RPVCCA_CC_SR_2014_05_14_03_Infrastructure_Mgmt_Plan_&_Report_Card_Background_DataCITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
MICHAEL THRONE, PE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
MAY 14, 2014
INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND
REPORT CARD BACKGROUND DATAAND
RECOMMENDATIONS (SUPPORTS 2014 CITY
COUNCIL GOAL NO. 2, PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE)
REVIEWED: CAROLYNN PETRU, ACTING CITY MANAGER-ID
Project Managers: Siamak Motahari, Senior Engineer (Report Card)~ rY
Go-rMichael Throne, Director of Public Works (Management Plan)11~U
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Authorize a request for proposals from qualified firms to develop an
Infrastructure Management Plan.
2. Direct Staff to include an allocation of $175,000 in the draft FY2014/15 budget
for the preparation of an Infrastructure Management Plan.
3. Direct the Finance Advisory Committee to review the fiscal impact of the
Infrastructure Management Plan.
4. Receive and file the 2013 infrastructure report card.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
On February 10, 2014 your Public Works and Finance and Information Technology
departments made a presentation to the City Council and the community on the subject
of infrastructure management and financing. Public Works presented a summary
infrastructure report card, which graded several categories of public improvements, and
Finance presented information on how funding and financing considerations are
3-1
INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PLAN/REPORT CARD
PAGE2
integrated into an infrastructure management plan (IMP). Tonight is a follow-up to
questions, comments, and inquiries made at that meeting regarding the infrastructure
management plan and the report card. This report is organized into an infrastructure
management plan section and an infrastructure report card wrap-up.
Infrastructure Management Plan
The RPV Infrastructure Management Plan (IMP) will be the tool to chart the long-term
operating and financial course for the actions and funding required to maintain and
preserve community public property, which will improve the condition (and therefore
future grades) of each infrastructure category. The IMP will provide a comprehensive
basis to create a reality-based capital improvement program by allowing the City Council
and the community to determine the impact of different funding strategies/scenarios and
prioritize project delivery over the course of multiple planning decades. The IMP will also
estimate technical and funding requirements and make recommendations of policies to
assist the City Council with program implementation, goal-setting, and prioritization.
Attachment A to this report is a proposed scope of work intended to accomplish these
goals.
IMP Scope of Work: A scope of work was prepared that outlines the work to be performed
on all infrastructure categories and includes:
• Creation of an infrastructure roadmap to the year 2050 that is comprehensive and
integrated with risk assessment and economics, the City's geographic information
system (GIS), and the future use of an asset/maintenance management and work
order system
• A civic engagement process to invite, assess, evaluate, and include citizen-
initiated capital improvement projects (CIP) using "suggestion box" or
crowdsourcing concepts, and to assist in the formation of a City Council-appointed
infrastructure management plan advisory committee
• Identify best management practices and key performance indicators for each
infrastructure category to help guide policy formulation and decision-making
• A web-based tool that is easy and intuitive to use by members of the community
to try different "what-if' scenarios based on priorities and economic and community
factors
IMP Civic Engagement: A citywide, open civic engagement process will solicit input from
stakeholder, civic, and community groups such as the PV Chamber of Commerce and
the Council of Homeowners Associations on items such as community needs and
priorities. Public Works and the IMP consultant will host public outreach meetings with
these groups (and others as identified) early in IMP process to gather their comments
and suggestions and then, as necessary, check back with that group. These meetings
will encourage multiple points of view from each stakeholder group. One of the IMP
deliverables is a public process for the long-term involvement of the City Council and the
community through the creation of an infrastructure management plan advisory
committee, who will regularly meet to review and advise the City Council on the progress
3-2
INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PLAN/REPORT CARD
PAGE3
of projects, maintenance standards and performance results, and implementation of the
IMP.
Outside Professional Assistance: Your seven Public Works staff engineers are managing
during the next 36 months over 60 active and funded capital improvement projects with a
construction value of over $20 million (excluding the $19.3 million San Ramon project).
Several of the tasks identified in the scope of work, specifically in-depth knowledge of
financial analysis, civic engagement, asset management, and geographic information
systems, require expertise not available within the department. It is then advisable to seek
the assistance of an outside consultant firm that can bring together and provide these
specialized skills. The IMP consultant will be managed by the Director of Public Works
and assisted by the Deputy Director of Public Works.
Schedule: Should the City Council approve tonight moving forward with requesting
proposals from qualified firms, it is expected that a professional services agreement could
be awarded in July with a draft IMP being available in January 2015. The selected firm
would be requested to deliver a final IMP next May 2015.
FISCAL IMPACT
The costto prepare the IMP and perform work as described in the IMP Scope of Work
section, including the infrastructure planning tool, is estimated to be $175,000. It is
recommended therefore to include an allocation of $175,000 in the draft FY2014/15
budget for the preparation of the IMP. The actual contract value will be requested at the
time of the award of the professional services agreement.
It is also recommended that the Finance Advisory Committee review the fiscal impact of
the IMP.
Infrastructure Report Card
This portion of this agenda item summarizes the contents of Attachment B, which includes
additional details on the sections described below. All the information may also be found
on the City's website.
2013 Infrastructure Report Card
The City Council commissioned in 2013 the preparation of an infrastructure report card
to gauge the current condition of eight categories of public infrastructure. The categories
and the initial grades presented to the City Council and the community are:
Infrastructure Category Grade
1. Public buildings ..................................................................... D
2. Park sites ............................................................................... B
3. Trails ...................................................................................... A
4. Storm water system ............................................................... C
5. Citywide sanitary sewer system ............................................ D
3-3
INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PLAN/REPORT CARD
PAGE4
6. Abalone Cove Sewer District system .................................... D
7. Right-of-way/traffic control devices ........................................ A
8. Palos Verdes Drive South landslide ...................................... D
Background Data: The City Council requested that all the background data used to
formulate the infrastructure grades and the preliminary cost information be made
available. Public Works has compiled this information and it was made publically available
on March 14, 2014 on the City's website under Government > Public Works > Public
Works Programs > Infrastructure Report Card. Over 600 documents were reviewed by
the consultant and each category has a sub-listing of all the supporting documents
reviewed by the report card consultant and the evaluations performed.
Category Evaluations: An evaluation document (called Assessment-Analysis on the
webpage) was prepared for each infrastructure category. Some categories, such as
public facilities and trails, include building structure or trail segment-specific evaluations
as these types of facilities readily lend themselves to discrete analysis. Other facilities
were evaluated as systems, which is the typical way they are viewed by engineering
professionals.
Sewer System: The City Council and members of the public made inquiries regarding the
ownership, operations, and maintenance of this system. The outcome of research by
Public Works in conjunction with representatives of the County of Los Angeles is that the
City owns and is ultimately responsible for the operations and maintenance of RPV sewer
mains. The City also bears the legal and financial responsibility to increase sewer main
size if through private development the lines become undersized. The County of Los
Angeles is responsible for operations, maintenance, and replacement. A detailed review
of the past and current management of the sewer system is attached.
Storm Water System: The City Council and members of the public made inquiries
regarding the status of work currently underway related to investigating and assessing
our storm water drainage system. The work being performed by the Public Works
department is designed to be integrated into an infrastructure management plan if one is
so approved by the City Council.
Preliminary Costs: The preliminary cost information was calculated by the consultant as
part of the report card scope of work. It provides an order-of-magnitude estimate of the
possible cost to 1) improve each category one letter grade and 2) improve each category
to an "A." It was not included with the report card as the intended focus of the report card
was to evaluate and grade the existing condition of our infrastructure system. The cost
information is now available on the website and a summary can be found in Attachment
B. In general, the preliminary estimate cost to improve the City's infrastructure one grade
level is $14,000,000 and the cost to make the capital improvements necessary to be
grade "A" level is $63,400,000. These estimated costs do not include ongoing operations
and maintenance expenses and the new facilities that mig_ht be required to increase use
and/or capacity.
3-4
INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PLAN/REPORT CARD
PAGE5
What else is needed to complete the report card assessment? It can be seen from the list
of documents available that an extensive effort was made to provide the consultant with
all known data, which was sifted from city records and historic plans made available by
the County of Los Angeles and the federal government. However, some civic facilities do
not have any plans or other documents. It is not recommended to pursue any further
research as the on-site inspection of these facilities attest to their existing condition, and
if data gaps are found in existing documents, it is not expected to be problematic.
Report Card Wrap-up: The data collected and currently available is useful for the
purposes of creating an infrastructure management plan and no additional assessments
are recommended at this time. Furthermore, the preliminary estimated costs are
adequate to use in the preparation of the infrastructure management plan because as
projects are advanced and included in the annual capital improvement program, the
estimated cost to make the capital improvement (and the overall financial picture) will be
refined ..
The report card should be updated every four years to gauge the progress of the city's
efforts to improve infrastructure condition.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no immediate fiscal impact by receiving and filing the report card follow up
information. The estimated $50,000 cost to update the 2013 report card is proposed to
be included in the FY17/18 municipal budget.
Attachment: A. Draft IMP scope of work
B. Infrastructure workshop background data follow-up
3-5
ATTACHMENT A
DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK TO DEVELOP
AN INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PLAN
ATTACHMENTS 3-1
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)
FOR PROFESSION AL SERVICES
CITY OF RANCHO PAL OS VERDES
I NFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PLAN
MAY 19, 2014
www .palosverdes .com
Mayor JERRY DUHOVIC
Mayor Pro Tern JIM KNIGHT
Councilmember SUSAN BROOKS
Councilmember BRIAN CAMPBELL
Councilmember ANTHONY MISETICH
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is inviting selected consulting engineering firms to submit their firm's
qualifications and this proposal to provide professional services to develop an infrastructure
management plan .
To be considered for this project, 5 bound copies and a CD or thumb drive of your
qualifications/proposal must be received by the Public Works Department, 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard , Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 , Attention : Michael Throne , Director of Public Works , no
later than 2 p.m., Friday, June 13, 2014. Faxed or electronic submission is not acceptable . The
proposals shall be delivered by hand or by mail post marked no later than Friday, June 13, 2014 at 2 :00
p.m.
1. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes (RPV) is seeking ass istance in the preparation of an integrated
infrastructure management plan (IMP), which will chart an operations and financial course for the
actions and f unding required to maintain and preserve community public property through the year
2050 .
Paqe 1 ATTACHMENTS 3-2
RPV IMP S cope of Work
The IMP is expected to be more comprehensive than a typical 5-year capital improvement program
because it will determine the impact of different funding strategies/scenarios and prioritization on project
delivery over the course of multiple planning decades. One of the outcomes from the preparation of the
IMP will be a reality-based capital improvement program .
Although the IMP wil l consider the maintenance level required and the useful life for each public asset,
it will especially focus on the community's current and future needs (including public safety and
regulatory mandates) and community expectations. The IMP will also calculate shortfalls in resources
and funding and make recommendations of C ity Council policies to assist with program implementation ,
goal-setting, and prioritization. A civic engagement process will be used to both create the IMP and
implement it upon adoption by the City Council.
2013 Infrastructure Report Card
The City Council commissioned in 2013 the preparation of an infrastructure report card to gauge the
current condition of eight categories of public infrastructure. The categories and the initial grades
presented to the City Council and the community are:
Infrastructure Category Grade
1. Publ ic buildings ................................................ D
2 . Park sites ......................................................... B
3 . Trails ................................................................ A
4 . Storm water system ......................................... C
5. Citywide sanitary sewer system ....................... D
6 . Abalone Cove Sewer District system ............... D
7. Right-of-way/traffic control devices .................. A
8. Palos Verdes Drive South landslide ................. D
The report card and all supporting documentation used to establish the initial grades can be accessed
at http://www. pa losverdes .com/r pv/pu bl icworks/RPV -1 nfrastructu re-Report-Card/ .
Project Issues
It is expected the successful consultant will provide technical expertise, project management, and
support the City to develop and initially implement an infrastructure management plan and address and
resolve the following critical project issues:
• Creation of an infrastructure roadmap to the year 2050 that is comprehensive and integrated
with risk assessment and economics , the City's geographic information system (GIS), and the
future use of an asset/maintenance management and work order system
• A civic engagement process to invite, assess, evaluate, and include citizen-initiated capital
improvement projects (CIP) using "suggestion box" or crowdsourcing concepts and to ass ist in
the formation of a City Council-appointed infrastructure management plan advisory committee
• Identify best management practices and key performance indicators for each infrastructure
category to help guide policy formulation and decision -making
• A web-based tool that is easy and intuitive to use to try different "what-if' scenarios based on
priorities and economic and community factors
May 19, 20 14 Paqe2 ATTACHMENTS 3-3
RPV IMP Scope of Work
Assumptions
It is anticipated that there may be the need for the Consultant to include with their team subconsultants
specializing in financial analysis, civic engagement , asset/maintenance management and work order
software , interactive web -based tools , and geographic information systems .
It is anticipated that the availab le documents and infrastructure evaluations already prepared for the
City are adequate and no further work is required to assess the report card categories for the purposes
of IMP preparation .
The City does not have a computerized asset/maintenance management and work order system .
Budget and Schedule
The City has established a conceptual budget of $175,000 for th is work . A tentative project schedule
as shown below:
Proposals due from Consultants ........................................ 2 :00 p .m. Jun 13 , 2014
Interviews .................................................................................... June 24-26, 2014
Award of agreement by City Council. ................................................. July 15, 2014
Issue Notice to Proceed/Kickoff meeting ........................................... July 21 , 2014
Submit draft IMP ........................................................................... January 9, 2015
Submit final IMP .................................................................................. May 1, 2015
City Council Adopts IMP ................................................................... May 19 , 2015
2 . SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Consultant shall be responsible for prov iding professional and technical services to develop an
infrastructure management plan and to complete the following tasks :
Task 1 . Work Activity Planning
• Review all available documentation used to establish the initial category grades
• Determine future activities for each category. Future activities are defined as , and including but
are not limited to , new work, rehabilitation , replacement, operations and maintenance ,
preventative maintenance, volunteerism , best management practices , and maintenance/level of
service standards for the life-cycle span of the components in each category through year 2050
• Identify data that should be collected in the future to assist in future condition assessments (e .g .,
infrastructure report cards)
• Identify technology shortfalls by category
• Identify key performance indicators by category (i.e ., actions that can raise the category
condition or keep the category at the "A " condition)
• Evaluate demand versus capacity of existing infrastructure
• Develop a work program including an i m mediate needs l ist, a 5-year capital improvement
program , and scenario-based economic and risk modeling
• De l iverables
o Letter report listing the future activities by category, conclusions , and recommendations
May 19 , 20 14 Paq e 3 ATTACHMENTS 3-4
RPV IMP Scope of Work
Task 2 . Economics
• Review available funding (annual municipal budget, 5-year capital improvement program and
financial model, and comprehensive annual financial report )
• Calculate needed funding including financing mechanisms by proj ect and category for the next
20 years and through category-item life-cycle (e.g., 75-years for sewer mains , 100-years for
storm drains, etc.)
• Estimate funding shortfalls by category
• Identify debt policy options
• Conduct a risk analysis by category considering political , economic , social , technological , legal,
environmental, demographic, and regulatory factors
• Establish life-cycle cost methodology to support decision-making and long-range planning
• Deliverables
o Letter report with summary, conclusions , and recommendations
Task 3 . Asset/Maintenance Management Work Order System/GIS Integration
• All data compiled is organized to be easily and publically-accessible and modifiable in the future
either by city personnel and /or outside consultant
• Utilize GIS to integrate infrastructure inventory
• Recommend an asset/maintenance management and work order system that promotes efficient
scheduling of activities and tracks service requests , work orders , personnel, equipment, and
material, that is compatible with RPV GIS and the infrastructure inventory database being
prepared for the RPV storm drain master plan update
• Deve lop an asset/maintenance management and work order system integration p lan
• Coordinate with the C ity 's IT Manager and IT provider
• Deliverables
o An implementation plan to migrate existing and future data and IMP into future
asset/maintenance management system and RPV GIS
Task 4 . Civic Engagement
• Engage the community in the early stages of the development of the IMP using the principles of
contemporary civic engagement
• Gather a representative and diverse group of participants including but not limited to the
stakeholder list included in this RFP
• Propose a process to evaluate and incorporate community-suggested solutions to observed
problems and/or capital improvements using crowdsourcing and /or a "suggestion box" approach
• Incorporate the results of the civic engagement process into the infrastructure planning tool
• Actively engage the community through workshops , site visits and field trips , and web-based
customer service surveys and as appropriate small , informal , personali zed meetings with
stakeholder groups
• Propose a framework for a City Council-appointed infrastructure management plan advisory
committee including a committee work plan approved by the City Council that will assist in the
implementation of the infrastructure management plan and the use of the infrastructure planning
tool
• Host and attend up to 10 stakeholder and community meetings
Ma y 19 , 2014 P a~e4 ATTACHMENTS 3-5
RPV IMP Scope of Work
• Deliverables
o A written civic engagement plan and schedule
o Written plan outlining a draft work plan for the City Council-appointed infrastructure
management plan advisory committee
Task 5. Infrastructure Planning Tool
• Develop a web-based tool that incorporates as feasible all information to try differing priorities,
physical hazards, risks, economic conditions, and community factors that when a scenario is
acceptable to the user, the tool can print a draft multi-year work plan with project listings,
schedules, estimated costs, and graphs of expenditures, available revenues, and estimated
additional funding needs
• Tool should be intuitive for use by members of the public, the in frastructure management plan
advisory committee, and city staff, potentially patterned in the fashion of an on-line retirement
calculator
• Deliverables
o Web-based tool w ith a user manual hosted on the City 's website
Task 6. Project Management
• Manage the efforts of the project team members and subconsultants , assign manpower,
delegate responsibilities, review work progress, and otherwise direct the progress of the work
so as to ensure satisfactory completion of work, on schedule and within budget
• Prepare monthly progress reports and attend 12 monthly progress meetings
• Attend up to 4 City Council meetings and 6 city commission/committee meetings
• Prepare, monitor, and update task and deliverable schedule
• Schedule and lead IMP team meetings and civic engagement activities
• Coordinate data collection, assessments, and other activities between various City departments
and Magis Advisors, the City's financial advisor
• Assist the City with public information
• Deliverables
o Monthly invoices with supporting documentation and updated schedule
3. DELIVERABLES
All documents shall be submitted on CD or other acceptable electronic media in a format acceptable to
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes , (e.g., Microsoft Word 2013 and AutoCAD 2000).
All co mputer software recommended for procurement or written for City shall be in a format acceptable
to the City of Ran c ho Palos Verdes Information Technology Manager and written in such a code or
format that it can be edited or otherwise modified by ci ty staff or others as appropriate.
4. CONSULTANT'S REPRESENTATIVE
The Consultant shall assign a primary represe ntative and an alternate to perform the services described
in the scope of work. Both shall be identified in the proposal. The Consultant's representative shall
remain in responsible charge of all duties from contract negotiations through the completion of the
design project. If the primary representative is unable to continue with the design project, then the
alternate representative shall become the primary representative.
May 19, 2014 Paqe 5 ATTACHMENTS 3-6
RPV IMP Scope of Work
5. ADDITIONAL CONSULTANT RESPONSIBILITIES
The successful Consultant shall be required to enter into a written agreement with the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes and shall be responsible for completing the specified services in accordance with the
City 's standard "Professional Services Agreement," which shall be prepared by the City. A copy of this
standard agreement is attached .
This Request for Proposals and any subsequent correspondence, or any part thereof, may be
incorporated into and made a part of the final agreement. However, the City reserves the right to further
negotiate the terms and conditions of the agreement with the successful Consultant. At a minimum , the
agreement shall include a maximum "not to exceed" cost to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. The
primary components and provisions of the agreement shall include errors and omissions insurance
coverage in the minimum amount of $2 ,000,000 .
6. CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
The City shall provide the following to assist the Consultant with the project and its completion:
• Existing record information as available
• Assistance in identifying stakeholders and scheduling civic engagement meetings
7. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL
The proposal shall be presented in letter format and include at a minimum the following information :
• Introduction and understanding of the project and scope of work
• Identification of any subconsultants
• Identification of the project team
• Consultants experience with at least three recent projects of similar scope in cl uding references
with contact person and telephone number
• Project schedule including task start and completion dates
8. SELECTION PROCEDURE
A review committee comprised of City staff will review the submitted proposals . Proposals will be
evaluated based on the following criteria :
• Experience of the firm in providing similar services (25%)
• Understanding of the project (25%)
• Relevant experience of individual t eam members and subconsultants assigned to the project
(25%)
• Referen ces from clients for whom similar services were provided (10 %)
• Appropriateness of project schedule (15%)
Questions regarding this RFP shall be submitted in writing to the Public Works Department, 30940
Hawthorne Boulevard , Rancho Palos Verdes , CA 90275, Attention: Michael Throne . Questions may
be submitted via e-mail to M ic hael T@rpv.com . Th e e-mail shall be clearly identified in the subj ect line
as : "RPV IMP RFP Question." All questions must be received no later than 5 pm , Monday June 2 ,
2014 .
May 19, 2014 Paqe 6 ATTACHMENTS 3-7
RPV IMP Scope of Work
9. GENERAL INFORMATION
• This Request for Proposals does not commit the City of Rancho Palos Verdes to pay costs
incurred in the preparation of a response to this request. No work may begin until a "Professional
Services Agreement" is executed and the City issues a Notice to Proceed .
• Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Request for Proposals , the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to waive any informality in a
proposal
• Submission of a Proposal shall constitute acknowledgement of all terms and conditions set forth
in the Request for Proposals unless otherwise expressly stated in the proposal
• All data, documents, and other products used or developed for this project shall remain in the
public domain upon completion of the project. Similarly, all responses to this Request for
Proposals shall become the property of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes .
• The method of payment upon negotiation of a contract shall be monthly payments based upon
satisfactory progress and the submission of invoices for payment
• All correspondence during the reply period shall be by e-mail
• The City reserves the right to conduct personal interviews of any or all consultants
• The City reserves the right to request clarification of information submitted and to request
additional information that it may reasonably require, which shall be furnished by the Consultant
• Statements may not be modified or withdrawn prior to the selection of consultants
• The City will require the selected consultant to enter into a standard professional services
agreement prepared by the City
10.EXHIBITS
1 . Stakeholder List
2 . References
3 . Sample standard Professional Services Agreement
May 19 , 2014 Pai:Je 7 ATTACHMENTS 3-8
RPV IMP Scope of Work
EXHIBIT 1
POTENTIAL STAKEHOLDER LIST
The following list is representative (and not all-inclusive) of the potential groups that might be interested
in participating in the development of the IMP through some portion of the civic engagement process.
Business groups and businesses
Golden Cove Shopping Center
Local building contractors
PV Chamber of Commerce
PVP Chamber of Commerce
RPV businesses along Western Avenue
Terraces Shopping Center
Terranea Resort
Trump National Golf Club Los Angeles
Westmont Plaza Shopping Center
Citizen and community groups
Archery Club
A YSO Region 10
Boy and Girl Scouts
Council of Homeowners Associations (CHOA)
Local cycling clubs
Local equestrian clubs
Local PTAs
Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council
Peninsula Seniors
Portuguese Bend Club
Portuguese Bend HOA
City Council committees/commission
Emergency Preparedness Committee
Finance Advisory Committee
Planning Commission
Traffic Safety Committee
Water Quality and Flood Protection Oversight Committee
City staff /departments
Other Public and NGO institutions
Abalone Cove Landslide Abatement District (ACLAD)
City of Palos Verdes Estates
City of Rolling Hills
City of Rolling Hills Estates
LA County Fire Department
Lomita Sheriff Department
Los Serenes de Point Vicente
Marymount California University
Metro
Miraleste Recreation and Park District
Palos Verdes Library District
Palos Verdes Peninsula Community Emergency Response Team (PVPCERT)
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (PVPLC)
Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit Authority (PVPT A)
Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School district (PVPUSD)
Salvation Army
US Coast Guard
RPV listserve
May 19, 2014 Paqe8 ATTACHMENTS 3-9
RPV IMP Scope of Work
Utility companies
May 19, 2014
California Water Service
County of Los Angeles
Cox Cable
The Gas Company
Southern California Edison
Sprint
Verizon
AT&T
Paqe 9 ATTACHMENTS 3-10
RPV IMP Scope of Work
EXHIBIT 2
REFERENCES
The following documents were used to formulate the scope of work and indicate a general approach
to the subject RFP . The Consultant may use these or others as needed to formulate a response .
Citizen 's Infrastructure Advisory Committee Final Report. July 2000 . City of Huntington Beach .
http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/files/users/public works/Infrastructure Advisory Comm Fina l Report.pdf
Community Suggestion Box. City of Sonoma . http://www .sonomacity.org/form suggestion .aspx
Davenport Institute for Public Engagement and Civic Leadership
http ://pub I icpo l icy . pep perd i ne .ed u/ d av en port-institute/
Infrastructure and Funding Strategy. City of Edmonton , Alberta, Canada.
http://www.ed monton .ca/c ity government/initiatives in novation/infrastructu re -funding-strategy .aspx
Infrastructure Report Card Background Data and Recommendations. April 29, 2014. City of Rancho
Palos Verdes. [Ins e rt lin k before send in g to consultants]
Infrastructure Report Card . February 2014. City of Rancho Palos Verdes .
http://www.pa losverdes .com/rpv/citycouncil/agendas/2014 Agendas/MeetingDate-2014-02-
10/RPVCCA CC SR 2014 02 10 01 RPV Infrastructure Management Workshop -R.pdf
Infrastructure Workshop Presentations . February 10, 2014 . City of Rancho Palos Verdes .
http://www. pa losverd es . co m/rpv /p u bl icworks/RPV -1 nfrastru ctu re-Re po rt-Ca rd /Repo rt-Ca rd-Presentation-CC-
02 -10-14. pd f
Infrastructure Workshop. February 10, 2014. City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
http://www.pa losverd es .com/rpv/citycou nci l/agendas/2014 Agendas/M ee ti ngDate-2014-02-10/
Integrated Infrastructure Management Plan. September 2000. City of Huntington Beach .
Retirement Planner. 2014. MarketWatch .com . http://www. ma rketwatch .com/retirement/tools/reti rement-
p Ian ning -calcu lator
San Ramon Financing Staff Report. Agenda Item 2 . March 18, 2014 . City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
http://www.palosverdes .com/rpv/citycouncil/agendas/2014 Agendas/Meet i ngDate -2014-03-
18/RPVCCA CC SR 2014 03 18 02 San Ramon Fun di ng .pdf
Ma y 19 , 2014 Paqe 10 ATTACHMENTS 3-11
RPV IMP Scope of Work
EXHIBIT 3
SAMPLE ST AND ARD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
May 19, 2014 PaQe 11 ATTACHMENTS 3-12
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT 3
THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into this day of
__ , 2014, by and between the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (hereinafter referred to
as the "CITY") and (hereafter referred to as
"CONSULTANT").
JN CONSIDERATION of the covenants hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto
agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.1 Project Description
The Project is described as follows: ____________ _
1.2 Description of Services
CONSUL TANT shall: ------------------, as described --------------------------in the CITY's Request For Proposals , which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A " and
incorporated herein by this reference, and in CONSUL TANT's Proposal, which is
attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this reference . In the event of
any confl ict between the terms of this Agreement and incorporated documents, the terms
of this Agreement shall control. In the event of any conflict between Exhibits "A" and "B ,"
the terms of Exhibit "A" shall control , except fo r section in Exh ibit "B ."
