc... We have also met
with representatives from Seaview and LL HOAs to discuss their concerns in depth. We want to receive community
input at every stage of this process. Staff and RFA did meet with a number of stakeholders, which is a best practice in
any Master Plan effort, but by no means do those stakeholders hold sway over the outcome. We'd rather hear their
opinions early rather than later in the process.
The City Council approved the current Master Plan process for Ladera Linda which included a recommendation to
demolish the existing buildings and replace them. This was based on the building's poor condition which earned an "F"
rating in a 2013 study. Spending funds to renovate temporary buildings that are now fifty years old with significant
infrastructure problems would not be a solid investment.
No designs have been created yet for this project. I hope that the local community likes what RFA Consultant comes up
with for this beautiful part of Palos Verdes, but I certainly encourage you to stay involved in the process and voice your
opinions at the upcoming public workshop where residents will be welcome to weigh in on the merits of the two
alternate designs. Your comments will be forwarded to staff and to RFA.
Thank you and please feel free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
B-27
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattw(ci)rpvca.q V - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
From: erstevens@cox.net [mailto:erstevens@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 4:28 PM
To: cprotem73@cox.ne; tjduhovic@hotmail.com; mizie@cox.net; briancampbell@gmail.com;
susanbrooks0l@yahoo.com; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>
Cc: martycrna@cox.net; ': "R. Gene Dewey' <rgdewey@cox.net>; 'edmundo hummel' <ecarloshum@gmail.com>; 'Jim
Lehman' <jimlehman@mac.com>; 'Gary Randall' <grapecon@cox.net>; 'barry hildebrand' <bjhilde@aol.com>; 'Bill
Foster' <bfos@cox.net>; 'Richard Stark' <dimarstark@cox.net>; 'Donald Bell' <dwbrpv@gmail.com>; 'George Fink'
<gfinkll@cox.net>; Jessica Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>;'bill schurmer' <sbschurm@yahoo.com>; 'Sam Rubino'
<IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net; 'Tom Smith' <thomash.smith@gmail.com>; 'Angelows Angelow'
<blagangel@gmail.com>; 'Mike Hansen' <cfink@cfid.net>; 'Judy Youssef:' <julysa@aol.com>; 'Youseff Aelony'
<y.aelony@cox.net>; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; 'Paul Henrikson' <paul.henrikson@cox.net>; 'Bob Klatt'
<r.klatt@cox.net>; 'Herb Stark' <stearman@juno.com>; latterpeg@cox.net; 'Chuck Agnew' <cvagnew@cox.net>;
'Amanda Wong' <kiwi_esq@hotmail.com>; Erika Barber <nbarber310@cox.net>; Emeric Rodich (mickeyrodich
<mickeyrodich@yahoo.com>; Lenee Bilski <leneebilski@hotmail.com>; George Fink <gfinkll@cox.net>; Joyce
<jfinkcentral@cox.net>; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; Emily McKean <Mickeydande@cox.net>
Subject: New Ladera Linda Community Center
Subject: New Ladera Linda Community Center
To Whom it May Concern:
I am disgusted with the way the City of RPV is going about the Ladera Linda Park Project. Our park is not Hess Park off
the main thoroughfare; which is a central focal point for the hill. The city has gone about the entire process in a long and
convoluted way that is "catawampus" to the community's original purpose of bringing the park into health and safety
conformity. It is a project of divide and conqueror. Instead of bringing leaders together from the adjoining neighborhoods
for the community park and making them the spokespersons for the renewal project by forming a small neighborhood
committee of the true stakeholders the City with their consultant has convened a series of "stakeholders" meetings with
users and undermined the very purpose of the park to serve the community in which the park rests. These groups have
tailor made a list of improvements along with others classified as "stakeholders" to upgrade the park to something the
neighbors DO NOT WANT or NEED. Adding insult to injury the Parks Department with the blessing of the City Council
have approved a $90,000 park improvement plan by an outside consultant from of all places ...Orange County ... a
microcosm of planned communities. What in the world do we need a consultant to tell us what the community wants and
needs. In addition, why would we spend $90,000 for a plan when we do NOT want one! The funds we are giving the
consultant we could use to make the updates and modifications.
In closing, we all moved to this part of the south bay to retreat from urbanization and to make sure we were not invaded
by outsiders. There is no way in our right minds we would have envisioned any building on the park site that would attract
anyone but us locals. We are satisfied with our small local facility and would appreciate some updates to keep it cozy and
hidden like it is now.
•
L •
We must solidify to bringing the City to the realization we DO NOT want to move forward with this consultant and want
instead and RFP for a contractor to make bids on repairs and modifications. If we give an inch here we will lose our
community to outsiders.
Sincerely
Edward Stevens
Seaview
This message w/attachments (message) is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential or proprietary. If you are not an intended recipient, please
notify the sender, and then please delete and destroy all copies and attachments, and be advised that any review
or dissemination of, or the taking of any action in reliance on, the information contained in or attached to this
message is prohibited.
Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment products or
other financial product or service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official statement of Sender.
Subject to applicable law, Sender may intercept, monitor, review and retain e -communications (EC) traveling
through its networks/systems and may produce any such EC to regulators, law enforcement, in litigation and as
required by law.
The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived,
supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are located. This message cannot be
guaranteed to be secure or free of errors or viruses.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.ava.com/
Version: 2016.0.7797 / Virus Database: 4656/13113 - Release Date: 09/29/16
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 5:35 PM
To: R. Gene Dewey
Cc: herbertstark@cox.net; Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; James Flannigan; Mona Dill; CC;
Mary Hirsch
Subject: RE: Monday Sept 26, 2016 Meeting with P & R Staff Minutes
Hi Gene,
Hope you're doing well. I think you were cc'd on recent responses to emails from Eric Stevens and Marty Foster. I
believe my responses touched on many of the points you raised in your email so I won't bother repeating them here. I
understand there are significant concerns about the project and I want to assure you that we are committed to working
with the adjacent HOAs and local residents to ensure that this process moves forward efficiently and with maximum
transparency. From the early workshops in 2014 and 2015, staff has done its best to be up front about the details and
timeline of this project. We are as dedicated as you are to bringing Council's directives to reality, namely to see Ladera
Linda be a low-key, neighborhood friendly park that the community can be justly proud of. I worked at Ladera Linda for
over 10 years as a part-time staff and supervisor, so I know just how cherished and wonderful a park it is. Staff is ready
and willing to meet with you to discuss this project in more detail.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattw(cD_rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
From: R. Gene Dewey [mailto:rgdewey@cox.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 12:28 PM
To: Herb Stark <stearman@juno.com>
Cc: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Monday Sept 26, 2016 Meeting with P & R Staff Minutes
Herb,
Would you send the attached document out to all of our residents. Thanks Gene
Matt Waters
From: Doug Willmore
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 9:23 AM
To: martycrna@cox.net; Matt Waters
Cc: rgdewey@cox.net; Bill Foster; grapecon@cox.net; barry hildebrand; bill schurmer;
ecarloshum@gmail.com; jimlehman@mac.com; dimarstark@cox.net;
herbertstark@cox.net; gfinkll@cox.net; Jessica Vlaco; dwbrpv@gmail.com; sam rubino;
j.tetherow@cox.net; tsks@hotmail.com;jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; CC; Ron Dragoo;
James Flannigan; Mona Dill; Daniel Trautner; Mickey Rodich
<mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Mary Hirsch; Cory Linder
Subject: RE: Plan for Ladera Linda
Thanks a lot for your commitment to your neighborhood and for communicating your thoughts, Marty. Just so that I can
fully understand what your concerns are - what are you "agreeing to disagree" with in Matt's email?
Regarding why Matt is replying to your email: when an email is sent to cc@rpvca.gov, various staff members (City
Manager, Deputy City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, etc.) are also copied on the email, so that staff can respond to
any specific issues, problems, questions, or complaints that may be brought up in the email. A Councilmember cannot
reply to everyone on the email while also copying other Council members, because to do so would be a Brown Act
violation.
-----Original Message -----
From: Marty Foster [mailto:martycrna@cox.net]
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 5:25 PM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: rgdewey@cox.net; Bill Foster <bfos@cox.net>; grapecon@cox.net; barry hildebrand <bjhilde@aol.com>; bill
schurmer <sbschurm@yahoo.com>; ecarloshum@gmaii.com; jimlehman@mac.com; dimarstark@cox.net;
herbertstark@cox.net; gfinkll@cox.net; Jessica Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; dwbrpv@gmail.com; sam rubino
<IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net; tsks@hotmail.com; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>;
Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>; James Flannigan <JamesF@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>; Daniel
Trautner <DanielT@rpvca.gov>; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Mary Hirsch
<MaryH@rpvca.gov>; Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Plan for Ladera Linda
Thanks, Matt
We will just have to agree to disagree.
Matt, I don't think I sent my post to you but rather CC. May I ask how it is that you are replying?
Sent from my iPad
> On Oct 3, 2016, at 4:58 PM, Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov> wrote:
> Dear Marty,
> Thank you for your email about the Ladera Linda Community Center Master Plan. I'd like to respond to some of the
points and concerns you have raised about this project.
B-31
> *"More rather than less." Staff and the consultant RFA have taken the Council's "less is more" philosophy to heart.
Even though no designs have been made yet (it is important to note that the project is at an information -gathering
phase), the two designs that will be shown at another public workshop before going to Council will show a community
center that is smaller than the existing buildings. Additionally, a number of major recreation elements have been
purposefully excluded from consideration, including a gymnasium, pool, dog park and skate park. No elements that
were opposed by the community will be included and the scope of the project has not increased.
