The URL can be used to link to this page

RPVCCA_CC_SR_2014_04_29_C_PVDS_Roadway_RealignmentCITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: REVIEWED: Project Manager: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS MICHAEL THRONE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS «b APRIL 29, 2014 PVDS ROADWAY REALIGNMENT-EAST END/GATEWAY PARK PARKING LOT INFORMATIONAL REPORT CAROLYNN PETRU, ACTING CITY MANAGE~ Ron Dragoo, Senior Engin~ RECOMMENDATION 1. Receive and file BACKGROUND Palos Verdes Drive South is the only major east-west arterial across southern Rancho Palos Verdes. Palos Verdes Drive South is a primary access route for citizens and commuters traveling in and out of the City. Access to the City of Los Angeles, the port and Interstate 110 to the east is needed to facilitate those who commute to employment centers, visit RPV's many scenic destinations and to provide for the passage of emergency vehicles. This arterial crosses the Klondike Canyon, Portuguese Bend, and Abalone Cove Landslides where the roadway is subjected to the differential land movement of the three landslide areas. The point where Palos Verdes Drive South crosses the slip surface of the Portuguese Bend and Klondike Canyon Landslides is notable when driving in either direction, as the roadway veers toward the ocean at this location (See Attachment B Location Map). The deformation of the roadway surface has taken place over several years as the Portuguese Bend Landslide slips toward the ocean at a much faster rate than the Klondike Canyon Landslide. The land movement over time has resulted in the need to realign this section of roadway putting put the asphalt back within its right of way and to address a safety concern. To address this safety concern, the City Council authorized funding to construct the PVDS Roadway Realignment-East End project in the FY2013/14 budget. Additionally, C-1 the FY 13/14 budget includes funds to construct a parking area in the vicinity of the PVDS roadway project to help alleviate the lack of available parking for folks that enter the preserve through the end of Crenshaw Blvd. in the Del Cerro neighborhood. To enable Staff to make a more informed decision regarding the location of the parking lot, and to provide an opportunity for the public to relay any ideas or concerns, Staff conducted two public informational meeting. The first meeting was held in October 2013 and the second in March 2014. Both meeting were well attended and comments received during the October meeting indicated that many opposed the installation of a parking lot along PVDS and a few opposed the roadway relocation project. Comments received during the March meeting indicated that many were opposed to the installation of a parking lot along PVDS, but none opposed realigning the east end of PVDS. Communication received from the public and notes taken during the meeting are attached to this memorandum (Attachment A). DISCUSSION The roadway project is needed to address safety concerns caused by the landslide. The parking lot as initially configured was not well received by the public and accordingly Staff is not recommending proceeding with siting and building a parking lot in conjunction with the roadway project. Staff met in the field and reviewed possible locations to site the parking lot following the March public meeting. Attachment Bis a map that illustrates one possible location where the parking lot could be located. The land surface in this area is currently not broken or fissured due to landslide activity; however, the land is located in the landslide so movement is inevitable. Staff is planning to proceed and finalize the design for the roadway repairs. The parking lot will be studied further and public input will be sought prior to developing recommendations for the City Council to consider. The City's Recreation and Parks Department will lead the Gateway Parking Lot effort with support from the Community Development and Public Works Departments. The proposed Parking Lot project is included in the list of proposed uses of Capital Improvement Projects Reserve, which is attached to the FY 2014/15 Hybrid Zero-Based Budgeting menu staff report also on this evening's agenda. CONCLUSIONS Receive and file this report. FISCAL IMPACT Funding for a Gateway Parking Lot project will be included, for the City Council's consideration, in the draft FY2014-15 budget. Attachments: A) B) Public Meeting Comments Gateway Parking Lot Location Map C-2 Attachment A C-3 Public Meeting Comments and Questions as noted by Staff for Roadway Maintenance on PVDS in Portuguese Bend Project October 30, 2013 Robert Halderwan • What type and quantity of soil will be used to fill in the fissures and the area where the ililriJJf JJir•IJIOli!ilttfewl\tgimiii:t#d,X~t;:m~wA:~fiJ • ~-~lill!!ll?¥!Wili>:lGll!lfillfAM'm'.@'.'®'Bmif~ Oliver Hazard • He has concerns with the impact the additional weight vehicles will have on the slide liimAlfi~&Jl&Jii.®lftefl®i!rffllJWmli!t4'.<i!tRIB • Existing abandoned homes on the south side of the road experience vandalism (graffiti, drugs, parties, etc.), dead bodies have been found in the area and drug trafficking occurs along the shore; he believes proposed parking lot will "invite" more people to continue misusing the area and aggravating the problem. WJiJe:ct • He does not support an equestrian activity due to many existing fissures; these create an unsafe path for the horses and their riders. WB1et! • Proposed fence around the parking lot will be tedious and costly to maintain due to constant land movement. NJjJ'ef#.:&: • There are no lifeguards in the beach area; improvements will invite the public to an l)llSl)pervised beach. 'NJ:#ea • What will be done to maintain the proposed parking lot and existing dewatering wells effluent lines? ,,., •• ,.~a • i:)(isting broken dewatering well lines need to be maintained and supervised. if;g(~gcl 1 C-4 • Existing white pipe is in the same condition as the black pipe line; it needs to be maintained. m9t~a • He is concerned that the new road design will be moving up and down towards the p[opgsed parking lot. &a:t&a Robert Pedersen • He wants for the existing road curve to be fixed only. N:f#~ef!I Lynn Swank • • Does the City have an approximate number of people that will be visiting the area per l!fj::i~i[~rim~i~~:::rq1::;Q~:~Pmm:&¢'.a.t~Faapea&1ma1eB~::4:a;p~c&tag:::$m~a:~sAtn(u:::mu1:1tm1i:tm:w· !Q$.{£ll9i itb.gftf{@J,~tiJ§JJlQ~i) Richard Stark • He is concerned with the cost to maintain the road and parking lot? 6tci'tg&~ • Jeanne Smelley • Where is the soil coming from to fill in the area where the proposed road is being ~)~i1·E:ai;wJ3ot~~.$oltta:Goro~tH:>mw1tmnm~R;iY:U:1SJr6'e·ctt~ai, • 2 C-5 Al Edgerton • He supports proposed parking lot; this will relieved the existing overcrowding parking in Del Cerro area. wa.te2i Mickey Rodich • Y'!~S!L!S. .. !~~ !?.Y99,~tf2rJIJ.