1.3 Schedule of Work
Upon receipt of written Notice to Proceed from the CITY, CONSUL TANT
shall perform with due diligence the services requested by the CITY. Time is of the
essence in this Agreement. CONSUL TANT shall not be responsible for delay, nor shall
CONSUL TANT be responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default
by reason of strikes, lockouts, accidents, or acts of God , or the failure of CITY to furnish
timely information or to approve or disapprove CONSUL TANT's work promptly, or delay
or faulty performance by CITY, other consultants/contractors, or governmental agencies,
or any other delays beyond CONSUL TANT's control or without CONSUL TANT's fault.
ATTACHMENTS 3-13
2.1 Fee
ARTICLE 2
COMPENSATION
CITY agrees to compensate CONSUL TANT an amount not to exceed
__________ dollars ($ ) for services as described in Article 1.
2 .2 Terms of Compensation
CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices for the percentage of work
completed in the previous month. CITY agrees to authorize payment for all undisputed
invoice amounts within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. CITY agrees to use its
best efforts to notify CONSUL TANT of any disputed invoice amounts or claimed
completion percentages within ten (10) days of the receipt of each invoice. However,
CITY's failure to timely notify CONSULTANT of a disputed amount or claimed completion
percentage shall not be deemed a waiver of CITY's right to challenge such amount or
percentage .
Additionally, in the event CITY fails to pay any undisputed amounts due
CONSUL TANT within forty-five (45) days after invoices are received by CITY then CITY
agrees that CONSUL TANT shall have the right to consider said default a total breach of
this Agreement and be terminated by CONSULTANT without liability to CONSULTANT
upon ten (10) working days advance written notice.
2 .3 Prevailing Wages
CITY and CONSUL TANT acknowledge that this project is a public work to
which prevailing wages apply . The Terms for Compliance with California Labor Law
Requirements is attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by this reference .
2.4 Additional Services
CITY may request additional specified work under this Agreement. All such
work must be authorized in writing by the CITY's Director of Public Works prior to
commencement. CONSUL TANT shall perform such services, and CITY shall pay for
such additional services in accordance with CONSUL TANT's Schedule of Hourly Rates
within Exhibit "B," which in any case shall meet or exceed prevailing wage rates. The
rates in Exhibit "B" shall be in effect through the end of this Agreement.
2.5 Term of Agreement
This Agreement shall commence on and shall
terminate on unless sooner term inated pursuant to Article 4 of
this Agreement. Additionally, there shall be (_) __ -year options to renew
the Agreement with the mutual written consent of both parties.
Page 2of11
R6876-000 1\1656345v 1 .doc Agreement for Des ig n Professiona l Services
ATTACHMENTS 3-14
ARTICLE 3
INDEM NIFICATION AND INSURANCE
3.1 Indemnification , Hold Harmless, and Duty to Defend
(a) Indemnity for Design Professional Services. In connection with its
design professional services and to the maximum extent permitted by law,
CONSUL TANT shall hold harmless and indemnify CITY, and its officials, officers,
employees, agents and independent contractors serving in the role of CITY officials , and
des ignated volunteers (collectively , "lndemnitees"), with respect to any and all claims ,
demands, causes of action, damages, inj uries , liabilities, losses , costs or expenses,
including reimbursement of attorneys ' fees and costs of defense (collectively, "Claims "
here inafter), including but not lim ited to Claims relating to death or injury to any person
and injury to any property, which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to in whole or in part to
the negligence, recklessness, or willful m isconduct of CONSUL TANT or any of its officers ,
employees, subcontractors , or agents in the performance of its design professional
services under this Agreement.
(b) Other Indemnities . ln connection with any and all claims, demands,
causes of action , damages, injuries, liabilities, losses , costs or expenses, including
attorneys ' fees and costs of defense (collectively , "Damages" hereinafter) not covered by
Section 3 .1(a), and to the maximum extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall defend ,
hold harmless and indemnify the lndemnitees with respect to any and all Damages,
including but not limited to, Damages relating to death or injury to any person and injury
to any property , which arise out of, pertain to , or relate to the acts or omissions of
CONSULTANT or any of its officers, employees, subcontractors , or agents in the
performance of this Agreement, except for such loss or damage arising from the sole
negligence or willful misconduct of the CITY, as determined by final arbitration or court
decision or by the agreement of the parties . CONSUL TANT shall defend lndemnitees in
any action or actions filed in connection with any such Damages with counsel of CITY's
choice, and shall pay all costs and expenses , including all attorneys ' fees and experts'
costs actually incurred in connection with such defense . Consultant's duty to defend
pursuant to this Section 3 .1 (b) shall apply independent of any prior, concurrent or
subsequent misconduct , negligent acts , errors or omissions of lndemnitees.
(c) All duties of CONSULTANT under Section 3.1 shall survive
termination of this Agreement.
3 .2 General Liability
CONSUL TANT shall at all times during the term of the Agreement carry,
maintain, and keep in full force and effect, a policy or policies of Commercial General
Liability Insurance, with minimum limits of one million dollars ($1 ,000,000) for each
occurrence and two mil li on dollars ($2 ,000 ,000) general aggregate for bodily injury, death ,
loss or property damage for products or completed operations and any and all other
activities undertaken by CONSUL TANT in the performance of this Agreement. Sa id
Page 3 of 11
R68 76-0001 \1656 3 45v1 .doc A greem ent for Des ig n Prof essio n a l Se rvices
ATTACHMENTS 3-15
policy or policies shall be issued by an insurer admitted or authorized to do business in
the State of Californ i a and rated in A.M . Best's Insurance Gu ide with a rating of A :Vll or
better.
3.3 Professional Liability
CONSUL TANT shall at all times during the term of this Agreement, carry,
maintain , and keep in full force and effect a policy or policies of professional liability
insurance with a minimum limit of one million dollars ($1 ,000 ,000) per claim and
aggregate for errors and/or omissions of CONSUL TANT in the performance of this
Agreement. Said policy or policies shall be issued by an insurer admitted or authorized to
do business in the State of California and rated in Best's Insurance Guide with a rating of
A:Vll or better. If a "claims made" policy is provided, such policy shall be maintained in
effect from the date of performance of work or services on the CITY's behalf until three
(3) years after t he date of work or services are accepted as completed. Coverage for the
post-completion period may be prov ided by renewal or replacement of the policy for each
of the three (3) years or by a three-year extended reporting period endorsement, which
reinstates all limits for the extended reporti ng period . If any such policy and/or policies
have a retroactive date, that date shall be no later than the date of first performance of
work or services on behalf of the CITY . Renewal or replacement policies shall not allow
for any advancement of such retroactive date.
3.4 Automobile Liability
CONSUL TANT shall at all times during the term of this Agreement obtain,
maintain , and keep in full force and effect, a policy or pol icies of Automobile Liability
Insurance , with minimum of one million dollars ($1,000 ,000) per claim and occurrence
and two million dollars ($2,000 ,000) in the aggregate for bodily injuries or death of one
person and five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) for property damage arising from
one inciden t. Said policy or policies shall be issued by an insurer admitted or authorized
to do business in the State of California and rated in A.M . Best's Insurance Guide with a
rating of A:Vll or better.
3 .5 Worker's Compensation
CONSUL TANT agrees to maintain in force at all times during the
performance of work under this Agreement worker's compensation insurance as required
by the law . CONSUL TANT shall require any subcontractor similarly to prov ide such
compensation insurance for their respective employees .
3 .6 Notice of Cancella t ion
(a) All insurance policies shall prov ide that the insurance coverage shall
not be cancelled or modified by the insurance carrier without thirty (30) days prior written
notice to CITY, or ten (10) days notice if cancellation is due to nonpayment of premium .
Additionally, CONSULTANT shall provide immed iate notice to the CITY if CONSULTANT
receives a cancellation or policy revision notice from the insurer.
Page 4of11
R687 6-0001 \1656345v1 .doc Ag ree m en t fo r Design Professiona l Se rvice s
ATTACHMENTS 3-16
(b) CONSUL TANT agrees that it will not cancel or reduce any required
insurance coverage. CONSUL TANT agrees that if it does not keep the aforesaid
insurance in full force and effect, CITY may either immediately terminate this Agreement
or, if insurance is available at a reasonable cost, CITY may take out the necessary
insurance and pay, at CONSUL TANT's expense, the premium thereon .
3.7 Entire Policy and Certificate of Insurance
At all times during the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall maintain
on file with the CITY Clerk both a copy of the entire policy and a certificate of insurance
showing that the aforesaid policies are in effect in the required amounts. The commercial
general liability policy shall contain endorsements naming the CITY , its officers, agents
and employees as additional insureds.
3.8 Primary Coverage
The insurance provided by CONSUL TANT shall be primary to any coverage
available to CITY . The insurance policies (other than workers compensation and
professional liability) shall include provisions for waiver of subrogation .
ARTICLE 4
TERMINATION
4 .1 Termination of Agreement
(a) This Agreement may be terminated at any time , with or without
cause, by the CITY upon thirty (30) days prior written notice or by CONSUL TANT upon
ninety (90) days prior written notice. Notice shall be deemed served if completed in
compliance with Section 6 .15 .
(b) In the event of termination or cancellation of this Agreement by
CONSUL TANT or CITY, due to no fault or failure of performance by CONSUL TANT ,
CONSUL TANT shall be pa id compensation for all services performed by CONSUL TANT,
in an amount to be determined as follows : for work satisfactorily done in accordance with
all of the terms and provisions of this Agreement as determined by the CITY ,
CONSUL TANT shall be paid an amount equal to the percentage of services performed
prior to the effective date of termination or cancellation in accordance with the work items;
provided , in no event shall the amount of money paid under the foregoing provisions of
this paragraph exceed the amount which would have been paid to CONSUL TANT for the
full performance of the services described in this Agreement.
Page 5 of 11
R6876-0001 \1656345v1 .doc Agreement for Desig n Profess ional Services
ATTACHMENTS 3-17
ARTICLE 5
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
5.1 Ownership of Documents and Work Product
All final documents , plans, specifications, reports, information , data,
exhibits, photographs, images , video files and media created or developed by
CONSUL TANT pursuant to this Agreement ("Written Products ") shall be and remain the
property of the CITY without restriction or limitation upon its use, duplication or
dissemination by the CITY . All Written Products shall be considered "w orks made for
hire ," and all Written Products and any and all intellectual property rights arising from their
creation , including, but not limited to , all copyrights and other proprietary rights, shall be
and remain the property of the CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use ,
duplication or dissemination by the CITY. CONSUL TANT shall not obtain or attempt to
obtain copyright protectio n as to any Written Products.
CONSUL TANT hereby assigns to the CITY all ownership and any and all
intellectual property rights to the Written Products that are not otherwise vested in the
CITY pursuant to the paragraph directly above this one.
CONSUL TANT warrants and represents that it has secured all necessary
licenses, consents or approvals to use any instrumentality, thing or component as to
which any intellectual property right exists, including computer software, used in the
rendering of the services and the production of all Written Products produced under this
Agreement, and that the CITY has full legal title to and the right to reproduce the Written
Products. CONSUL TANT shall defend , indemnify and hold the CITY, and its elected
officials, officers, employees, servants , attorneys, designated volunteers, and agents
serving as independent contractors in the role of CITY officials , harmless from any loss ,
claim or liability in any way related to a claim that C ITY's use of any of the Written Products
is violating federal , state or local laws , or any contractual provisions, or any laws relating
to trade names , licenses , franchises , copyrights, patents or other means of protecting
intellectual property rights and/or interests in products or inventions. CONSUL TANT shall
bear all costs arising from the use of patented, copyrighted, trade secret or trademarked
documents, materials, equipment , devices or processes in connection with its provision
of the services and Written Products produced under this Agreement. In the event the
use of any of the Written Products or other deliverables hereunder by the CITY is held to
constitute an infringement and the use of any of the same is enjoined, CONSUL TANT, at
its expense, shall: (a) secure for CITY the right to continue using the Written Products
and other deliverables by suspension of any injunction, or by procuring a license or
licenses for CITY; or (b) modify the Written Products and other deliverables so that they
become non-infringing while rema ining in co mpliance with the requirements of this
Agreement. This covenant shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
Upon t ermination , abandonment or suspension of the Project, the
CONSUL TANT shall deliver to the CITY all Written Products and other deliverables
rela ted to th e Project without additional cost or expense to the CITY. If CONSUL TANT
Page 6of 11
R6876-0001\1656345v1 .d oc Agreement for Des ig n P rofess ional Services
ATTACHMENTS 3-18
prepares a document on a computer, CONSUL TANT shall provide CITY with said
document both in a printed format and in an electronic format that is acceptable to the
CITY.
6.1 Representation
ARTICLE 6
GENERAL PROVISIONS
The CITY representative shall be the Director of Public Works or his or her
designee , and CONSULTANT shall notify CITY of CONSUL TANT's des ignated
representative. These individuals shall be the primary contact persons for the parties
regarding performance of this Agreement.
6.2 Fair Employment Practices/Equal Opportunity Acts
In the performance of this Agreement, CONSUL TANT shall comply with all
applicable provisions of the California Fair Employment Practices Act (California
Government Code Sections 12940-48), the applicable equal employment provisions of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ( 42 U.S. C. 200e-217), and the Americans with Disabilities Act
of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 11200 , et seq.).
6 .3 Audit
The CITY or its representative shall have the option of inspecting, auditing ,
or inspecting and auditing all records and other written materials used by CONS ULT ANT
in preparing its billings to the CITY as a condition precedent to any payment to
CONSULTANT . CONSUL TANT will promptly furnish documents requested by the CITY.
Additionally , CONSUL TANT shall be subject to State Auditor examination and audit at
the request of the CITY or as part of any audit of the CITY , for a period of three (3) years
after final payment under this Agreement.
6.4 Personnel
CONSULT ANT represents that it has, or shall secure at its own expense ,
all personnel required to perform CONSUL TANT's services under this Agreement. Any
person who performs engineering services pursuant to this Agreement shall be licensed
as a Civil Engineer by the State of California and in good standing . CONSULTANT shall
make reasonable efforts to maintain the continuity of CONSULTANT's staff who are
assigned to perform the services hereunder and shall obtain the approval of the Director
of Public Works of all proposed staff members who will perform such services.
CONSUL TANT may associate with or employ associates or subcontractors in the
performance of its services under this Agreemen t , but at all times shall CONSUL TANT
be responsible for its associates and subcontractors ' services.
Page 7of11
R6876-0001 \1656345v 1 .doc Agre ement fo r Design Profession al Services
ATTACHMENTS 3-19
6 .5 CONSUL TANT's Representations
CONSUL TANT represents, covenants and agrees that: a) CONSULTANT
is licensed, qualified , and capable of furnishing the labor, materials, and expertise
necessary to perform the services in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth
in this Agreement; b) there are no obligations, commitments, or impediments of any kind
that will limit or prevent CONSUL TANT's full performance under this Agreement; c) to the
extent required by the standard of practice , CONSUL TANT has investigated and
considered the scope of services performed, has carefully considered how the services
should be performed, and understands the facilities, difficulties and restrictions attending
performance of the services under this Agreement.
6 .6 Conflicts of Interest
CONSUL TANT agrees not to accept any employment or representation
during the term of this Agreement or within twelve (12) months after completion of the
work under this Agreement which is or may likely make CONSULTANT "financially
interested" (as provided in California Government Code Sections 1090 and 87100) in any
decisions made by CITY on any matter in connection with which CONSUL TANT has been
retained pursuant to this Agreement.
6. 7 Legal Action
(a) Should either party to this Agreement bring legal action against the
other, the validity, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement shall be controlled
by and construed under the laws of the State of California, excluding California 's choice
of law rules . Venue for any such action relating to this Agreement shall be in the Los
Angeles County Superior Court.
(b) If any legal action or other proceeding , including action for
declaratory relief, is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement or because of an
alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with this Agreement,
the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees, experts' fees ,
and other costs, in addition to any other relief to which the party may be entitled.
(c) Should any legal action about a project between CITY and a party
other than CONSULTANT require the testimony of CONSULTANT when there is no
allegation that CONSUL TANT was negligent, CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for
its testimony and preparation to testify at the hourly rates in effect at the time of such
testimony .
6.8 Assignment
Neither this Agreement nor any part thereof shall be assigned by
CONSUL TANT without the prior written consent of the CITY. Any such purported
assignment without written consent shall be null and void , and CONSUL TANT shall hold
harmless, defend and indemnify the CITY and its officers, officials, employees, agents
Page 8of11
R6876 -0001 \1656345v1 .doc Agreement for Des ign Professional Services
ATTACHMENTS 3-20
and representatives with respect to any claim, demand o r action arising from any
unauthorized assignment.
Notwithstanding the above , CONSULTANT may use the services of
persons and entities not in CONSULTANT's direct employ, when it is appropriate and
customary to do so. Such persons and entities include, but are not necessarily limited to,
surveyors, specialized consultants, and testing laboratories. CONSUL TANT's use of
subcontractors for additional services shall not be unreasonably restricted by the CITY
prov ided CONSUL TANT notifies the CITY in advance .
6.9 Independent Contractor
CONSULTANT is and shall at all times remain, as to the CITY, a wholly
independent contractor. Neither the CITY nor any of its agents shall have control over
the conduct of CONSULTANT or any of the CONSULTANT's employees, except as
herein set forth, and CONSULTANT is free to dispose of all portions of its time and
activities which it is not obligated to devote to the CITY in such a manner and to such
persons , firms , or corporations as the CONSUL TANT wishes except as expressly
provided in this Agreement. CONSUL TANT shall have no power to incur any debt,
obligation , or liability on behalf of the CITY or otherwise act on behalf of the CITY as an
agent. CONSULTANT shall not, at any time or in any manner, represent that it or any of
its agents, servants or employees, are in any manner agents , servants or employees of
CITY. CONSULTANT agrees to pay all required taxes on amounts paid to CONSULTANT
under this Agreement, and to indemnify and hold the CITY harmless from any and all
taxes, assessments , penalties , and interest asserted against the CITY by reason of the
independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement. CONSUL TANT shall fully
comply with the workers ' compensation law regarding CONSUL TANT and its employees .
CONSULTANT further agrees to indemnify and hold the CITY harmless from any failure
of CONSUL TANT to comply with applicable workers ' compensation laws. The CITY shall
have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to CONSUL TANT under this
Agreement any amount due to the CITY from CONSUL TANT as a result of its failure to
promptly pay to the CITY any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this Article .
6.10 Titles
The titles used in th is Agreement are for general reference only and are not
part of the Agreement.
6 .11 Entire Agreement
This Agreement, including any other documents incorporated herein by
specific reference , represents the entire and integrated agreement between CITY and
CONSUL TANT and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements,
either written or oral. Th is Agreement may be modified or amended , or provisions or
breach may be waived , only by subsequent written agreement signed by both parties .
Page 9 of 11
R68 76-0001\1656345v1 .doc A greem ent fo r Des ig n Prof essional Services
ATTACHMENTS 3-21
6.12 Construction
In the event of any asserted ambiguity in , or dispute regarding the
interpretation of any matter herein, the interpretation of this Agreement shall not be
resolved by any rules of interpretation providing for interpretation against the party who
causes the uncertainty to exist or against the party who drafted the Agreement or who
drafted that portion of the Agreement.
6.13 Non-Waiver of Terms . Rights and Remedies
Waiver by either party of any one or more of the conditions of performance
under this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any other condition of performance under
this Agreement. In no event shall the making by the CITY of any payment to
CONSUL TANT constitute or be construed as a waiver by the CITY of any breach of
covenant, or any default which may then exist on the part of CONSUL TANT, and the
making of any such payment by the CITY shall in no way impair or prejudice any right or
remedy available to the CITY with regard to such breach or default.
6.14 Severability
If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid , illegal, or
otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction , the rema ining provisions of
this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.
6.15 Notice
Except as otherwise required by law, any payment, notice or other
communication authorized or required by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be
deemed received on (a) the day of delivery if delivered by hand or overnight courier
service during CITY's regular business hours or (b) on the third business day following
deposit in the United States mail , postage prepaid, to the addresses listed below , or at
such other address as one party may notify the other:
To CITY:
Responsible Person : ______________ _
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
To CONSULTANT :
Responsible Person : ______________ _
Address :
------------------~
Page 10 of 11
R6 876-0001 \1 656345v 1 .doc A g reem ent fo r Des ign P rofessio na l Servi ces
ATTACHMENTS 3-22
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of
the date and year first above written.
Dated:
-----------~
ATTEST:
City Clerk
("CONSUL TANT")
Printed Name: ---------
Printed Name: ---------
Title: ------------
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
("CITY")
By: ____________ ~
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By : ____________ _
City Attorney
Page 11 of 11
R6876-0001\1656345v1 .doc Agreement fo r Design Professional Services
ATTACHMENTS 3-23
Exhibit "A":
City's Request For Proposals
Exhibit "A"
R6876-0001\1656345v1 .doc Agreement for Design Professional Services
ATTACHMENTS 3-24
Exhibit "B":
Consultant's Proposal and Schedule of Hourly Rates
Exhibit "B"
R6876-0001\ 1656345v1 .doc Agreement for Design Professional Services
ATTACHMENTS 3-25
Exhibit "C ":
TERMS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA LABOR LAW REQUIREMENTS
1. Consultant acknowledges tha t the project as defined in this Agreement
between Consultant and the City, to which this Terms for Compliance with California
Labor Law Requirements is attached and incorporated by reference , is a "public work" as
defined in Division 2, Part 7, Chapte r 1 (commencing with Section 1720) of the Cal ifornia
Labor Code ("Chapter 1 "). Further, Consultant acknowledges that this Agreement is
subject to (a) Chapter 1, includ ing without lim itation Labor Code Section 1771 and (b) the
rules and regulations established by the Di rector of Industrial Relations ("DIR ")
implementing such statutes . Consultant shall perform all work on the project as a public
work. Consultant shall comply with and be bound by all the terms , rules and regulations
described in 1 (a) and 1 (b) as though set forth in full herein.
2 . California law requires the inclusion of specific Labor Code prov isions in
certain contracts . The inclusion of such specific provisions be low, whether or not requ ired
by California law, does not alter the meaning or scope of Section 1 above.
3 . Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1773.2, copies of the prevailing rate of per
diem wages for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to perform the
Agreement are on file at City Hall and will be made available to any interested party on
request. Consultant acknowledges rece ipt of a copy of the DIR determination of such
prevailing rate of per diem wages , and Consultant shall post such rates at each job site
covered by this Agreement.
4. Consultant shall comply with and be bound by the provisions of Labor Code
Sections 177 4 and 1775 concerning the payment of preva ili ng rates of wages to workers
and the penalties for failure to pay prevailing wages . The Consultant shall, as a penalty
to the City, forfeit two hundred dollars ($200) for each calendar day, or portion thereof,
for each worker paid less than the prevailing rates as determined by the DIR for the work
or craft in which the worker is employed for any public work done pursuant to this
Agreement by Consultant or by any subcontractor.
5. Consultant shall comply with and be bound by the provisions of Labor Code
Section 1776, which requires Consultant and each subcontractor to : keep accurate
payroll records and verify such records in writing under penalty of perjury, as specified in
Section 1776; certify and make such payroll records available for inspection as provided
by Section 1776; and inform the City of the location of the records .
6 . Consultant shall comply with and be bound by the prov isi ons of Labor Code
Sections 1777.5, 1777.6 and 1777 .7 and California Administrative Code title 8 , section
200 et seq . concerning the employment of apprentices on public works projects.
Consultant shall be responsible for compliance with these aforementioned Sections for
all apprenticeable occupations. Prior to commencing work under this Agreement,
Consultant shall provide City with a copy of the information submitted to any applicable
apprenticeship program . Within sixty (60) days after concluding work pursuant to this
Agreement, Consultant and each of its subcontractors shall submit to the City a verified
statement of the journeyman and apprentice hours performed under this Agreement.
7. Consultant acknowledges that eight (8) hours labor constitutes a legal day's
work. Consultant shall comply with and be bound by Labor Code Section 1810 .
Consultant shall comply with and be bound by the provis ions of Labor Code Section 1813
Exhibit "C"
R68 76-0001 \1 65 6 345v 1 .doc Ag reem ent fo r D esig n Profes sional Servi ces
ATTACHMENTS 3-26
concerning penalties for workers who work excess hours. The Consultant shall , as a
penalty to the City, forfeit twenty-five dollars ($25) for each worker employed in the
performance of th is Agreement by the Consultant or by any subcontractor for each
calendar day during which such worker is requ ired or permitted to work more than eight
(8) hours in any one (1) calendar day and forty (40) hours in any one calendar week in
violation of the provisions of Division 2, Part 7 , Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code.
Pursuant to Labor Code section 1815 , work performed by employees of Consultant in
excess of 8 hours per day, and 40 hours during any one week shall be permitted upon
public work upon compensation for all hours worked in excess of 8 hours per day at not
less than 11/2 times the basic rate of pay.
8. California Labor Code Sections 1860 and 3700 provide that every employer
will be requ ired to secure the payment of compensa ti on to its employees . In accordance
with the provisions of California Labor Code Section 1861 , Consultant hereby certifies as
follows:
"I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require
every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to
undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will
comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of
this contract."
9. For every subcontractor who will perform work on the project, Consultant
shall be responsible for such subcontractor's compl iance with Chapter 1 and Labor Code
Sections 1860 and 3700 , and Consultant shall include in the written contract between it
and each subcontractor a copy of those statutory provisions and a requirement that each
subcontractor shall comply with those statutory provisions. Consultant shall be required
to take all actions necessary to enforce such contractual provisions and ensure
subcontractor's compliance , including without limitation , conducting a periodic review of
the certified payroll records of the subcontractor and upon becoming aware of the failure
of the subcontractor to pay his or her workers the specified prevailing rate of wages.
Consultant shall diligently take corrective action to halt or rectify any failure .
10 . To the maximum extent permitted by law , Consultant shall indemnify, hold
harmless and defend (at Consultant's expense with counsel reasonably acceptable to the
City) the C ity, its officials , officers, employees , agents and independent contractors
serving in the role of City officials, and volunteers from and against any demand or claim
for damages, compensation , fines, penalties or other amounts arising out of or incidental
to any acts or omissions listed above by any person or entity (including Consultant, its
subcontractors , and each of their officials, officers, employees and agents) in connection
with any work undertaken or in connection with the Agreement , including without limitation
the payment of all consequential damages, attorneys ' fees, and other related costs and
expenses . All duties of Consultant under this Section shall survive termination of the
Agreemen t.
Exhibit "C"
R687 6-0001 \1656345v1 .doc Ag reem ent for Design Professional Se rv i ce s
ATTACHMENTS 3-27
Introduction
ATTACHMENT B
INFRASTRUCTURE WORKSHOP BACKGROUND DATA
FOLLOW-UP
This attachment to the staff report includes detailed information that was requested by
the City Council and member of the public related to public access to the data used to
formulate the infrastructure grades, estimations of costs to raise the grades , revisions to
the February report card based on community comments, and background information
on the ownership and maintenance of the RPV sewer system. A revised 2013
infrastructure report card (dated May 14, 2014) is included with this attachment and is
now available on the webpage noted below .