> **Survey: You note that a survey has made the rounds showing strong community resistance to this project. Public
workshops and a survey conducted in 2014 and 2015 showed strong community support for this project. The project is
included in the Parks Master Plan Update that was approved by City Council in October 2015. The September 22
workshop generated many constructive comments, suggestions, and strong opinions but there was no consensus
expressed there to end the project. It's difficult to be completely for or against this project until the conceptual designs
are complete and made public. No designs have even been created yet for this project, but all comments received,
including the one -question survey, will be forwarded to RFA. Ladera Linda -adjacent residents will have the opportunity
to see and comment on the designs at a subsequent public workshop and again in front of Council.
> **Renovating the buildings: The City Council approved the current Master Plan process for Ladera Linda which
included a recommendation to demolish the existing buildings and replace them. This was based on the building's poor
condition which earned an "F" rating in a 2013 study. Spending funds to renovate temporary buildings that are now fifty
years old with significant infrastructure problems would not be a solid investment.
> **City Hall instead of Ladera Linda: City Hall is going through its own Master Plan process, but it is at a very early
stage. Some of the recreation elements that are excluded from the Ladera Linda site may be considered at City Hall
including a gym, pool, and Public Safety components. The site already has a dog park.
> **$7.2million: This design, demolition, and construction estimate was taken from the 2015-16 Capital Improvement
Plan, and was based on a 12,000 sq foot footprint to be funded by Capital Improvement Plan Reserves. The CIP cost
calculation is admittedly just an estimate but it does include many of the elements being discussed currently:
restrooms, multi-purpose rooms, activity rooms, landscaping, irrigation, discovery rooms, and a ranger/Sheriff drop-in
office. A new cost estimate will be developed by RFA as part of the LL Park Master Plan process.
> **15 employees: This total, which was the result of a meeting with Ladera Linda Homeowner representatives and City
staff is misleading. Ladera Linda is currently staffed by one part-time staff at a time who is overseen by a full-time
Recreation Supervisor. The new building would likely increase staffing to two part-time staff at a time with one full-time
Supervisor. This is comparable to staff levels at Hesse Park and PVIC. The fifteen is a mix of Sheriff personnel and Open
Space Management Staff who would only use their office for drop-in use since the vast majority of their time will be
spent enforcing rules and monitoring the Preserve. Several volunteer docents might stop by occasionally to lead a tour
of the Discovery/Nature room or work on artifacts as they do now. This adds up to 15, but actual staffing levels would
only increase from 2 to 3.
> **"LL will be a very busy place" Staff and RFA, following the lead of Council and the community, are not proposing
additional uses. The building footprint and square footage will be smaller. Parking will be improved. There will still be
"green space and a safe place for children to play." There's already a nature center and a Sheriff and Open Space
Management crew drop in office there now. There will still be classes, HOA meetings, summer camps, and paddle
tennis. City staff will work closely with residents to create clear policies to set limits on hours, noise, and usage to help
maintain the low-key neighborhood feel.
> I encourage you to continue to be a part of the process as it moves forward because local resident input is crucial to
the success of this project. I personally appreciate your obvious pride in this wonderful part of the RPV community. Feel
free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.
> Sincerely,
B-32
> Matt Waters
> Senior Administrative Analyst
> City of Rancho Palos Verdes
> Recreation and Parks Department
> 30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
> Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
> www.palosverdes.com/rpv
> mattw@rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p - (310) 544-5291 f
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marty Foster [mailto:martycrna@cox.net]
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 3:01 PM
> To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
> Cc: rgdewey@cox.net; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Bill Foster
<bfos@cox.net>; grapecon@cox.net; barry hildebrand <bjhilde@aol.com>; bill schurmer <sbschurm@yahoo.com>;
ecarloshum@gmail.com; jimlehman@mac.com; dimarstark@cox.net; herbertstark@cox.net; gfinkll@cox.net; Jessica
Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; dwbrpv@gmail.com; sam rubino <IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net;
tsks@hotmail.com; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com
> Subject: Plan for Ladera Linda
> Some facts have come to light this week.
> Again, homeowners surrounding LL thought the message was received that'less is more'.
> Apparently not, since LLHOA members learned ' more rather than less' at Monday's meeting with Parks and
Recreation personnel.The scope of the plan is far greater than previously realized.
> A survey has been sent to homeowners in the last few days. Results thus far show 86 % in favor of retaining the
buildings present and refurbishing them.
> At this time, is it possible to get estimates for such repairs and remodeling deemed necessary at LL? Those buildings
have served well for many years. To update them will be a fraction of the cost discussed this far.
> Can the idea be entertained by CC to expand/rebuild city hall and add some park like amenities at that site, diverting
the $7.2 million (gasp) meant for LL?
> The plan at LL includes parking and office space for 15 city employees, parking and space for sheriff park rangers,
interpretive center personnel and open space management employees totaling at least 15 more folks that will inhabit
the center, some 24/7 and at least Monday through Friday. This does not sound like a park or a community center. It
seems more like an extension of City Hall.
B-33
> There are many wonderful groups that would like some permanence at LL. Their work is admirable. However, with all
we have mentioned LL will be a very busy place. The surrounding communities' desire for green space and a safe place
for children to play is usurped by these plans.
> In the current climate of 'green' concerns, let us follow the three R's ... reduce, reuse, and recycle.
> Thank you all as always for the significant work you do for our city.
> Marty Foster
> Sent from my Wad
4 B-34
Matt Waters
From: Marty Foster <martycrna@cox.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 6:52 AM
To: Matt Waters
Subject: Re: Plan for Ladera Linda
Thanks, Matt.
I do appreciate your outreach.
There is a disconnect unfortunately between what the community vs the city entertains
Best
Marty
Sent from my iPad
> On Oct 3, 2016, at 5:39 PM, Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov> wrote:
> Hi Marty,
> Thanks for your response. You are correct, the email was not sent to me directly. Since I am the Recreation point
person on this project, it was forwarded to me for my review. Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
> Sincerely,
> Matt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marty Foster [mailto:martycrna@cox.net]
> Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 5:25 PM
> To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
> Cc: rgdewey@cox.net; Bill Foster <bfos@cox.net>; grapecon@cox.net; barry hildebrand <bjhilde@aol.com>; bill
schurmer <sbschurm@yahoo.com>; ecarloshum@gmail.com; jimlehman@mac.com; dimarstark@cox.net;
herbertstark@cox.net; gfinkll@cox.net; Jessica Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; dwbrpv@gmail.com; sam rubino
<IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net; tsks@hotmail.com; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>;
Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>; James Flannigan <JamesF@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>; Daniel
Trautner <DanielT@rpvca.gov>; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Mary Hirsch
<MaryH@rpvca.gov>; Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>
> Subject: Re: Plan for Ladera Linda
> Thanks, Matt
> We will just have to agree to disagree.
> Matt, I don't think I sent my post to you but rather CC. May I ask how it is that you are replying?
B-35
> Sent from my iPad
>> On Oct 3, 2016, at 4:58 PM, Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov> wrote:
>> Dear Marty,
>> Thank you for your email about the Ladera Linda Community Center Master Plan. I'd like to respond to some of the
points and concerns you have raised about this project.
>> *"More rather than less." Staff and the consultant RFA have taken the Council's "less is more" philosophy to heart.
Even though no designs have been made yet (it is important to note that the project is at an information -gathering
phase), the two designs that will be shown at another public workshop before going to Council will show a community
center that is smaller than the existing buildings. Additionally, a number of major recreation elements have been
purposefully excluded from consideration, including a gymnasium, pool, dog park and skate park. No elements that
were opposed by the community will be included and the scope of the project has not increased.
>> **Survey: You note that a survey has made the rounds showing strong community resistance to this project. Public
workshops and a survey conducted in 2014 and 2015 showed strong community support for this project. The project is
included in the Parks Master Plan Update that was approved by City Council in October 2015. The September 22
workshop generated many constructive comments, suggestions, and strong opinions but there was no consensus
expressed there to end the project. It's difficult to be completely for or against this project until the conceptual designs
are complete and made public. No designs have even been created yet for this project, but all comments received,
including the one -question survey, will be forwarded to RFA. Ladera Linda -adjacent residents will have the opportunity
to see and comment on the designs at a subsequent public workshop and again in front of Council.
>> **Renovating the buildings: The City Council approved the current Master Plan process for Ladera Linda which
included a recommendation to demolish the existing buildings and replace them. This was based on the building's poor
condition which earned an "F" rating in a 2013 study. Spending funds to renovate temporary buildings that are now fifty
years old with significant infrastructure problems would not be a solid investment.
>> **City Hall instead of Ladera Linda: City Hall is going through its own Master Plan process, but it is at a very early
stage. Some of the recreation elements that are excluded from the Ladera Linda site may be considered at City Hall
including a gym, pool, and Public Safety components. The site already has a dog park.
>> **$7.2million: This design, demolition, and construction estimate was taken from the 2015-16 Capital Improvement
Plan, and was based on a 12,000 sq foot footprint to be funded by Capital Improvement Plan Reserves. The CIP cost
calculation is admittedly just an estimate but it does include many of the elements being discussed currently:
restrooms, multi-purpose rooms, activity rooms, landscaping, irrigation, discovery rooms, and a ranger/Sheriff drop-in
office. A new cost estimate will be developed by RFA as part of the LL Park Master Plan process.
>> **15 employees: This total, which was the result of a meeting with Ladera Linda Homeowner representatives and
City staff is misleading. Ladera Linda is currently staffed by one part-time staff at a time who is overseen by a full-time
Recreation Supervisor. The new building would likely increase staffing to two part-time staff at a time with one full-time
Supervisor. This is comparable to staff levels at Hesse Park and PVIC. The fifteen is a mix of Sheriff personnel and Open
Space Management Staff who would only use their office for drop-in use since the vast majority of their time will be
spent enforcing rules and monitoring the Preserve. Several volunteer docents might stop by occasionally to lead a tour
of the Discovery/Nature room or work on artifacts as they do now. This adds up to 15, but actual staffing levels would
only increase from 2 to 3.
a>
>> **"LL will be a very busy place" Staff and RFA, following the lead of Council and the community, are not proposing
additional uses. The building footprint and square footage will be smaller. Parking will be improved. There will still be
"green space and a safe place for children to play." There's already a nature center and a Sheriff and Open Space
Management crew drop in office there now. There will still be classes, HOA meetings, summer camps, and paddle
tennis. City staff will work closely with residents to create clear policies to set limits on hours, noise, and usage to help
maintain the low-key neighborhood feel.