~prgpgs~cj F9c:t9 c:i.119parking lot? '$.S.OX13QQO}f.oMFJ~ft&XJil¥i$'$oftJJJ:Qt6:t::tti~il9tKlh§t@t • A Hill located at the toe of the landslide near the bluff in Portuguese Bend was removed lfl•li•IJ/latif1liAfil111sj • Address the new weight from proposed road filling and parked vehicles that will be added to the area. r:5;~:::1i~tMtJJJI$.i\:qn'RIXa:wbliil!itn'ef ac.91~:c;t::t$:::a:fJtt~h:t1Qt9t!ta§:~FiJt1:w1~::c9t~:ar.e::tcgm}lgf:it::g@:Mi;~fQ,# m'cl$.fm~~J1::1gxaa1Jr~ttimfJttiJt::a.rMl~Jil.at:r$foa1::§.19am~tlnti: • A comprehensive study needs to be done of the area to understand its land movement iil~-~W&rE!J&ti~fillli~lf£~<f{,f2~,f&<11iiro1k!¢t1WiPt<t • Investigate the "black water" in the dewatering wells. [Ee:::§le:l&J~rtfJ'g[I[W,~1.l$!ltit~fl!~f::~9.#l9.f::t0t~fEflP11i~t~ Joe Lindorfer • Will a left turn on PYDS (east direction) be accommodated? ~ratttaata:at~JfiU@:tt::mrai:iBI!:vfim'~n:t$~:wr11:Jfaeytqg§'.'l~nsm9'.taa:t~'Qt • He is concerned that the proposed road alignment won't last; it will start slipping and moving south as soon as the work is completed. ll•l•tf•JlfrlJlllllS,ci Herb Stark • He is speaking against the project. He is concerned with the new soil load that will be added to the area and accelerate the land movement. 'fjfi]l;fd • Find solution to slow down movement instead of realigning road. 3 C-6 • He is concerned that land movement will increase when fill is placed in the proposed ROW area with soil from local hill as it did when soil was removed from toe to fill in the road on previous years. &it?llff&i~J1t::rQ:::ta:effJ.s'PHan::ra.&<BRtaQ,~low.&a:toae5sv1ffgfil&c.?Jrl$B:f"Bt:f6e!~&ttres~{ Lowell Wedemeyer • Jim Knight • • • Are we having a continuation of the bike lanes? aJ~eua£lE,~t~tiJ.rt~an~,:gfffJ112rtqr::to::trJ:~:::ttJB:WJJHa~N:ii6t~iPrB1fM~t:rw1ttrnittMst?J:MJ1~BNaJm:~lM:~il~ti~n fitt'btr<euan:e11u1£Mi1t111a:y&J1iiaHt:1$f§fgrHn~l:frit::t#J1auf1Hi:m·a:t$t aJerfiJJ.!:Jrfe:e:BJtiJ1lvwe:'1ta?Jffg P-l~J:~;~JfilkJ~;:::lqni~$:tiiffm~::ar~:a:i • He advised to keep ~xisting sewer pipe lines in their current location. . . . ................... . ~t$ltilx!$llitm~a:lHmteN£:saBm:Jt1t:JiKt>tsJttctlifa~:1~ftu~:$1'lJJdt6§i11ttl9il.1t&.~PJ~.ro<Jv~.il:w118JflJ:ei roa&:&Y:BeaUtt~fflH9Ji~r:£:::ici::r.aBJJH&:t~rfftatme:n:er59J~LoJ::15~:'P:JP.e$):ttfe.Qvfh?J:.tfr~:J;fti2'.'E£~::ta1::tM:g/t gf/fte:nt:t9:&J£:tt?lnJ::::w2.9R1Htgf~J~rtJ:9:t::th~itaJ;1utt~s::at:'li.~1z9£::tan:rJXeI.&$$BBTar:ea:w.tt&nti&lac~:91~r tana::m9'.!Wm~mm1~H::~xl$l~:'951:'9n~:ma&M$:::§1~$~r::tp:::m~t9g~¢H;, Gordon Leon • H~ supports having a left turn lane (eastbound) onto the proposed parking lot. &9Wd 4 C-7 • • • • The proposed design should be for a 1 O year road design plan . &'a left ~tiln~aMi~~~im~~:tm~~1~116~i%%;~~~16iiaii&aiwmW.1a~~~iiiai:aai.cleaa&~~!.:w116uh~ st~fftaJJr?JJotrtfJ:tJJJ:J1¢!k1aa:ta'g#feqeffotcrs2raiat/rr~hfiyJBJ#H~axona'&'HB::e1trt£i$r&11:~'ilY ne:e}'.#':J9::§§::r.~tn=a¥~~w ~.~!!~r ~gly!ign~ ~b<:?.Y.19 9~§9Y.9~t()th~r thc:i.r:i .. placing more asphalt . !fff:ije¢trS!r~<::iWteJJ:tQ1 cfg¢le$~ $titec'fY ?Nffi¢etfJ$; Sunshine • Have a comprehensive plan to slow down the land movement. mcit~a • Go back to the research made by Dr. Ehlig to solve problem and save money. rm9·1~·a Chris Del Moro • • • • • People involved in project should be acquainted with the proposed road and parking lot area? rl6Je:?J Is the City aware of the existing big cracks (fissures) where the new road and parking lot ~~~iB:ali:~imrb:~:::$x9.9tla@am~n::QttB~:c9g§'wo&1:119~;0:9·t:1ae'.~o·::a~:t~rmta:~mY:~t~ Dewatering wells and drains do not get maintained. What will be the difference with this Ciiff $frE~uu1lana.a::"t:ina"?ste:·wqrorarog?i~:Sffit6~ t2r~fJAffrr8.mmm~::fattm~ (JBS! ar~t~'Ptfft~WB i6isBra1~araa~~::H9JlH9rt/8$doJ.f6nattofiot:.motiiNJ.h9H&e::atteHheiEt6'$:JB&awl!ixJ$ mcHHra;n~a:~1mH2lfry &Hew$eBttP-oorro2i<twd9wilt6~ mamtdiH&&: 5 C-8 • Ray Mathys • rJ()\Af l()ng will it take for the current road to end up in the ocean? 'tlllikfia:wrn • • He is questioning if the realignment of the road has something to do with the proposed lll•m11••1111a1r1J1farra11 (;QD.'.¢~trn Robert 6 C-9 Nadia Carrasco From: Ron Dragoo Sent: To: Monday, November 04, 2013 4:36 PM lindorfer Cc: Subject: Hi Mr. Lindorfer, Nadia Carrasco; PublicWorks RE: PVDS road project Thanks for taking the time to review this very important safety project and provide what appears to be a logical suggestion toward the ongoing maintenance required by the continuing land movement in this area. I was thinking we could add pavement and grading, from time to time when appropriate, to the north side of the roadway on the Portuguese Bend side of the landslide as the movement affected the roadway alignment, but your thoughts seem valid as well. My only concern about preparing for the movement with additional Asphalt to the South of the roadway (in the right of way as you have shown) is how the alignment of the striping will affect the appearance of bending in the roadway as the roadway moves with the land. I'll call you later this week (most likely on Thursday afternoon) so we can discuss your thoughts and my thoughts further. Thanks again for your positive suggestions they are very encouraging to me! Best regards, Ron Dragoo, PE Senior Civil Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 (310) 544-5252 From: lindorfer [mailto:lindorferl@cox.net] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 2:55 PM To: Ron Dragoo Cc: Nadia Carrasco; PublicWorks Subject: PVDS road project Hi Ron, Some more thoughts about the S turn problem. I suggested that you might push the proposed roadway curve north to touch the edge of the right ofway(ROW) at the dividing line between the PB and Klondike slides. In order to prevent the S turn from coming back as soon as PB slips south, the Klondike side roadway must move with the PB side -to accomplish this I propose that the Klondike side be paved between the edges of the ROW for some distance to the east of the dividing line so that the roadway could be shifted by moving edge barriers and painted road markings. The dirt paths east of the dividing line could be kept adjacent to the edges of the ROW. I have attached a marked up picture and some notes. If you would like to talk, my number is 310 5413803. Thanks for reading and listening, Joe Lindorfer 1 C-10 ' ·----- C-11 Nadia Carrasco From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hi Ron, SunshineRPV@aol.com Tuesday, November 05, 2013 12:24 PM Ron Dragoo Nadia Carrasco; PublicWorks; lindorferl@cox.net; Ara Mihranian Re: PVDS road project Check with Jim. There is an area between the Portuguese Bend Landslide and the Klondike Canyon Landslide which is not moving. There is no point to spending any money on that bit of roadway other than smoothing out The Hook for the relatively short period of time while the roadway on the sliding slide moves south in relation to the not moving roadway in the right of way. That brings up the problem of the sewer lines. Did I hear correctly that RPV has no agreements with the Sanitation Districts regarding restoring the roadside trail each time they finish some sort of work on the pipelines? Check out the RPV Conceptual Trails Plan SECTION 4 Trails C9, C10, and C11. This roadside of the most seaward side of the most seaward roadway is supposed to be maintained as pedestrian/equestrian friendly. Now, it has