Webpage
A webpage was created on March 28 , 2014 for the infrastructure report card which
contains the revised 2013 report card and evaluations , preliminary costs , background
data, and available documents for each infrastructure category. The webpage also
includes a section containing links to reports cards prepared for other agencies such as
the City and the County of Los Angeles. Using this link
http://www.pa losverdes .com/rpv/pub l icworks/RPV -lnfra structure -Report-Card/ will connect
you with this information . Excerpts from those local report cards are included for your
reference .
Preliminary Cost Estimates
The preliminary cost analysis was performed by SA Associates and id e ntifies the order-
of-magnitude cost to make capital improvements to each infrastructure category one letter
grade and to raise its condition to an "A " level. The cost information is preliminary and is
based on the background do cuments made available to the consultant. These costs are
adequate to use in the preparation of the infrastructure management plan because as
projects are advanced and included in the annual capital improvement program , the
estimated cost to make the capital improvement will be refined .
The costs shown in the following table do not account for the ongoing operations,
maintenance, and preventative maintenance of the various categories nor the cost to
completely replace with new those facilities that may need to be expanded due to
increased use . The cost to replace functionally obsolete sewer mains are also not
included in the table as those expenses (estimated from $5 to 7 million) are the finan c ial
responsibility of the Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District (CSMD), who collects user
fees from each property owner inside the city limits for operations, maintenance , and
replacement (as described later in this attachment).
Page 1
ATTACHMENTS 3-28
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATED COSTS TO IMPROVE BY ONE OR MORE GRADES
Infrastructure Prelim Est Cost to Prelim Est Cost to Improve to "A" Improve One Grade Category (rounded to nearest $1 ,000) (rounded to nearest $1,000)
Public Oto C $3,247,000 Oto A $27,639,000 Build ings
Park Sites B to A 3,469,000 B to A 3,469,000
Trails Already A 0 Already A 0
Storm Water C to B 3, 150,000 CtoA 17,350 ,000 System
Citywide
Sanitary D to C 1,91 8,000 D to A 2,418,000 Sewer
System 1
Abalone
Cove Sewer D to C 900,000 D to A 2 ,000,000 District
System
ROW/Traffic
Control Already A 0 Already A 0
Devices
Palos Verdes
Drive South D to C 1,316 ,000 D to A 11,479,0 00
Landslide2
Totals $14 ,000,000 $64,355,000
Notes
1. Excludes cost of work to be performed by CSMD to replace sewer mains -capacity-
increasing work is not included
2. Includes drainage work in Paintbrush Canyon and Altamira Canyon
Att achment B Page 2
ATTACHMENTS 3-29
Sewage System Questions
There was a general inquiry as to the responsibility levels of the various agencies that
provide wastewater service and as to the ownership of the collection facilities in RPV. To
help assist in that inquiry, the following information is provided including a color-coded
map was prepared identifying the responsible agencies . The map is also available on the
Public Works page of the City 's website .
It was asked if a maintenance agreement between RPV and CSMD was in place to govern
activities performed by CSMD . There is not specifically an agreement because CSMD is
a special district with legal authority over the use of fees paid to it by the property owners
annexed into its boundaries for the purposes of maintenance, preventative maintenance,
replacement, and repair. Consequently, it becomes the City 's obligation to ensure that
CSMD complies with the operations and maintenance commitment it makes to our
residents and property owners .
There are some key points regarding the ownership and maintenance responsibilities of
the sewerage systems in RPV including :
• RPV owns the sewer mains within the city limits (main lines only-all sewer laterals
from the main line to the building structure are owned and maintained by the
property owner)
• RPV is responsible to ensure that all sewer mains that receive flows that exceed
the design capacity of the sewer main are improved if that additional capacity is
due to private development approved by RPV through its discretionary approval
process
• RPV owns and maintains the sewer mains and pump stations in the Abalone Cove
Sewer Maintenance District on behalf of the property owners in that district. The
City also prov ides maintenance of the "grinder pumps" that many property owners
need to convey their flows to the public system .
• CSMD cleans , repairs, constructs, reconstructs , renews, replaces , operates , and
maintains all the collection systems within RPV that have been annexed into the
CSMD in accordance with the California Health and Safety Code Section 4885 and
its Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP). This activity by CSMD is in
accordance with City Council Resolution No. 49 (creating in October 1973 the
justification for annexation of the existing sewer system into CSMD) and
Resolution No. 95-33 (approving a continuous consent that all properties in RPV
that need to connect to the RPV sewer mains are automatically annexed into the
CSMD). CSMD collects fees from each property owner for the activities listed
above .
• CSMD has in the past made the management decision of which sewer main to
clean and replace based on maintenance inspections and available funding .
Cleaning and repairs are prioritized on a district-wide basis and the work is
scheduled accordingly.
• CSMD is a function of the County of Los Angeles , Department of Public Works ,
Atta chm e nt B Page 3
ATTACHMENTS 3-30
Sewer Maintenance Division (see htt p://dpw .l acounty .gov/smd/smd /) and they are
accountable to the LA County Board of Supervisors insofar as accomplishing
operations and maintenance
• The Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County owns and maintains the pumping
stations and trunk lines (sewer lines that transport sewage from RPV sewer mains
to the treatment plant). Each district has its own Board of Directors and RPV is in
District 5 (formed on March 31, 1924) and South Bay Cities (formed Christmas Eve
1923). Our delegate is Council Member Brooks and Council Member Misetich is
alternate.
There was a suggestion that the City should be more actively involved in the operations,
maintenance, and replacement of the RPV collection system . It is important for the City
to meet regularly with CSMD to rev iew maintenance and replacement status to ensure
that adequate CSMD resources are being assigned to RPV. RPV has the underlying
ownership of the sewer system and as such RPV has a legal obligation to ensure it is
operated and maintained in such a fashion as to prevent and eliminate overflows and
remain compliant with environmental regulations. City receives overflow and
maintenance reports from CSMD including inspection and cleaning on a regular basis.
CSMD posts condition assessment program results (http://dpw.lacounty .gov/smd/J UR /)
that are accessible to Public Works and interested members of the public .
CSMD recently reported to Public Works that it is also embarking on renewal projects in
RPV that will address system defects by installing liners in 10 line segments totaling 2, 173
linear feet this fiscal year and 36 segments totaling 7 ,669 linear feet in FY 14/15. The total
estimated construction cost of these projects is $450,000.
Public Works met with CSMD staff at the end of March and we will be meeting on a sem i-
annual schedule to highlight this important relationship and provide our input on the
management and replacement of RPV sewer mains. At the conclusion this year of the
five year inspection/cleaning cycle, Public Works will be inviting CSMD to make a
presentation to the City Council and the community regarding the overall status of the
maintenance program .
It is important to note that the City has identified, through the 2009 Sewer Master Plan,
specific locations that appear to be under capacity in terms of sewer flow, which if not
investigated and addressed could potentially be a source of sanitary sewer overflows .
Overflows that occur because there is not adequate room in the sewer main for the flows
are the legal and financial responsibility of the City . The City Council has approved
funding for a capital project to investigate and confirm if these locations need upsizing or
other modifications to address the under-capacity issue with the next step being approval
of a consulting agreement to make the detailed engineering analysis. The report card was
revised on Page 32 to reflect this current work .
Public Works also received comments from Mr. Bob Nelson , which were reviewed and
are acknowledged in the prior paragraphs of this section.
Storm Water System Questions
Public Works is performing two important projects related to the storm drain system: a
Attachment B Page4
ATTACHMENTS 3-31
video inspection/repair program and a new storm drain master plan to replace the 1998
and 2004 editions. These projects are complementary in that the data from the
inspection/repair work is being fed into the engineering work to update the hydraulic
engineering of the storm drain system, thereby linking that work with the City's GIS
database for recordkeeping. This work will then dovetail into the infrastructure
management plan .
Inspection/Repairs: To date, the City has videotaped 70% of the corrugated metal pipe
storm drain culverts that have been located. This work is being done methodically and
Public Works has completed inspecting and repairing approximate 10% of the system per
year since 2008. The process requires first carefully cleaning the storm drain , which is
often in very delicate condition due to its age, before it is videotaped; otherwise, it is not
possible to determine the actual condition of the pipe . Once clean , and invert repairs are
completed in areas to facilitate passage of the inspection equipment, the pipe condition
is assessed and other repairs such as joint and crack sealing are made. At the completion
of this work , the inspection and repair records are integrated into our GIS . Public Works
is on schedule to have the entire known system fully inspected and repaired by June 2016
as the City Council recently approved moving forward with the remaining three fiscal
years of inspection/repairs.
Storm Drain Master Plan: The goal of the Master Plan of Drainage is to develop a
comprehensive planning effort for the City's drainage system. In order to be a
comprehensive plan, the program includes development of a verified inventory database;
updating the hydrology and hydraulic calculations ; integrating the assessment of pipe
conditions and remaining service life; identifying required improvements and cost
estimates ; addressing current and future water quality requirements; and developing a
scheme for the prioritization and implementation for the recommended
improvements . The plan will be integrated with the City 's GIS and incorporate drainage
master plan information in a user-friendly application to allow annual updates as
necessary to reflect new data and completed projects. The consultant is reviewing the
City's current storm drain master plan and system components to develop a program for
the overhaul and implementation of a new drainage master plan and capital improvement
program.
Some of the remaining work to the system will include the design and construction of
concrete inlet and outlet structures to secure culverts and minimize pipe failures during
peak flows , replacing line segments that are inadequately sized and designing and
constructing systems to remove storm water from roadways where systems do not exist
today. The work locations , scope, and costs of the projects will be quantified along with
all other needed work through the Master Plan of Drainage. The master plan is scheduled
to be completed at the end of 2014 .
Storm Drain User Fee: The storm drain user fee was enacted November 7 , 2007 and is
legislated to sunset June 30, 2016 if it is not renewed .
Trails
Two pieces of correspondence were received regarding the report card and the original
comments and staff replies are attached. The Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy
requested clarification on maintenance responsibilities within the Preserve, which was
Attachment B Page5
ATTACHMENTS 3-32
responded to by revising the description of those responsibilities as follows:
The following paragraph on pages 8 and 22 were deleted :
"101 Preserve trails about 29 miles in length . The Preserve trails are within
the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve. The Palos Verdes Peninsula Land
Conservancy (PVPLC) is responsible for maintenance and repair of existing
unimproved trails in the Preserve while the City is responsible for the
construction of new trails and maintenance of improved trails . Preserve
trails are generally maintained by volunteer crews ."
And replaced with :
"101 Preserve trails about 29 miles in length . The Preserve Trails are within
the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve. According to the November 1, 2011
Preserve Management Agreement between the City and the PVPLC , any
"trail maintenance" and "trail repair" on unimproved trails in the City Council
approved Preserve Trails Plan (PTP) is neither the City 's or the PVPLC 's
obligation, but rather a permissive activity as determined necessary by the
PVPLC and as funding becomes available as stated in Exhibit B-3 of the
Agreement."
Ms. Eva Cicoria provided comments on trail condition and evaluation and sought
clarification on some items . The following changes (in strikeout/underline) were made in
the revised Report Card:
Page 23: "The trails network in the City is mainly comprised of natural trails , and
the implementation of any new trails will strictly preserve the existing ecosystem .
As such , the design criteria physical condition is not an evaluation factor. of trails
with respect to the trails ' width , slope and type of surface is not an evaluation
factor." [This change was made to differentiate design standards from
maintenance activities , which are an evaluation factor.]
Page 23 : "All trails within the City are accessible can be accessed ... " [This change
was made to clarify that 'accessibility' does not necessarily mean ADA
accessibility.]
There was also a general comment that the trails may be graded too high . The consultant
evaluated the City's trail system and assigned it an "A" grade basing their opinion on
access and connectiv ity, adequate trail markers , signage indicating direction, public
parking areas , and maintenance. The consultant has recommended that as time and
funding permits , the City should pursue a survey of all the trails as a means to assess the
needs for further improvements.
Various editorial revisions were made to the report card to address these comments ,
which are highlighted on the attached revised report card .
Landslide
There was a request at the workshop to make more of a distinction between Abalone
Cove and Portuguese Bend landslides and accordingly various editorial revisions have
Attachme nt B Page 6
ATTACHMENTS 3-33
been made to the report card to improve the distinction between these two landslide areas
as described below and on page 42 of the report card . A map was included on page 43
of the report card showing the different landslide areas.
The Abalone Cove landslide is defined by the boundaries of the Abalone Cove Landslide
Abatement District (ACLAD). ACLAD co llects fees from the property owners within the
District for various maintenance and improvement various projects. The Abalone Cove
landslide represents an area within the ancient Portuguese Bend landslide and is
characterized today by very slow movement (creeping is the geologic term of art). The
long-term and consistent use of dewatering wells in Abalone Cove has demonstrated that
removing groundwater has slowed landslide movement in this area.
The Portuguese Bend landslide area is also within the boundaries of the ancient
Portuguese Bend landslide . However, annual land movement is generally much greater
(measured in feet per year) than that in Abalone Cove. A designated funding source has
not been established for mitigation projects in the Portuguese Bend landslide area and
activities in this area have been funded by the City's General Fund. Although in years
past dewatering wells have been installed in the area, the land movement at those
locations (generally in the middle portion of the landslide area) has damaged most of the
existing wells and they no longer remove groundwater. Recently Public Works has
reviewed possible dewatering well locations along Burma Road, which appears to be
stable enough to consider as future well lo cations. Future dewatering work will be
proposed in the upcoming new fiscal year budget process.
Exhibits
1. Revised Infrastructure Report Card contain ing various editorial revisions, evaluations ,
estimated costs
2. Screenshots of the Public Works infrastructure report card webpages
3. Excerpt from City of Los Angeles report card
4. Excerpt from LA County report card
5. Map of sewer system agencies in RPV
6. City Council Resolution No . 49
7 . City Council Resolution No. 95-33
8. California Health & Safety Code Section 4885
9. Excerpt from CSMD SSMP
10. CSMD FY2013/14 and FY20 14/15 sewer lining projects
11. Written comments received from the public
Attachm ent B Page 7
ATTACHMENTS 3-34
EXHIBIT 1
Revised May 14, 2014
ATTACHMENTS 3-35
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
FOREWORD
It is with great pleasure that we present this 2013 Infrastructure Report Card to the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes. Infrastructure is designed and maintained by engineers and can be defined as :
The basic physical and organizational structures and facilities (e .g ., buildings, roads, and utilities)
needed for the operation of a society or enterprise.
This report card is an assessment of the existing condition of infrastructure in the City. It is a snapshot in a
moment of time: it does not evaluate community needs and priorities nor is it an in -depth assessment . It is
a data-driven, objective, professional review that grades the existing state of the infrastructure on an
established scale from Exceptional (A) to Failing (F), based on the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
guidelines and standard criterion.
The assessed infrastructure components in this report are: the City's Public Buil9ings, Park Sites, Trails, Storm
Water System, Sanitary Sewer System, Abalone Cove Assessment District ~ewer System, Right of Way and
Traffic Devices, and Palos Verdes Drive South Landslide .
,
This report card suggests improvements to raise the existing infr~structure condition one grade up and to
raise its grade to Exceptional ("A"). To calculate the cost estimates associated with these two upgrades, an
Infrastructure Management Program (IMP) is recommended. While this report card assesses the current
condition of the infrastructure, and provide recommendations to improve it, an IMP will provide a
comprehensive cost estimate of the current and fu;u're needs on a long term basis, will identify the
maintenance level required for each infrastructur,e' component, will identify the resources, the funding
shortfalls, and will identify prioritization of projects and expenditures.
/
This report card reflects a collaborative effort by SA Associates and City staff, including members of Public
Works, Traffic/Right-of-Way, Water Quality, Parks and Building Facilities, and Community Development.
In spite of the current state of the economy, it is the responsibility of engineers and our fellow citizens to
know the state of our infrastrucrure and to work towards improving it. As engineers, it is important that we
/
inform our public on the importance of infrastructure maintenance, and encourage our colleagues in the
public sector to continu~ to seek infrastructure funding. We should not underestimate the importance of
infrastructure in our lives . It is essential to our way of life, our economy, and our health and wellbeing.
Warmest Regards,
Shahnawaz Ahmad, P.E.
President, SA Associates
ASCE Los Angeles Section President, 2003-04
APWA Southern California Chapter President, 2003
ATTACHMENTS 3-36
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CITY OF RANCHOS PALO S VERDE S
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD 2013
This Report Card provides an overview of the City, its infrastructure, as well as an evaluation of the various
infrastructure components. This Report Card is broken down into the following sections :
CONTENTS
1 Introduction ........................................................................................... 3
2. Grades and Grading Process ................................................................. 6
3. Report Card Summary ........................................................................... 8
4. Why Should I Be Interested ........................................................... 11
5. Infrastructure Costs ............................................................................ 13
6. Public Buildings ................................................................................... 17
7. Parks .................................................................................................... 18
8. Trails .................................................................................................... 22
9. Storm Water System .......................................................................... ~27
' 10. Citywide Sanitary Sewer System ....................................................... 30
11. Abalone Cove Assessment District Sewer System ............ : ............. 33
12. Right of Way and Traffic Devices .............................. ! ................... 36
/
13 . Palos Verdes Drive South Landslide ................... ,..' ........................ .40
14. Acknowledgments ......................................... ,...~ ................................ 43
"You and I come by road or rail, but economists travel on infrastructure"
-Margaret Thatcher
/
/
/
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-37
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
The City retained SA Associates to evaluate the condition of the City's existing infrastructure and to prepare
an assessment of the existing condition of infrastructure in the City. This Report Card reflects the findings of
that analysis . The grades associated with each infrastructure component help the City prioritize its
infrastructural needs, help organize its decision making process, and also build a base for the preparation of
the City's Infrastructure Management Program . City staff provided support and feedback to SA Associates
during the preparation of this report.
1.2 CITY BACKGROUND
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is located in the southwestern most portion of Los Angeles County. It is
bounded on the northwest by the City of Palos Verdes Estates, on the east by the City of Los Angles {San
Pedro), on the north by the Cities of Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Estates, and on the south and southwest by
the Pacific Ocean. ,
At the close of the 19th Century, the Palos Verdes Peninsula was inhabited solely by a few cattle ranchers
and sheepherders. The land was mostly covered w ith nothing more than native vegetation. Then, for a brief
period in the early 1900s, the Peninsula enjoyed prosperity not only as a cattle ranch, but also as a rich
farming area. Japanese immigrant families farmed the most southern slopes, growing fields of beans, peas
and tomatoes, while the manager of the cattle ranch grew garley for hay and grain on the dryer northern
slopes . In 1913, Frank A. Va nderl ip, president of the National Bank of New York, purchased the 16,000-acre
Palos Verdes Peninsula with a vision to develop the "m6st fashionable and exclusive residential colony" in
the nation. Unfortunately, his dream was put on hol<l' after the Stock Market Crash, the Great Depression,
and the onset of World War II . None of these se,tbacks, however, reduced the beauty of the Palos Verdes
Peninsula, or its potential desirability as a residential area .
/
The city boundaries contain approximat~ly 13 .6 square miles of area and 7.5 miles of coastline. The reported
population in 2000 was 41,145 and t,his is estimated to have increased to 42,800 in 2009.The population is
not expected to increase dramatjcally as only a small number of vacant areas remain for development.
Future developments and/or redevelopments that do occur will likel y have limited impact on the overall
population . The City is curr~rrtly revising its General Plan and there is a strong community feeling that the
semi-rural nature of the community should be preserved. Today, as a result of the foresight of its founders
/
and residents, the City,of Rancho Palos Verdes continues to offer magnificent views , open spaces, clean air,
and remains an extremely desirable place to live.
ATTACHMENTS 3-38
Fi gure 1.1 : C ity shoreline
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
;
2013
The climate of the City is Mediterranean with average annual rainfall of 13 .17 inches . The majority of this
rainfall occurs during January, February, and March. The steep terrain of the qty allows most of the rainfall
to drain quickly with little observed surface flooding. The average temperature varies from 67Q F in the
winter to 80Q F in the summer. ,
/
/
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-39
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
1.3 CITY INFRASTRUCTURE
The City owns and/or maintains an extensive infrastructure system consisting of sewers, storm drains, roads,
parks, trails, and buildings . For this report, the following infrastructure categories/quantities were
considered :
•!• Public Buildi ngs
17 Buildings I 68 ,819 Total Square Feet
•!• Park Sites
16 Parks I 185.95 Acres
•!• Trails
101 Preserve Trails I 29 Miles
16 Non-Preserve Trails I 3 miles
•!• St o rm Wat er System
4.6 miles of storm water lines; 588 catch basins; 67 manholes; 82 culverts; 51 inlets; 200 trash
exclude rs
•!• Sanitary Sewer Syste m
150 miles of sewer lines; 3,707 manholes; 17 primary lift statipns
•!• Abalone Co ve Asses sment Di strict Sewer System
7.8 miles; 130 manholes; 44 grinder pumps ; 4 primary lift stations
•!• Rig ht of W ay and Traffic Devic es
23,497,303 SF of AC pavement; 3,332,396 SF of concrete sidewalk; 1,084,172 ft. of curb & gutter;
627,435 SF of medians '
•!• Palo s Ve r d es Dr ive South Lands li de t and dewaterin g we ll s)
1.2 miles of Palos Verdes Drive South exposed to Landslide ,
The City maintains its infrastructure '?n a regular basis as part of the City's annual capital improvements. The
City evaluates its infrastructure ne.eds and plan fo r improvements on a priority needs basis.
/
/ ,
sl SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-40
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 2 : GRADES AND GRADING PR O CESS
2.1 THE GRADING PROCESS
The grading process is performed as follows :
1. Identify Categories
2. Conduct Visits & Gather Informati on
3. Identify Grading Criteria
4. Review Available Documents
5. Assign Preliminary Grade for Review by Rev iew Committee
6. Assign Final Grade
2013
The Infrastructure Report Card Working Group (Working Group); comprised of engineers specialized in the
assessed infrastructure categories , worked closely with the City staff to identify the categories to be
considered in the report card. Site visits, for all categories, were conducted and photos were taken for
documentation.
Information about each category was gathered, reviewed and categorized. The information included: master
plans, master plan updates, studies, third party consultant reports, City staff reports, City staff presentations,
survey plans, rehabilitation plans, City website, City budgets, City capital improvement plan, etc. The
documents reviewed for each category are listed at the end of each category section under the heading
"Sources".
After many hours of review and analysis, the Working Group assigned a preliminary grade to each category.
For the buildings and the parks, individual grades were assigned for each building/park and an overall grade
was calculated based on the individual grades .
The assigned grades were based on the reviewed City documents, the reports/studies prepared by third party
consultants, and the findings of the site visits .
The grades and the support material were reviewed by the "Review Committee" responsible for the quality
assurance/quality control of the Report Card . The review committee included professional engineers
specialized in the field of infrastructure. The Review Committee comments were discussed/implemented and
the final grades were assigned .
The assessment/grading was conducted for the existing facilities in the City and was based on the facilities
current condition. Future plans were not taken into consideration in the grading process . However, they
were considered in defining the future recommendations .
2.2 DEFINITION OF THE GRADES
The infrastructure report card utilizes grading criterion that the general public can relate to, similar to the
grading used in education . This is the grading criterion used by The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
in infrastructure grading.
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-41
2013
Grade
A
B
c
D
F
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
Percentage
90-100%
80-89%
70-79%
41-69%
40%or Lower
/
/
/
Definition
Exceptional
Good
Average
Poor
Failing
ATTACHMENTS 3-42
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 3: REPORT CARD SUMMARY
2013
The following are summaries of the different infrastructure co mpone nts and their associated grades:
P u blic Buildings: D
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes owns a total of 17 public facilities, located within park si tes , with a total
square footage of 68,819. Most of the public buildings are 25 years old or older and were purchased from
sc hool districts or transferred to the City from the federal government. The criteria of evaluation of the
public buildings was based on (1) the structural/seismic condition of the building, (2) the condition of exterior
and interior finishes, (3) the functionality/operability of the building's systems including electrical , plumbing,
heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), and firefighting, (4) safety issues, and (5) sustainability and
energy saving. The Overall Grade for the public buildings is D. This shows a great need for
retrofitting/renovation of the publ ic buildings .
Park Sites: B
The city has 16 parks, 3 recreational acti ve, 12 recreational passive, and 1 'i nstitutio na l educa ti ona l, with a
total acreage of about 186 acres. In addition to housing the City's community centers, the active parks
provide sports and recreational facilities; tot lots, playgrounds , terrhis courts, baseball diamonds, grassy
fields, and picnic areas . Some parks also serve as trailheads for the' trails system serving the cities of Rancho
Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, and Palos Verdes Estates . Parks are maintained by outside
vendors retained by the City under the supervision of the Public Works Department. Other park activities
and rentals are managed by the Recreation and Parks Department. The City parks were assessed based on
(1) the condition of the available infrastructure, JZ) the condition of the ex is ting facilities (tot lots,
playgrounds, benches, picnic tables, drinking fountains, and spo rts facilities), and (3) the assigned parking.
The assessment showed more than 70% of the parks in excellent condition . The Overall Grade for the park
sites is B. It is important to mention that the current condition of the City parks is the result of the recent
improvement/renovation projects. Maintilining this grade req uires the continuity of these projects . ,
Trail s: A
The City's trails network systerp includes: (1) 101 Preserve trails about 29 miles in length. The Preserve Trails
are with the Palo s Verdes Nature Preserve. According to the November 1, 2011 Preserve Management
Agreement between the City and the PVPLC, any "trail maintenance" and "trail repair" on unimproved trails
in the City Council approved Preserve Trail s Plan (PTP) is neither the City's or the PVPLC's obl igation, but
rather a permissive activity as determined neces sa ry by the PVPLC and as funding becomes available as stated
in Exhibit B-3 of the Agreem e nt.
. (2) 16 currently operating Non-Preserve Trails, about 3 miles,
within the City's open spaces, managed and maintained by the City. The trails are designated for specific
users . They are either pedestrian, cyclists, equestrians, a com bination of any two, o r multipurpose t rai ls
designated for the three types of users. The assessment of the trails was based on {l) the available access
points and trail markers/s ignage, (2) available parking, (3) connectivity, and (4) maintenance . The
assessment showe d the trails in a very good co nditio n. The Overall Grade for the trails is A.
Storm Wate r System: C
SA l s
ATTACHMENTS 3-43
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
The City 's storm water system consists of buried pipes, open channels, catch basins , inlets, and outlets
strategi ca lly placed within the City to drain water from properties and roads. For the City's storm water
system, the capaci ty, condition, operation and maintenance, and environmental sustainability of the system
were evaluated for grading purposes. Age is a significant factor in the evaluation of grading si n ce a newer
system reflects both a capacity to accept the drainage flows and the condition to carry it properly. Since most
of the City's drainage facilities were constructed by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works prio r
to incorporation of the City, the City's drainage capacity is lacking in certain areas. However, due to the City's
investments, the storm water system provides functionality. With the completion of the Mccarroll Canyon
system and the San Ramon project currently under construction, the City is making strides to begin managing
its many uncontrolled canyons. Thus, overall grade was determined to be C. This shows a need for improving
the City's storm water system.