>> I encourage you to continue to be a part of the process as it moves forward because local resident input is crucial to
the success of this project. I personally appreciate your obvious pride in this wonderful part of the RPV community. Feel
free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.
>> Sincerely,
>> Matt Waters
>> Senior Administrative Analyst
>> City of Rancho Palos Verdes
>> Recreation and Parks Department
>> 30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
>> Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
>> www.palosverdes.com/rpv
>> mattw@rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p - (310) 544-5291 f
>> -----Original Message-----
» From: Marty Foster [mailto:martycrna@cox.net]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 3:01 PM
>> To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
>> Cc: rgdewey@cox.net; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Bill Foster
<bfos@cox.net>; grapecon@cox.net; barry hildebrand <bjhilde@aol.com>; bill schurmer<sbschurm@yahoo.com>;
ecarloshum@gmail.com; jimlehman@mac.com; dimarstark@cox.net; herbertstark@cox.net; gfinkll@cox.net; Jessica
Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; dwbrpv@gmail.com; sam rubino <IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net;
tsks@hotmail.com; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com
>> Subject: Plan for Ladera Linda
>> Some facts have come to light this week.
>> Again, homeowners surrounding LL thought the message was received that 'less is more'.
>> Apparently not, since LLHOA members learned ' more rather than less' at Monday's meeting with Parks and
Recreation personnel.The scope of the plan is far greater than previously realized.
>> A survey has been sent to homeowners in the last few days. Results thus far show 86 % in favor of retaining the
buildings present and refurbishing them.
>> At this time, is it possible to get estimates for such repairs and remodeling deemed necessary at LL? Those buildings
have served well for many years. To update them will be a fraction of the cost discussed this far.
3 B-37
>> Can the idea be entertained by CC to expand/rebuild city hall and add some park like amenities at that site, diverting
the $7.2 million (gasp) meant for LL?
>> The plan at LL includes parking and office space for 15 city employees, parking and space for sheriff park rangers,
interpretive center personnel and open space management employees totaling at least 15 more folks that will inhabit
the center, some 24/7 and at least Monday through Friday. This does not sound like a park or a community center. It
seems more like an extension of City Hall.
>> There are many wonderful groups that would like some permanence at LL. Their work is admirable. However, with all
we have mentioned LL will be a very busy place. The surrounding communities' desire for green space and a safe place
for children to play is usurped by these plans.
>> In the current climate of 'green' concerns, let us follow the three R's ... reduce, reuse, and recycle.
>> Thank you all as always for the significant work you do for our city.
>> Marty Foster
>> Sent from my Wad
i
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 9:33 AM
To: 'Marty Foster'
Cc: Cory Linder, Daniel Trautner; James Flannigan; Mona Dill; Mary Hirsch; Ron Dragoo
Subject: RE: Plan for Ladera Linda
Hi Marty,
Happy to discuss any of the disagreements you have with my email to hopefully bridge that disconnect. The elements
for the site are based on feedback from the community. Thanks again for your involvement and I look forward to
working with you.
Matt
-----Original Message -----
From: Marty Foster [mailto:martycrna@cox.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 6:52 AM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Plan for Ladera Linda
Thanks, Matt.
I do appreciate your outreach.
There is a disconnect unfortunately between what the community vs the city entertains
Best
Marty
Sent from my iPad
> On Oct 3, 2016, at 5:39 PM, Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov> wrote:
> Hi Marty,
> Thanks for your response. You are correct, the email was not sent to me directly. Since I am the Recreation point
person on this project, it was forwarded to me for my review. Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
> Sincerely,
> Matt
> -----Original Message-----
* From: Marty Foster [mailto:martycrna@cox.net]
> Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 5:25 PM
1 B-39
> To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
> Cc: rgdewey@cox.net; Bill Foster <bfos@cox.net>; grapecon@cox.net; barry hildebrand <bjhilde@aol.com>; bill
schurmer <sbschurm@yahoo.com>; ecarloshum@gmail.com; jimlehman@mac.com; dimarstark@cox.net;
herbertstark@cox.net; gfinkll@cox.net; Jessica Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; dwbrpv@gmail.com; sam rubino
<IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net; tsks@hotmail.com; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>;
Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>; James Flannigan <JamesF@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>; Daniel
Trautner <DanielT@rpvca.gov>; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Mary Hirsch
<MaryH@rpvca.gov>; Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>
> Subject: Re: Plan for Ladera Linda
> Thanks, Matt
> We will just have to agree to disagree.
> Matt, I don't think I sent my post to you but rather CC. May I ask how it is that you are replying?
> Sent from my iPad
>> On Oct 3, 2016, at 4:58 PM, Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov> wrote:
>> Dear Marty,
>> Thank you for your email about the Ladera Linda Community Center Master Plan. I'd like to respond to some of the
points and concerns you have raised about this project.
>> *"More rather than less." Staff and the consultant RFA have taken the Council's "less is more" philosophy to heart.
Even though no designs have been made yet (it is important to note that the project is at an information -gathering
phase), the two designs that will be shown at another public workshop before going to Council will show a community
center that is smaller than the existing buildings. Additionally, a number of major recreation elements have been
purposefully excluded from consideration, including a gymnasium, pool, dog park and skate park. No elements that
were opposed by the community will be included and the scope of the project has not increased.
>> **Survey: You note that a survey has made the rounds showing strong community resistance to this project. Public
workshops and a survey conducted in 2014 and 2015 showed strong community support for this project. The project is
included in the Parks Master Plan Update that was approved by City Council in October 2015. The September 22
workshop generated many constructive comments, suggestions, and strong opinions but there was no consensus
expressed there to end the project. It's difficult to be completely for or against this project until the conceptual designs
are complete and made public. No designs have even been created yet for this project, but all comments received,
including the one -question survey, will be forwarded to RFA. Ladera Linda -adjacent residents will have the opportunity
to see and comment on the designs at a subsequent public workshop and again in front of Council.
>> **Renovating the buildings: The City Council approved the current Master Plan process for Ladera Linda which
included a recommendation to demolish the existing buildings and replace them. This was based on the building's poor
condition which earned an "F" rating in a 2013 study. Spending funds to renovate temporary buildings that are now fifty
years old with significant infrastructure problems would not be a solid investment.
>> **City Hall instead of Ladera Linda: City Hall is going through its own Master Plan process, but it is at a very early
stage. Some of the recreation elements that are excluded from the Ladera Linda site may be considered at City Hall
including a gym, pool, and Public Safety components. The site already has a dog park.
>> **$7.2million: This design, demolition, and construction estimate was taken from the 2015-16 Capital Improvement
Plan, and was based on a 12,000 sq foot footprint to be funded by Capital Improvement Plan Reserves. The CIP cost
calculation is admittedly just an estimate but it does include many of the elements being discussed currently:
restrooms, multi-purpose rooms, activity rooms, landscaping, irrigation, discovery rooms, and a ranger/Sheriff drop-in
office. A new cost estimate will be developed by RFA as part of the LL Park Master Plan process.
>> **15 employees: This total, which was the result of a meeting with Ladera Linda Homeowner representatives and
City staff is misleading. Ladera Linda is currently staffed by one part-time staff at a time who is overseen by a full-time
Recreation Supervisor. The new building would likely increase staffing to two part-time staff at a time with one full-time
Supervisor. This is comparable to staff levels at Hesse Park and PVIC. The fifteen is a mix of Sheriff personnel and Open
Space Management Staff who would only use their office for drop-in use since the vast majority of their time will be
spent enforcing rules and monitoring the Preserve. Several volunteer docents might stop by occasionally to lead a tour
of the Discovery/Nature room or work on artifacts as they do now. This adds up to 15, but actual staffing levels would
only increase from 2 to 3.
>> **"LL will be a very busy place" Staff and RFA, following the lead of Council and the community, are not proposing
additional uses. The building footprint and square footage will be smaller. Parking will be improved. There will still be
"green space and a safe place for children to play." There's already a nature center and a Sheriff and Open Space
Management crew drop in office there now. There will still be classes, HOA meetings, summer camps, and paddle
tennis. City staff will work closely with residents to create clear policies to set limits on hours, noise, and usage to help
maintain the low-key neighborhood feel.
>> I encourage you to continue to be a part of the process as it moves forward because local resident input is crucial to
the success of this project. I personally appreciate your obvious pride in this wonderful part of the RPV community. Feel
free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.
>> Sincerely,
>> Matt Waters
>> Senior Administrative Analyst
>> City of Rancho Palos Verdes
>> Recreation and Parks Department
>> 30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
>> Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
>> www.palosverdes.com/rpv
>> mattw@rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p - (310) 544-5291 f
>> -----Original Message-----
» From: Marty Foster [mailto:martycrna@cox.net]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 3:01 PM
>> To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
>> Cc: rgdewey@cox.net; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Bill Foster
<bfos@cox.net>; grapecon@cox.net; barry hildebrand <bjhilde@aol.com>; bill schurmer <sbschurm@yahoo.com>;
ecarloshum@gmail.com; jimlehman@mac.com; dimarstark@cox.net; herbertstark@cox.net; gfinkll@cox.net; Jessica
Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; dwbrpv@gmail.com; sam rubino <IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net;
tsks@hotmaii.com; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com
>> Subject: Plan for Ladera Linda
>> Some facts have come to light this week.
>> Again, homeowners surrounding LL thought the message was received that'less is more'.