been clearly identified as the equestrian corridor of the California Coastal Trail. One would think that the appropriate criteria would be shared with the· Sanitation Districts. Pass the word to KOA CORPORATION. They should know everything which the City of RPV really has in mind to accomplish all in one conceptual design. . .. S In a message dated 11/4/2013 2:55:22 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, lindorfer1@cox.net writes: Hi Ron, Some more thoughts about the S tum problem. I suggested that you might push the proposed roadway curve north to touch the edge of the right ofway(ROW) at the dividing line between the PB and Klondike slides. In order to prevent the S tum from coming back as soon as PB slips south, the Klondike side roadway must move with the PB side -to accomplish this I propose that the Klondike side be paved between the edges of the ROW for some distance to the east of the dividing line so that the roadway could be shifted by moving edge barriers and painted road markings. The dirt paths east of the dividing line could be kept adjacent to the edges of the ROW. I have attached a marked up picture and some notes. If you would like to talk, my number is 310 5413803. Thanks for reading and listening, Joe Lindorf er 1 C-12 Ron Dragoo From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mr. Stark, Ron Dragoo Friday, November 01, 2013 3:35 PM 'Richard Stark'; CC Nadia Carrasco RE: Public Information Meeting for PVDS Roadway Maintenance Project The scope of the project that is currently being designed and was presented Wednesday evening included straightening out a dangerous section of roadway on PVDS, a parking area and turning options into the parking area. Delaying this safety project is not advisable. The funds budgeted for this Capital Improvement Project are included in the 2013/2014 fiscal year budget in the amount of $500,000 as was reported at the meeting. The approved budget for the 2013/2014 fiscal year can be viewed on the City's web site by clicking this link, the city does not have an approved budget for fiscal year 2014/2015. Staff did not focus on realigning the entire length of PVDS at the meeting Wednesday evening, the purpose of the meeting was to gather input from the community which was relevant to the project being designed. Another project that has been funded this fiscal year ($245,000) will design the realignment of PVDS and design the repair for the storm drainage system near the ski jump on PVDS. Funding for roadway maintenance on PVDS within the landslide has increased over the past several years and, you are correct, we are in a drought. When I investigated why this accelerated movement is occurring the best answer I was given came from Geologists who suggested the ground where the roadway is currently located (it has moved toward the ocean) is not as stable as the ground to the north where the roadway right of way is located. It seems logical that moving the roadway back into its right of way could help reduce ongoing maintenance costs as the land in the right of way is not experiencing as much movement. It is also understood that addressing one of the major causes of movement (groundwater) within our landslide will likely help to slow the ground movement. To that end, funding has also been approved in the 2013/2014 fiscal year budget for Landslide Mitigation Projects that will remove groundwater from the landslide. Two new dewatering wells ($170,000) and the rehabilitation of one existing dewatering well ($70,000) are funded. It is anticipated that expanding the dewatering well network and removing additional groundwater will further slow movement in the landslide. We realize that as the movement of the landslide slows, it should positively affect the cost of maintaining the roadway. Slowing the landslide will take time and the sooner we begin our efforts the sooner the benefit will be known. The location of the first new dewatering well has already been identified. The two new wells will be installed this fiscal year and one of the existing wells will be restored to a fully functional condition this fiscal year. Staff plans to continue expanding the existing network of dewatering wells as the land movement slows and funding is available. Best regards, Ron Dragoo, PE Senior Civil Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 {310) 544-5252 1 C-13 From: Richard Stark [mailto:dimarstark@cox.net] Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 5:33 PM To: Ron Dragoo; CC Cc: Nadia Carrasco Subject: Fw: Public Information Meeting for PVDS Roadway Maintenance Project Mr. Dragoo-- I attended your meeting last evening on the PVDS Maintenance Project. After the meeting I reread the article in PV Watch Newsletter on the PV Drive South/Landslide Area. They did say "RPV is budgeted to spend $3,755,000 over the next two years to rebuild PV South Drive in the landslide area." That is not consistent with my understanding of your statement that the general maintenance budget for PVDS is $500,000 for the year, and for this project an additional $500,000. Is there a budget item for rebuilding PVDS in the landslide area and is the PV Watch amount any where near correct? If so, that only emphasizes the comments made by several of us that if the length of PVDS is going to be rebuilt soon, a project plan and roadmap for the entire project should be laid out before pieces of it are undertaken. And that plan must include not only the construction of the road itself but also mitigation of the conditions that have led to the continuing movement even during these past two years when there has been essentially no rain. Richard Stark dimarstark@cox.net 2 C-14 Nadia Carrasco From: Sent: To: Subject: Ali Derek <aliderek@gmail.com> Wednesday, October 30, 2013 5:41 PM Ron Dragoo; Nadia Carrasco PVDS Roadway Realignment Project Good evening, my name is Ali Derek, I reside at 32430 Nautilus Dr. I am a 25 year Rancho Palos Verdes resident and President of the Seaview Residents Association of 270 homes. I write to formally protest the proposed land use changes to the General Plan. The change in designation is detrimental to the peace, privacy, and security ofRPV, particularly the surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed change will leave the door WIDE open to the commercialization of our fine city; with increases in traffic, pollution, and noise. Not to mention the insects and odors that will eminate from the horse stables to be used for the horseback tours. Further the greeting and informational centers will destroy the NATURAL peaceful landscape we have enjoyed and continue to do so. Our esteemed City Council, Planning Commission, and Staff should consider the dramatic change this re designation will bring to our sacred city. Sincerely, Ali Derek 310-350-3350 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. 