Citywide Sa nita ry Sewer System : D
The City's overall sewer system consists of sewer mainlines, laterals, manholes, lift stations, and grinder
pumps. The City's sewer mainl ines, which are ma i ntained by the Conso l ida t ed Sewer Maintenance District of
Los Angeles Coun t y, consist mostly of gravity pipelines constructed with vitrified -clay pipe (VCP), with some
force mains (pressure pipe) that transmit sewage from low elevation point~. For the City 's sanitary sewer
system, the capacity, condition, operation and maintenance, and envi ro nme ntal sustainability of the system
were evaluated for grading purposes. For sewer systems, age is a more significant factor in the evaluation
of grading than with storm drain systems since the age of sewers typica lly reflects the capacity to properly
transmit flows. A damaged sewer sys tem cannot transmit flows properly, and wastewater must be
transmitted and disposed of properly. Also, an older sewer system is likely to reflect inferior construction
sta ndards as well as deteriorated pipelines . Despite the age of the City's sewer system, the system provides
acceptable functionality. Thus, overall grade was determined to be D. This shows a fairly strong need for
improving the City's sewer system .
,
Abalone Cove Ass essment District Sewer System: D
The City's Abalone Cove Assessment Sewer Sys t em is considered part of the sewer system in the 2009 Master
Plan but for billing and maintenance pu1poses it is considered a separate sewer system. The Abalone Cove
Assessment Sewer District System cunsists of sewer main lines, latera ls, manholes, grinder pumps, and 4 lift
stations . Fo r th e system, the capacity, co ndition, operation and maintenance, and environmental
sus tainability were eva lu ated f o r grading purposes. Since the system w as constructed in 2001 to help
/
minimize water infiltration into the landslide area and to replace septic systems, the capacity and condition
of the sys tem were more' heavily weighed. The system is co nstru cted using polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and
Polyethylene (PE) pip~ due to the active land slide, however, v itrified clay pipe (VCP) is used in some areas.
Despite the threat of landslide, the sys tem currently has good capacity and condition. However, the sys tem
is highly vulnerable to land movement and mechanical wear, and requires a high degree of maintenance, and
provides slightly les s than desired functionality. Thus, the overall grade was determi ned to be D. This shows
a strong need for improving the District sewer system.
Right of Wa y and Traffic Devices : A
The City's right of way network consists of local street s and arterials, including pavement, medians, curb,
gutter, sidewa lk, stree t lights/signals, and right of way landscaping (i.e. median trees). In terms of length, the
majority of City roadways consist of local streets (i.e. residential), as local streets comprise nearly 75% of the
tota l length of roadways in th e City. Arterials comprise 25% of the total len gth of roadways in the City. For
the City's ri ght of way system, the capacity, condition, operation and maintenance, and environmenta l
sustainability of the system were evaluated for grading purposes. For right of way/street sys tems, the
con dition is perhaps the primary aspect of co ncern to residents and City officials , as deteriorated pavement
ATTACHMENTS 3-44
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD 2013
poses a threat to the safety of not only motorists, but bicyclists and pedestrians in particular. Due to the
City's strong CIP program and excellent operation and maintenance procedures, the City's streets are in great
condition and provide exceptional functionality. Thus, the overall grade was determined to be A. This shows
that the City's right of way system is in good condition .
Palos Verdes Drive South Landslide: D
An important portion of the City lies within a natural landslide area that is composed of several component
landslides . It is mainly located at Palos Verdes Drive South, an important arterial that connects the east part
of the city. The landslide affects not only surface streets and buildings, but also other infrastructure as well,
including much needed utilities. The City has established mitigation infrastructure and improvements as part
of efforts to slow the rate of the landslides and to minimize the likelihood of catastrophic landslide
movements. This mitigation infrastructure consists of, grading, and dewatering wells in addition to drainage
and sewer systems. The mitigation infrastructure was evaluated based on the capacity of the infrastructure
to prevent or slow subsurface land movement, the condition of the infrastructure as it relates to operation
and maintenance, and the environmental impacts as it relates to maintaining dwe11ings, landscapes, and
utilities, and protecting the public from harm. For the City's landslide mitigatiein infrastructure, only the
grading, and dewatering wells were evaluated since drainage and sewer infrastructure were evaluated in
previous sections. Although the individual mitigation infrastructure is proving to slow landslide movements,
it does not fully meet the needs of the City and provides inadequate functionality. Thus, the overall grade
was determined to be D. This shows a very strong need for imptoving the City's landslide mitigation
infrastructure.
/
/
/
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-45
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 4: WHY SHOULD I BE INTERESTED?
The City's infrastructure benefits all of the Ci ty's citizens as well as its v isito rs. The City's infrastructure is vital
to not only the City's economy but also to the Palos Verdes Penin sula as a whole. In addition to its economic
imp ortance, the quality of the City's infrastructure also has significant recreational and social benefits, which
include community centers, trails, and parks.
Figure 3.1: Seascape Trail at Vicente Bluff Reserve
As with any home, each infrastructure system needs to be m,aintained and upgraded on a continuous basis.
Infrastructure system failures can cause disruptions to our daily lives , trigger slow-downs in economic
activity, or even be the cause of injury and death. For, example, a roadway failure cou ld cause widespread
traffic jams, disrupt access to buildings and ho spital,s;-and could also result in fatal injury. Proper ca r e of our
cities, including maintaining our roads, upgrading storm water and sewer systems, and having regularly
evaluated and maintained sys tems, goes a long way. These investments will benefit our present communit y
for generations to come. /
This assessment of the current co nditj on of the City's infrastructure is an in dicator on how the City is currently
doing and how it should act in the,future .
/
This report card is a tool to self-appraisal that will empower the t rack ing of the current trends and the
forecasting of the City's future. Thi s report card will inform the public and the policy makers, w ill establish
com munity expectations, and will facilitate the policy makers in building the basis for the Infrastructure
Management Program.
111 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-46
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 5: CITY'S RECENT INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS
2013
Annua l costs needed to maintain and appropriately expand the City's infrastructure are i n the tens of millions
of dollars . These costs can better be considered as investments. Investment decisions are based on a priority
needs basis, through reports by City staff. These decisions are mostly recommended by City staff and
reviewed and approved by the City Council. The following are average annual inve stments made to each
infrastructure category over the past three years :
•:• Public Buildings
Average 2010-2013 Expenditures: $475,000/year
•:• Park Sites
Average 2010-2013 Expenditures: $1.4 million/year
•:• Trails
Average 2010-2013 Expenditures: $70,000/year
•:• Storm Water System
Average 2010-2013 Expenditures : $2 .5 million/year
•!• Sanitary Sewer System
Average 2010-2013 Expenditures: $90,000/year
•!• Abalone Cove Assessment Di stri ct Sewer System
Average 2010-2013 Expenditures: $77,000/year
•!• Right of Way and Traffic Devi ces
Average 2010-2013 Expenditures: $4 million /year '
•!• Palos Verd es Drive South Landslide (a nd dewatering wells}
Average 2010-2013 Expenditures: $700,000/year ,
These numbers can fluctuate over a given time period from under $100,000 to over $5 mi llion based on the
needs of the City's infrastructure. The sourc7s of funding for the City's infrastructure co me from the City's
general fund, CIP reserves , State and fede~al grants, and inter-agency funding with neighboring cities and the
County of Los Angeles.
/
/
/
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-47
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 6: PUBLIC BUILDINGS 0
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes owns a total of 17 public facilities with a total square footage of 68,819.
Located within park sites, the public facilities provide gathering spaces for the general public, learning and
exploration environments for the youth, and work spaces for public employees, representatives, and
volunteers. The maintenance of the public buildings is the responsibility of the Public Works Department.
The City's buildings are listed below:
No. Building Location Area Sq . Ft
City Hall (Administration& Cata lina wing) Civic Center 17,530
2 Community Development Department C ivic Center 4,604
3 PVNET Civic Center 3,083
4 Cable TV (CH-33 Studio) Building Civic Center 1,242
5 Warhead Room I Shop Civic Center 890
6 Sign Maintenance Building Civic Center 880
Sub-total Civic Center Buildings 28,229
7 Ladera Linda Community Bu ilding Ladera Linda Park 3,473
8 Ladera Linda Discovery Room Ladera Linda Park 3,398
9 Ladera Linda Multi-Purpose Room Ladera Linda Park 3,288
10 Ladera Linda Classroom Ladera Linda Park 3,538
11 Ladera Linda Restroom Ladera Linda Park 5,182
Sub-total Ladera Linda Community Center 18,879
12 Pointe Vicente Interpretive Center (PVIC) Museum & Gift PVIC Park 9 ,746
Shop
13 Fred Hesse Jr. Community Building Hesse Park 9 ,040
14 Robert E. Ryan Community Building Ryan Park 1,725
15 Abalone Cove Building Abalone Cove Park 700
16 Eastview park ( Restrooms ) Eastview park 300
17 Pelican Cove (Fishing Access) Restrooms Pelican Cove Park 200
Total Area for City Owned Buildings 68,819
/
Except for PVIC (shown below in Figure 5.1), the public buildings are 25 years old or older. Many of the
buildings were purchase9 from school districts or transferred to the City from the federal government. Some
of these building were completely renovated like PVIC and Fred Hesse buildings, and only minor
improvements have been made to others since their acquisition (such as Ladera Linda buildings and City Hall
Buildings).
13 1 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-48
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
Figure 5.1: Point Vi cente Interpretive Center Museum & Gi ft Shop
Assessment of City Buildings
The criteria of evaluation of the public buildings was based on:
1. The structural/seismic condition of the building
2. The condition of exterior and interior finishes
2013
3. The functionality/operability of the building's systems including electrical, plumbing, heating
ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), and fire fighting
4. Safety issues
5. Sustainability and energy saving
The compliance with Americans with Disability Act (ADA) requirements was not considered in the evaluation
criteria since ADA improvements are scheduled for all City Buildings ; however, the cost of these
improvements should be considered wtlen calculating the investment needs.
The assessment depended on Hie reports performed by consultants retained by the City (please refer to
"Sources" below for a list of these reports) and the visual inspection performed by the Infrastructure Working
Group. The "A" grade was ,assigned to the newly constructed buildings , those in excellent condition, and the
other buildings were r51(ed relative to the "A" building(s), with "F" given to those buildings that are in very
poor condition.
The Civic Center and Ladera Linda buildings were mainly evaluated based on (1) the structural/seismic
condition especially in the event of an earthquake, (2) the safety risks and effect on productivity caused by
the condition/functionality of the building systems .
Final Grade
The Overall Grade for the public buildings is D. The overall grade was calculated as the average of the
individual grades of the 17 buildings. Figure 5.2 below provides the grades of the individual buildings :
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-49
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
OloiC:Cen'ttt· Pl1M1"'~rtm1flt
Ch.C ~nt .,.·l'\fl[l
OlolC C.rt:tt-Cl~t""'(CH-"J~doe)
CIVCCll'(t ,.. Wlll'hUC ROOt!'I 1 Shep
d\'IC C.nt'lff'· Sipi ~Wl~l'U Bi.llldift(
u de,1 1,.1r"lkCOmm11ncy o.-dc't
uidw.1 unda 0-:SC'OwryAcem
llOMtt t: ~~ .. "' O)l"l'U"'l"'f'ICV o ~
Abllclnl CQ¥1 a,,-::1'1"
tan·oii-~rt.j ~rtrccnu)
P'Oun C0\4 Vll'llftl ACtUI RUtn:IOr".1
-,_
I
I
I
I
I
0 -~
I
I
I
I
Figure 5.1 : Grades of City-owned Buildings
Investment Needs
-
A --r ----
I
I
Citizens take pride in their public buildings as they reflect their City's isfentity. The safety, well-bei ng, quality
of life, and economic vitality of the City are tied to the services administered and delivered from these pub l ic
buildings . Green Ill and energy efficient city hall (similar to other ' neighbor cities) and community buildings
will have its benefits on the local community and economy. State-of-the-art green facilities will ensure safety,
increase revenue potential, improve health and productivity of employees, and ensure the anticipated
operability of city facilities in seismic/catastrophic eve11ts~ The City has recently dedicated substantial efforts
in increasing energy efficiency in its facilities and ha~ 'some energy saving projects in its future plans.
To upgrade the public buildings one grade up (from D to C), the city needs to perform retrofitting for some
buildings and system replacement for others." This includes the replacement of the mechanical and electrical
systems for the City Hall Building s and Ladera Linda Community Center Buildings , and the retrofitting of Ryan
Commu nity Building and Abalone Cove Park Building. The upgrade also includes the necessary ADA
Compliance improvements for items identified as th e "Potential Safety Hazard " and "S evere" barriers (the
most severe) in the City's ADA Ass essment Compliance Report.
/
To upgrade the public bu)ldings to A, the City need s to perform complete retrofitting of the City Hall Buildings
and Ladera Linda Community Center Buildin gs and new so lar power system for PVIC and Fred Hesse Bui ldings.
The upgrade shall also include all ADA compliance retrofitting for all buildings.
The cost estimate of the investment needs will be determined in the Infrastructure Management Program.
Although the complete retrofitting for City Hall Buildingsl 2l and Lad era Linda Community Buildi ngs l3l will result
in modernized energy efficient buildings with an expected useful life of at least 20 years, the inherent
constraints of the structure's layout will rem ain and the area (square footage) will remain the same . Another
alternative is the complete replaceme nt of these buildings. This will resu lt in brand new, state-of-the-art
green and sustainable civic and co mmunity centers, which reflect the city's sp irit of envi r o nme nt and habitat
preservation, and accommodate the city's future space needs. The replacement cost for the Cit y Hall
buildings, and for Ladera Linda community buildings can be estimated in the Infrastructure Management
Program .
Funding for the City-owned infrastructure, includ ing streets, parks, sew er s, and buildings co mes from various
1s l SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-50
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD 2013
sources; including transfers from the General Fund and restricted funds , and grants from other governmental
agencies.
The annual budget for buildings maintenance is in the range of $SOO,OOO. FY 13-14 budget is around
$600,000.
Recommendations
1. Develop a comprehensive long term maintenance plan that ensures the continuous maintenance
and renovation of the buildings to extend their useful life, enhance their functiona lity, improve their
efficiency, and minimize their impact on the environment
2. Secure funding sources for maintenance, renovation or replacement of existing buildings and
construction of new buildings.
3. Perform a cost benefit analysis to decide between replacement or reJrofitting for the City Hall
Buildings and Ladera Linda Community Buildings .
4. Resume efforts/secure funding towards transferring city buildings into green and sustainable
buildings, reflecting the city's spirit of environment and habitat preservation (the City's Green
Building Construction Ordinance was passed by the City Council in November 2008)
Sources
• City Hall property Survey plans , 12/S/2007, KDM Meridien
• Modifications to Utilities Plan Site LA-SSL-TACT and Administration Fac ility Plan-Paving, Water
System & Diesel Storage (current City Hall site), 1963, Quinton Engineers Ltd.
• City Hall Generator Plans: Electrical, 2/12/2009, Nikolakopulos and Assoc., Inc., Plumbing: 4/9/2010,
The Sullivan Partnership Inc.
• LA Site SS Cathodic Protection (current City Hall site), 10/4/1968, Fort MacArthur, CA Office of the
Post Engineer
• ADA updates at City of RPV City Hall, 2/7 /2008, Willdan
• Seismic Hazard Evaluation for RPV Civic Center Buildings, 10/2S/2000, Breiholz Qazi Engineering, Inc.
• Community Development &Administration Building Floor Plan s, date and preparer name not
available on plan
• Civic Center Facilities Assessment for City of RPV, 11/2010, Gonzalez Goodale Architects
• Certified Thermography Reports for Planning Department Building and Ladera Linda Community
Center, 3/2010, California IR
• TV Communication & Administration Building Floor Plan, date and preparer name not available on
plan
• City of RPV Accessibility Self Evaluation and Transition Plan , 6/4/2013, City Staff Report
• Office Space Planning Plans for Community Development Building, 10/30/2008, John M. Cruikshank
Consultants, Inc.
• City Hall Administration & PVNET Annex Floor Plan , 12/1/2008 , date and preparer name not available
on plan
• Community Development Department Re stroom ADA Compliance, 9/29/22010, John M . Cruikshank
Consultants, Inc.
• Sustainable Sites Initiative -A Case Study: Rancho Mirage City Hall Undergoes Site Renovation, APWA
by David Volz
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-51
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
• Ladera Linda Facility Inspection Report, 6/29/2011, Willdan
• Ladera Linda Facility Preliminary Inspection Report, 2/22/2011, City Staff Report
• Ladera Linda Architectural/MEP/Landscape Plans, 1966-1967, Kistner, Wright & Wright Architects
and Engineers
• Ryan Park Restrooms Improvement and Accessibility Compliance, 5/4/2012, Willdan Landscape
Architects
• Abalone Cove Building Plans, 6/28/1989, Super Secur MFG . Co.
• Eastview Park Playground & Accessibility Improvements, 2/23/2013, BOA Architecture
• Fisherman's (Pelican Cove) Parking Lot Plans, 9/3/2008, Stantec
• "New Civic Center Financing Options", 6/29/2010, City Staff Report & PowerPoint Presentation
• ADA Assessment Compliance Reports, May 2013, BOA Architecture
• City of Rancho Palos Verdes Budget for Fiscal Year 2013/2014 and appended Capital Improvement
Plan
(1) The City's Green Building Construction Ordinance was passed by the City Council in November 2008
/
(2) In 2009, the City Council initiated the creation of a Civic Center Master Plan, however, in 2012 this planning effort was placed on
hold. The future of this site and its uses, which must comply with the Program of Utilization for the site unless an amendment is
sought, remains undetermined until Master Planning efforts resume. Any changes in land use to the property through the Master
Planning efforts would require approval by the Planning Commission and City Council through public hearings along with review and
approval of a change, if nece ssary, to the Program of Utilization by the Nat ional Park Service.
(3) The Lad era Linda Park & Community Center Buildings Repla cement concept is comprise d of 2 phases: Phase I includes infrastructure,
landscaping, and park improvements and Phase 2 covers the building~.
/
/
/
/
11 1 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-52
SECTION 7 : PARK SITE S B
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD 2013
"It is the goal of the City to conserve, protect and enhance its natural resources, beauty and open space for
the benefit and enjoyment of its residents and the residents of the entire region. Future development shall
recognize the sensitivity of the natural environment and be accomplished in such a manner as to maximize
the protection of it."-City of Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan .
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes has a unique interconnected parks, trails and wildlife habitat system. The
system has crowned the City an exceptional recreational destination serving the local community and the
surrounding cities in and outside the Peninsula. The city has 16 parks, 3 recreational active, 12 recreational
passive, and 1 institutional educational with a total acreage of about 186 acres as shown in the exhibit below.
No. Park Name Use Des ig nation Area
1 Abalone Cove Shoreline Park (Upper & Recreational
Lowe r Parks) Passive 46.84
2 Clovercliff Park
Recreational
Passive* 0.17
3 Del Ce rro Park Recreational
Pass ive 4.50
4 Eastview Park Recreational
Pa ss ive* 9 .90
s Foun ders Park (Maintained by Trump) Recreational
Passive 5 .21
6 Frank E. Vanderlip Sr. Park
Recreati ona I
Pas sive* 0 .48
7 Fred Hesse Jr . Community Park (Upper) Recreational
Active
8 Fred Hesse Jr. Community Park (Lower) Rec rea tional 29 .40
Active
9 Grandview Park Re creationa l
Passive 18.00
10 Ladera Li nda Community Center Park Institutional
Edu cational 11.00
11 Marilyn Ryan Park (Maintained by Trump) Recreational
Pa ssive* 1 .50
12 Martingale Tra ilhead Park Recreational
Passive* 1.20
13 Pelican Cove Park (Fishing Access) Recreational
Passive 10.50
14 Lower Point Vicente Park (Interpretive Recreational
Center -PVIC) Passive 28.00
1 5 Upper Point Vicente Park and Civic Center & Recreational
Rancho Canines Dog Park Passive 8.25
16 Robert E. Ryan Community Park Recreational
Active 11.00
Total Acreage 186.86
*Use Designation proposed as part of the City's General Plan, not yet approved.
In addition to housing the City's community centers, the parks provide sports and recreational facilities; tot
lots, playgrounds, tennis courts, baseball diamonds, grassy fields, and picnic areas . The parks also serve as
trailheads for the trails system serving the cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates,
and Palos Verdes Estates .
The City is the home of stunning scenic ocean views, whale watching, hiking, biking, equestrian activities,
hands-on environmental exploration, and picnicking. The City's residents are exceptionally aware of the
importance and effect of the open spaces on the quality of life and have given the City's reserves, parks, and
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-53
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
trails a priority along the years . This is translated in Rancho Palos Verdes Coast Vision Plan that (1) established
the development and maintenance of community parks and recreational areas as a top priority and (2)
outlined new carefully planned projects to enhance the enjoyment of the beautiful coastline and the natural
landscape of the peninsula .
The current city document representing the parks system is the Parks Master Plan that was last revised in
1989. With the vision plan and the associated park developments in place, the update of the 1989 City's
Parks Master Plan becomes essential. An updated Park s Master Plan will consolidate existing information,
accumulate and incorporate related planning efforts, and map data to determine both the existing and
desired level of service related to both passive and active recreation in the City.
As part of the implementation of the Coast Vision Plan, the City has two new major park developments on
its unfunded CIP plan: The Lower Point Vicente Park Improvement Project (13-acre of the lower portion of
PVJC) and the Gateway Park Development (a 23-acre site within the City's Landslide Moratorium ar ea). Other
major projects are the improvement of Grandview Park and Lower Hesse Park .
Parks are maintained by outside vendors retained by the City under the sup~r\tision of the Public Works
Department. Other park activities and rentals are managed by the Recreati?n and Parks Department.
Figure 6.1 : Robert E Ryan Community Park
/
Assessment of Parks
/
/
The City parks were assessed based on:
1. The condition of the available infrastructure
2. The condition of the existing facilities (tot lots, playgrounds, benches, picnic tables, drinking
fountains, and sports facilities)
3. The assigned parking.
The ADA improvements were not considered in the evaluation criteria as they are scheduled for all City parks ;
however, they were included in the investment needs. The assessment showed more than 70% of the parks
in excellent condition. The "A" grade was assigned to the parks that are in excellent condition, and the other
parks were rated relative to the "A" parks.
Note: The assessment of the city parks did not include the building components. The buildings were assessed
separately. Refer to Section 6: Public Buildings for assessment of buildings.
191 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-54
Fi nal Grade
CITY OF RANCH OS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUC TURE REPORT CARD 2013
The Overall Grade for the parks is B. The overall grade was cal cul ated as t he average of the in dividual grades
of the 15 Parks. Figure 6.2 be low provides the grades of the individual parks:
i I ' I
I I ' i .. ..,1 I 'I ' I I I I
Up:P4r PointVictnCW CMc Cwi te r & OOC P1rk
I
• I I I I I I
• I I I I I
I I
! I !
Pl~Un CCM Pirie. fr;s~n r.tcctu)
.I I ., I .. I I
'I I I I I
j I
I
I I I ! i I I I I '' i I I i
r:rtd Htsn lr communit)·P1ric.(t.owtr)
,~d HUH Jt. Communit)o P1rttUpp1r)
I I I . ' I ; I I
. ' I I i I I I I i
. \ I I ; I I I
Otl Ctn o Pill
.1 I I ' ' I I I
j I I I I I I
.I I .,
' '
acwr cUf~rlc
Atl!ont C.OVt Sh«eint '•r\: (U~ & l,l:Wtr Plrks)
D c B A
Figure 6.2 : Park Grades
' It is important to mention that the current v ery good .condition of the City parks is the result of the recent
improvement/renovation projects. Maintaining this g rade requires the co ntinuit y of these projects .
Investment Needs
Expenditure for the maintenance of the parks, trails, and open spaces is about $1.35M/year, cons tituti ng
around 5% of the total Primary Ge~eral Fund expenditure . Although the General Fund s cover most of the
maintenance requirements, cyrrently, Quimby Development Im pa ct Developer fees are used for
construction/acquisition of par:k and recreat ion facilities . In addition, count y bond money (Measure A Parks
Maintenance/ lmprovem~nts ) is allocated for acqui si tion and maintenance of open space and pa rk
improvements . City Staff expects that allocations for maintenance from these sou rce s will continue to be
available through FYlS-19, with the fund being closed by FY19 -20, after w hich t he City's General Fu nds will
have to cover 100% of the maintenance costs.
Investments will be needed to upgrade the parks system from B to A. This i ncludes Abalone Cove Shoreli ne
Park Parking Improvement; Aba lone Cove Shoreline Park ing Lot Improvements; Lower Hesse Park
Improve ment; Hesse Park parking lot re surfacing; Minor improvements t o Civic Cen t er park ; Ryan Par k
Parking Lot Improvements; Ladera Linda Park site Improvement; Lo wer Po i nt Vice nte Par k Improvements;
Grand vi ew Park Improvements; Gateway Park improvements; and all ADA com pliance improvements for
all parks. ADA Compliance improvem e nts for the "Potential Safety Hazard " an d "Seve re " barriers (t he most
severe)
The cost estimate ofthe investment needs will be determined in the Infrastructure Management Program .
SA I 20
ATTACHMENTS 3-55
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
Recommendations
Continuous maintenance, renovation , and development of the parks system, as follows :
1. Secure Consistent Funding: Develop consistent funding streams from all funding sectors to
ensure that projects can be implemented and maintained.
a. Maintain and increase the allocated budget for the maintenance of the parks. The annual
budget for parks maintenance is in the range of $1.35M and is expected to increase wit h the
increase of the number of active parks in the city.
b. Allocate funding for the implementation of the un-funded projects on the CIP plan.
c. Allocate funding for the implementation of the City's Vision Plan for the parks.
2. Update the Parks Master Plan (latest revision in 1989). An updated Parks Master Plan will
consolidate existing information, accumulate and incorporate related planning efforts, and map
data to determine both the existing and desired level of service related to both passive and active
recreation in the City.
3. Expand Public Awareness: Broaden and strengthen the public's understanding of natural/cultural
values that will help protect our resources forthe future. Plan ; support, and enhance educationa l
opportunities through nature centers, outdoor education programs, and ranger programs.
Sources
• Parks Master Plan, Revi se d 1989
• Parks conceptual plans, survey plan s, gri:iding plans, improvemen t plans, irrigation plans, as-built
plans, etc. prepared by outsourced co nsultants for the City.
• ADA Assessment Compliance Reports, Ma y 2013, BOA Architecture
• City of Rancho Palos Verdes Bupget for Fiscal Year 2013/2014 and appe nded Capital Improvement
Plan
/
/
/
21 1 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-56
SECTION 8: TRAILS A
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD 2013
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes began planning for a non-motor vehicle transportation circulation system
for pedestrians, equestrians, and bicyclists, as early as the adoption of the City's General Plan in 1975. In the
early years after the City's formation, it was recognized that trails are an integral part of the City's circulation
system and play an important role in contributing to the successful interaction of residential, institutional,
commercial, and recreational zoning, while encouraging recreational and fitness opportunities.