>> Apparently not, since LLHOA members learned ' more rather than less' at Monday's meeting with Parks and
Recreation personnel.The scope of the plan is far greater than previously realized.
>> A survey has been sent to homeowners in the last few days. Results thus far show 86 % in favor of retaining the
buildings present and refurbishing them.
>> At this time, is it possible to get estimates for such repairs and remodeling deemed necessary at LL? Those buildings
have served well for many years. To update them will be a fraction of the cost discussed this far.
>> Can the idea be entertained by CC to expand/rebuild city hall and add some park like amenities at that site, diverting
the $7.2 million (gasp) meant for LL?
>> The plan at LL includes parking and office space for 15 city employees, parking and space for sheriff park rangers,
interpretive center personnel and open space management employees totaling at least 15 more folks that will inhabit
the center, some 24/7 and at least Monday through Friday. This does not sound like a park or a community center. It
seems more like an extension of City Hall.
>> There are many wonderful groups that would like some permanence at LL. Their work is admirable. However, with all
we have mentioned LL will be a very busy place. The surrounding communities' desire for green space and a safe place
for children to play is usurped by these plans.
>> In the current climate of 'green' concerns, let us follow the three R's ... reduce, reuse, and recycle.
>> Thank you all as always for the significant work you do for our city.
>> Marty Foster
>> Sent from my Wad
4 B-42
Matt Waters
From:
Matt Waters
Sent:
Tuesday, October 04, 2016 9:49 AM
To:
jack fleming; martycrna@cox.net
Cc:
rgdewey@cox.net; Bill Foster; grapecon@cox.net; barry hildebrand; bill schurmer;
ecarloshum@gmail.com;jimlehman@mac.com; dimarstark@cox.net;
herbertstark@cox.net; gfinkll@cox.net; Jessica Vlaco; dwbrpv@gmail.com; sam rubino;
j.tetherow@cox.net; tsks@hotmail.com; CC; Ron Dragoo; James Flannigan; Mona Dill;
Daniel Trautner; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Mary Hirsch; Cory Linder
Subject:
RE: Plan for Ladera Linda
Hi Jack,
Thanks for your follow-up question. The input and involvement of HOA's, local residents and the RPV community is of
the utmost importance in the Ladera Linda Park Master Plan importance. The Council emphasized this during the Parks
Master Plan process with their "less is more" philosophy of park projects, maintaining a community/neighborhood feel,
and being respectful and cognizant of park neighbors. That is why we had a public workshop at Ladera Linda which was
mainly attended by local residents and why we have scheduled meetings with HOA representatives. A second public
workshop will be scheduled at Ladera Linda to solicit additional feedback from attendees, the majority of whom I
anticipate will be residents as well.
Regarding stakeholder meetings, it is a best practice in park planning and design to reach out to park users and adjacent
neighbors to ascertain what the current use levels are at the site and to identify any particular issues. That is why we
reached out to the Docents, YMCA, park instructors, PVPLC, Las Candalistas, PVPUSD, Lomita Sheriff, and LA County
Fire. They don't have a vote in the process; that is reserved for the City Council, but we do want to hear from them as
part of the process.
I hope this addresses your question. Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattes rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
From: jack fleming[mailto:jjfleming2000@yahoo.comj
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 8:26 PM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>; martycrna@cox.net
Cc: rgdewey@cox.net; Bill Foster <bfos@cox.net>; grapecon@cox.net; barry hildebrand <bjhilde@aol.com>; bill
schurmer <sbschurm@yahoo.com>; ecarloshum@gmail.com; jimlehman@mac.com; dimarstark@cox.net;
herbertstark@cox.net; gfinkll@cox.net; Jessica Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; dwbrpv@gmail.com; sam rubino
<IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net; tsks@hotmail.com; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Ron Dragoo
<RonD@rpvca.gov>; lames Flannigan <JamesF@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>; Daniel Trautner
<DanielT@rpvca.gov>; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Mary Hirsch
<MaryH@rpvca.gov>; Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Plan for Ladera Linda
Hi Matt,
Thank you for your response. Would you please address the stakeholder issue? The only stakeholders in the
project are the residents of the four homeowner associations; the YMCA, Red Cross, Sheriff and other groups
are tenants and should not have a voice or vote in the design of the project.
Best,
Jack Fleming
REALTOR and CPA
310-748-5206
License # 01946212
RE/MAX Estate Properties
oh by the way .... I'm never too busy for your referrals!
From: Matt Waters <MattW(o.rpvca.gov>
To: "martycrna(o)cox.net" <martycrna .cox.net>
Cc: "rgdewey(a)cox.net" <rgdewey(@cox.net>; Bill Foster <bfos(a)_cox.net>; "grapecon(a),cox.net" <grapecon cox.net>;
barry hildebrand <bjhilde(a.aol.com>; bill schurmer <sbschurm(ayahoo.com>; "ecarloshum(o-)_gmail. com"
<ecarloshum(5_)gmail. com>; "jimlehman�a mac.com" <iimlehman(a mac.com>; "dimarstark a.cox.net"
<dimarstark(a-cox.net>; "herbertstark(a),cox.net" <herbertstark(cDcox.net>; "gfink11(c)-cox.net" <gfink11 a(),.cox.net>; Jessica
Vlaco <vlaco5na.cox.net>; "dwbrpv(a-gmail. com" <dwbrpv(a),gmail.com>; sam rubino <IAMSAMBINO(-)aol.com>;
"i.tetherow(a-cox.net" <j.tetherowO_cox.net>; Isks(chotmail.com" <tsksahotmail.com>; "1jfleming2000(awahoo.com"
<jjfleming2000(acr�jc yahoo.com>; CC <CC(a-rpvca.gov>; Ron Dragoo <RonD(q-)_rpvca.gov>; James Flannigan
<JamesF(a rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD a(�.rpvca.gov>; Daniel Trautner <DanielT(�i_)rpvca.gov>; "Mickey Rodich
<mickeyrodich(@gmail.com>" <mickeyrodich(b_gmail.com>; Mary Hirsch <MaryH(a.rpvca.gov>; Cory Linder
<CorvL(a_rpvca_gov>
Sent: Monday, October 3, 2016 4:58 PM
Subject: FW: Plan for Ladera Linda
Dear Marty,
Thank you for your email about the Ladera Linda Community Center Master Plan. I'd like to respond to some
of the points and concerns you have raised about this project.
*"More rather than less." Staff and the consultant RFA have taken the Council's "less is more" philosophy to
heart. Even though no designs have been made yet (it is important to note that the project is at an information -
gathering phase), the two designs that will be shown at another public workshop before going to Council will
show a community center that is smaller than the existing buildings. Additionally, a number of major recreation
elements have been purposefully excluded from consideration, including a gymnasium, pool, dog park and
2 B-44
skate park. No elements that were opposed by the community will be included and the scope of the project has
not increased.
**Survey: You note that a survey has made the rounds showing strong community resistance to this
project. Public workshops and a survey conducted in 2014 and 2015 showed strong community support for this
project. The project is included in the Parks Master Plan Update that was approved by City Council in October
2015. The September 22 workshop generated many constructive comments, suggestions, and strong opinions
but there was no consensus expressed there to end the project. It's difficult to be completely for or against this
project until the conceptual designs are complete and made public. No designs have even been created yet for
this project, but all comments received, including the one -question survey, will be forwarded to RFA. Ladera
Linda -adjacent residents will have the opportunity to see and comment on the designs at a subsequent public
workshop and again in front of Council.
**Renovating the buildings: The City Council approved the current Master Plan process for Ladera Linda
which included a recommendation to demolish the existing buildings and replace them. This was based on the
building's poor condition which earned an "F" rating in a 2013 study. Spending funds to renovate temporary
buildings that are now fifty years old with significant infrastructure problems would not be a solid investment.
**City Hall instead of Ladera Linda: City Hall is going through its own Master Plan process, but it is at a very
early stage. Some of the recreation elements that are excluded from the Ladera Linda site may be considered at
City Hall including a gym, pool, and Public Safety components. The site already has a dog park.
**$7.2million: This design, demolition, and construction estimate was taken from the 2015-16 Capital
Improvement Plan, and was based on a 12,000 sq foot footprint to be funded by Capital Improvement Plan
Reserves. The CIP cost calculation is admittedly just an estimate but it does include many of the elements
being discussed currently: restrooms, multi-purpose rooms, activity rooms, landscaping, irrigation, discovery
rooms, and a ranger/Sheriff drop-in office. A new cost estimate will be developed by RFA as part of the LL
Park Master Plan process.
* * 15 employees: This total, which was the result of a meeting with Ladera Linda Homeowner representatives
and City staff is misleading. Ladera Linda is currently staffed by one part-time staff at a time who is overseen
by a full-time Recreation Supervisor. The new building would likely increase staffing to two part-time staff at a
time with one full-time Supervisor. This is comparable to staff levels at Hesse Park and PVIC. The fifteen is a
mix of Sheriff personnel and Open Space Management Staff who would only use their office for drop-in use
since the vast majority of their time will be spent enforcing rules and monitoring the Preserve.. Several
volunteer docents might stop by occasionally to lead a tour of the Discovery/Nature room or work on artifacts
as they do now. This adds up to 15, but actual staffing levels would only increase from 2 to 3.
**"LL will be a very busy place" Staff and RFA, following the lead of Council and the community, are not
proposing additional uses. The building footprint and square footage will be smaller. Parking will be
improved. There will still be "green space and a safe place for children to play." There's already a nature center
and a Sheriff and Open Space Management crew drop in office there now. There will still be classes, HOA
meetings, summer camps, and paddle tennis. City staff will work closely with residents to create clear policies
to set limits on hours, noise, and usage to help maintain the low-key neighborhood feel.