1 C-15 Nadia Carrasco From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: To whom it may concern, davidddemaria@aol.com Tuesday, October 29, 2013 4:32 PM Ron Dragoo Nadia Carrasco PVDS Can't well enough be left alone ? Why increase the speed from 35 to 45 when presently it's drive as fast as you can. I walk, run along PVDS on a daily basis usually early morning between school traffic and Terranea the road in it's current state try's to slow traffic down. Leave the road alone find some Where elese to waste our city's money. David Demaria 4255 Exultant Drive RPV CA 90275 Cell: 310-293-8886 1 C-16 Nadia Carrasco From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Hello Ron, lindorfer < lindorferl@cox.net> Saturday, October 26, 2013 2:15 PM Ron Dragoo Nadia Carrasco; CC Public Information Meeting for PVDS Roadway Maintenance Project Follow up Completed I have questions about the conceptual design: 1 -has anything been included in the design to mitigate/stop the PB landslide? 2 -how will th<;:: design prevent hazardous left turns from PVDS into the Gateway Park for vehicles travelling east on PVDS? 3 -why would the design not include (assuming westbound direction on PVDS) a banked S-turn to the north towards the edge of the right of way for the new roadway at the eastern point of the current landslide induced S-turn to the south, when this would provide a longer time span before the south S-turn returns due to slippage? It seems that over time the road would slowly slip to a smooth curve before slipping towards the south. The current design will start slipping south as soon as the work is completed. Thank You, Joe Lindorfer 1 C-17 Nadia Carrasco From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: MEMO from SUNSHINE SunshineRPV@aol.com Thursday, October 24, 2013 7:01 PM CC; PlanningCommission; Ron Dragoo; nadiac@epv.com; Cory Linder; Ara Mihranian; Dennis Mclean cprotem73@verizon.net A roadway, a park, a trails network and a landslide come together TO: RPV City Council, Staff and interested parties RE: Coordination of Gateway Park land and the realignment of PV Drive South. There is no controversy in that the City of RPV purchased land from Barry Hon and that the City needs to realign PV Drive South, again. What appears to be missing is what has been come to be called "institutional knowledge" on the part of Staff. It has been more than 25 years since the City attempted to reduce the scope of the landslide by moving one million cubic yards of dirt and realigned PV Drive South across the active Portuguese Bend landslide into its legal Right of Way. The City opted out of pursuing any further proposals for Dr. Ehlig to continue playing in his "sandbox". Then, he died. It has been eight years since the City purchased the Hon property (all of which is north of the legally recorded PV Drive South Right of Way). Part of that land is to be deed restricted based on the conditions of the grant monies. Part of that land is to become unburdened parkland because unrestricted donations were received. I have asked Dennis McLean to track down how much restricted money was spent, how much unrestricted money was spent and how many acres were purchased. With those facts, even I can do the math. The number of acres in the Portuguese Bend Reserve and the number of acres in Gateway Park have nothing to do with the Public Works Department's effort to realign The Hook out of PV Drive South. And, no matter how much the land moves, that will never change without a properly noticed public hearing and a City Council resolution. I have a few more questions which should be looked into ideally before the public gets to ask questions and Staff doesn't know the background. The conceptual design to be addressed at the October 30, 2013 "informational public meeting" involves the realignment of PV Drive South, some improvements on the Gateway Park property and some work on what used to be RDA property. I read a proposal. Has the formerly RDA property south of PV Drive South been formally removed from the scope of the NCCP? Or, has it never been legally deed restricted with a conservation easement? Which government agencies are likely to be concerned about importing dirt, improving drainage, and disturbing foliage in the public roadway? Is the unlabeled, dash line just east of the proposed parking lot supposed to represent the eastern edge of the Portuguese Bend active land movement? That would suggest that the Hon property east of that line is not in the Hazard Zone. The "Mexican Village" was a legal home in the residential zone. Just because it burned down does not make that any different. Has anyone considered realigning the roadway improvements all the way to the north edge of the Right of Way at The Hook? That would buy us a few more years (maybe an extra 10) before the roadway needs to be realigned particularly if nothing else is done to mitigate the slide. 1 C-18 ~;' Will the sewer pipes be relocated? What is the criteria for the Sanitation Districts to abide by in relation to leaving the roadside trail "pedestrian friendly" when they complete any of their repairs? They certainly-don't appear to know that a TYPE 6 should be the minimum. What are the pros and cons ofrolled curbs vs vertical curbs in this situation? Given that the City no longer has a Recreation and Parks Committee, there is no procedure for the public to suggest changes to the RPV Conceptual Trails Plan. The PUMP Committee proposed and the Palos Verdes Loop Trail Project's Segment Adopters accepted a modification to the PV Loop Trail "ideal route". The creation of a Gateway Park made a new "trailhead/destination" so the new route is totally compliant with the Project's Mission. (See attached map.) The proposed new fenced in parking lot appears to obstruct the trail corridor's continuity. When is that going to be addressed? The equestrian corridor of the California Coastal Trail leaves the coastal zone at Gateway Park and joins the Palos Verdes Loop Trail to go on across the Forrestal Reserve. Who is looking into choosing where the pedestrian/equestrian crossing of PV Drive South should be? Someone should have a look at the new RPV Zoning Map. The south side of the Equestrian Zone appears to have moved with. the road instead of staying north of the legal Right of Way. The proposed parking lot does not appear to be wide enough for school buses and horse trailers to tum around. Lake Ishibashi has been filled in. The Ishibashi farm and the archery club have been relocated in the bigger interest of stabilizing the land flow. The storm water runoff infrastructure which Dr Ehlig approved has not been maintained. Why is anyone surprised that the land is still moving? In fact, now that the paved roadway has moved to where it was before it was realigned, why is anyone surprised that it is exhibiting the same geologic contortions? Mother Nature does not keep secrets. We had and now we have two ski jumps to the west, a hook to the east and lots of little cracks in the middle. Like Dr Ehlig said... Capture the water before it gets under the slide plane. When you hire an engineer, remember "garbage in= garbage out". Is the public meeting going to be formatted as an exercise of the Delphi Technique? Are we going to have an ICLEI trained facilitator? It is not just me who needs to know the answers to these questions. The future of RPV is in our hands. 