The City's trails network system includes:
•101 Preserve trails about 29 mi les in length . The Preserve Trails are with the Palos Verdes Nature
Preserve. According to the November 1, 2011 Preserve Management Agreement be tween the City and
the PV PLC , any "trail maintenance" and "trail repa ir" on un improve d trails in the City Council ap proved
Preserve Trail s Plan (PTP) is neither the City's or the PV PLC 's obligation, but rather a permissive activity
as detennined necessary by the PVP LC and as fu nding becomes available ~s stated in Exhibit B-3 of the
Agreement.
• 16 currently operating Non-Preserve Tralls, about 3 miles, within designated trail easements
throughout the City, managed and maintained by the City.
"
The trails are designated for specific us~rs . They are either pedestrian, cyclists, equestrians, a combination
of any two, or multipurpose trails de~ignated for the three types of users.
The City's current Trails Network Plan is identified by the 1993 Conceptual Trails Plan (CTP), and the 1996
Conceptual Bikeways Plan (CBP). Additionally, the 2012 city council adopted the Preserve Trails Plan (PTP)
that identifies the trails for the Palos Verdes Natural Preserve, and the 2008 Coast Vision Plan, which is "a
/
modern vision to unify the City's coast through design," providing a framework of connectivity of public
amenities within and adjacent to the City's coastal zone, and identifying the route of the City's segment of
the California Coastal Trail. The current trails network plan divides the City into 5 sections or sub regions, as
depicted on the project area map shown in Figure 7.1 below:
The City anticipates the updating and consolidation of all of its existing trails plans and documents into a
single, comprehensive Trails Master Plan (TMP) expected to be completed in 2014. At this time, the City
expects the TMP to be organized in a similar geographical categorization. The TMP will also include the City's
segment of the California Coastal Trail (9.5 miles) that extends the entire length of the City's coastline
between the boundary lines of the City of Palos Verdes Estates and the City of Los Angeles.
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-57
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
-Mf!Pk"'"
c:Jo., ........ ~
r::J ~"""""""·"'· ........... , _,,.,ru
-<Wl'C-wa
Figure 7.1 : Rancho Palos Verdes Trails Maste r Plan Project Area
Assessment of Trails
The trails network in the City is mainly comprised of natural trails, and the implementation of any new trails
will strictly preserve the existing ecosystem. As such , the desi gn criteriq ~~~i!jijij~~~!!
~!!!!~~!!!~-o f the trails with respect to the t rails ' width, slope and type of surface is not an
evaluation factor.
The asse ss ment of the trails was based on :
1. The available access points and tra il markers/signage
2. Available parking,
3. Connectivity
4 . Maintenance
All trails within the City can be accessed and are provided with adequate trail markers
identifying the trail name, 'direction arrow, and designated trail uses. Trails also have signage indicating the
/
direction of approved ,trails which help users recognize approved and unapproved trails . New signs have
recently been installed at preserve trail heads explaining the pre serve rules .
All trails have designated public parking areas either at trail heads , at public parks, or street parking. Although
currently sufficient, the noticed recent in crease in the number of trail users is signaling the need for more
public parking spaces .
Recent efforts to link the Preserve and Non-Preserve trails ha s been tremendous and has improved the
connectivity of the City's trail system. Connectivity with the trails in neighboring cities in the peninsula is
being studied/implemented too.
Trails are well maintained. Vegetation clearance and weed abatement are performed regularly to ensure
ea sy and safe ac cess and use.
23 1 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-58
~--~··~SEJ.
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
Figure 7.2: North Spur Trailhead at Alta Vicente Reserve
Final Grade
The Overall Grade for the trails is A.
Investment Needs
2013
Trails maintenance provides for erosion control, vegetation clearance and weed abatement. Preserve trails
are generally maintained by volunteer crews managed ,bv PVPLC. Non-Preserve Trails are maintained by the
City. Expenditure for the maintenance of Non-Preserve trails is not available as a separate item. It is included
in the overall expenditure for parks, trails, and op,e~ spaces which is about $1.35M (FY13/14 Budget) mostly
from General Funds . Currently Quimby Development Impact Developer fees are used for construction or
acquisition of park and recreation facilities . In addition, county bond money (Measure A Parks Maintenance/
Improvements) is allocated for acquisitj on and maintenance of open space and park improvements. City
Staff expects that allocations for maiptenance will continue to be available through FY18-19, with the fund
being closed by FY19-20, after which the City's General Funds will have to cover 100% of the maintenance
costs .
/
Figure 7.3 : Burma Road Trai l at Portuguese Bend Reserve
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-59
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
I NF RASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
A part from t rai ls maintenance, the trails projects outlined in the 20 08 Vision Plan and the Preserve Trails Plan
were in corpora ted in the City's CI P Plan attached to the FY13/14 Budget. The CIP pl an inclu des the
con struction of the Crystal (Preserve) Trail (.12 mile) in the Fo rrestal Reserve. It a ls o includes the followi ng
projects for the Non-Preserve Trail s: (1) the Pre limin ary Planning, Design, and cons truction for t he Bro nco ,
Martingale, and Grayslake Trails, (2) the design and construction of the Salvation Army Trai l Improvement
Project, (3) The Sunnyside Seg ment Trail connection, and (4) the construction of t rai lh eads at ke y entra nc es
to the existing City trail system along with overl ooks and vista points withi n the Visio n Plan project area.
These project will contribute to the completion of the City's Trails Network Plan and will improve the
connectivity of the trails, the non-preserve trails, in particular.
Allocation of in ves tments will be required to main t ai n the current "A" grade of t he trails .
It was noticed that the currently avai lab le plans do not provi de enough information o~ the no n-exi sting trails
i n the Trai ls Networ k Plan. These non -ex ist in g trails, when constructed, will impr9ve the connectivit y of the
trai l sys t em. These trai ls will be identified in the comp reh ensive Trails M as ter .P la n. Thu s a co mprehensive
Trail s Master Plan will be required to ca lcu late th e requ i red in vestmer;it' needs for the Infrastruct ure
Management Program (IMP).
Recommendati ons
1. Resume the current efforts t o prepare the comprehensive Tr ails Master Pla n (ant icipated i n
2014)
,
2. Secure Consistent Funding: Develop consistent funding streams from all fundin g sectors to
e nsure that projects can be implemented and mainta ined.
a. Maintain and in crease the ~lrocated budget for th e maintenance of the tra ils, particu larly
outsid e the preserve. !he annual requirements for trails maintenance is expected t o
increase w ith t he incr~a se of the no. of trails and the number of users .
b. Allocate funding f9r the imp lem e ntation of the un -funded projects on the Trail s Master plan .
2. Perform a Parki ng Assessment St udy for the trails sys te m and provide so lutions for the
anticipated future increase in the ne ed for public parking, particularly adjacent to the Preserve.
Thi s may include de signating new parking areas or diverting trail users to less -used access points.
3. Perform a Visitor Survey/Study to find out the numbe r of cu rrent t rail users, the type of use (hike,
bike, equestrian), and the expected increase in the number of vi sitors. Such a study will guide in
plan ning future p roj ect s, their order of priority, and the need for new reg u lations to prevent any
uninte nded con se qu ences that may arise from th e increase in the number of users.
4. Expand Pub li c Awareness : Con tinu e and support the efforts in ed uca ting people rec reation ally
on how to use the City's trails t o help ensure that se nsitive areas are maintained in a thriving
st at e .
2s l SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-60
Sources
• 1993 Conceptual Trails Plan
• 1996 Conceptual Bikeways Plan
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
• 2008 Preserve Trails Plan (PTP)& Oct 2012 adopted amendment
• 2008 Coast Vision Plan
• City General Plan -Conservation and Open Spaces Element
• 2008 City Council Six Month Review for Trails at Portuguese Bend Reserve
• 2012 PVPLC Visitor Use Survey-Portuguese Bend Reserve
• 2013 Counci l Adopted PUMP Document
2013
• City of Rancho Palos Verdes Budget for Fiscal Year 2013/2014 and appended Capital I mprovement Plan
/
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-61
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 9: STORM WATER SYSTEM (
The City's land sc ape consists of a diverse topography that consists of undeveloped hilly terrain and canyons.
As a result, the City is more vulnerable t o flooding from nearby can yons that carry runoff during rainstorms .
To protect property and loss of life, the City's storm drain sys tem ha s been care full y desig ne d to capt ure t he
maximum amount of storm water through numerous inlets, including the newly constructed Mccarrell
Canyon Storm Drain inlet shown below in Figure 8.1 :
Figure 8 .1 : Mccarrell Canyon Storm Drain Inlet North of PVD South
Due to the City's hilly terrain, the City's drainage system utilizes the na t ural lan dsca pe of t he City to the ex t ent
possible, as underground drain s dis charge water into adjacent canyons and creeks, or carry it to ma n-made
discharge structures. The City's storm water ultimately discharges into the ocean, in one of eight nat ural o r
man-made disc harge points (see Figure, 8.2). As a re sult of utilizing the City's natural land scape, howeve r ,
City staff is faced with challenges of ,having to maintain the City's aesthet ic quality while preventing debris
accumulation from cl ogging drain .inlets .
/ Assessment of Storm water System
/'
As mentioned previously, the City has a diverse, hilly terrain . The terra in varies from elevation s at sea level
to over 1,400 feet above sea level. Due to this diverse topography, the City's storm drain system is divided
up into six separate drainage sub-basins, based on the natural characteristics of the terrain and t he natural
direction of runoff flows for the areas . The drainage sub-basins include the following:
Dr ainage A r ea
Lo s Ange les Dra inage Area
Ocean South Drainage Area
Ocean West Drainage Area
Palo s Verd es Estates West Drainage Area
Pa los Verd es Est ates No rth Drainage Area
Roll ing Hills Estates Drainage Area
To t al
21 1 SA
A rea (ac)
2820
3330
710
1100
4 50
500
8910
ATTACHMENTS 3-62
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD 2013
Of the sub-basins, the Ocean South Drainage Sub -basin is the largest, consisting of over 3,300 acres and
nearly the majority of the City's coastline. The City's landslide area is also located within the Ocean South
Drainage Sub-basin. Palos Ve rdes Drive South (PVDS) is the major arterial street t hat transverses the Ocean
South Drainage Sub-basin. The Ocean South Drainage Sub-basin is also the on ly area of that con tains
undeveloped land (that is not marked as reserve land), including the Portuguese Bend area north of PVDS.
Every other drainage sub-basin is nearly fully developed with a significant drainage infrast ructure network.
With regard to man-made infrastructure, the City's storm drain system consists of inlets , pipes, manholes,
and discharge structures . Storm drain pipes consist of reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), and corrugated metal
pipe (CMP). Overall, the condition and capacity of the City's storm drain infrastructure is consistent
throughout each drainage sub-basin . According to the City's records, there are over 4.6 miles of storm d rain
lines , 82 culverts, along with a multitude of inlets, catch basins , and manholes. A significant portion of the
City's storm drain infrastructure lies within the Ocean South Drainage Area, including a number of culverts
that cross PVDS . Since a number of these culverts are also located within the City's landslide area , the culverts
are v ulnerable to damage from severe landslides that result from heavy storm s. Th€ damage can also be
compounded when the culverts become clogged with natural debris from the surroundin g landscape which ,
gets washed down during rainstorm periods. This could result in flooding which in creases the potential for
significant landslide activity to occur. To prevent flooding, the City's goal i~ to ensure that the storm drain
pipe network drains stormwater away from deve loped areas and into one of eight outlets, as shown in Figure
8.2 below:
Figure 8.2 : Outlet Structure to Ocean in Ocean West Dr ainage Area
As part of the City's goal to prevent flooding , the City is continually in the process of maintaining its existing
infrastructure and improving it by adding additional infrastructure. Maintenance typically includes repairing
and/or replacing damaged pipe, removing debris, and modifying existing. New improvements vary from small
residential storm drains to large, multi-million dollar projects such as the under-co nstruction San-Ramon
Canyo n Project just north of PVDS .
After reviewing several documents related to its storm water infrastructure, and visiting several locations,
including those in Figure 8.1 and Figure 8 .2, the City's storm water sys tem was evaluated on following th ree
criteria:
1. The capaci ty of storm water infrast ru ctu re as it re lates to flood prevention
2. The st ructural condition of storm water infrastructure as it relates to operation and maintenance
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-63
2013 CITY OF RANCHO S PALOS VER DE S
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
3. The environmental sustainab i lity of storm water infra struct u re as it relates to preserving the na tural
landscape and wildlife w he n operat ing, maintaining, and improving stormwater infrastructure.
Final Grade
After lo oking at the three grading crite ria categories , it was determined that the Ci t y had good capacity to
transmit storm water flows , average structural condition with appropriate operation and mainten ance , and
exceptional environmental sustainabi l ity. The weight of these three criteria was then we ig hed as t o the
overa ll leve l of importance of the sys t e m. Overall, the City's storm water system earne d a gra de of C.
Recommendations
Ba se d o n t he assessmen t and grade of the City's storm water infrastructure, we recommend t he following
actions:
• Maintain a stro ng CIP pro gram ,
A st rong CIP program adds new infrastructure and also r ep lace s exi~t~ng failing infrastru ctu r e.
• Renew Rates
The Cit y currently charges a fee to he lp fund its sto rm water sys tem . This fe e wi ll expire at the end
of fiscal year 15-16. As a res ult of agi ng infra structure and, r i;i ng const r uction costs , the City and its
citizens will benefit from a more subs tantial storm water bud get resul t ing from renewal of the ra tes .
• Utilize Natural Dr ainage Patterns
Thu s far, the City has done a terrific job of utilizing natural d r ai n age canyons and ch annels as opposed
to pipes and concrete channels. The City wouJd 'benefit by continued use of natural land scape s to
keep the costs associated with co nstructing,rrew facilities low, when poss i ble .
• Install debri s red uction methods
Debris reduction methods may include' the use of grouted rip-rap, where possible, i n the place of
loose rock and gravel. '
• Maintain proper maintenance/cleaning
Strong maintenance ensures,properly working storm drains and the protection of property.
• Inspect 100% of known Storm Drain System ,
/
Sources
/
Thi s report summary for the City's sto rm wat er sys tem has been has been determined as a result of t he
following sources of data :
• 2004 Master Plan Update
• CIP Priority Lists
• GIS Maps
• Current GIS Spread sheet Data
• Meetings w ith City Staff
• Fie ld Ana lysis
29 1 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-64
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECT I ON 10: CITYWIDE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM 0
2013
The City's landscape consists of developed land to the extent practical, and the majority of the development
in the City consists of single family residential homes. This results in the need for an extensive sewer system
that has the capacity to properly transmit wastewater flows. Due to the City's hilly terrain, this results in the
need for a carefully designed sewer system that utilizes the natural landscape of the City to the extent
practical, in order to avoid additional infrastructure which can add to operation and maintenance costs and
lower the reliability of the system during power outages or equipment malfunctions. Figures 9.1 and 9.2
show two of the City's wastewater lift (pumping) stations:
/
Figu re 9 .1: L aur el Drive Sewer Station
Assessment of Sanitary Sewer System
As mentioned previously, the City has a'diverse, hilly terrain. The terrain varies from elevations at sea level
to over 1,400 feet above sea level: As a result, the City has to utilize a combination of gravity pipes, lift
stations, and pressurized force IJlains. With regard to its sanitary sewer infrastructure, there are over 150
miles of sewer pipelines, 17 lift,stations, 44 grinder pumps, and 3, 707 manholes . Sewer pipes consist primarily
of vitrified clay pipe (VCP)t with some plastic pipe, along with a few other materials . Due to the age of the
City's sewer system, the majority of its pipe (VCP) was installed without gaskets, as the prevailing theory was
that additional groundwater that flowed into the pipes was good for cleaning and flushing of the pipes.
SA J 30
ATTACHMENTS 3-65
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
.J
Figure 9.2 : Calle Entradero Sewer Station
As part of the City's goal to maintain a properly working sewer system and .to protect the public, the City is
continually in the process of maintaining its existing infrastructure and improving it by adding additional
infrastructure. The LA County Department of Public Woks provides mt,Jintenance for the City's sewer system.
Maintenance typically includes repairing damaged pipe, repairing Jift stations, removing debris from pipes,
and repairing manholes . New improvements vary from pipeline replacement to lift station replacement.
After reviewing several documents related to its sewer infrastructure, the City's sewer system was evaluated
on following three criteria: '
1. The capacity of sewer infrastructure as it-relates to transmission of wastewater flows (both gravity
pipes and pressurized force mains). '
/
2. The structural condition of sewer infrastructure as it relates to operation and maintenance .
3. The environmental sustainability of sewer infrastructure as it relates to ensuring sanitary conditions
and an aesthetic City landscape.
It is important to note that the City has identified, through the 2009 Sewer Master Plan, areas that appear to
be u nder capacity and some of these areas have been identified and funded in the City's CIP which will include
further investigation and upsizing if approp riate . The costs cited for CIP related projects per the 2009 Sewer
Master Plan Update could be less than indicated if the future investigations determine the existing capacity
is sufficient. Additionally the use of con sultants would likely be beneficial in working with Los Angeles County
Consolidated Sewer Maintenance Di strict to further improve the overall grade of the system . Other costs
associated with upg r ading the system to improve the grades are the responsibility of Los Angeles County
Conso lidated Sewer Maintenance District and were therefor not included with the cost s presented herein .
Fi n al Grade
After looking at the three grading criteria categories, it was determined that the City had good capacity to
transmit existing wastewater flows (both gravity and pressurized force mains), below average structural
condition with appropriate operation and maintenance, and a good safety/sanitary protection . The weight
of these three criteria was then weighed as to the overall level of importance of the system. Overall, the
City's wastewater system earned a grade of a D.
31 I SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-66
Recommendations
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUC TURE REPORT CARD 2013
Based on th e assessment and grade of th e City's sew er infrastructure, we recom mend the following actions:
• Maintain a strong CIP program
A strong CIP program adds new infrastructure and also replaces existing failing infrastru ct u re.
• Establish a sewer user fee rate
The County currently charges a fee to help fund maintenance of the sanitary sewer system. Howeve r
this fee is not sufficient for capital improvements or ca pacity increa ses .
• Maintain proper maintenance
Strong maintenance ensures properly worki ng lift stations, sewer mains, and the protection of
property and the public.
Sources
This report summary and the grade assigned for the City's sewer system has been has been determined as a
result of the following sources of data :
• 2009 Master Plan Update
• 2009 County Condition Assessment
• Meetings with City Staff
• Field Analysis
/
/
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-67
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES ~
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 11: ABALONE COVE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT SEWER SYSTEM 0
The Abalone Cove Assessment District (District) is a moderately developed portion of City land that is
comprised mostly of single family residential homes, along with one church bu il di ng . The District
development is located in the heart of the landslide area and experiences a slow but continuous land
movement. As a result, the District requires a special kind of sewer system that can maximize reliability while
minimizing maintenance due to ground movement. The District also requires a system that fits its hilly
terrain. Figure 10.1 below shows the Abalone Cove landscape:
Figure 10.1 : Abalone Cove/Portuguese Bend Reserve, '
Assessment of Aba lone Cove Sewer System '
;
As mentioned previously, the District, as ~ell as the City overall, has a diverse, hilly terrain. The terrain varies
from elevations at sea level to over 1:400 feet above sea level. As a result , the District has to utilize a
combination of gravity pipes, grind~r pumps, low-pressure sewer mains, lift stations, and high pressurized
force mains. According to the 20.p9 Master Plan, the District's system was installed in 2001 to replace septic
systems in la nd slide areas. There are 130 manholes , 1 diversion structure, approximately 19,000 linear feet
of gravity pipeline, 19,615 Jinear feet of low pressure pipe, and 2,505 linear feet of force main. Overall, there
are 44 grinder pumps in the District, with 41 of them serving single family homes and 3 duplex grinder pumps
serving two or more residences. There are 4 lift stations serving the District, one of which is the Abalone Cove
Shoreline Park Lift Station shown in Figure 10.2 below:
33 1 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-68
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
Figure 10.2: Abalone Cove Shoreline Park Sewer Lift Station
'
2013
Since the District is prone to landslide, the City is continually in the process of maintaining its existing
infrastructure and improving it by adding additional infrastructure. Maintenance typically includes repairing
damaged pipe, repairing lift stations, grinder pumps, removing debris from pipes, and repairing manholes. ,
New improvements vary from pipeline replacement to lift station replacement. With the Abalone Cove
Assessment District, this is all the more important, due to the pre~ence of multiple grinder pumps and low
pressure mains that use galvanized transmission lines, as welJ as the potential for landslide.
After reviewing several documents related to its sewer infrastructure, the District's sewer system was
evaluated on following three criteria : '
1. The capacity of sewer infrastructure as 1t relates to transmission of wastewater flows (both gravity
pipes and pressur ized force mains). '
2. The structural condition of sewi;r'infrastructure as it relates to operation and maintenance.
3. The environmental sustaina~ility of sewer infrastructure as it relates to ensuring sanitary conditions
and an aesthetic City land~cape .
Final Grade /
/
After looking at the three grading criteria categories, it was determined that the District had good capacity
to transmit existing wastewater flows (both gravity and pressurized force mains), below average structural
condition with appropriate operation and maintenance, and a good safety/sanitary protection . The weight
of these three criteria was then weighed as to the overall level of importance of the system. Overall, the
Abalone Cove Assessment District's wastewater system earned a grade of D.
Recommendations
Based on the assessment and grade of the City's sewer infrastructure, we recommend the following actions:
• Maintain a strong CIP program
A strong CIP program adds new infrastructure and also replaces existing failing infrastructure.
• Increase Rates
The City currently charges a fee from District properties to help fund the District's sanitary sewer
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-69
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALO S VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
system. Even though the City subsidizes part of the maintenance cost, the budget is not sufficient for
required maintenance and capital improveme nts. As a result of high ma i ntenan ce and replacement
costs due to landslide activity, the District and its citizens will benefit from a more subs tantial sanitary
sewe r budget resulting from an increased rate.
• Maintain proper maintenance
Strong maintenance ensures properly working lift stations, sewer mains, and t he protection of
property and the public.
Sources
This report summary and the grade assigned for the City's sewer system has been has been determined as a
result of the following:
• 2009 Master Plan Update
• 2009 County Condition Assessment
• Discussions with City Staff
• Field Analysis
;
/
;
3s l SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-70
SECTION 12: RIGHT OF WAY &
TRAFFIC DEVICES A
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD 2013
The City maintains a right of way network that consists of over 142 miles of local streets and major arterials.
Due to the demographics of the City, local streets comprise the majority of the City's roadways at
approximately 75% of the overall length or 106 miles. All of the City's roadways consist of asphalt-concrete
(AC), with over 23 million square feet of AC pavement. In addition to the road network, the City also maintains
traffic signals, safety lights, and flashers . The City's right of way network serves both motorists as well as
bicyclists and pedestrians with nearly all major arterials consisting of a sidewalk and bike lanes. Figure 11.1
below provides a sample of the condition of the City's streets.
Figure 11 .1 : Crest Rd west of Crenshaw Blvd looking southwest
;
In 2009, the City hired a consultant to prepare a Pavement Management System (PMS) report that provided
a summary, inventory, and breakdown e>fthe condition of the City's streets. The 2009 PMS was prepared as
a means to guide planning efforts to, maintain the City's large capital investment in streets. The main function
of the PMS lies in the implementation of capital improvements such that every dollar spent is maximized
/
towards extending the lifespap of the street network. The 2013 PMS update is currently being prepared and
is expected to be complet~d by March 2014.
/
Assessment of City Right of Way and Traffic Devices
Due to the City's hilly terrain, major arterials are not arranged in a typical North/South grid-like manner, but
rather change direction as they traverse the City's landscape. Figure 11.2 below illustrates this .
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-71
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
Figure 11 .2 : Hawthorne Blvd looking northwest
Oftentimes, the City's major arterials do not provide direct access to destinations. There are also no freeways
or highways located in the City. However, travel access restrictions are offset by the natura l beauty of the
City and the man-made landscape improvements along the City 's streets, and the City is well known for its
accommodating en vironment to all commuters, including cyclists, equestriaJ1S, and pedestrian s. Nearly all of
the City's major arterials provide bike lanes for cyclists. The City 's bi ke lanes are categorized into four
different classes of bike lanes, as classified by the City's Conceptual Bi~ewa ys Plan (Pla n), adopted in January
of 1990 and revised in October of 1996. The Plan classifies bikeways as either Class I, Class I/Off-Road, Class
II, or Class Ill. The Plan's purpose is to identify the bikeway's opportunities with the community and to
implement new bikeways into development projects and into the City's public trails network.
One major factor that makes the City's streets so appeatrng to both motorists and cyclists is the condition of
the pavement, not only on major arterials but throughout the City's streets as whole. The 2009 Pavement
Management System (PMS) revealed that the City;s st reet s received an overall score of 84.5 on the Pavement
Condition Index (PCI) and 95.3 on the Structural'lndex (SI), while arterials received a score of 76.8 on the PCI
i ndex and 90.8 on the SI in dex. The PCI and 'SI indexes focus on d ifferent aspects of pavement conditions .
Residential st re et s received a score of ~7.6 on the PCI Index and a score of 97.1 on the SI index. The 2013
PMS update revealed that the City's s~reets received an overall score of 82 on the PCI index. PCl s greater than
86 are considered to be "very goo9" and Sis greater than 90 are considered to be "good". Figure 11.2 below
shows a sample condition of resrdential streets:
/
Figure 11 .3 : Beach View Drive Looking East
With regard to vehicu lar traffic conditions, the City does experience some moderate to high traffic volumes
37 I SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-72
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD 2013
which results in a low Level of Service (LOS) for major arterials. A recent Traffic Study Report conducted in
2011-2012 revealed that the current traffic conditions in certain intersections of Palos Verdes Drive South
and Hawthorne Boulevard resulted in a LOS ranging from A to F, with F being a low level of service with traffic
delays . The Traffic Study Report was prepared mainly to identify traffic impacts associated with a
development project in the Abalone Cove are known as the Annenbe rg Project . Despite the low LOS
associated with ce rtain intersections, the City does look for new ways to improve traffic conditions, and
overall traffic conditions are good throughout the City.
With regard to pedestrian traffic, the City does have an annual sidewalk maintenance program, with an
annual budget of $140,000. The City routinely looks for ways to improve sidewalk conditions throughout the
City, and sidewalk conditions were noted to be in great condition th roughout the City.
After reviewing several documents related to the City's right of way and traffic devices , the City 's right of way
and traffic devices were evaluated on following three criteria:
l. The capacity of infrastructure as it relates to accommodating vehicula;, bicycle, equestrian , and
pedestrian traffic flows
2. The structural cond ition of infrastructure as it relates to drive-ab ility~ ri de-ability, walk-a bility, safety,
and also as it relates to operation and maintenance costs and efforts .
3. The environmental condition of infrastructure as it relates to promoting recreation , an aesthetic
environment, and preserving nature.
Final Gr ade
,
After looking at the three grading cri t eria categories, it was determined that the City had good capacity to
accommodate traffic flows, good structural conait ions of pavement and sidewalk, and excellent
environmental con ditions. The weight of these,. three criteria was then weighed as to the overall level of
importance of the system . Overall, the City's }raffic and right of way network earned a grade of A.