I encourage you to continue to be a part of the process as it moves forward because local resident input is
crucial to the success of this project. I personally appreciate your obvious pride in this wonderful part of the
RPV community. Feel free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
M,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattw@Mvca. ov - (310) 544-5218 p - (310) 544-5291
-----Original Message -----
From: Marty Foster [mailto:martycrnaQcox.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 3:01 PM
To: CC <CCnrpvca. gov>
Cc: r dg ewey&cox.net; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich 2gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Bill Foster
<bfos@cox.net>; grapecon(a,cox.net; barry hildebrand <bjhilde °,aol.com>; bill schurmer
<sbschunn&yahoo.com>; ecarloshum&gmail.com; jimlehman&mac.com; dimarstark(2cox.net;
herbertstarkoa,cox.net;fg mkl I &cox.net; Jessica Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; dwbrpy@gmail.com; sam rubino
<IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net; tsks e hotmail.com; jjflemin 2g 000&yahoo.com
Subject: Plan for Ladera Linda
Some facts have come to light this week.
Again, homeowners surrounding LL thought the message was received that'less is more'.
Apparently not, since LLHOA members learned ' more rather than less' at Monday's meeting with Parks and
Recreation personnel.The scope of the plan is far greater than previously realized.
A survey has been sent to homeowners in the last few days. Results thus far show 86 % in favor of retaining the
buildings present and refurbishing them.
At this time, is it possible to get estimates for such repairs and remodeling deemed necessary at LL? Those
buildings have served well for many years. To update them will be a fraction of the cost discussed this far.
Can the idea be entertained by CC to expand/rebuild city hall and add some park like amenities at that site,
diverting the $7.2 million (gasp) meant for LL?
The plan at LL includes parking and office space for 15 city employees, parking and space for sheriff park
rangers, interpretive center personnel and open space management employees totaling at least 15 more folks
that will inhabit the center, some 24/7 and at least Monday through Friday. This does not sound like a park or a
community center. It seems more like an extension of City Hall.
There are many wonderful groups that would like some permanence at LL. Their work is admirable. However,
with all we have mentioned LL will be a very busy place. The surrounding communities' desire for green space
and a safe place for children to play is usurped by these plans.
In the current climate of 'green' concerns, let us follow the three R's ... reduce, reuse, and recycle.
Thank you all as always for the significant work you do for our city.
Marty Foster
Sent from my Wad
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 10:07 AM
To: erstevens@cox.net; cprotem73@cox.ne; tjduhovic@hotmail.com; mizie@cox.net;
briancampbell@gmail.com; susanbrooks0l@yahoo.com; CC; Mona Dill
Cc: martycrna@cox.net; ': "R. Gene Dewey'; 'edmundo hummel'; 'Jim Lehman'; 'Gary
Randall'; 'barry hildebrand'; 'Bill Foster'; 'Richard Stark'; 'Donald Bell'; 'George Fink';
Jessica Vlaco; 'bill schurmer'; 'Sam Rubino'; j.tetherow@cox.net; 'Tom Smith'; 'Angelows
Angelow'; 'Mike Hansen'; 'Judy Youssef:'; 'Youseff Aelony'; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com;
'Paul Henrikson'; 'Bob Klatt'; 'Herb Stark'; latterpeg@cox.net; 'Chuck Agnew'; 'Amanda
Wong'; 'Erika Barber'; 'Emeric Rodich (mickeyrodich '; 'Lenee Bilski'; 'George Fink';
'Joyce'; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; 'Emily McKean'; Cory Linder; Mona Dill; James
Flannigan; Ron Dragoo; Mary Hirsch; Daniel Trautner; aliderek@gmail.com; Margaret
Moilov; Liz
Subject: RE: New Ladera Linda Community Center
Hi Ed,
Thanks for the follow-up email. The current building at Ladera Linda total 18,000 sq ft, but the City
and RFA have not created any specific plans for the site or determined square footage. At the 9-22
public workshop and subsequent meetings with LL and Seaview HOAs, RFA opined that the square
footage would likely be less than the current size which was designed for an elementary site not a
community center. Possible elements for Ladera Linda that Hesse Park does not have include a
nature room, sheriff/Open space drop in office, and additional storage. Actual meeting room space
could be similar to Hesse Park with one larger room and several smaller spaces for meetings and
classes. But again, RFA and staff are in an information gathering phase right now, there is no design
in place. The two alternative designs will be available for community review at a public workshop and
again at a Council meeting.
The intent is to maintain a low-key community feeling at the site, not a County -wide attraction. That is
why a gym, pool, dog park, and skate park are not included. That is why there will be clear policies
limiting the number and type of activities and the hours. That is also why the elements and activities
being considered match current uses at the park.
Regarding staffing, there is some confusion about this issue that I'd like to address. The "15" total,
which was the result of a meeting with Ladera Linda Homeowner representatives and City staff is
misleading. Ladera Linda is currently staffed by one part-time staff at a time who is overseen by a
full-time Recreation Supervisor. The new building would likely increase staffing to two part-time staff
at a time with one full-time Supervisor. This is comparable to staff levels at Hesse Park and
PVIC. The fifteen is a mix of Sheriff personnel and Open Space Management Staff who would only
use their office for drop-in use since the vast majority of their time will be spent enforcing rules and
monitoring the Preserve. Several volunteer docents might stop by occasionally to lead a tour of the
Discovery/Nature room or work on artifacts as they do now. This adds up to 15, but actual staffing
levels would only increase from 2 to 3.
Happy to address any follow-up questions or concerns.
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www. palosverdes.com/rpv
mattw(Qrpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
Subject: RE: New Ladera Linda Community Center
Dear Mr. Waters,
I was just thinking that if the P&R decide to build a 2 story 18,000 sq. ft. Community Center it will almost be double the
size of the Hess Park Center.
Is this what we want for our quiet secluded neighborhood?
TOO OPEN IT UP to all of LA County?
Do we really want all this going on at Ladera Linda Park?
This should be going on at City Hall or at Hess Park.
Wow
Dan said they need room for as many as 15 employees using various offices in the new building, 2 Sheriff Park Rangers,
2-3 Direct Staff for management, 6 to 7 open space management employees, 2 to 3 museum and interpretive center
personal. They have identified the "Stake Holders" as The Land Conservancy/Docents/Enforcement staff/Mommy and
me classes/yoga/ YMCA/ Los Serranos and all four surrounding HOA's. The Sheriff Park rangers need space to store and
charge their electric vehicles. They need space for the ranger's pickups, etc. There is a need for considerable storage for
the Interpretive Center and other organizations that currently store material and artifacts in the existing
buildings. Mickey suggested storage be relocated to other sites closer to the user.
Ed Stevens
From: Matt Waters [mailto:MattW0)rpvca.gov]
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 5:22 PM
To: erstevens(acox.net; cprotem73@cox.ne; Uduhovic@hotmail.com; mizie(aacox.net; briancampbell(a)gmail.com;
susanbrooks0l(a)yahoo.com; CC; Mona Dill
Cc: martycrna(&cox.net; ': "R. Gene Dewey'; 'edmundo hummel'; 'Jim Lehman'; 'Gary Randall'; 'barry hildebrand'; 'Bill
Foster'; 'Richard Stark'; 'Donald Bell'; 'George Fink'; Jessica Vlaco; 'bill schurmer'; 'Sam Rubino'; jAetherow@cox.net;
'Tom Smith'; 'Angelows Angelow'; 'Mike Hansen'; 'Judy Youssef:'; 'Youseff Aelony'; jjfleming200Wbyahoo.com; 'Paul
Henrikson'; 'Bob Klatt'; 'Herb Stark'; latterpeg@cox.net; 'Chuck Agnew'; 'Amanda Wong'; Erika Barber; Emeric Rodich
(mickeyrodich ; Lenee Bilski; George Fink; Joyce; jjfleming20000yahoo.com; Emily McKean; Cory Linder; Mona Dill;
James Flannigan; Ron Dragoo; Mary Hirsch; Daniel Trautner
Subject: RE: New Ladera Linda Community Center
Dear Mr. Stevens.
I am responding to your email about the Ladera Linda Park project. This project has been conducted in an inclusive
manner involving significant and ongoing input from the adjacent HOAs and local residents. Public workshops were
conducted in 2014 and 2015 regarding Ladera Linda as part of the Parks Master Plan Update that was approved by the
City Council in October 2015. That plan included the demolition and redesign of Ladera Linda. Because of the strength
and clarity of community involvement and feedback, a gymnasium, pool, dog park and skate park are not being
considered. The improvements you refer to in your email mirror the community response and Council direction to
maintain a "less is more" approach and keep a low -ley community feel.
In advance of the September 22, 2016 Parks Master Plan workshop, we contacted all adjacent HOAs and mailed flyers to
every resident within a 1000 foot radius of the park, in addition to banners, listsery messages etc... We have also met
with representatives from Seaview and LL HOAs to discuss their concerns in depth. We want to receive community
input at every stage of this process. Staff and RFA did meet with a number of stakeholders, which is a best practice in
any Master Plan effort, but by no means do those stakeholders hold sway over the outcome. We'd rather hear their
opinions early rather than later in the process.
The City Council approved the current Master Plan process for Ladera Linda which included a recommendation to
demolish the existing buildings and replace them. This was based on the building's poor condition which earned an "F"
rating in a 2013 study. Spending funds to renovate temporary buildings that are now fifty years old with significant
infrastructure problems would not be a solid investment.
No designs have been created yet for this project. I hope that the local community likes what RFA Consultant comes up
with for this beautiful part of Palos Verdes, but I certainly encourage you to stay involved in the process and voice your
opinions at the upcoming public workshop where residents will be welcome to weigh in on the merits of the two
alternate designs. Your comments will be forwarded to staff and to RFA.