2 C-19 Nadia Carrasco From: Sent: Jim York <theyorkproperties@gmail.com> Tuesday, October 29, 2013 5:01 PM To: Ron Dragoo Cc: Nadia Carrasco Subject: Re: PV Drive South roadway maintenance project Thanks for the update. Jim Sent from my iPad >On Oct 29, 2013, at 9:10 AM, Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpv.com> wrote: > >Hi Jim, > > Dewatering wells are definitely being considered, however new wells will likely be placed above the slide - north of Burma Rd. initially. As time passes and movement slows, dewatering wells will be drilled closer to the road. This Fiscal Year the City is funding two new wells -one in Abalone Cove and one in Portuguese Bend. > > Ron Dragoo, PE > Senior Civil Engineer >City of Rancho Palos Verdes > 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard >Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 > (310) 544-5252 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim York [mailto:theyorkproperties@gmail.com] >Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 5:31 PM >To: Ron Dragoo; Nadia Carrasco > Subject: PY Drive South roadway maintenance project > >The repositioning of the road appears to be a reasonable project. > > What is the status of adding dewatering wells to the area to slow the land movement? > >Jim York > > Sent from my iPad > 1 C-20 Tyson Schilz March 5, 2014 Public Workshop Comments PVDS Roadway Realignment -Gateway Parking Lot He is concerned that more mountain bikers will be attracted to the place and damage the natural landscape. Also, bringing more public will increase the pollution and trash at the bottom towards the ocean. He suggest to charge a parking fee. He is also concerned about people crossing the road to access the beach; this might cause accidents and therefore City would be involved in lawsuits. Steve Cummins He agrees that safety is a primary concern. People will be crossing the road to go to the ocean and might get involved in accidents. Also, they might fall into the many existing fissures. This is a dangerous location for mountain bikers, hikers and fishermen. Parking lot will be costly to maintain. He brought to City Council attention that the road is currently on Bend Club's property. Lynn Swank She recommends to talk to TSC; she would like to have crosswalks or flashing lights. Parking lot gravel would be better if it has a more natural color to blend in with the surroundings. Who would be responsible for picking up the trash, open & close the gates and restrooms? Chris Del Moro He would like to have a more natural landscape. He is concerned with people crossing the road. Adding more parking spots is not going to relieve the problem at Del Cerro. Parking lot will bring "unwanted" public to party, trash and do drugs. He believes safety is being overlooked. He agrees that the road realignment is necessary. Fissures are a concern as well. Al Edgerton He wants parking lot to help relieve parking at Del Cerro. People are traveling at high speeds on Crenshaw. Parking lot could help to reduce the traffic accidents along Crenshaw. If people park at Abalone Cove, they are going to want to cross PVDS to hike up to Del Cerro; this is a safety concern. He believes bikers and hikers would prefer to go up and cruise down; therefore the proposed parking lot would benefit both the public and the residents up in Del Cerro. Oliver Hazard Agrees that Del Cerro gets crowded. Maybe the speed limit should be 35 mph instead of 40 mph for safety purposes. Ladera Linda parking is available. Road and proposed parking lot would be under big cracks. Adding a parking lot will add to the already high cost of PVDS. He is concerned with kids falling into the big cracks. C-21 Jeanne Smolley Bringing people to the area might increase fire hazards. There is a lot of traffic and inviting more people is dangerous. Eric Johnson (Geologist) There is a lot of vertical (2 11 -5 11 per year) and horizontal (1'-5' per year) movement where the new road and parking lot will be placed. 211 annual rotation will continue. Parking lot is not going to last; it will be a nuisance. Parking lot is being placed where the land moves the most. It will be costly to maintain. People should be guided to cross the road at a safer (further) point. Michael Barth He is against the parking lot. He is aware of the problem at Del Cerro. Money will be wasted on parking lot. Ladera Linda parking exists, use it. There will be issues with fires, litter, drugs, vandalism, etc. More problems will be created instead of solutions; reconsider the issues. People will get hit by crossing the road. Eva Cicoria She sympathizes with both sides Del Cerro and Portuguese Bend residents. Charge a fee to park and to limit the incoming visitors. Perhaps close Crenshaw after parking lot is in place? People will cross the road therefore a crosswalk is needed. Aesthetics is important. If money is not available then do not design it or start with a small parking lot. She is concerned with destroying the natural habitat. Restrooms are needed but no ugly portable potties. Lucianna Molinari Public safety is a concern. She hikes the trails but they are difficult and dangerous in some areas. Southside area is dangerous (fissures). Hikers will be attracted by 44 spaces. People should be guided away from the shore. Parking lot maintenance cost should be taken into consideration. Kim McCarthy There are more cyclist and hikers. With more parking more people will come and make it even less safe. She does not feel safe when walking alone for there are homeless people in the area. Kathy Edgerton She supports the preserve. She welcomes the public but is getting out of hand at Crenshaw. Kathy is speaking for 120 homes HOA. She mentioned that despite the increase of visitors in the area there is no spike in crime therefore the parking lot crime concerns are unfounded. There is a hot line available for the residents and it has not being used so crime is not a problem. C-22 David Leeper # 1 Roseapple Rd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 (310) 373-0715 March 4, 2014 Nadia Carrasco, Public Works 30940 Hawthorne Bl. R.P.V., CA 90275 Re: Parking Lot with roadway realignment Dear Nadia, RECEIVED City of Rancho Palos Verdes MAR 6 2014 PUBLIC WORK$ DEPARTMENt The proposed parking lot, associated with the roadway realignment of P.V. Dr. South, is a bad idea for the following reasons: 1) There is no way to prevent people from filling the parking lot with cars of people going to the beach, and people will save money by parking in the parking lot instead of the beach parking lot at Abalone cove, costing the city lost revenue. 