Recommendati on s
Based on the assessment and,,grade of the City's right of way infrastructure, we recommend the following
action s:
/
• Maintain a strong CIP program
A strong CIP program adds new infrastructure and also repla ces existing failing infrastructure.
• Continue to Seek and Obtain Funding Sources
The City's existing funding so urces, although adequate for routine maintenance, may need to be
supplemented to implement larger improvement projects.
• Maintain proper maintenance
Strong maintenance ensures excellent pavement conditions, pedestrian access, and the protection
of property and the public.
Sources
This report summary and the grade assigned for the City's right of way system has been has been dete rmin ed
as a result of the following sources of data :
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-73
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
• 2011-2012 Traffic Study
• 2008 Ne ighborhood Traffic Calm i ng Program
• 1996 Conceptual Bikeways Plan
• 2009 Pavement Management Sy stem Report
• Discussions w ith City Staff
• Field Analysis
/
/
/
39 1 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-74
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 13: PALOS VERDES DRIVE SOUTH LANDSLIDE 0
2013
A significant portion of the City lies w ithin a natural landslide area t ha t is composed of several co mponent
landslides. Overall, these landslides move sou therly towards the ocea n into th e Aba lon e Cove, Sacred Cove,
and Portuguese Bend shorelines . Approximately 1,000 acres, or 12% of th e City's 13 .6 sq ua re m ile limits , are
affecte d by landslide. The landslide affects not only surface streets and buildings, but also other
infrastructure as well, including below grade utilities. Figure 12.1 below shows part of th e City's landscape
that is located within the land slide region:
Fig u re 12.1 : Palos Ve rdes Dri ve South al o n g L ands l!de Area
,
Assess m ent o f th e La nds lid e an d Lan dslide/Infras tru ct ure
There are over a doze n landslides that ll}al<e up w hat is known as the City's la nd sl ide area along Pa los Verdes
Drive So uth. The three main landsliges in the City are the Aba lone Cove, Po rtuguese Bend, and Klondike
Ca nyo n Land slides. The landslides are ca use d primarily by gro undwater which decreases t he st r ength of clays
and adds additional weight to subsurface soi ls. Rainfall is the primary contributor to groun dwa ter. The City
has three main drainage basi n's within the lands lide regions that collect rain w ate r and allow it t o percolate
to the soi ls below. These drainage bas in s include the Altamira Canyon Drainage Basin, the Po rtu guese
/
Ca nyon/Paintbrush CaRyon Drainage Basin, and the Klondike Canyon Drainage Basin . It is estimated that 50-
75% of storm water infiltrates the ca nyons to become gro und water, primari ly through fractures and
expansive soils . A lthoug h the City ha s established draina ge faciliti es w ithin these canyons, the land slide
movement causes damag e to drainage facilities which e nables more storm water to enter the surface below.
Figure 12.1 shows a damaged half co rrugated pipe system along Palos Verdes Drive Sou t h resulting from
con tinuous landslide movement:
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-75
2013 CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
Figure 12.2 : Landslide Damage to Palos Verdes Drive South
,
To combat infiltrating storm water and landslide movements, the City ha s established mitigation
infrastructure and improvements as part of efforts to slow the rate of the landslides and to minimize the
likelihood of catastrophic landslide movements. This mitigation infrastructure consists of, gradi ng, and
dewatering wells in addition to drainage and sewe r systems. For this section of the report, only the, grading, ,
and dewatering wells were evaluated. The grading performed by .the City in 1986 and recently in 20 10 has
resulted in significant benefits for the City. Also, the City's d~waterin g wells (in addition to other wells not
owned by the City) he lp extract groundwater which enables subsurface ground movement. Overall, it
appears that the mitigation efforts and infrastructure are~ in some areas, effective in slowing subsurface land
movement and preventing storm water from collectifli;ponding. ,
Abalone Cove has a desig nated fundin g source for the maintenance of various projects through the funds
collected by the Aba lon e Cove Landslide Aba t ement District (ACLAD). The phy sical area de l in eated by the
boundary of the Abalone Cove Landslide represe nts an area within t he Ancient Portu guese Bend Land sli de
(see map below) that is characterized by very slow movement (i t is creep ing along at slow rate). As a
resu lt, the i nstallation of dewatering wells ha s been very success ful in this area, the wells have a lo ng lif e
and are removing ground water which, in turn, helps slow landslide movement. The Portuguese Bend
landslide area is also w ithin the boundaries of the Anc ient Portuguese Bend Landslide, however annua l land
movement is ge nerally much greater than that in Aba lon e Cove (measurements are i n feet per year) and a
designated funding source does not exist . Although severa l dewatering wells have been insta lled in the
Portuguese Bend area , only 8 remain functional. The high rate of ground movement in the area shears or
deform s t he well shaft rather quickly limiting viable installation sites. Recently staff has reviewed possible
dewatering well locations along Berma Road which appear to be stable enough to consider as future well
locations.
41 I SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-76
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
Map of the Anci e nt Portug uese Bend Land slide
2013
After reviewing seve ral docume nts relate d to th e Ci t y's land slide mitigation infrast ru ct ur e, the following
/
three ca tegorie s were evaluated:
1. Th e capac ity ot the infrastructure to prevent or slow subsurface land movement
2. Th e condition of the infrastructure as it re lates to operation and maintenance .
3. The environmental impacts as it relates to maintaining dwell i ngs, lands capes, and uti lities, and
protecting the public from harm.
Final Grade
After looki ng at the three gr ading criteri a catego ri es, it was determined tha t although t he condition and
environmental impacts of th e infras tru ctu r e (i.e. g rad i ng/d raina ge ) was meas urable , and although the
dewatering well s extract a large amount of groundwater, t he in frastructu r e is inadequate duri ng years of
high ra infa ll, leaving the City's streets and building vu lner able to lands lid e damage . Overall, the City's
land sl id e mitigation infrastructure ea rn ed a g r ade of D.
Recommendations
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-77
2013 CITY OF RANCHO S PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
Based on the assessment and grade of the City 's sewer infrastructure, we re co mmend the following act io ns:
• Maintain a strong CIP program
A strong CIP program adds ne w infrast ru cture and also replace s existing failing infrastructure .
• Continue to seek and obtain Funding Sources
The City's existing funding sources, although adequate for routine maintenance, may need to be
supplemented to implement larger improvement projects , especi ally after a land sl ide emergency.
• Maintain a strong maintenance program
Strong maintenance ensures properly working mechanical infrastru ct ure, and also corrects eroded
grad ing improvements.
• Continue to Work Together with other agencies
A portion of dewatering wells located in the City are not owned by the City. Thus , the City would
benefit from a co nti nued and strong alliance with all owners of landslide mitigation infrastructure.
• Groundwater sources in neighboring cities should be investigated and minil]lize, if possible
Sources
Thi s report summary and the grade assigned for the City's landslide mitigation infras tructure system has been
has been determined as a result of the following sources of data:
• 2012 Abalone Cove , Portu guese Bend , and Klondike Ca nyon Lan dslides: Landslide Workshop
Presentation
• Discu ss ions with City Staff
/
/
/
43 1 SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-78
CITY OF RANCHOS PALOS VERDES
INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
SECTION 14: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
City of Rancho Palos Verdes:
• Siamak Motahari
Public Buildings, Parks, Trails
• Bindu Vaish
Public Buildings, Parks, Trail s
• Ron Dragoo
Storm Water, Sewer, Abalone Cove Sewer, Palos Verdes Drive South Landslide
• AndyWinje
Storm Water, Sewer, Abalone Cove Sewer, Palos Ve rdes Drive South Landslid€
• Nicole Jules
Right of Way
• Ara Mihranian
Trails
SA Associates:
• Shahnawaz Ahmad
President, Project Manager
• Ruba Qaqish
Public Buildings, Parks, and Trails
• Phillip West
/
2013
Storm Water, Sewer, Aba lone Cove Sewer, and Palos Verdes Drive South Landslide ,
/
/
SA
ATTACHMENTS 3-79
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Buildings Data Sheets
Facility N o.:
Facility Name:
Location :
Conditio n ·
Background Info
1 Year Built
Last Renovation/Improvement
2 Any Recent Work
3 Any Scheduled Future Work
4 Identified Problems/ Issues
Cap acit y
Area (square fool)
Type of Use
B 1
City Hall (Admin istration Build in g & Cat alina Wingl -Civic Center
Point Vicente Park and Civic Center
Originally Military Building.
1940's
New Lobby & Elevator added circa 2005
ADA Access Improvements ($1.3M for the wh~e campus)
Ortginal!y military barracks. Constructed at 3 different tlmes. There Is an
expansion joint between the two parts of the bonding. The new lobby and
elevator were added circa 2005. N ew back-up generator for the whole
campus (2009) . No ventilation.
17,530 (2 storey building, L shaped footprint)
offices
3 Parking Adequate parking on campus
Operation & Maintenance
1 Maintenance Program Operation: ( 1) Lack of Mechanical Ventilation (only local coating
2 S/year Current equipment for the computer rooms}: violating code of buildings for
occupancy type. (2) Shortage of sanitary facillties. (3) Supply waler pipe
is too small to meet code with increased sanitary facilities. (4) The
building is an energy hog: does not meet lhe current Tiie 24
requirements. Maintenance Cost: Approx. S500K/year for all buildings.
FY13-14 Budge! around $600K
S &Sf ecurlty a etv
1 Safety lncidents/Accldenls
(1) Fire Alarm syslem mnimal. (2) No Automatic Sprinkler Syslem. (3)
Internal Is not compliant wtth ADA requirements. (4) Building does not
2 Any Injuries/Law Suits
meet C\lrrenl building codes and ASCE and FEMA Criteria (mnimally
reinforced concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls and weak connections
from the floor and roof diaphragms do not meet current design standa rds
for earthquake resistance. The existing suspended ceilings and
cabinet/equipment
anchorage do not meet current standards.)
Grading Cost & Recommendations
(1) A cost benef~ analysis lo be performed to decide between
A 90-100% replacement or retr ofitting (if replacement is an option). (2) Estimated
cost for reconstruction apprx . S4 M (inherent constraints of the
B Fred Hesse Community Building Plans, The Reynotds Environmental Groop, Jan. 5, 1982.
2 Fred Hesse Community Building Floor Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical Plan. Black & O"Oowd & Associates
Inc .. Oct. 8. 1985
D 41-69%
Available Documents
1 City Hall property Survey plans. 121512007. KDM Meridien
2 Modifications lo Utilities Plan Site LA-55L-TACT and Administration Facility Plan-Paving, Water System & Diesel
Storage (current City Hall site), 1963, Quinton Engineers Lt d.
3 City Ha ll Generator Plans: Electrical, 211212009, Nikolakopulos and Assoc .. Inc .. Plumbing: 41912010, The Sullivan
Partnership Inc.
4 LA Site 55 Cathodic Prolec>on (current City H all site). 1014/1968. Fort Mac:Arttlur. CA Office of lhe Post Engineer
5 NJA updates at City of RPV City Hall, 217/2008, Willdan
6 Seismic Hazard Evaluation for RPV Civic Center Buildings, 10/2512000, Breiholz Qazi Engineering, Inc.
7 Community Development &Administration BuHding Floor Plans, date and preparer name not available on plan
8 Civic Center Facilities Assessment for City of RPV, 11/2010, Gonzalez Goodale Archite<:ts
9 Certified Themiogr aphy Reports for Planning Department Building and Ladera Linda Community Center, 312010,
Ca l~orn;a IR
10 TV Communication & Administration Builcfing Floor Plan, date and preparer name not available on plan
11 City of RPV Accessibility Seff Evaluation and Transition Plan, 6/4/2013, City Staff Report
12 ~~ice Space Planning Plans for Community Development Building, 10/3012008, John M. Cruikshank Consultants.
13 City Hall Admin istration & PVNET Annex Floor Plan. 12/112008, date and preparer name not available on p lan
14 Community Development Department Restroom ADA Compliance, 9/29122010, John M. Cruikshank Consultants,
lnc.
15 ~~~ainable Sites Initiative -A Case Study: Rancho Mirage City Hall Undergoes Stte Renovation, APWA by DavKf
16 •New Civic Center Financing Opbons·, 6129/2010. City Staff Report & PowerPoinl Presentation
Page 1of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-80
Cdy or Rancho Pakls Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
1
2
3
4
1
2
1
2
A
2
c
F
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Faci lity No.:
f acility Name;
Location :
Condition ·
Bacl<grouoo Info
Year Built
Last Renovation/Improvement
Any Recent Wotk
Any Scheduled Future Work
Identified Probfems /Issues
Ca pa cit
Area (square foot)
Type of Uso
Parking
O pe raUon & Mai ntenance
Maintenance Program
Sfyear Current/Near Future
Securitv & Safetv
Safety Incidents/Accidents
Any Injuries/Law Suits
Grad In c
Frod Hesse Community Bulkting Plans.
82
Planning Dept Buildi ng· Ci v i c Center
Point Vicent e Par k and Cfvic Center
Originally the adminlstraUon building of the Military base
1040'&
In rn84 two public r estrooms and a meeting room were added to the
north s\de entry aroa of tho existi ng structure No ventilation
4,604 (one storey bulkfing, rectangular footprint)
offices
Adequate parking on campus
Operation· (1) Lack of Mechanical Ventilation {only k>cal oooling
equipment for the computer rooms): violating oode of bu~kjlngs for
occupancy type (2) Shortage of sanitary facilities (3) Supply water
pipe Is loo small lo meet code with Increas ed sanitary facillties (4)The
building ~s an energy hog: does not meet the current Tile 24
requirements M .tlntenance Cost: Approx. $SOOK/year fo r all buildings
FY13-1 4 Budget erou'ld $6001<
(1) Fire Alarm system minimal. (2) No Automatic Sprinkler System. (3)
Internal is not comp~ant with ADA requirements. (4) Building does not
meet current bu ilding codes and ASCE and FEMA criteria (minimally
reinforced concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls and weak connections
from the floor and roof diaphragms do not meet current d~n
standards for earthquake r~sistanco_ Tho existing suspended ceilings
and cablneVequipment
anchorage do not moot current standards.)
Gradina Criteria
(1) A o:>st benefit analysts to be performed to decide between
replacement or retrofitting (If replaC(lment is an option}. (2) Estimated
cost for rotrofrtti~ ~~ epprx. $1 M (inhere~ constraints.of the .struclure·s
Fred Hesse Community Buiktlng Floor Plan and Plumblng and Mechanical Plan. Black & O'Oowd & Associates
lnc , Oct. 8, 1985
11>1g•1.
40".4 or lower
Avai l abl e Documents
City Hall property Survey plans. 121512007. KOM Merldlen
Modifications lo Ut ilities Plan Sito LA·55l·TACT end Administration Facility PJao--Paving, Water System & Dies el
Storaae (current Citv Hall silo). 1063. Quinton Enaineers ltd.
City Hall Generator Plans: Electrical. 2112/2009, Nikolakopulos and Assoc , Inc. Plumbing: 41912010, The Sullivan
Partnership Inc.
LA Site 55 Cathodic Prctectton (current City Hall site). 10/411968. Fort MacArthur. CA Offioa of the Post Engineer
ADA updates al City of RPV City HaH, 2fll2008, Wllldan
Solsmic Hazard Evaluation for RPV Civic Center Buildings. 1012512000. B roihotz Qa.zJ Engineering, Inc.
Community Development &Administraton Building F loor Plans, date and preparer name not availabl e on plan
Civic Center Facilities Assessment for City of RP V, t 1/2010, Gonzalez. Goodale Architects
Certified Thermogrephy Reports for PlannJng Department Building and Ladera Li nda Community Center, 31201 0,
California IR
10 iV Communication & AdrnJni stration Building Floor Plan, date and preparer name not available on plan
11 City of RPV Accesslbility Self Evaluation and Transition Plan, 61412013, C ity Stnff Report
12 Office Space Planning Plans for Community Development Building, 10/30/2008, John M. Cruikshank Consultants.
Inc.
13 City Hall Administration & PVNET Annex Floor Plan. 121112008 . date and preparer oatne not available on plan
14 Community Development Department Restroom ADA Compliance. 9129122010. John M Cruikshank Consuttants,
Inc
Bui l dings Data Sheets Page 2 of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-81
City of Rancho Pabs Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Buildings Dat a Sheets
Faclllty No.: BJ
Facility Nam e: PV NET -Civic Cent er
Location: Poi nt Vicente P ark and Civic Center
Condi ti on·
Background Info Built as an annex to the Administration Building . mobile building
1 Year Built
Last Renovatior\llmprovement
2 Any Recont Wori<
3 Any Scheduled Future Work
4 ldentifiod Pfobloms I l &Sue.s Mobile buikfing
Capac it
Area (square root) 3,083 (R&ctangu!ar Footprint)
Type of Use Offices
PaMng Adequate Parking on Campus
Operation & Maintenance
1 IMaintenanco Program Ope r atlon ~(t) Lack of Mechanical Ventilation (only local cooling
2 IS/year Current equipment for the eomputer rooms}' violating code of buildings for
occupancy type (2) Shortage of s anitary facilities . (3) Supply water pipe
is too small to meet code with increased sanitary facilitios (4)The
building is an energy hog. does not meel the current Tile 24
requirements M aintenance Cost Approx S500K/year fo r alt buildings
FY13-14 Budget around $600K
Securi & Safe
1 Safety Incidents/Accidents
Any Injuries/Law Suits
GradinR GradinR Criteria
The building ls a mobHe building. No mechanical ventilation Shortage
A 00.100% of sanitary facil!Ues Energy hog. Cost or retrofrtting estimated at $1-~QM
(e.sti.rllf'l.ted prorata rates in report for other buildings at S24S/ft2}
B 80-8Q%
c 10.19%
D Fred Hesse Community Building Plans, Tho Reynolds Environmental Group. Jan. 5. 1982
2 Fred Hosse Communi ty Building Floor Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical Ptan, Blad; & O'Oowd & Associates
Inc., Oct. 8, 1985
1 City Han property Survey plans, 121512007. KDM Meridi an
2 Modifications to Utilities Plan Sile LA·55L-TACT and Administration Facility Plair Paving, Water System & Diesel
Storage (current City Hall site). 1963, Quinton Engi neers Ltd
3 City Hall Generator Plans. Electrical. 211212009. Nikolakopu\os and Assoc .. Inc .. P1umbh1g 41Q12010. The Sulllvan
Partnarsliio lne • LA Site 55 Cathodic Protectton (current C ity HaH site). 10/4/1968, Fort Mac.Arthur, CA Office of the Post Engineer
5 MJA updates at C~y of RPV City Hall. 2fl/20CJ8. Wllldao
6 Seismic Hazard Evaluatkm for RPV Civic Center B uildings, 1012512000. Breiholz Qazi Engineering, Inc
7 Community Development &AdministratJon Building floor Plans, date and preparer name not available on plan
6 Civic Center FaciJities Assessment fo r City of RPV, 11120 I 0, Gonzalez Goodale Architects
g Certified Thermography R eports for Planning Depanment Building and Lader a Linda Community Center, 312010.
California IR
10 TV Communication & Administration 6uUding F loor Plan, date and preparer name not available on plan
11 City of RPV Accessibility Solf Evaluation and Transition P lan. 614120 13, City Staff Report
12 Office Space Planning Plans for Community Development Bulldl ng, 10/30/2008, John M . Cruikshank Consultants,
Inc.
13 City Hall Administration & PVNET Annex Floor Plan, 121112008, date and preparer name not available on plan
14 Community Development Department Restroom ADA Compliance, 9129/22010, John M Cruikshanl'; Consultants.
Inc
Page 3of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-82
City of Rancho Palos Verd es
Infrastructure Report Card
Buildings Data Sheets
1
2
3
4
f acility Ho.:
Facility Name:
location:
Condition·
Background Info
YearBoltl
Last Renovation/Improvement
Any Recent Work
Any Scheduled Future Work
Identified Problems/ Issues
Capac It
Area (square loot)
Type of Use
84
Cable TV-CH-33 Studi o · Civic Center
Point Vicente Park and C iv i c Cent er
Originally the missile assetnbty and testing building
1050's era buHding
Building has various heights, high bay rooms with large roll-up doors.
1,242 {rectangular foolprint)
Telecommuolcation Building
3 Parking Adequate parking on site
Operation & Mai ntenance
1 Maintenance Program Operation: (1) There is a spltt system rooftop padi;age AC Unit.serving
2 $/year Cu rrent a portion of the buildi ng. (2) Lack of mechanical ventilation or heating of
any kind in the remaining of lhe building (3) Shortage of sanitary
facilities. Maintenance Cost Approx S500Klyear ror all building s
FY13-14 Budget around $600K
Secur1t & Safet
Safety Incidents/Accidents (1) No fire alarm system (2) No iiu1omaUc sprinkler system (3} Existing
l--l-An-y-1"'"nj-u-ne-s/l.-aw-S-u<-s-----~system is compliant with current code requirements
G radi ng Gr adlnn Criteria
A 90-100% Building from the 1950's No improvements performed Cost for
retrofitting or rec:ondiUoning to "Jike n8'N status" aprx $76K. However.
B 8()..89'/o the buHding witl forever suffer from other limitations M odern buildings
c 7().79%
would oot be designed with the proportions that exist or the construction
technology used, unless H was being designed as a barracks for mid
0 41-69% century military Recommendation ~ Potenttal value should be given to
reuse the facilities for olherCity/commun1ty services
F 40% or Lower
Fred Hesse Communitv Build ln~ Plans, The Revnolds Envi ronmental Group, Ja n. 5, 1982.
2 Fred Hesse Community Building Floor Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical Plan . Black & O'Oowd & Associates
Inc, Oct 8, 1985
1 City Hall property Smvey plans, 1215/2007, KOM M eridien
3 City Hall Gonorato r Plans: Eloctrical, 211212009, Nikolakopulos and Assoc , Inc , Pl umbing 419/2010 , The Sul livan
Partnership Inc.
4 LA Site 55 Cathodic Protection (current City Hall site). 10/411968. Fort MacArthur. CA Office of the Post Engineer
5 ADA updates at CHy of RPV City Hall. W/2008, Wilklan
6 Seismic Hazard Evaluation for RPV Civic Center Buildi119s, 1012.5/2000, Br&lholz Qazi Engineering, Inc.
7 Community Development &Administrahon Building fk>or Plans . date and preparer oame not avaitable on p!an
8 Civic Center Facilities Assessment for City of RPV, 11/2010, Gonzalez Goodale Architects
9 CertiflOd Therrnography Reports for Planning Department Bui~ing and Ladera Linda Community Center. 312010.
Cahfornla IR
10 TV Communication & Administration Building Floor Plan, date and preparer name not avaflable on plan
11 City of RPV Accessibility Sett Evaluation and lransi1ion Plan, 6/412013, City Slaff RePort
12 Office Space Planning Plans for Community Devel opment Building, 10/3012008, John M Cruikshank Consultants,
Inc .
13 City Hall Administration & PVNET Annex Fk>or Plan, 12/112008, date and preparer name not avaHable on plan
14 Community Development Department Restroom ADA Compliance. 9/2g122010, John M Cruik.Shank Consultants ,
Inc,
Page 4of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-83
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Buildings Data Sheets
Facility No.: 85
Facility Name: War Head Room I Shop
Location: Poi nt Vi cente Park and Civi c Center
Condition:
Background Info
1 Year Built rnso·s era building
Last Reoovation/Jmprovemenl
2 Any Recent Work
3 Any Scheduled. Future Wock
4 Identified Problems/ Issues
Capac it
1 Area (squaro foot) 800
Type or Use Ma'1ntenance Workshop
Parking Adequate parl<ing on site
Operatio n & Mai nten ance
1 Maintenance Program Maintenance Cost. Approx. $500K/year fo r all buildings. FY13--14
f-2-1-S/-ye_a_r _C_urr_e_nt'N_e::..a_r F_ut_u_re-----laudget around $600K
Securi & Safet
1 Safety Incidents/Accidents
2 Any lnjurieSJlaw Su'its
G rading Grading Criteria
A oo.1ow. Building from the 1'>50's No Improvements performed Same problems
8 ao-a~w. as othor buildfngs due to bei ng built as a military base bu!khng Large
roll·up doors No ventilation No fire alarm/sprinkler s ystem c 70-7{We
D 41~ov.
F 40'k or lower
Available Doc uments
1 Fred Hesse Community Building Plans. The Reynolds Environmental Group. Jan. 5. 1962
2 Fred Hesse Community Building Floor Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical Plan, Black & O'Dowd & Associates
Ince. Oci 8. 1gs5
3 City Hall Generator Plans· Ektdlical, 211212009, Ni kolakopukls and Assoc., Inc, Plumbing· 419/2010, The Sullivan
Partnership Inc
5 ADA updates at City of RPV City Hall. 2fl/2008. Willdan
6 SeJsmic Hazard EvaluaUon for RPV Civic Center Buildings, 10125/2000, Breiholz Qazi Engineering, Inc.
7 Community DEwelopment &Administration Building F loor Plans, date and preparer name not available on plan
8 Civic Center Facilities Assessment ror City of RPV, 1112010, Gonzalez Goodale Arch1tacts
g Certified TMrmography Reports for Planning Department Building and Ladora Linda Community Center, 312010,
California IR
10 TV Communic.ation & Administration Building floor P tan. date end preparer name not available on plan
11 City of RPV Accessibility Self Evaluation and Transition Plan. 61412013, City Staff Report
12 Office Space Planning Plans for Communi ty Development Buildi ng , 10f30/2008, John M Cruikshank Consuttants.
Inc
13 City Hall Administration & PVNET Annex Floor Plan, 121112008, date and preparer name not available on plan
14 Community Development Department Restroom ADA Comphance. 9129122010. John M Cruikshank Consultants.
Inc
Page5of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-84
Cily of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Bwldings Data Sheets
Facility No.: 85
Facility Name: S ign M aintenance Building
Location : Poi nt Vicent e Park and Civic Center
Condition·
Background Info
1 Year Built 1950's era building
Last Renovation/Improvement
2 Any Recent Wor1<
3 Any Scheduled Future Worl<
4 Identified Problems/ Issues
Capac it
1 Area (square root) 880
Type of Use Storage
Par1<ing Adequate parking on stte
Operation & M ai ntenance
1 Maintenance Program Maintenance Cost· Approx S500K/year for all buildings fY1J...14
1--1-$/y_e_a_r _Cu-r-re_n_\IN_o""a-r F-ul-u-re------1 Budgot around S600K
Securitv & Safety
1 Safety Incidents/Accidents I
2 Any lnJuries/Law Sults
Grad Ina Gr adlna Crit e ria
A 90-100% Building from the 1050"s No improvements performed . Same problems
B so-eg'I. es other buildtngs due to being built as a military base building No
venll!allon No fire alarm/sprinkler system c 70.79%
D 41-6Q%
F 4CW. or lower
Avail abl e Docu m ents
1 Fred Hesse Community Building Plans, The Reynolds Environmental Group, Jan 5, 1ge2
2 Fred Hesse Community Building Floor Plan and Plumblng and Mechanical P~n . Slack & O"Dowd & Associates
Inc_, Oct 8, 1\185
3 City Hall Generator Plans. EJectrK;.al, 2/1212009. Nikolakopulos and Assoc,, Inc , Plumbing; 41912010, The Sullivan
Partnership Inc
5 J>.IJA updates at City of RPV City Hall, 21712008. Wilktan
6 S&ismic Hazard Evaluation for RP\/ Civic Center Buildll"lgs. 1012512000. Breihotz Qazi Engineering, Inc
7 Community Development &Administration Building F loor Plans. date and preparer name not available on pf an
8 Civic Center Facilitles Assessment for City of RPV, 11/2010, Gonzalez Goodale ArchUocls
g Certified Thermography Reports for Planning Department Building and Ladora Linda Community Cantor, 312010,
California IR
10 TV Communi cation & Admi nistrahon B uilding F loor Plan, date and preparer name not available on plan
11 City of RPV Accessibility Solf Evaluation and Transijton Plan, 6/4/2013. City Staff Reµort
12 Office Space Planning Plans for Community D evelopment Buikti ng, 10/30/2008, John M Cruikshank Consultants,
Inc
13 City Hall Administration & PVNET Annex Floor Plan. 12/112008, date and preparer name not available on plan
14 Community Development Oepanmonl Restroom ADA Compliance, 9129122010, John M Cruikshank Consultants,
Inc.