Thank you and please feel free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rp
mattw(aDrpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
From: erstevens@cox.net [mailto:erstevens@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 4:28 PM
To: cprotem73@cox.ne; tjduhovic@hotmail.com; mizie@cox.net; briancampbell@gmail.com;
susanbrooks0l@yahoo.com; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>
Cc: martycrna@cox.net; ': "R. Gene Dewey' <rgdewey@cox.net>; 'edmundo hummel' <ecarloshum@gmail.com>; 'Jim
Lehman' <iimlehman@mac.com>; 'Gary Randall' <grapecon@cox.net>; 'barry hildebrand' <bihilde@aol.com>; 'Bill
Foster' <bfos@cox. net>; 'Richard Stark' <dimarstark@cox.net>;'Donald Bell' <dwbrpv@gmail.com>;'George Fink'
<gfinkll@cox.net>; Jessica Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; 'bill schurmer' <sbschurm@vahoo.com>; 'Sam Rubino'
<IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; i.tetherow@cox. net; 'Tom Smith' <thomash.smith @gmail.com>; 'Angelows Angelow'
<blagangel@gmail.com>; 'Mike Hansen' <cfink@cfid.net>; 'Judy Youssef:' <iulysa@aol.com>; 'Youseff Aelony'
<v.aelonv@cox.net>; i*fleming2000@yahoo.com;'Paul Henrikson' <paul.henrikson@cox.net>;'Bob Klatt'
<r.klatt@cox.net>; 'Herb Stark' <stearman@iuno.com>; latterpeg@cox.net; 'Chuck Agnew' <cvagnew@cox.net>;
'Amanda Wong' <kiwi esq@hotmail.com>; Erika Barber <nbarber310@cox.net>; Emeric Rodich (mickeyrodich
<mickeyrodich@vahoo.com>; Lenee Bilski <leneebilski@hotmail.com>; George Fink <gfinkll@cox.net>; Joyce
<ifinkcentral@cox.net>; jifleming2000@yahoo.com; Emily McKean <Mickeydande@cox.net>
Subject: New Ladera Linda Community Center
Subject: New Ladera Linda Community Center
To Whom it May Concern
I am disgusted with the way the City of RPV is going about the Ladera Linda Park Project. Our park is not Hess Park off
the main thoroughfare; which is a central focal point for the hill. The city has gone about the entire process in a long and
convoluted way that is "catawampus" to the community's original purpose of bringing the park into health and safety
conformity. It is a project of divide and conqueror. Instead of bringing leaders together from the adjoining neighborhoods
for the community park and making them the spokespersons for the renewal project by forming a small neighborhood
committee of the true stakeholders the City with their consultant has convened a series of "stakeholders" meetings with
users and undermined the very purpose of the park to serve the community in which the park rests. These groups have
tailor made a list of improvements along with others classified as "stakeholders" to upgrade the park to something the
neighbors DO NOT WANT or NEED. Adding insult to injury the Parks Department with the blessing of the City Council
have approved a $90,000 park improvement plan by an outside consultant from of all places ...Orange County... a
microcosm of planned communities. What in the world do we need a consultant to tell us what the community wants and
needs. In addition, why would we spend $90,000 for a plan when we do NOT want one! The funds we are giving the
consultant we could use to make the updates and modifications.
In closing, we all moved to this part of the south bay to retreat from urbanization and to make sure we were not invaded
by outsiders. There is no way in our right minds we would have envisioned any building on the park site that would attract
anyone but us locals. We are satisfied with our small local facility and would appreciate some updates to keep it cozy and
hidden like it is now.
We must solidify to bringing the City to the realization we DO NOT want to move forward with this consultant and want
instead and RFP for a contractor to make bids on repairs and modifications. If we give an inch here we will lose our
community to outsiders.
Sincerely
Edward Stevens
Seaview
This message w/attachments (message) is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential or proprietary. If you are not an intended recipient, please
notify the sender, and then please delete and destroy all copies and attachments, and be advised that any review
or dissemination of, or the taking of any action in reliance on, the infonnation contained in or attached to this
message is prohibited.
Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment products or
other financial product or service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official statement of Sender.
Subject to applicable law, Sender may intercept, monitor, review and retain e -communications (EC) traveling
through its networks/systems and may produce any such EC to regulators, law enforcement, in litigation and as
required by law.
The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived,
B-51
supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are located. This message cannot be
guaranteed to be secure or free of errors or viruses.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg_com/
Version: 2016.0.7797 / Virus Database: 4656/13113 - Release Date: 09/29/16
B-52
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 10:12 AM
To: Charles Agnew; erstevens@cox.net; cprotem73@cox.ne; tjduhovic@hotmail.com;
mizie@cox.net; briancampbell@gmail.com; susanbrooks0l@yahoo.com; CC; Mona Dill
Cc: martycrna@cox.net; ': "R. Gene Dewey'; 'edmundo hummel'; 'Jim Lehman'; 'Gary
Randall'; 'barry hildebrand'; 'Bill Foster'; 'Richard Stark'; 'Donald Bell'; 'George Fink';
Jessica Vlaco; 'bill schurmer'; 'Sam Rubino'; j.tetherow@cox.net; 'Tom Smith'; 'Angelows
Angelow'; 'Mike Hansen'; 'Judy Youssef:'; 'Youseff Aelony'; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com;
'Paul Henrikson'; 'Bob Klatt'; 'Herb Stark'; latterpeg@cox.net; 'Amanda Wong'; 'Erika
Barber'; 'Emeric Rodich (mickeyrodich '; 'Lenee Bilski; 'George Fink'; 'Joyce';
jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; 'Emily McKean'; Cory Linder; Mona Dill; James Flannigan;
Ron Dragoo; Mary Hirsch; Daniel Trautner
Subject: RE: New Ladera Linda Community Center
Dear Mr. Agnew,
Thank you for your email and for your interest in Ladera Linda Community Center. Based on community feedback and
City Council direction, significant added recreation elements such as a gym, pool, skate park, and dog park are not being
considered for the LL Master Plan process. Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns and I
encourage you to stay involved in this process as it moves forward.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattw(a-)-rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
?b
Better,
Dear Mr. Waters.
I am a resident of Ladera Linda.
I want a new building, not a repair of the existing buildings.
The present park is a ghost town, inviting unwanted behavior.
A new community center would be a great addition to the neighborhood.
Having a continual presents with some personnel is strongly desired.
1 B-53
However, I do not want attractions that would bring in unwanted youth
from outside the neighborhood such as gymnasiums or pools.
Thank You,
Charles Agnew
From: Matt Waters [mailto:MattWCa>rpvca.gov]
Sent: Monday, October 3, 2016 5:22 PM
To: erstevens@cox.net; cprotem730cox.ne; t cluhovic@hotmail.com; mizie@cox.net; briancampbell@gmail.com;
susanbrooks0l@yahoo.com; CC; Mona Dill
Cc: martycrna@cox.net; ': "R. Gene Dewey'; 'edmundo hummel'; 'Jim Lehman'; 'Gary Randall'; 'barry hildebrand'; 'Bill
Foster'; 'Richard Stark'; 'Donald Bell'; 'George Fink'; Jessica Vlaco; 'bill schurmer'; 'Sam Rubino'; j.tetherow@cox.net;
'Tom Smith'; 'Angelows Angelow'; 'Mike Hansen'; 'Judy Youssef:'; 'Youseff Aelony'; jjfleming2000@yahoo.com; 'Paul
Henrikson'; 'Bob Klatt'; 'Herb Stark'; latterpeg@cox.net; 'Chuck Agnew'; 'Amanda Wong'; Erika Barber; Emeric Rodich
(mickeyrodich ; Lenee Bilski; George Fink; Joyce; jifleming2000@yahoo.com; Emily McKean; Cory Linder; Mona Dill;
James Flannigan; Ron Dragoo; Mary Hirsch; Daniel Trautner
Subject: RE: New Ladera Linda Community Center
Dear Mr. Stevens.
I am responding to your email about the Ladera Linda Park project. This project has been conducted in an inclusive
manner involving significant and ongoing input from the adjacent HOAs and local residents. Public workshops were
conducted in 2014 and 2015 regarding Ladera Linda as part of the Parks Master Plan Update that was approved by the
City Council in October 2015. That plan included the demolition and redesign of Ladera Linda. Because of the strength
and clarity of community involvement and feedback, a gymnasium, pool, dog park and skate park are not being
considered. The improvements you refer to in your email mirror the community response and Council direction to
maintain a "less is more" approach and keep a low -ley community feel.
In advance of the September 22, 2016 Parks Master Plan workshop, we contacted all adjacent HOAs and mailed flyers to
every resident within a 1000 foot radius of the park, in addition to banners, listsery messages etc... We have also met
with representatives from Seaview and LL HOAs to discuss their concerns in depth. We want to receive community
input at every stage of this process. Staff and RFA did meet with a number of stakeholders, which is a best practice in
any Master Plan effort, but by no means do those stakeholders hold sway over the outcome. We'd rather hear their
opinions early rather than later in the process.
The City Council approved the current Master Plan process for Ladera Linda which included a recommendation to
demolish the existing buildings and replace them. This was based on the building's poor condition which earned an "F"
rating in a 2013 study. Spending funds to renovate temporary buildings that are now fifty years old with significant
infrastructure problems would not be a solid investment.
No designs have been created yet for this project. I hope that the local community likes what RFA Consultant comes up
with for this beautiful part of Palos Verdes, but I certainly encourage you to stay involved in the process and voice your
opinions at the upcoming public workshop where residents will be welcome to weigh in on the merits of the two
alternate designs. Your comments will be forwarded to staff and to RFA.