2) The outhouse toilets will be hard to screen and not used much, due to the smell, and more people will use secluded spots in the trails instead, and leave more tissues and discarded underwear, as occurs now. 3) The Peninsula News, dated Feb. 20, 2014, top of page 1, lists the same problems with the Marymount parking lot as will occur in the proposed parking lot: noise, loud music, car alarms, smoking marihuana, drinking alcohol, drug taking, increase in fire hazard activity. Gas powered vehicles sometimes leak gas and catch on fire. Fires starting in or near the parking lot expose the city to liability for loss of people's homes and loss of lives and injuries. Occasional patrols will not help significantly, any more than patrols adequately mitigate problems in the current parking lot. Many people from the inner city bring large dogs, including pitbulls, and most of these dogs have no license, usually meaning no shots for any diseases, such as rabies. Signs will not help because patrols are too infrequent, and some kland user:s do not speak English. f:"fvr:/~ vid Leeper C-23 David Leeper # 1 Roseapple Rd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 (310) 373-0715 March 10, 2014 Nadia Carrasco, Public Works 30940 Hawthorne Bl. R.P.V., CA 90275 Re: Parking Lot with roadway realignment Dear Nadia, RECEIVED City of Rancho Palos Verdes MAR 12 2014 PU!31..1C WORKS OEPARTMEN1· The proposed parking lot, associated with the roadway realignment of P.V. Dr. South, is a bad idea for the following reasons: Older or poorly maintained gas powered vehicles, such as many of those used by inner city residents who come to use the landslide area I nature preserve, sometimes catch fire. Also, people smoke various things in and around their cars before walking. The area where the parking lot is proposed is in a dry brush, high fire hazard area. The city's attorneys may state that brush can be cleared and save the city from responsibility for fire damage to homes and injuries or deaths of people, but they might not consider the following facts that could be argued by victims of a wildfire starting near the proposed parking lot. Several years ago, the city caused grading of many acres of the lower landslide area, removing low vegetation, in the area of the proposed parking lot. This grading by the city caused much ground to be left bare, within an easy walk of the proposed parking lot. Where the ground was graded by the city, hundreds of acacia bushes, covering several acres, have since grown to about 20+ feet in height, making an acacia bush forest. Most of these bushes are dry and dead, except for the very tops. During a fire, the seeds of these bushes are known to catch fire and float to new areas and spread wildfires. The dead acacia bush branches are mostly too thick to walk through, but in some places narrow foot paths have been made to remote, hard to access areas, where people camp, rest, smoke, or have rendevous, leaving condoms and trash. Therefore, it would be safer if people from anywhere in Los Angeles County did not have parking available in the area around the proposed parking lot, to give easy access to ariyone, from anywhere, to this area around the proposed ~'nglot. , #~ avid Leeper C-24 Nadia Carrasco From: Sent: To: Subject: Good Morning Ms. Schmid, Nadia Carrasco Tuesday, March 04, 2014 8:10 AM 'VIELKA SCHMID ORTEGA' RE: PVDS Project Thank you for taking the time to submit your comments. We will be forwarding them to the City Council for consideration. Regards, Nadia Carrasco Assistant Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes Public Works Department Phone (310) 544-5333 Fax (31 OJ 544-5292 From: VI ELKA SCHMID ORTEGA [mailto:veortega@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 5:04 PM To: Nadia Carrasco Subject: PVDS Project Hi Ms. Carrasco, Attached is a letter regarding the PVDS Roadway Realignment Project. The letter was signed by several neighbors of the project location and we would like our input to be heard by the City Council. Thanks for your help. Vielka Schmid 1 C-25 February 26th, 2014 Dear Council Members, As a member of the Seaview Community of Rancho Palos Verdes I am opposed to the Gateway Park Parking Lot Proposal. The land is to be preserved and protected. Parking lots and Porta Potties don't fit that plan. Currently this area is served by two large parking lots. Lad era Linda has plenty of parking adjacent to the trails and would require minimal modifications for restroom facilities to meet the Disabilities Act Abalone Cove parking lots meets the people's needs equally well on the ocean side of the trails. Perhaps the hours c;>f these two existing parking sites could be adjusted to the hours proposed at the Gateway Park? I know first hand how congested Del Cerro Park and Abalone Cove become during the Holidays and weekends. Between the existing parking lots in place there is already enough parking here for what the hill can handle. Personally, I think the parking lot is a bad idea with good intentions. I believe the cost to construct, maintain, and operate will add no real value to the Residents of Rancho Palos Verdes. Sincerely and Thanks, C-26 Nadia Carrasco From: Nadia Carrasco Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 8:14 AM 'Dottie Hashizumi' To: Subject: RE: Crenshaw/Del Cerro Good Morning Ms. Hashizumi, Thank you for attending the Public Workshop yesterday night. As I had mentioned to you previously, your comments will be submitted to the City Council for consideration. Regards, Nadia Carrasco City of Rancho Palos Verdes Public Works Department Phone (310) 544-5333 Fax (310) 544-5292 From: Dottie Hashizumi [mailto:dottiehash@cox.net] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 12:10 AM To: Nadia Carrasco Subject: FW: Crenshaw/Del Cerro Hello Nadia, I went to the meeting tonight. I did not speak because, at that time, I didn't have anything to say. But several hours have passed and I have given great thought to the parking lot on PVDS. Although at the beginning of the presentation, I was 100% for the parking lot, now, late this evening, after giving all the speakers comments a lot of thought, I have changed my opinion and am not in favor of it. Here's why: 1. First and foremost, I do not now believe this will resolve or help our issues up here on Crenshaw for us Del Cerro residents. I feel the City may be doing this parking lot and "hoping" it will solve our Crenshaw/Del Cerro issues 2. At first, I believed the possibility of hikers/bikers wanting to go uphill and have an easier trip back downhill, therefore decreasing our traffic issues up here, however, now I feel this parking lot will only ADD more people, especially those from the San Pedro direction and those looking for FREE parking. 3. Why would we spend money to build something in a proven landslide area? Guess the City and we tax payers have so much money and just want to see what will the parking lot look like & have cost us after 10 years? 4. Why did we not anticipate possible problems with pedestrians and vehicles turning left to go back towards San Pedro from that parking lot ? Those things should have certainly been thought about/talked about, and included, in the prepared presentation tonight. One minute it sounds like we have money to throw away and build in a known slide area, and the next, hey, let's cut corners and see what accidents and injuries can occur. So, bottom line, what are you folks doing on Crenshaw Blvd in the immediate future for us Del Cerro residents ? 