Page 6of 17
ATTACHMENTS 3-85
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Repart Card
Buildings Data Sheets
faclllt y No.:
F.aclllty Name:
Location:
Condition·
Background Info
\ Year Suitt
Last Renovation/Improvement
2 Any Recent Work
3 Any Scheduled Future Work
4 Identified Probtems I Issues
Capacitv
1 Area (square foot)
2 Type of Use
3 Panong
0Deration & Maintenance
1 Maintenance Program
2 Maintenance Logs
3 No of Maintenance Crow
4 Employees:JV~itors Complaints
5 $/year Historical
6 $/year Current/Near Future
7 $/year Furore
Sec:uri & S.afet
67
Po int Vicent e Inte rpretive Center (MuM um & Glfl Shop Building)
31501 Pal os Verdes Drive West
rns9
2005 complete Arch/Interiors/ MEPJHardscapellrrigation renovation
(1) POINT VICENTE PARK COMMUNITY
CENTER Adopted by the City Council in 2008, the latest concepl calls for
a 20,000 square-foot community center that could accommodate meeting
space for community groups, recreational facilrties. d assroorn space and
rull·sized recreational pool. $3M lo $8M (New Community Center
suggested in the CIP Plan Budget not available) (2) POINT V ICENTE
INTERPRETIVE
CENTER (PVIC) BUILDING IDENTIFICATION SIGN I SCREENING
WALL In order lo provtde a buildi ng identification sign that wHl also screen
the exis1ing above ground power generator. gas ta nk. electrical panels/
transformers. a 100..foot k>ng concrete serpentine shaped wall ts
proposed to bo lnstalJod in the lawn area adjacent to lhe pedestr~n
walkway ($110,000) (3) SOLAR POWER SYSTEM FOR POINT
VICENTE INTERPRETIVE CENTER
(PVIC) Installation of lightweigllt and advanood solar energy generating
systems over the roof of PVIC to reduce power consumption with
occasional opportunrties to sell power lo the grid This project will help the
Ctty with Its energy savings goal and w ill roduce considerable amounts of
emissions. lypically the energy savings can cover the cost of projects of
this scale in an estimated period of 15 to 20 years {.$410.000)
g}46
Natural & Cuttural History Museum, Gift Shop & MuHi Purpose Hall With
Full Kitchen.
Adequate Paric;irtg
Fully Sprinkled All building MEP & HVAC systems are working property
Building w ell mai ntained after latest renovatJon 2004
i-+:-sa:;.fety'-"-"'lncld=•;..n.;.lsl.;.A.;.cdd.;.';..•;..n..;l•----~No socunty or safety concems. available
Any l njuriesllaw Suits
Gradlna Grading Criteria
The building has a modem design. Alt building systems are in place and
oporating property No security or safety l hreats lo the public or the
A 90-100'!. employees Rooommondation; continue current maintenance program.
Future improvements scheduled
B 80-80.,, ..
c FrOO Hesse Community Building Plans, The Reynolds Environmental Group, Jan. 5. 1082.
2 Fred Hesse Communlty Building Fk>or Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical Plan, Black & O'Oowd & Associates Inc ,
Ocl 8, 1985
F 400!. or Lower
Avail.able Documents
1 Demolit'ion, Grading & Control Plans
2 2004 PVIC E,J(pansion Plans
3 Emergency Generator Plans
4 2011 PVIC lnigation Water Saving Compliance
Page7of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-86
City of Rancho Pak>s Vtudes
Infrastructure Report Card
Buildings Data Sheets
Facilit y No.: 8 8
F.aclllty Name: C ommuni ty Building
Location~ Ladera Linda Communi ty Center
Condition:
Background Info
Prefabricated, assembled on-site, ioterk>cking metaUic panel constructed school
classroom type units
1
Year Built 1960's
Last Renovation/Improvement
2 Any Recent Work
3 Any Scheduled Future Work The city is considering the rehabilitation of the of community center (CIP Plan for
FY17/18)
LADERA LINDA PARK & COMMUNITY CENTER BUILDINGS REPLACEMENT
The initial slacJe of this proj&ct. for which e budget is approprialQd is to create a
master plan w hich will lay th e grounctwor1< for the site's l ong-term redevek>pment
and phased implementation. This s tage Involves a study ot community needs
through public outreach along with contemplating the City's needs for publi<l
service facilities. This wortt will be followed by programming, quantifying the
tlOOds. planning and preparing a feasibility report to qeate a master plan which
can bo phased for dosign and construction
The cost calculation for Ladera Unda Buildings Ropfacement project is based on
an estimated need for 12,000 square-feet or buildings to replace the exi sting
18,000 square-reet The anticipated square foolage can cover park reslrooms. a
st aff building, multipurpose room. activity roorns, disoovery rootn and a Park
Ranger/Deputy Shortff drop.in office . other improvements include park grounds
landscaping & lrr'pgaUon, picnic tabl es, benches and an emergency generator The
project can be divided in three phases. The first phase will include Ho.zmal
abatement. removal of all buildings, installation of aU uti!l1y Infrastructures, th e
construction of 6,000 SF of now building, pork grounds, landscaping &
improvements The second and t hird phase will include 3,000 SF of nOIN buildings
each
For Phase 1 $1 4 Mas estimated for the park improvements and Infrastructure
(20% of the $7.2M). and $2 6M for buildings Phaso 2 (S3.2M) buildi ngs onty
Total for buik:lings is SS.8 Nol considered in investment needs
4 ktentified Problems/ Issues Ok:l buildings. Maintenance no k>nger effective No ventilation No operating
heat1ng/cooling system
Ca acit
1 Area (square foot} 5,182
2 T~oofUse Multi purpose room
3 Parking Adequate paridng available
O pe ration & Mai ntenanc e
1 Maintenance Program
(1j Buik:ling deQared an energy hog by California JR (2) Parlcing lot in fair
condiUon end wlll need resurfacing in tho near future (3) Forced air heating
equipment are inefficient and are not worth replacing . (4) Temporary electric
2 $fyear Future heaters aro too small and do not provide comfort and shouk:l be removed as a
safety measure.
Se c u rity & S afety
(1) Strudures seems seismically questionable (2) Temporary electric heaters
1 Safety Incidents/Accidents should be removed as a safety measure (3) No Sprinkler System (4) Not ADA
compliant. Accossibitity needs to be upgraded (5) In terms of liability the defects
2 Any lnjuriesl\.ew Suits
should be abated frotn the electrical and plumbing systems
Gradi ng G rading C riteria
A
{1) Prefabricated buildings since 1000-s (2) Structures seems seismically
00-100% questionable. (3) Building system s are loo old and are not operating properly (4)
No ventilation (5) Liability due to defects in the electric.al and plumbing systems.
B 80-89% (6) Peehng paint lead based (7) Ffoor and cell ing tiles and other bu rldlng matenals
contain asbest os. Note T iiie IV of l he Toxic Substances Control A ct consders
buik:lings bui lt prior t978 cont ain lead
c 70..79'/o Recommendation: (1) Given the potenUal costs associates with renovation, the
cost of maintenance, end the fact that the buikting is an energy hog . a "'1W facility
D 41-6Q% might be a better investment (2) lhe remodialion of tho buikiing ls unreasonable
for the overall Return On Investment (2) For tho lime being. at a minimum, seismic
retrofitting should be considered
F 40-/o or Lowor
Fred Hesse Community Building Plans, The Reynolds Environmental Group, Jan. 5, 1982.
2 Fred Hosse Community Building Floor Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical Plan, Black & O'Dowd & Associates Inc , Oct 8,
1985
1 Ladera Linda Facllrty Inspection Repor1. 6129/2011. Willdan
3 Ladera Linda Archltoctural!MEP/Landscape Plans, 1006-1007. Klslner. Wright & Wrtght Architects and Engineers
4 Caritornia !R Certified Thermography Report
Page 8of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-87
Cityol Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Buildings Data Sheets
F acility No .: 8 9
Facility Name: Discovery Room
Location: Ladera Li nda Community Center
Conditi on·
Background Info Prefabricaled, assembled on-site, interlockl ng me1allic panel
constructed school classroom type units
1 Year Built 1ooo·s
Last Renova1ion/Jmprovement
2 Any Recent Wort<
3 Any Scheduled Future Work same plan for all buildings. Details on B·B sheet
4 Identified Problems/ Issues Old buildings. Maintenance no longer effective No ventilation.
heahna/coolina
Capac It
Area (square foot) 3 ,398
Type of Use Small museumldiscovory room for children
3 P arking Adequate parking evaUable
Ot>eratlon & Maintenance
{1) Building declared an energy hog by California IR (2) Parking lot In
1 Maintenance Program fatr condi1ion and will need resurfacing in the near future . (3) Forced air
heating equipment are inofficiont and are not worth replacing (4 )
Temporary electric heaters are too small and do not provide comfort and
2 $/year Current should be romoved as a safety measure
Securitv & Safety
1 Safety l ncidenlsJAccldents
{1) Structures seems seismically questionable (2) Temporary el ectric
heate~ shoukl be removed as a safety measure (3) No Sprinkler
System (4) Not ADA comptiant Acc&ssibi!ity needs to be upgraded (5)
2 Any Injuries/Law Suits In terms of liability the defects shoukt be abated f rom the electrical and
plumbi ng s ystems.
Gr adinR Gradlna Criteria
(1) Prefabricated buildings s ince 1960's (2) Structures seems
A 90-100% seismically questionable (3) B uilding systems are too old and are not
operating properly. {4) No vontilation (5} Liability due to defects in the
electrical and plumbing systems. (6) Pee/mg poinl ~based (7J Floor
B 8().89% and coiling tiles and other bultdlf19 materials oonta1n ~-Note
Titl e I V of the To:x;ic S ubstances Control Act o:>nsid ers buildings built
c 70-79%
prior 1978 contai n l ead
Recommendation : (1 ) G iven tho potential costs associates wfth
renovation, the cost of maintenance, and the faci lhat the bulldi ng is an
D 41-69%
energy hog, a 08W' facili1y might be a bettef investment. (2) The
remediation of the building is unreasonable fo r the overall Return On
Investment (2) For tho time being, at a minimum, seismic retrofitting
F 4 0%or Lower should be consktered
Available Document•
1 Fred Hesse Community BuiJding Plans, The Reynolds Environmental Group, Jan. 5, 1982.
2 Freel Hesse Community Building Floor Plan and Plumbtng and M echanical Plan. Black & O'Dowd & Associates
Inc., Oct. 8, 1985
3 Ladora LindaArchttecturaVMEP/landscape Plans. 1966-1967. Kistner, Wright & Wright Architects and Engineers
Page 9 of 17
ATTACHMENTS 3-88
City of Rancho Pakls Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Bui ldings Dat a Sheets
Facility No.: 810
Faclllty Name: Multi Purpow Room
Location: Ladera Linda Community Center
Condition ·
Background Info Prefabricated, assembled on·si1e, interlock.Ing metallic panel
constructed school dassroom tvoe units.
\ Year Built 1000's
Last RenovatiOnllmprovement
2 Any Recent Work
3 Any Scheduled Future Work
4 ldentlftod Problems / Issues
Old buildJngs Maintenance hO longer effective No ventilation ,
hoaUnglcooling
Ca aclt
1 Afoa (square foot) 3,288
Type of Use Multi Purpose Hall
Parking Adequate parking available
Operation & M aintenance
(1) Building deciared an energy hog byCaHfomia IR (2) P arking klt Jn
\ Mainlenance Program fair condition and will need resurfacing jn the near Mure (3} Forced air
healing equipmenl are inefficient end are not worth rep1acing (4)
Temporary electric heaters are loO small and do oot provide comfort and
2 $/year Current should be removed as a safety measure
Securitv & Safety
(1) St ructures seems selsmlcall yquestionable (2) Temporary olectrk:
1 Safety Incidents/Accidents heaters should be removed as a safety measure. (3) No Sprinkler
Syst8ftl (4) Not ADA compli ant. Accessibility needs to be upgraded (5)
2 Any lnjuriesA...aw Suits
In terms of liability tho defects should be abated from the eleclricat and
plumbing systems
Gr.ad I no Gradl na Criteria
(1) P refabricated buildings sinca 1960's (2) Structures seems
A 90--100"/ .. seismically questionable (3) Butlding systems me too old and are not
opera1ing property (4) No ventilation(5) Liability due to defects in the
electdcal and plumbing systems {6) P eehrig paint~ based (7) F loor
B SQ..89% and ceiling Mos and other buildi ng materials contai n asbestos_ Note
Trtle IV of the Toxi c Substances Control Ad considers buildings built
prior 1978 contain lead
c 70.79% Reco mme ndation: (1) Given the potential costs associates with
renovation, the cost of maintenance. and the fact ttaal the building is an
&n61'QY hog , a new facility might be a better investrrwnt (2) The
D 41~69% remedi ation of tho building is unreasonable for tho overall Return On
Investment (2) For tho time being, at a m inimum, seismic retrofitting
should be cons.!dered
F 40-/o or lower
Avalfable Document•
1 Fred Hesse Community Building Plans, The Reynolds Environmental Group, Jan. 5, 1982
2 Fred Hesse Community B Uikhng Floo c Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical Plan, Black & O'Oowd & Associates
Inc., Oct. 8, 1985
3 Ladera Linda Architeclural/MEP/Landseape Plans. 1966-1967. Kistner. Wright & Wright Architects and Engineers
Page 10of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-89
Cily of Rancho Pak:ls Verd es
lnfras tnicture Report Card
Bu1ldmgs Data Sheets
Facility No.:
Faclllty Name:
Locatio n:
Condition·
Background Info
1 Year Built
Last Renovationtlmprovement
2 Any Recent Work
3 Any Scheduled F uture Work
4 Identified P roblems/ Issues
Ca acit
811
Classroom
Ladera Linda Community Center
Prefabricatod, assombled on-site, interk>cking metallic panel
construded s chool classroom type units
196-0's
Okt burldings. M aintenance no lOnger effective No ventJlalion.
heating/cooling
1 Area (square fool) 3538
Type of Use Adivitles/day care for toddlers and pr&-schoo~rs
Parking Adequate parking available
Oper at ion & Maintenance
(1) B uilding declared an energy hog by California IR. (2) Parking lot in
1 Maintenance Program fair condition and will need resurfacing in the near future. (3} Forced air
heating equipment are inefficient and are not worth replacing (4)
rompo rary electric heaters are too small and do not provide comfor1 and
6 S/year Current F uture should be removed as a safety measure
Securitv & Safet v
1 Safety Incidents/Accidents
(1) Structures seems seismicalty questionable (2) Temporary electric
heaters should be removod as a safoty measure. (3) No Sprinkler
Syslem (4) Not ADA compliant Ac.c;essibility needs to be upgraded (5)
2 Any tnjuriesA..aw Suits In terms or liability the defects should be abated from the electrical and
plumbing systems
Gr adina Gradlna Criteria
A 00-100%
(1} Prefabricated buildings since 1000's (2) Structures seems
seismically quest)Onabte (3) Building systems are too old and are not
operating properly {4) No ventilatlo/l (5) Liability due lo defects in the
B 80-89'!.
electrical and plumbtng systoms. {fl) Peeling paint lead basod (1) FloOJ
and celling tiles and other building matenals contain~ Noto
TiUe IV or the Toxic Substances Control Ad considers buildings buitl
prior 1978 contain lead c 70-79'/o Recommendation: ( 1) Given the potential costs associates with
renovation . the cost of maintenance. and the fact tt)at lhe buikjing is an
energy hog, a new-facility might be a better investment. (2) The
0 41·69% remediation or the building is unreasonable ror the overall Return On
Investment (2) For the time being, at a minimum. seismic retrofitting
should be conslderod.
F 404'1. or Lower
Available Documents
1 Fred Hesse Community Building Plans, The Reynold s Environmehlal Group, Jan_ 5, 1982.
2 Fred Hesse Community Building Floor Plan and Pturnblng and Mechanical Plan, Black & O'Oowd & Associates
lne . act e. 1gss
3 Ladora Linda Architect.uralnvtEP/Landscape Plans, 1006-1967, Kistner, Wnghl & W nght Arc:h!lects and Engineers
Page 11 of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-90
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Buildings Dat a Sh eets
F.aclllty No.: 812
Faclllty Name: Restroom&
L ocation: Ladera Linda Community Cent er (P9)
Condition·
Background Info Prefabricated, assembled on-5ite, inter locking metallic panel
conslruci.ed school classroom type unijs.
1 Year Built 100<Ys
Last R enovat ion/Improvement
2 Any Recent Work
3 Any Scheduled Future Wotk
4 Identi fied Prob~ms / l ssuos Old buildings Malnlenance no longer effect.fve
Capaclt
t Area (square foot) 3,473
Type of Use Restrooms servi ng the park and the community center
5 Parking Adequate parking available
Operation & M aintenance
Maintenance Program (1) Buik:ling declared an energy hog by California IR (2) Plumbing
1--+-S-ly_ea_r_C_ur-ren-t .....::.-------lsyslem is very oki. (3) Requires Renovation
Securi & Safet
1 Safety Incidents/Accidents (1} Structures seems selsmically questionable (2) Nol ADA compliant
1-2+-An-y-l""nj-un-.es/L-a-w-Su_tt_s ____ ---;Accessibitity needs to be upgraded
Grading Gradinn Criteria
A 90-100%
(1} Pref abricated buildings sloce 1000's (2) Structuros. sooms
seismically quesHonable (3) Rostroom systems ara too old and are not
operating proper1y (6) Peehng pmnt ~based (7) Floor and ceili ng
B 80-89% liles and other buildi ng materials contain~ Nole Title IV of the
Toxi c S ubstances C ontrol Act considers buildings buih prior 197B
c 70-79% contain lead Recommendation s:
(1) For the lime being, at a mi nimum. se~sm ic retrofitting should be
D 41·69'1. considerod along with renovation of the existing rest room and drinking
fountains es pecially the plumbing s ystem serving the restrooms
F 400!. or Lower
Available Documents
t Fred Hesse Community Buildi ng Plans. The Reynolds Envlronmenlal Group, Jan. 5 , 1982
2 Fred Hesse Community Building F k>or Plan and P lumbing and Mechanical Plan, Black & O'Dowd & Associates
Inc., Oct 8, 1085
3 Ladera UndaArchitectural/MEP/Landscape Plans , 1966-1967. Kistner. Wright & Wright Architects and Engineers
Page 12of 17
ATTACHMENTS 3-91
Cily of Rancho PaJos Verdos
Infrastructure Report Card
Buildings Da ta Sheets
Facility No.:
Facility Name:
Location:
Condi t ion·
B ackground Info
1 Year Bulll
Last Renovationflmprovement
2 Any Recent Work
3 • Any Scheduled Future Woric
4 kientified Problems/ Issues
CapacHv
1 Alea (square loot)
2 Type of Use
3 Parking
Operation & M1intenance
1 Maintenance Program
$/year CurrenllNoar Future
Securi & Safot
813
Community Bulldi ng
F red Hene Jr. Part!;
Buil ding retrofrtUng performed arou nd 1Q6Q
!ntornal renovoUon performed recantly No documentatton available
(1) JOHN MCTAGGART MEMORIAL HALL ANO COUNCIL CHAMBERS
IMPROVEMENTS $250.000 (the hall where council meetings lake place)
Funding available In CIP Plan fro FY 13'14 (2) SOLAR POWER SYSTEM
FOR HESSE PARK BUILDING lo reduce power c:onst.tmptlon with
occaSM>nal opportunities to sell power lo the grid $350.000 (Fundltlg not
available In CIP Plan)
9.00>
Active Community Center House of City Counci Meetings and ac:tive
senior center
Adequate Parktng
Internal renovaOon performed recently No documentation available.
Fiber optics $60.000 & Parking Lot Resurfacing $190,000
1--+-S-•l_et"'y-lncid_· _•n_1s1_A_ccld_' _•nl_•'-----INono reported
Any Injuries/Law Suils
A
B
c
0
F
Gradina Gradlna Crit eria
00-100'1. The site Inspection during the site visit show$ the bulldlng as a modem
so-eg•4 buildi~. with buikting systems fully operational. The buikting looked very
well maintainod One of the best buik1ings in the city No documonts
7().79% available for the latest renovation
41-69%
40%orlower
Available Document&
Fred Hesse Community Buikting Plans, The Reynolds EnvwoMlental Group, Jan. 5, 1982
Fred Hesse Community Buitdl ng Floor Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical P1an, Black & O'Dowd & Associates Inc ,
Oct 8. 1985
Page 13of 17
ATTACHMENTS 3-92
Crty or Rancho Palos Verdos
lnrrastructure Report Card
Buildings Data Sheets
Facil ity No.: 814
Facility Nam e : Community Build i ng
Location: Robert E . Ryan Community Park
Condition ·
Background Info
1 Year Built 1009
Last Renovation/Improvement 2oi 1 Restrooms Renovation (ongoing)
2 Any Rooonl Work
3 Any Schoduled Future Work
4 Identified Problems/ Issues
1,725
Community/Activity Buildlng & Restrooms
Adequate Parking on Site
Maintained as part of lhe City's Building Maintenance Program
Securitv & Safety
1 Safety Incidents/Accidents None reported
2 Any Injuries/law Suits
3 Current Securjty Measures
4 Employoos/Visitors Complaints
Gradl na Gr adlna Criteria
A 90-100'!. The restroom part of the bu~lding was c;omptetely fenovated recenUy
B 80-8Qo/. with AOA compliance The other part of the building {community
c 7(>-79%
cenlef/multipur'pOse} requires renovatiOn
D 41 ~6Q•/,
F 400/., or Lower
Fred Hesse Commun·1ty Building Plans, The Reynolds Environmental Group, Jan. 5, 1982.
2 Fred Hesso Community SuUchng Foor Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical Plan , Black & O'Oowd & Associates
Inc. Oot. 6, 1965
1 Ryan P ark Restrooms Improvement and Accoss.ibility Comp!!ance. 5/412012. Wdldan landscape Architects
Page 14of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-93
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Buildmgs Data Sheets
Fac ility No.:
Fac lllty Name:
Locat ion :
Condition·
Backgrouod Info
1 Year Built
Last Renovationtlmpmvemehl
2 Any Recent Work
3 Any Scheduled Future Wori{
4 Identified Problems/ Issues
Capacity
1 Area {square fool)
2 Type of Use
3 Parking
O eration & Mai ntenance
015
Abal one Cove Building
Abal one Cove Shoreline
1Q89
No recenl renovation performod
Retrofitting (FY12·13 Budget 108k for Improvements)_ Abalone Cove
Shoreline Park Slaff Building. Restroom. and
Driveway Improvements With lhe expected 2014 completion of
the Abalone Cove Shoreline Park project, usage of this park wllf
incrnase slgnlficantty. The FY12·13 project. is 50'/o funded by a
Land and Water Conservation Fund grant. with a 50% City
matching requirement. Costs to Improve the staff bu11ding,
restrooms and drive"Ways, which are i n poor condrtion, are not
eligible for grant funding _ Those additional improvements wlll
enhance lhe overall condition of this faci lity and also improve l ho
C ity 's ADA compHance. This proj ect w itl be funded from Q uimby
m<>ney. ($108,000)
700
Concession buikhng, storage, all purpose room, kitchen, hfeguard &
restroom
Adequate parking on site (d"1rt parking)
1 Maintenance Program Me~nlained as part of t he City's Building Maintenance Program
2 $/year Current
A
B
c
D
F
Securl & Safet
Safety Incidents/Accidents None raported
Any 1njuriesA.aw Suits
Gr adlna Gradlm:J Criteria
00.100'.4 ( t) Building was built in 198Q and has not undergone major renovation
since (2) The silo visit shows the building in a poor condition (3)
80-89.,,., Re110vatlon for the park site isschedolod for 2014. (4) FY13114 budget
70-1Q% includ8$ Abalone Cove Shoreline Park Steff Buikting, Restroom, and
41·69%
Driveway Improvements· These additkmal Improv ements will enhance
the overall condition of t his facil ity and also improve the City's ADA
40-/, or Lower compliance
Avai lable Documents
Fred Hesse Community B ulSding Plans . The Reynokfs Environmental Group, Jan. 5, 1982
Fred Hesse Community Bu i~ing Floor Plan aod Plumbing and Mechanical Plan, Blad: & O'Oowd & Associates
Inc. Oct 8. 1985
Page 15of17
ATTACHMENTS 3-94
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure R eport Card
Buildings Data Sheets
Facllity No .:
Faclllty Nam e:
Locatio n :
Co ndition·
Background Info
1 Year Buin
Last Renovationflmprovement
2 Any Recent Woril
3 Any Scheduled future Work
4 Identifi ed Problems I Issues
Capactt
1 Area (square foot)
Type of Use
PariO ng
Operation & Maintenance
1 M alnlenanco Program
2 $/year Current
S.curitv & Safetv
1 Safety l ncidenls/Accidents
2 Employ ees/V~ito rs Complafnts
Gradlna
A ll().100%
B 80.89'1.
c 70.79%
D 4 1·6Q'.4
F 40%or lower
Available Documents
816
Public Restro oms
Eastview Park
114 million project i m provement for buildings??? Find source
0
2012
ADA Compliance
300
Restrooms/S torage
Adequate Parking
Maintainod as part of the City's Su lJding Matntenaoce P rogram
None reported
Gr adi na Criteria
Restroom/storage building was constructed during 2012 Anew
building
Fred Hesse Community B uilding Plans. The Reynolds Environmetllal G roup, Jan_ 5, 1982
Fred H asse Community B uilding f loor Plan and Plumbing and Mechanical Plan. Btaci< & O'Oowd & Associates
Inc. O ct . e. 1085
Page 16of 17
ATTACHMENTS 3-95
City of Rancho PaklS Vetdes
lnfraslrudure Report Card
Buildings Data Sheets
1
2
3
4
A
B
c
D
F
Facility No.:
Facility Na tru1;
L ocation:
Conditi on·
Background lnfo
Year Built
Last Renovation/Imp rovement
Any Recent Worn
Any Scheduled Future Work
Identified Problems I Issues
Ope ration & Maintenance
Maintenance Program
$/year Current
Securi & Safet
Safety Incidents/Accidents
Any lnjuri&sllaw Suits.