Thank you and please feel free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattes cni.rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
I4 4ki
Bfirl
From: erstevens@cox.net [mailto:erstevens@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 4:28 PM
To: cprotem73@cox.ne; tiduhovic@hotmail.com; mizie@cox.net; briancampbell@gmail.com;
susanbrooks0l@vahoo.com; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>
Cc: martycrna@cox.net;': "R. Gene Dewey' <rgdewev@cox. net>; 'edmundo hummel' <ecarloshum@gmail.com>;'Jim
Lehman' <iimlehman@mac.com>;'Gary Randall' <grapecon@cox.net>;'barry hildebrand' <bihilde@aol.com>;'Bill
Foster' <bfos@cox.net>; 'Richard Stark' <d imarsta rk@cox. net>; 'Donald Bell' <dwbrpv@gmail.com>; 'George Fink'
<Bfinkll@cox.net>; Jessica Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; 'bill schurmer' <sbschurm@vahoo.com>; 'Sam Rubino'
<IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; i.tetherow@cox.net; 'Tom Smith' <thomash.smith@gmail.com>; 'Angelows Angelow'
<blagangel@gmail.com>; 'Mike Hansen' <cfink@cfid.net>; 'Judy Youssef:' <iulysa@aol.com>; 'Youseff Aelony'
<v.aelonv@cox.net>; 'Paul Henrikson' <paul.henrikson@cox.net>;'Bob Klatt'
<r.klatt@cox.net>; 'Herb Stark' <stearman@iuno.com>; latterpeg@cox.net; 'Chuck Agnew' <cvagnew@cox.net>;
'Amanda Wong' <kiwi esq@hotmail.com>; Erika Barber <nbarber310@cox.net>; Emeric Rodich (mickeyrodich
<mickeyrodich@vahoo.com>; Lenee Bilski <leneebilski@hotmail.com>; George Fink <gfinkll@cox.net>; Joyce
<ifinkcentral@cox.net>; jifkMing2000@yahoo.com; Emily McKean <Mickeydande@cox.net>
Subject: New Ladera Linda Community Center
Subject: New Ladera Linda Community Center
To Whom it May Concern:
I am disgusted with the way the City of RPV is going about the Ladera Linda Park Project. Our park is not Hess Park off
the main thoroughfare; which is a central focal point for the hill. The city has gone about the entire process in a long and
convoluted way that is "catawampus" to the community's original purpose of bringing the park into health and safety
conformity. It is a project of divide and conqueror. Instead of bringing leaders together from the adjoining neighborhoods
for the community park and making them the spokespersons for the renewal project by forming a small neighborhood
committee of the true stakeholders the City with their consultant has convened a series of "stakeholders" meetings with
users and undermined the very purpose of the park to serve the community in which the park rests. These groups have
tailor made a list of improvements along with others classified as "stakeholders" to upgrade the park to something the
neighbors DO NOT WANT or NEED. Adding insult to injury the Parks Department with the blessing of the City Council
have approved a $90,000 park improvement plan by an outside consultant from of all places ...Orange County... a
microcosm of planned communities. What in the world do we need a consultant to tell us what the community wants and
needs. In addition, why would we spend $90,000 for a plan when we do NOT want one! The funds we are giving the
consultant we could use to make the updates and modifications.
In closing, we all moved to this part of the south bay to retreat from urbanization and to make sure we were not invaded
by outsiders. There is no way in our right minds we would have envisioned any building on the park site that would attract
0
anyone but us locals. We are satisfied with our small local facility and would appreciate some updates to keep it cozy and
hidden like it is now.
We must solidify to bringing the City to the realization we DO NOT want to move forward with this consultant and want
instead and RFP for a contractor to make bids on repairs and modifications. If we give an inch here we will lose our
community to outsiders.
Sincerely
Edward Stevens
Seaview
This message w/attachments (message) is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential or proprietary. If you are not an intended recipient, please
notify the sender, and then please delete and destroy all copies and attachments, and be advised that any review
or dissemination of, or the taking of any action in reliance on, the information contained in or attached to this
message is prohibited.
Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment products or
other financial product or service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official statement of Sender.
Subject to applicable law, Sender may intercept, monitor, review and retain e -communications (EC) traveling
through its networks/systems and may produce any such EC to regulators, law enforcement, in litigation and as
required by law.
The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived,
supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are located. This message cannot be
guaranteed to be secure or free of errors or viruses.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - hilp://www.avg.co
Version: 2016.0.7797 / Virus Database: 4656/13113 - Release Date: 09/29/16
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 9:59 AM
To: 'Carol Dygean'
Cc: Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; Mona Dill; Mary Hirsch; Ron Dragoo; James Flannigan
Subject: RE: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan - suggest to consider an acquatic center
Dear Ms. Dygean,
Thank you for your interest in the Ladera Linda Park Master Plan. My apologies for the delay in getting back to you. I'm
glad to hear that you and your family have used the facilities there in the past.
Unfortunately, the City's Parks Master Plan which was adopted in 2015 does not include a gymnasium or pool at that
site, so those elements are not being considered during the Ladera Linda Park process. Those elements are considered
as possible components at the Point Vicente Park/Civic Center complex which is in the early stages of a Master Plan
process currently. Thank you again for your interest and I encourage you to stay involved in both Master Plan projects
as they move forward.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattw(o-)-rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
From: Carol Dygean [mailto:mcdygean@cox.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:33 AM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Ladera Linda Park Master Plan - suggest to consider an acquatic center
My husband and I reside in the City of Palos Verdes Estates. We have been at the
Ladera Linda sight over the years for various things, like soccer, scout meetings, hiking,
etc.
My husband mentioned last year what a perfect site for an acquatic center. We have a 13
year old daugther that is a competitive swimmer, so we've visited lots of acquatic centers,
including the Rose Bowl acquatic Center, the Acquatic Center in Irvine, Alondra Acquatic
1 B-57
Center and many college and high school pools. An acquatic center can provide swim
lessons, recreation for all ages (including seniors) and also have an agreement with a
local swim team to train and hold meets. It would be a great thing for the site. It isn't
cheap and requires fundraising and/or grants, though likely there would be interest. EI
Segundo is in the process of partnering with the School Districts for one currently, along
with private donors.
Please consider this possibility as you make plans. It is a facility lacking on the hill right
now.
Carol Dygean
mcdygeancox.net
2 B-58
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 10:01 AM
To: 'Richard Fisher'
Subject: FW: Ladera Linda meeting tonight
FYI
From: Gary Randall [mailto:grapecon@cox.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 4:58 PM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>; Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>; 'Herb Stark' <herbertstark@cox.net>;
'Gene Dewey' <rgdewey@cox.net>; Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>; Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>; Daniel Trautner
<DanielT@rpvca.gov>; Leslie Williamson <LeslieW@rpvca.gov>; Mary Hirsch <MaryH@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Ladera Linda meeting tonight
Thank you , Matt, for the additional insight. I do think such things as "American Red Cross Evacuation and General
Shelter Location" are probably not known to all the residents (or maybe I just haven't been paying close attention). I
would think that would be an important item to mention. As that type of facility, I would imagine some supplies would
need to be stored there, which would occupy some building "square footage," but realistically that would not be square
footage for any sort of active use other than in the event of a disaster. I think that is an important distinction that might
be helpful for residents to hear.
From: Matt Waters [mailto:MattW(-0rpvca.govI
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 1:44 PM
To: Gary Randall
Cc: Cory Linder; Doug Willmore; 'Herb Stark'; Gene Dewey; Ron Dragoo; Mona Dill; Daniel Trautner; Leslie Williamson;
Mary Hirsch; Matt Waters
Subject: RE: Ladera Linda meeting tonight
Hi Gary,
Good to hear from you and thanks for your email. You raise a number of good points that will certainly be discussed
tonight. I also anticipate significant input from the audience, so our intent is to move quickly through our presentations,
so there'll be ample time for public discussion and questions.
The Powerpoint does broadly outline current uses at Hesse Park during the RFA section of the report (slides 20 and 21).
Ladera Linda currently hosts a wide range of ongoing classes, seasonal camps, a YMCA summer camp, community
meetings, workshops as well as drop in -sports and casual use. Besides classrooms of varying sizes and an MPR, Ladera
Linda also hosts a Discovery Room, and Sheriff/Open Space Management (Preserve Ranger) drop-in offices. Typically,
new community centers are not built with sufficient storage (e.g. Hesse and PVIC) which is an issue to consider early on
in this process. LL is also a designated American Red Cross Evacuation and General Shelter location as well.
Now you are certainly correct that all 18,000 sq feet of LL is likely not ever used at the same time. Based on community
input that has already been received, along with input from tonight's workshop and the professional expertise of our
consultant, it is likely that the two alternative designs will be less than the current 18,000 square feet. That size (and
layout) was intended for an elementary school, not a park and community center. 18,000 is listed as a maximum, not as
a target size. The identified elements of the site, along with topography and other factors, should drive the square
footage, not the other way around.
We will certainly discuss current usage in general terms tonight as you suggested and follow-up with more detail going
forward. Current usage may not be the best barometer given the condition of the facility, but it certainly is a factor
worth considering.
Hope that was helpful and I look forward to seeing you at tonight's meeting.
Take Care,
Matt
From: Gary Randall [mailto:grapecon@cox.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 11:13 AM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Cory Linder<CoryL@rpvca.gov>; Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>;'Herb Stark' <herbertstark@cox.net>;
Gene Dewey <rgdewev@cox.net>
Subject: Ladera Linda meeting tonight
Hi Matt
I am looking forward to tonight's meeting regarding the master plan for the Ladera Linda Community Center. Thank
you, also, for publishing the Powerpoint presentation ahead of that meeting.
In looking thru the Powerpoint presentation, I did not see any information about current actual usage of the 18,000
square foot community center in its current state. Perhaps I missed it — it I did, please let me know where that
information is in the reports.
Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much of, and how often, the current 18,000 square foot is being
utilized. Do YMCA day camps use all of the classrooms? Do Fall/Spring rec classes use all of the 18,000 square feet? If
the entire 18,000 square feet is not currently being utilized, or only utilized on very rare occasions, I would think that
would be important information to present so that those in attendance can make informed comments about their
wishes and input for the size of any new community center. For instance, if only 5000 square feet is being utilized, I
would likely be in favor of a community center that has similar square footage to what is currently being utilized (i.e.