1 C-27 Regards, Dottie Lancaster Hashizumi Over 40 year resident of 22 Coveview Dr., RPV 90275 From: Nadia carrasco [mailto:NadiaC@rpv.com] Sent: Wednesday, March OS, 2014 7:46 AM To: Dottie Hashizumi Subject: RE: Crenshaw/Del Cerro Good Morning Ms. Hashizumi, Thank you for submitting your comments regarding the Gateway Parking Lot. We will be forwarding them to the City Council for consideration. Regards, Nadia Carrasco · Assistant Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes Public Works Department Phone (310) 544-5333 Fax (31 OJ 544-5292 From: Dottie Hashizumi [mailto:dottiehash@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 12:05 PM To: Nadia Carrasco Subject: Crenshaw/Del Cerro Hello Nadia, So happy to hear about the future parking on PVDS. I so hope it is true that these hikers/bikers would rather park at the bottom and hike/bike up and then come back "down" to their vehicles. I am keeping that in my prayers every night! LOL I have been in my home here at Del Cerro for over 40 years. I have never feared being in a car accident ....... except now. When I am getting close to home from St. John Fisher until I get past Amber Sky, I am sooooo cautious. I have had to slam on my brakes when these inconsiderate fools open or leave open their vehicle doors while getting or putting something in the trunk or back of their truck and then on the other side of the street, the folks are doing the same thing. About 4 days ago, I stopped and yelled at two men whose pickup trucks were on opposite sides of Crenshaw, the driver's doors on both trucks were wide open and both men were at the back of their trucks getting their bikes out. I told them that Crenshaw is a PUBLIC STREET. MAYBE THEY SHOULD MOVE THEIR VEHICLES DOWN TO PCH AND DO THE SAME THING ...... SEE HOW LONG THEY WOULD HA VE DOORS ! One man, cussed me out saying it was none of my business and the other closed his big truck door so I could pass. It was up by the park where the street is narrowest. Also, the people walking their dogs, hello, don't let them wander with a long leash while you are walking down the middle of Crenshaw ..... 2 C-28 ITS A PUBLIC STREET! I almost ran over a little pooch that I_did not see because the woman had its leash loose about 12 feet. Anyhow, these trails are a NIGHTMARE. · Yes, I realize caps are "yelling". I don't mean to take it out on you, but by gosh, it is so very awful and something needs to be done to give us Del Cerro residents our rights again. Install parking meters and make some money for the city! Thank you for giving me the opportunity to say what's on my mind. Dottie Lancaster Hashizumi 22 Coveview Drive, RPV 3 C-29 Nadia Carrasco From: Ara Mihranian Sent: To: Monday, February 24, 2014 2:10 PM Nadia Carrasco Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: RE: Gateway Parking Lot Follow up Completed See my responses below in bold black. Ara Michael Mihranian Deputy Director of Community Development •!'I CITY a= ~RANcHo FALos VERoEs 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 310-544-5228 (telephone) 310-544-5293 (fax) aram@rpv.com www.palosverdes.com/rpv ~ Do you really need to print this e-mail? This e-mail message contains information belonging to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be privileged, confidential and/or protected from disclosure. The information is intended only for use of the individual or entity named. Unauthorized dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, or are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation. From: Nadia Carrasco Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 1:57 PM To: Ara Mihranian Subject: FW: Gateway Parking Lot Ara, Please provide us with a response for the first two questions/comments below. Thanks, Nadia Carrasco City of Rancho Palos Verdes Public Works Department Phone (31 OJ 544-5333 Fax (31 OJ 544-5292 From: Nadia Carrasco Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 10:29 AM To: 'rond@rpv.com' Subject: Gateway Parking Lot 1 C-30 i; Ron, I just received a phone call from Resident Don Schmidt (310)408-4855 regarding the proposed Gateway Parking Lot; these were his concerns and comments: • Are we going to provide restroom facilities (portable potties perhaps)?, if so he is against it for it would be an eyesore. Yes. The City intends to relocate one of the existing two port-a-potties located on PVDS near the Smugglers Cove trail to the new parking lot. It will be set back away from the road and screened with a trellis, lattice and shrubs. • What are going to be the parking hours and how we would enforce it? Specific hours will be set based on Staffing availability, who will be responsible for opening and closing the gate to the parking lot. Generally speaking, the hours may be similar to the City park hours which is one hour before sunrise and one hour after sunset to something less than that (i.e. 1 Oam-5pm). • There are already two parking facilities in the area (Ladera Linda and Abalone Cove) therefore there is no need for a new one. These two parking lots are not in close proximity to the Portuguese Bend Reserve Trailhead located off PVDS which is why the City is proposing a parking lot here. • Most of the people that will be enjoying the proposed parking lot and trails will be non-RPV residents; he believes is not fair that RPV money is being used to build and maintain a facility that will be enjoyed by others. It Is anticipated that residents from the east side of the City will use this parking lot, not to mention other residents who reside throughout the City. Of course, the parking lot will also be available to non-res.idents since it will be a public parking lot. Regards, Nadia Carrasco Assistant Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes Public Works Department 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Phone (31 OJ 544-5333 Fax (310) 544-5292 2 C-31 Nadia Carrasco From: Michael Throne Sent: To: Cc: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:03 AM Ron Dragoo; Nadia Carrasco Siamak Motahari Subject: FW: PV Drive South Parking Plan--Yay! Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Completed FYI regarding your meeting next week. From: Gary McCray [mailto:garymccray@cox.net] Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 4:36 PM To: Del Cerro HOA . Cc: Moonmist 05 Leimer; Oceanaire 59 Edgerton; Amber Sky 04 Luthi; Oceanaire 27 Paludi/Lebovitz; Oceanaire 62 Cicoria; Mark Martin; Amber Sky 10 Moore; All City Council Members Subject: Re: PV Drive South Parking Plan--Yay! Del Cerro HOA, I applaud our city for coming up with this WIN-WIN plan. Remember folks, we need always to think of our entire, extended community, not just ourselves. I am sure this new lower PV drive parking lot will help a lot. Gary McCray 16 Amber Sky Drive On Feb 23, 2014, at 1:58 PM, Del Cerro HOA. wrote: Dear Del Cerro residents, Attached is a copy of a mailer sent to our neighborhood from the City of RP V's Public Works Director Michael Throne. It details the new Gateway Parking Lot Design Plan that should help with our overcrowding up at the top of the trail by providing parking at the bottom of the same trail. Some relief is on the way! The Land Conservancy reps tell us that those who frequent the trail would rather park at the bottom and start the trail going