5000 square feet), and likely not in favor of an 18,000 square foot facility. Of course, this is just an example, but I think
you can appreciate how current usage information is very important to the residents making informed comments.
I realize this is late input, and that it might be difficult to present specific numbers at tonight's meeting. If you cannot
present specific numbers and statistics, could you at least do the following:
Perhaps generally comment on current usage, and commit to getting specific numbers put together in a
specific timeframe to help in the decision process
2. Commit to, once you have those details, provide the detail to at least everyone who signed in at the meeting
and gave an email address, and solicit their feedback based on that information when it is published?
Thank you for your consideration of this aspect.
I would anticipate a LOT of input from the audience tonight. I am very hopeful that you, Cory, and the consultant will be
given a chance by the audience to get through your presentations first, without interruption, and then that you would
allow a generous amount of time for audience comments. You might even start your presentations by asking the
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 10:05 AM
To: 'Gary Randall'
Cc: Cory Linder; Vlaco Jessica; ed hummel; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>;
'Herb Stark'; Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; James Flannigan; Ron Dragoo; Mona Dill
Subject: RE: Hike this morning
Hi Gary,
Thank you for these comments about and for your involvement. My apologies for the delay in responding. I will
certainly share your concerns with the other staff who are working on this project as well as RFA.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattw(o-)-rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
From: Gary Randall [mailto:grapecon@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 9:00 AM
To: Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>; Vlaco Jessica <jvlaco@yahoo.com>; ed hummel <ecarloshum@gmail.com>; Mickey
Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; 'Herb Stark' <herbertstark@cox.net>
Subject: Hike this morning
Hi Matt:
Attached is a good example of a large, organized group that came and completely filled the LL Community Center
Parking lot this morning at 7:15 a.m. (and parked a fair way down Forrestal). I estimated 50-60 hikers when they finally
all assembled and headed out, and it's not even Saturday morning! I think it will be extremely important for you,
working with the consultant, to come up with good, creative solutions to ensure parking at any new facility is reserved
for actual users of the facility, not for large groups going on hikes in the preserve. I also trust that, in this process, you
will be thinking about solutions to overflow parking onto Forrestal and onto Pirate, Phantom, and Sea Raven Drives.
I have suggested in the past that Pirate, Phantom, and Sea Raven should be considered for "parking by permit only"
restrictions, and that perhaps parking along Forrestal be limited to one side only (and perhaps have time limits on it, say
2 hours maximum). I think this discussion should be occurring now, regardless of any longer term project earmarked for
the community center and park. My views and ideas for a solution may not be exactly the same as other Ladera Linda
residents, but I think the majority of residents feel something needs to be done to improve the current situation.
I am not against the general public utilizing our beautiful parks and hiking trails — after all, these are public areas. I do
not think, however, that the city has any obligation to provide unlimited, or even large amounts, of parking, nor
encourage use of these areas thru social media. It's time to get this situation under control, and also develop some very
good plans for the future community center.
Thank you for your consideration. I do have some additional comments on last night's meeting, but will include those in
a separate email.
Gary
•
audience to hold all questions and comments until the end of the presentation and that there will be ample time for
discussion after the presentations.
Again, I look forward to seeing you at tonight's meeting.
Regards
Gary Randall
Matt Waters
From:
Matt Waters
Sent:
Friday, October 07, 2016 10:15 AM
To:
'Donald Bell'
Cc:
Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; Mona Dill; James Flannigan; Ron Dragoo
Subject:
RE: Ladera Linda
Dear Mr. Bell,
Thank you for your email and opinions on the Ladera Linda Park Master Plan. I will share your email with other City staff
involved in the project as well as the Design consultant firm, RFA.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
mattw(a-)rpvca.gov - (310) 544-5218 p — (310) 544-5291 f
From: Donald Bell [mailto:dwbrpv@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 2:21 PM
To: cprotem73@cox.ne; tjduhovic@hotmail.com; mizie@cox.net; briancampbell@gmail.com;
susanbrooks0l@yahoo.com
Cc: martycrna@cox.net; Gene Dewey <rgdewey@cox.net>; edmundo hummel <ecarloshum@gmail.com>; Jim Lehman
<jimlehman@mac.com>; Gary Randall <grapecon@cox.net>; Barry <bjhilde@aol.com>; Bill Foster <bfos@cox.net>;
Richard Stark <dimarstark@cox.net>; George Fink <gfinkll@cox.net>; Jessica Vlaco <vlaco5@cox.net>; bill schurmer
<sbschurm@yahoo.com>; Sam Rubino <IAMSAMBINO@aol.com>; j.tetherow@cox.net; Tom Smith
<thomash.smith@gmail.com>; Angelows Angelow <blagangel@gmail.com>; Mike Hansen <cfink@cfid.net>; Judy
Youssef: <julysa@aol.com>; Youseff Aelony <y.aelony@cox.net>; Jack Fleming <jjfleming2000@yahoo.com>; Paul
Henrikson <paul.henrikson@cox.net>; Bob Klatt <r.klatt@cox.net>; Herb Stark <stearman@juno.com>;
latterpeg@cox.net; Amanda Wong <kiwi_esq@hotmail.com>; Erika Barber <nbarber310@cox.net>; Emeric Rodich
(mickeyrodich <mickeyrodich@yahoo.com>; Lenee Bilski <leneebilski@hotmail.com>; Joyce <jfinkcentral@cox.net>;
Emily McKean <Mickeydande@cox.net>; Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>; James Flannigan <JamesF@rpvca.gov>; Ron
Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>; Mary Hirsch <MaryH@rpvca.gov>; Daniel Trautner <DanielT@rpvca.gov>; Matt Waters
<MattW@rpvca.gov>; Charles Agnew <cvagnew@cox.net>; erstevens@cox.net; Home Bell <dwbrpv@gmail.com>;
Mona Dill <MonaD@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Ladera Linda
Dear Council Members,
With respect, we believe a Master Plan for Parks at Ladera Linda is a distorted view of what our city should be
considering. Rancho Palos Verdes has an opportunity to create a City Center at Upper Point Vicente, not some isolated site
for "stakeholder needs" at Ladera Linda.
Many neighborhood meetings held years ago by the Recreation & Parks group encouraged citizens to add to a wish list of
recreational facilities they would use. Swimming pools, basketball courts, skate parks, and other recreation facilities plus
Sheriff Offices were universally supported and were to be centralized. We know ideas have floated for years to modernize and
expand the outdated and cramped facilities of our city government. All this should be done within one expenditure of millions
at the logical Upper Pointe Vicente site.
You must stop the Ladera Linda project now before more money ($7 million?) is wasted. We do not know who made the
decision that the Ladera Linda Buildings got an "F" and needed to be razed. At least instruct R&PD to get real costs for modest
repairs to the existing site to make it safe and useful for current needs. It is not hard to include earthquake upgrade, become
ADA compliant, upgrade HVAC and replace roofing and T -bar ceilings. There is an industry called "Commercial Tennant
Improvement" where you can obtain competitive proposals to save millions that should be used for a new City Center for
Rancho Palos Verdes.
The Recreation and Parks Department is consuming time and money needlessly. As a PUMP Committee member years ago, I
heard city staff considered Non -Reserve public lands as having minimal development except at Upper Point Vicente. We
neither want nor need anything more than exists now at Ladera Linda. We do not want tree removal, more parking, more
structure, more attractions, more storage or more self serving money wasted on consultants or planners. We believe the
statistics used by R&PD to justify the design and plan are skewed and do not represent the true opinions of more than 500
affected voters.
Very Concerned Citizens,
Donald and Carolyn Bell
3571 Vigilance Drive
Ladera Linda
•
Matt Waters
From: Matt Waters
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 10:18 AM
To: 'Lenee Bilski'
Cc: Cory Linder; Daniel Trautner; Mona Dill; James Flannigan; Ron Dragoo
Subject: RE: Ladera Linda Parksite
Dear Ms. Bilski,
Thank you for your email and opinions on the Ladera Linda Park Master Plan. I will share your email with other City staff
involved in the project as well as the Design consultant firm, RFA.
Sincerely,
Matt Waters
Senior Administrative Analyst
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Recreation and Parks Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpy
mattes rpvca.gov -(310)544-5218p—(310)544-5291
From: Lenee Bilski [mailto:leneebilski@hotmail.comj
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 3:55 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Matt Waters <MattW@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Ladera Linda Parksite
Oct. 4, 2016
Dear Mayor Dida , Councilmembers and city staff,
I attended the Sept. 22nd Ladera Linda Workshop mtg. which was well publicized.
I did not receive notice of a Sept. 26th mtg. for SeaView.
The city staff listed renters (yoga instruction, Mommy & Me classes, YMCA, etc.) among the "stakeholders"
which I believe is unfair! The residents, especially those in the surrounding neighborhoods, are the
"stakeholders". The needs of the Red Cross, Sheriff Dept. at LL are understandable and should be included in
the plans.
I do not believe that organizations/individuals renting the current site are "stakeholders" to be consulted
about future plans for the parksite. Did the City consider the Montesorri school located on the site a
"stakeholder" ? I don't think so.
Is the city staff trying to use our parks to raise money through rentals??? It appears that way.
Another question I heard was why does the city use social media to publicize our parks to the general public
in southern California area???
I believe the residents of SeaView, especially on Dauntless Dr., will be impacted by development plans for
Ladera Linda as well as the Ladera Linda area residents. It could be a very negative impact.
I would suggest that the City change it's slogan from"less is more" to
"LESS is BETTER".
Thank you for your consideration of my comments and questions.
Ever vigilant,
Lenee Bilski
SeaView resident
2 B-67