up, so they can be walking/riding downhill at the end. We think that is a lovely idea. If you would like to weigh in on this plan, you can deliver your input to Nadia Carrasco via telephone number 310-544-5333 or by email to NadiaC@rpv.com. 1 C-32 ' Or come to the workshop March 5th 2014 at Point Vicente Interpretive Center at 6pm and talk to them personally. An email has also gone out to the neighbors along Oceanaire/ Amber Sky/Crestwind/Seacrest who are most affected by the overflow parking of cars on the weekends and holidays by users of the trail. There is a program available to limit parking in front of those houses, but these neighbors need to weigh in on it and decide as a group if that is what they want to do. That's all~ contact any of your board members for more information. And if you think you would like to be a part of the board, please RSVP to this email and step up! We'd love to have you. This current board has been together for 2 years, with some members serving even longer than that, so maybe it's your turn to support the neighborhood you have chosen? 2 C-33 Nadia Carrasco From: Ron Dragoo Sent: To: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 5:59 PM Jim Knight <knightjim33@gmail.com> Cc: Subject: Carolynn Petru; Michael Throne; Ara Mihranian; Nadia Carrasco FW: PVDS Realignment Councilman Knight, I'll noticed one of your questions was not addresses in the email I previously sent, sorry about that. The questions was: What is the purpose of the pipe gate (#5)? ff his gate is to allow access into the area behind the gate by Fire, Rangers, Contractors, PVPLC and other authorized folks/agencies. Hope these responses help, if they spark questions or if you need help negotiating plans give me a call, we'll be happy to assist any way we can. Best regards, Ron Dragoo, PE Senior Civil Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 (310) 544-5252 From: Ron Dragoo Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 5:50 PM To: 'Jim Knight' Cc: Carolynn Petru; Ara M (AraM@rpv.com); nadia C (nadiac@rpv.com) Subject: RE: PVDS Realignment Councilman Knight, Thank you for taking the time to comment on the informational item sent out regarding the upcoming informational meeting. We reviewed your questions/concern and added responses (highlighted in hellow) to your original email below. Hope this helps and if you have additional questions/concerns don't hesitate to call/email. Best regards, Ron Dragoo, PE Senior Civil Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 (310) 544-5252 From: Jim Knight [mailto:knightjim33@gmail.com ] Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:08 PM To: Nadia Carrasco Cc: Ron Dragoo; Carolynn Petru Subject: PVDS Realignment 1 C-34 Nadia, I got your notice about the upcoming meeting regarding the PVDS Realignment project and I had a few comments and questions. -What is the line of sight for exiting the parking lot heading east? This could be a dangerous situation if a driver cannot see oncoming traffic heading west. The line of sight appears adequate--however for the final alignment we will verify that it meets CaMUTCD requirements. Will there be an entrance lane onto PVDS for those crossing onto the highway and heading east? I see a 1 O' strip that tappers off, I am not sure if this is an entrance lane. An entrance lane is not currently planned. -Are there any bathrooms or porta-potties planned for the parking lot? Yes. The City intends to relocate one of the existing tw o port-a-potties located on PVDS near the Smugglers Cove trail to the new parking lot. It will be set back away from the road and screened with a trellis, lattice and shrubs. -I need a better understanding of the elevations of the parking lot. The side section for the parking lot seems to show existing soil removal but, most of the area north of the road is below the road level. There is one naturally extended area that is about level with the road. Is this the location of the parking lot? Also, the side section seems to show the parking lot on a slope. Is that the plan? The illustration seems to show a level parking lot. The parking lot extends farther north than the existing graded area on site. The parking area will have a 2% slo e ~er ADA reguirements so it will reguire fill and the finished surface will be fairly level. -Is there any drainage planned for this area? This is a low point for the PB Landslide and we accumulation of water here can percolate into the subsurface. Drainage will be into the existing surface as currently exists. The _Rarking lot will be constructed of ermeable AC grindings, so no runoff is expected. -Where are the stairs to get down to the trails? No Are there going to be any ADA ramps? No What is the purpose of the pipe gate (#5)? -The plans show some marked parking stalls. I assume that that is just to count the number of spaces/area planned? Gravel instead of ashpalt is the right material but I assume you will not be painting stalls on that gravel. How was 40 spac€s determined? ff he Number of parking stalls identified was based on the Development Code's parking stall standards at 9'X20'. It is unlikely that the stalls will be painted, however, the stalls can be delineated using chalk or similar material which will increase the ongoing maintenance costs. Further, signs can be posted alerting drivers to ark head-in. -Wheel stops. My personal preference are more natural boulders. There is a contractor in the PB Community, Mike Cooper, that has occasional boulders that can be stock piled by the city for future projects such as this. Agreed. City Staff has already put the word out to various contractors to secure boulders. As for tire stops, I am not sure if boulders are ideal since vehicles may be damaged while parking. -Entrance pipe gate (#4) -we need to think about control of this parking lot. We had a problem with a gate at the entrance to the Forrestal area where the gate was never locked because the city did not want to trap people who had not exited with their cars. The solution I proposed for that was exit only traffic spikes so that the entrance gate could be loeked. We are in the process of discussing this item. We will need an exit system that allows folks to leave at their leisure. A traffic spike system is a complete mechanical device, It would likely be a ropriate unless we get a fissure directly along or through the device. -Just a note on the picture; the two gentlemen hiking on the far right comer are going up a trail where the old Ishibashi home dead ends and does not enter the Preserve. The Preserv€ sign also is placed at this entrance. Again, love the natural boulders defining the Preserve entrance. Although the trail the two men are walking on is not in the Preserve at this point, the trail eventually connects to the Klondike Canyon Trail that connects to the Conqueror Trail. Both of these trails are in the Preserve. 2 C-35 ' -I assume that no utilities are needed for this plan ? This is true no utilities are planned. Thanks , Jim Jim Knight Mayor Pro Tern RPV City Council 30940 Hawthorne Blvd . RPV, CA 90275 310/544-5207 cell 310/318-4290 3 C-36 Attachment B C-37 C-38