Gradina
90-100'~
8().6Q%
7().79%
41·6991.
4Q61, or Lower
Available Documents
81 7
Public Rest rooms
Pelican Cove Park (Prev lou sly Fisherman's Access)
Remodeled iri 2008 to match adJacent hote! architecture
2006
300
Restrooms
Adequate Par1<.ing
Maintained as part of tho City's Building Mai rdenanc:e Program
None reportod
Gradina Criteria
Remodeled in 2008 to match adjacent hotel arehi1odure Buik1ing
requires renovation to meet ADA requirements aod for upgrade or
facil/ties
Fred Hesse Community Building Plans, The Roynolds Environmental Group, Jan. 5 , 1962
Fred Hesse Community Building Floor Pl.an and P lumbing and Mechanical Plan, Black & O'Oowd & Associates
lne . Oct. 8 , 1985
Page 17of 17
ATTACHMENTS 3-96
~ City of Rancho Palos Verdes
2013 Infrastructure Report Card
Evaluation of Landslide Infrastructure
ATTACHMENTS 3-97
Evaluation Strategy
Grading Shall be the Opinion of the Consultant Based on the Following Approach :
~ Meet with City Staff (Kickoff Meeting)
~ Gather Required Information (i.e . Data, Reports, etc)
~ Visit Various Facility Sites
~ Review Provided Information
~ Evaluate Current Infrastructure Condition and Determine "Draft" Grade
~ Discuss Analysis of Data and Obtain Written and Verbal Elaborations on
Current Infrastructure Conditions from City Staff
(that Amend or Expand Written Report Data)
~ Re -Evaluate Current Infrastructure Conditions and Draft Grade
(Based on Increased Understanding of Infrastructure Condition s from City Staff)
~ Prepare Draft Report Summarizing the Infrastructure Conditions and
Provide a Revised Grade (if Different from "Draft" Grade Above)
~ Meet with City to Review Draft Report & Obtain Comments from City Staff
~ Finalize Report Based on Comments from City and Provide Final Grade
ATTACHMENTS 3-98
Kickoff Meeting with City Staff
~ June 12, 2013
~ Attendees:
Siamak Motahari
Bi n du Vai sh
Nico le Jules
Ron Dragoo
Andy Winje
Nadia Carasco
~ Ron Dragoo Provided Information on The Landslide Mitigation
Infrastructure Following the Kickoff Meeting.
Data/Information Eva I uated
~ 2012 Landslide Mitigation Workshop Presentation
~ 2007 GIS Landslide Inventory Maps
Site Visits
~ June 19th
~ June 20th
Visited the Abalone Cove are of the overall Palos Ve r des Drive South
Landslide area. Inspected surface drainage system s, dewatering and
monitoring wells, and surface conditions .
ATTACHMENTS 3-99
Photos from Site Visits (June 19, 2013 Site Visit:)
Abalone Cove Area:
Review of Provided Data/Reports
~ 2012 Landslide Mitigation Workshop Presentation
Determined: Types of landslide mitigation infrastructure present in City, ground/surface
conditions and the effects of rainfall, number of dewatering and monitoring wells and the
production amounts of dewatering wells, significant landslides in recent years {Paseo Del Mar)
and planned/recommended improvements to landslide mitigation infrastructure.
Preliminary Evaluation
Evaluation Criteria:
~ Capacity of Infrastructure
As it relates to landslide prevention
> Structural Condition of Infrastructure
As it relates to operation and maintenance
> Environmental Sustainability of Infrastructure
As it relates to preserving the natural landscape and wildlife when operating, maintaining, and
improving landslide mitigation infrastructure
ATTACHMENTS 3-100
Preliminary Evaluation (cont.)
11 Draft11 Grades
Capacity of Infrastructure: D (60%)
Structural Condition of Infrastructure: D (64%)
Environmental Sustainability of Infrastructure: C (74%)
Overall Grade: D (66%)
Progress Meeting
July 30, 2013 and August 8, 2013
Progress Meeting were held on above dates .
Data Evaluation and 11 Draft11 Grades were discussed with City staff. Current
condition of landslide mitigation system was discussed. Data presented in 2012
presentation was the most recent data the City had. Although some minor
aspects of the landslide mitigation system may have changed slightly, the overall
system were still lacking and CIP projects have not yet been implemented, due to
the recent nature of the presentation. Funding concerns were also discussed,
along with working together with other agencies .
Re-Evaluation of Landslide Mitigation Infrastructure, Report
Preparation, and Final Grade Determination
Final Grade of Landslide Mitigation System, based on review of existing data , site
visits, and discussions with City staff, is shown on spreadsheet breakdown on the
following page:
ATTACHMENTS 3-101
Evaluation of Landslide Mitigation Infrastructure
Criteria 1: The capacity of infrastructure as it relates to landslide prevention
No . Subcriteria Score Comments
1 Overall Coverage of Facilities 5 Insufficient coverage
throughout City
2 Size/sufficiency of surface drainage lines 5 Only a small% require capacity
upgrades
3 Redundancy of system 6 Multiple medium drains versus
fewer large ones
4 Grading improvements 8 Recent grading improvements
made
5 Cost of current or pending capacity 6 Many improvements (new
improvements facilities) needed
Average Score 6 "D" Grade
Criteria 2 : The structural condition of infrastructure as it relates to operation &
maintenance
No. Subcriteria
1 Overall structural condition of facilities
2 Quantity of maintenance/structural
problems
3 Severity of maintenance/structural
problems
4 Safety concerns of
structural/maintenance problems
5 Cost of structural /maintenance problems
5
5
5
5
Comments
Overall poor condition of
facilities
Facilities need continuous
maintenance/adjustment
Piping discontinuous, wells in
need of replacement , etc.
Some torn /cut CMP along
walking paths
Many repairs (to exist. facilities)
needed
Average Score 5.2 "F" Grade
Criteria 3: The environmental sustainability of infrastructure as it relates to
preserving the natural landscape and wildlife when operating , maintaining, and
improving landslide mitigation infrastructure.
No . Subcriteria
1 Overall environmental
utilization/optimization
2 Location of facilities in relation to
landscapes and aesthetic/visual qualities
3 Use of natural features to extent practical
4
5
Landslide facilities protect existing
landscape improvements (man-made)
Cost of landscape improvements (man-
made) due to faulty facilities
Final Grade: "D"
7
5
8
8
Comments
Overall fair
utilization/optimization
Facilities not a significant
eyesore
Natural Features (ground) are
not feasible for use
Facilities mostly located away
from man-made landscape
improvements
Facilities mostly located away
from man-made landscape
improvements
ATTACHMENTS 3-102
Cfty of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Facility No.:
Facility Name:
Ocean View:
Facility R entals:
Play Equipment Check-out:
P15
Robert E. Ryan C ommu nity Pa rk
Yes
Ye•
Yes
!Pathways and Trail.: I Yes
!Buildings I Yes No I
Buildings
Communi1y Building & Restrooms.
other Amenities Ye• No
1 Baseball Fiel d 1
2 Ba sketball Court Yes
3 Children's Play Equipment Yes
4 City Provided Barbecues 4
5 Designated ADA Parking 3 spaces
6 Drinking Fountains Yes
7 Muffi..Purpose Grass Field Yes
8 On.Site Dirt Parking No
9 On--Site Paved Parking 42
10 Picnic Tables 10
11 Public Pay Phones Yes
12 Public Restrooms Yes
13 Tennis Court/Paddle Court No
14 VoheybaU Court No
Available Documents
1 1970 Ryan Park Development Plans
2 1993 Ryan Park Access Road Plan s Draft
3 1995 Ryan Park Slairway Improvements
4 1996 Ryan Park Grading and Drainage
5 2001 Topographic Survey
6 2002 R.ya n Park Improvements
7 2009 Vertz.on Installation at Ryan Park
8 2011 Ryan Park Field Improvements
9 2013 Ryan RR ADA & Improvement Plans
Parks Data Sheets.
Facility No.: P15
Faclllty Name: Rob ert E. Ryan Community Park
Ocean View : Ye•
Pathway• and T"'lls: No
Condition·
1 Background Info The City's first park was transfe rred from the County a l lhe time of the City's
incorporation in 1973
Year Built
Last Renovationllmprovernent 2013 ADA complianca completed
2 Any Re.,,nt Work
(1) FY13/14 Budget : Ryan Park Parking Lot: This project win include
Yoidening the upper parking lot lo provtde additionat parking and space for
bus drop-on. as well as connection of the upper parking lot to the lower
parking lol The project win be turldod with Quimby money. ($400.000) (2)
3 Any Scheduled Future Work ABER OPTIC CABLING: HESSE/RYAN
PARK This p roject includes the installation of fiber optic cabling for the Ctty's
phone and information network between City facilities y..tthtn
the public right-of-way Yklich 'Mil run adjacent to Ryan Park and directly on to
Hesse Park. Total amount $320.000 (Year 1: $60,000, Year 2: S260,000)
Capacity
1 Area (acre) 11
2 Type of Use Active park
3 Parking More par1'ing spaces required. Upper park improvements is scheduled in
FY13114
O peration & Maintenance
1 1 I Maintenance Program I Maintained ~rough the City's maintenance program for parl<s. About $1.3M
2 $/year Future for p arks. tta1fs. and open spa ces.
Security & Safety I . !Safety lncidents/Actidents I None reported
Any Injuries/law Suits
Grading Grading C riteria
A 90-100% Til8 stte v isit shO'M!d the park in a very good cond ition. Field improvements
B 80-89% completed in 2011. ADA impro vements completed in 2013. Upper parking
c 70-79%
improvements sch eduled in FY13/1 4 budget.
D 41-69%
F 40% or Lower
Page 1of1
ATTACHMENTS 3-103
~ City of Rancho Palos Verdes
2013 Infrastructure Report Card
Evaluation of Right of Way and Traffic Devices
ATTACHMENTS 3-104
Evaluation Strategy
Grading Shall be the Opinion of the Consultant Based on the Following A pp roach:
~ Meet with City Staff (Kickoff Meeting)
~ Gather Required Information (i.e. Data, Reports, etc)
~ Visit Various Facility Sites
~ Review Provided Information
~ Evaluate Current Infrastructure Condition and Determine "Draft" Grade
~ Discuss Analysis of Data and Obtain Written and Verbal Elaborations on
Current Infrastructure Conditions from City Staff
(that Amend or Expand Written Report Data)
~ Re-Evaluate Current Infrastructure Conditions and Draft Grade
(Based on Increas ed Understanding of Infrastructure Conditions from City Staff)
~ Prepare Draft Report Summarizing the Infrastructure Conditions and
Provide a Revised Grade (if Different from "Draft" Grade Above)
~ Meet with City to Review Draft Report & Obtain Comments from City Staff
~ Finalize Report Based on Comments from City and Provide Final Grade
ATTACHMENTS 3-105
Kickoff Meeting with City Staff
~ June 12, 2013
~ Attendees:
Siamak Motahari
Bindu Vaish
Nicole Jules
Ron Dragoo
AndyWinje
Nadia Carasco
~ Nicole Jules Provided Information on The Traffic & Right of Way System
Following the Kickoff Meeting.
Data/Information Evaluated
~ 2013 PCI Street Map
~ 2013 PCI Report Spreadsheets
~ 2009 Pavement Management System Report
~ 2008 Traffic Calming Program
~ 2011-2012 Traffic Analysis Report
~ Capital Improvements Projects List (unfunded projects)
~ Conceptual Bikeways Plan
Site Visits
~ June 20th
Drove through various streets throughout City.
ATTACHMENTS 3-106
Photos from Site Visits (June 20, 2013 Site Visit:)
Various Streets
Review of Provided Data/Reports
~ 2009 Pavement Management System Report
Determined: Overall aspects of traffic and right of way system, including pavement and sidewalk
quantities, and the PCI and SI indexes of arterials and residential streets
41 miles of streets* (105 mi of local streets; 36 mi of arterials)
23.5 m illion square feet of AC**; 3.3 million square feet of concrete sidewalk**; 627,435 square feet of medians**
~ 2013 PCI Report Spreadsheets & Street Map
Determined: Current condition of streets in the City
~ 2008 Traffic Calming Program
Determined: Different Levels of Traffic Calming tools, their use in the City, and associated costs
~ 2011-2012 Traffic Analysis Report
Determined : Traffic flows along PVD South , connecting streets, and the impact of future
development
ATTACHMENTS 3-107
);> Conceptual Bikeways Plan
Determined: Bikeway Classes throughout City, lo cat ion of b ike ways, and associated costs
Preliminary Evaluation
Evaluation Criteria:
~ Capacity of Infrastructure
As it re lates to traffic flows
);> Structural Condition of Infrastructure
As it relates to drive-a bility/rid e abili t y, and operation & ma intenance
);> Environmental Sustainability of Infrastructure
As it relates to safety, promoting re creat ion, an aesthetic envi ron ment and preserv ing nature
Preliminary Evaluation (cont.)
"Draft" Grades
Capacity of Infrastructure : A {92%)
Structural Condition of Infrastructure: B {86%)
Environmental Sustainability of Infrastructure: A {96%)
Overall Grade: A {92%)
Progress Meeting
July 30, 2013 and August 8, 2013
Progress Meeting were held on above dates.
Data Evaluation and "Draft" Grades were discus se d with City staff. Current
condition of right of way/traffic system was discussed. Dat a pre sented in 2009
PMS Update was a little behind/outdated. Some portion s of the str eets had a
lower PCl/51 index. A 2013 Update (Spreadsheets and Map) was provided for
furth er eva lu ation . Funding concern s were also discussed.
ATTACHMENTS 3-108
Re-Evaluation of ROW/Traffic System, Report Preparation, and Final
Grade Determination
Final Grade of ROW/Traffic System based on review of existing data, site visits,
and discussions with City staff, is shown on spreadsheet breakdown below:
Evaluation of Right of Way and Traffic Devices
Criteria 1: The capacity of i nfrastructure as it relates to traffic flows
No . Subcriteria Score Comments
1 Overall accessibility/drive-ability 9 Good accessibility throughout City
throughout City
2 Width /Number of LanesfTraffic Concerns
3 Alternative Access Routes storm drain
system
4 Accessibility for cyclists and pedestrians
5 Cost of current or pending capacity
improvements
9
8
10
9
Traffic concerns only at certain
times/days
Not many feasible alternate routes
due to landscape
Multiple Class I , II , Ill bikeways
available
No widening projects anticipated
Average Score 9.0 "A" Grade
Criteria 2: The structural condition of infrastructure as it relates to drive-ability/ride
ability, and operation & maintenance
No. Subcriteria Score Comments
1 Overall structural condition of roadways 9 Overall great condition of roadways
2 Quantity of structural condition problems 8 Small amount of structural needs
3 Severity of structural/condition problems 8 Mostly general cracking /deterioration
4 Safety concerns of 9 No major potholes/safety hazards
structural /maintenance problems
5 Cost of structural/maintenance problems 8 Moderate to major improvements
anticipated
Average Score 8.4 "B" Grade
Criteria 3: The environmental sustainability of infrastructure as it relates to safety,
promoting recreation, an aesthetic environment and preservi ng nature
No. Subcriteria Score Comments
1 Overall environmental 10 Overall excellent environmental
conditions/utilization conditions
2 View/Scenery of local streets and 10 Excellent view/scenery
arterials
3 Landscaping improvements along 10 Great landscape
roadways planning/maintenance
4 Debris/trash /graffiti/etc on or adjacent to 9 Little to no debris/trash/graffiti
roadways noticed
5 Cost of cleaning /maintenance 9 City routinely cleans and inspects
Final Grade: "A"
ATTACHMENTS 3-109
~ City of Rancho Palos Verdes
2013 Infrastructure Report Card
Evaluation of Sanitary Sewer System and
Abalone Cove District Sewer System
ATTACHMENTS 3-110
Evaluation Strategy
Grading Shall be the Opinion of the Consultant Based on the Following Approach :
~ Meet with City Staff (Kickoff Meeting)
}' Gather Required Information (i.e . Data, Reports, etc)
}' Visit Various Facility Sites
}' Review Provided Information
}' Evaluate Current Infrastructure Condition and Determine "Draft" Grade
}' Discuss Analysis of Data and Obtain Written and Verbal Elaborations on
Current Infrastructure Conditions from City Staff
(that Amend or Expand Written Report Data)
~ Re -Evaluate Current Infrastructure Conditions and Draft Grade
(Based on Increased Understanding of Infrastructure Conditions from City Staff)
~ Prepare Draft Report Summarizing the Infrastructure Conditions and
Provide a Revised Grade (if Different from "Draft" Grade Above)
}' Meet with City to Review Draft Report & Obtain Comments from City Staff
}' Finalize Report Based on Comments from City and Provide Final Grade
ATTACHMENTS 3-111
Kickoff Meeting with City Staff
~ June 12, 2013
~ Attendees:
Siamak Motahari
Bindu Vaish
Nicole Jules
Ron Dragoo
AndyWinje
Nadia Carasco
~ Ron Dragoo and Andy Winje Provided Information on The Overall Sewer
System and the Abalone Cove District Sewer System Following the Kickoff
Meeting.
Data/Information Evaluated
~ 2009 Master Plan Update (Report)
~ 2009 County Condition Assessment (partial)
~ Abalone Cove Sewer Maintenance Fee Annual Reports (2010-2013)
Site Visits
~ June 19th
~ September 24th
Visited Various Sewer Sites throughout City
ATTACHMENTS 3-112
Photos from Site Visits (June 19, 2013 Site Visit:}
Calle Entradero Sewer Station
Abalone Cove District Facilities
ATTACHMENTS 3-113
Photos from Site Visits (September 24, 2013 Site Visit:)
Calle Entradero Sewer Station
' I , I
<'i
Laurel Drive Sewer Station
-..
Review of Provided Data/Reports
~ 2009 Master Plan Update (Report)
Determined: Overall aspects of sewer system (150 miles of sewer lines; 3,707 manholes), land
topography, number of lift stations, age of pipes, material of pipes, and planned CIP
improvements
~ 2009 County Condition Assessment (partial)
Determined: Condition of pipes in a portion of the overall sewer system
~ Abalone Cove Sewer Maintenance Fee Annual Reports {2010-2013)
Determined: Annual maintenance costs of Abalone Cove sewer system (i.e. $93,300 for 2013)
ATTACHMENTS 3-114
Preliminary Evaluation
Evaluation Criteria :
);>-Capacity of Infrastructure
As it relates to transmission of wastewater flows
~ Structural Condition of Infrastructure
As it relates to operation and maintenance
~ Environmental Sustainability and Safety of Infrastructure
As it relates to ensuring sanitary conditions and an aesthetic City landscape
Preliminary Evaluation (cont.)
"Draft" Grades
Overall Sewer System
Capacity of Infrastructure: C (78%)
Structural Condition of Infrastructure : D (62%)
Environmental Sustainability of Infrastructure: C (77%)
Overall Grade: C (72%)
Abalone Cove Sewer System
Capacity of Infrastructure: C (78%)
Structural Condition of Infrastructure: D (66%)
Environmental Sustainability of Infrastructure: B (76%)
Overall Grade: C (71%)
Progress Meeting
July 30, 2013 and August 8, 2013
Progress Meeting were held on above dates .
Data Evaluation and "Draft" Grades were discussed with City staff. Current
condition of overall sa nitary sewer system and Abalone Cove Di strict sewer
ATTACHMENTS 3-115
system were discussed . Data presented in 2009 Master Plan Update was general
but not very specific. Some portions of the sewer system were still lacking and
some CIP projects have not yet been implemented. Funding concerns were also
discussed , especially with the Abalone Cove District Sewer System (O&M Costs
were very high), along with the current user fee status.
Re-Evaluation of Sewer System, Report Preparation, and Final Grade
Determination
Final Grade of Sewer System based on review of existing data, site visits, and
discussions with City staff, is shown on spreadsheet breakdown on the following
page:
ATTACHMENTS 3-116
Evaluation of Sewer System
Criteria 1: The capacity of infrastructure as it relates to transmission of wastewater
flows
No. Subcriteria Comments
1 Overall Coverage of Sewer Facilities Good coverage throughout City
2 Size/sufficiency capacity of sewer lines 8 Only a small % requ ire capaci ty
upgrades
3 Redundancy of sewer lines 8 Over 1 foot of sewer per foot of
roadway
4 Capacity & Efficiency of Lift Stations 8 Good capacity/efficiency
5 Cost of current or pending capacity s City has made 1.3 mi of
improvements improvements since 04
Average Score 7 .4 "C" Grade
Criteria 2 : The structural condition of infrastructure as it relates to operation &
maintenance
No. Subcriteria
1 Overall structural condition of sewer
facilities
2 Quantity of maintenance/structural
problems
3 Severity of maintenance/structural
problems
4 Safety concerns of
structural/maintenance problems
5 Cost of structural/maintenance problems
Score
7
6
6
6
s
Comments
Some maintenance/structura l
deficiencies
Moderate # of
maintenance/structural need
locations
No gasketed joints/root
intrusion & crack ing
Potential for sewer
backups/spills (5 spills in 2009)
Costs are moderate over the
near term
Average Score 6.0 "D" Grade
Criteria 3 : The environmental sustainability & safety of infrastructure as it relates to
ensuring sanitary conditions and an aesthetic City landscape
No . Subcriteria Score Comments
1 Overall aesthetic/env ironmental 8 Overall good
utilization/enhancement utilization/enhancement
2 Safety design/location of sewe r 6 Overall Decent
facilities/manholes
3 Slope of sewer lines for proper 9 Good slope/flow velocity
scour/cleaning velocity
4 Odor Concerns/Problems 8 Master Plan does not
specifically mention "od or"
5 Cost of cleaning/maintenance 6 City routinely cleans and
inspects
Final Grade: "D"
ATTACHMENTS 3-117
Evaluation of Abalone Cove Sewer System
Criteria 1 : The capacity of infrastructure as it relates to transmission of wastewater
flows
No .
1
2
3
4
5
Subcriteria
Overall Coverage of Sewer Facilities
Size/sufficiency capacity of sewer lines
Redundancy of sewer lines
Capacity of Lift Stations
Cost of current or pending capacity
improvements
Score Comments
9 Good coverage throug hout City
8
7
8
5
Only a small % requ ire capacity
upgrades
Decent Redundancy
Good capac ity
Abalone Cove Requ ires consistent
maintenance
Average Score 7.4 "C" Grade
Criteria 2: The structural condition of infrastructure as it relates to operation &
maintenance
No. Subcriteria
1 Overall structural condition of sewer
facilities
2 Quantity of maintenance/structural
problems
3 Severity of maintenance/structural
problems
4 Safety concerns of
structural/maintenance problems
5 Cost of structural/maintenance problem s
Average Score
Score Comments
7 Some maintenance/structu ra l
deficiencies
6
8
6
5
6.4
Moderate # of
maintenance/structural nee d
locations
No gasketed jo in ts/root intru sion &
cracking
Potential for sewer backu ps/spil ls
Abalone Co ve Requires consistent
maintenance
"D" Grade
Criteria 3: The environmental sustainability & safety of infrastructure as it relates to
ensuring sanitary conditions and an aesthetic City landscape
No. Subcriteria Score Comments
1 Overall environmental 6 Overall decent
utilization/enhance ment uti lizatio n/enhancement
2 Safety design/location of sewer 7 Overall De cent
facil ities/manholes
3 Slope of sewer lines for proper 7 Moderate slope/flow ve locity
scour/cleaning v elocity
4 Odor Concerns/Problems 8 Master Plan does not mentio n
"odor"
5 Cost of cleaning/maintenance 5 City rou ti nely cleans and inspects
Final Grade: "D"
ATTACHMENTS 3-118
~ City of Rancho Palos Verdes
2013 Infrastructure Report Card
Evaluation of Storm Water System
ATTACHMENTS 3-119
Evaluation Strategy
Grading Shall be the Opinion of the Consultant Based on the Follow ing Approach:
~ Meet with City Staff (Kickoff Meeting)
~ Gathe r Required Information (i.e . Data, Reports, etc)
~ Visit Various Facility Sites
~ Review Provided Information
~ Evaluate Current Infrastructure Condition and Determine "Draft" Grade
~ Discuss Analysis of Data and Obtain Written and Verbal Elaborations on
Current Infrastructure Conditions from City Staff
(that Amend or Expand Written Report Data)
~ Re-Evaluate Current Infrastructure Conditions and Draft Grade
(B ased on Increased Understanding of Infrastructure Conditions from City Staff)
~ Prepare Draft Report Summarizing the Infrastructure Condit i ons and
Provide a Revised Grade (if Different from "Draft" Grade Above)
~ Meet with City to Rev i ew Draft Report & Obtain Comments from City Staff
~ Finalize Report Based on Comments from City and Provide Final Grade
ATTACHMENTS 3-120
Kickoff Meeting with City Staff
);;> June 12, 2013
);;> Attendees :
Siamak Motahari
Bindu Vaish
Nicole Jules
Ron Dragoo
AndyWinje
Nadia Carasco
);;> Ron Dragoo and Andy Winje Provided Information on The Storm Drain
System Following the Kickoff Meeting.
Data/Information Evaluated
);;> 2004 Master Plan of Drainage Update (Report)
~ 2004 Master Plan of Drainage Update (Atlas Maps)
~ 1999 Storm Drain Priority Lists Spreadsheets
);;> 2011 Drainage Master Plan Development Program
);;> Current GIS Data (Spreadsheet Data)
Site Visits
);;> June 19th
~ June 20th
Visited Various Storm Drain Sites in Ocean South and Ocean West Drainage
areas along Palos Verdes Dri ve South, Including Mccarrell Canyon Strom
Drain .
ATTACHMENTS 3-121
Photos from Site Visits (June 19, 2013 Site Visit:)
Drainage Facilities Near Pacifica Del Mar
Mccarrell Canyon Facilities
ATTACHMENTS 3-122
Photos from Site Visits (Cont. -June 19, 2013 Site Visit :)
Mccarrell Canyon Facilities
Drainage Facilities in Abalone Cove
San Ramon Canyon Stormwater Flood Reduction Project
ATTACHMENTS 3-123
Photos from Site Visits (Cont. -June 19, 2013 Site Visit:}
San Ramon Canyon Stormwater Flood Reduction Project
.,..,x-"\A A <1t ,..,~,·
PID.IECT Silt IF TIE
SAi IAIOI CAIYDI STlllWATtl RHD IEDUCJIR PlllfCT
FUR 1-E
CITY IF IAICHD PAUIS IEllES
lllll
AmCIPATED mmLE :
CllSTIUCTIOI ClllEICEIEIT lPlll 1011
CllSTIUCJIOI COIPLETlll l Plll H14
111£ llSASTO PIEl'AREDIESS AID RIOD r1mmo1 IOU ACT Of Z90I
(PrQ1111l11 1 E) AllO TllE CITT OF RA ltCHO mos rEP.DES WATU OllUITr
AKO FLOOD PIUTECTID• PIOWll
a•111STHEI If twflHIA mn ••m•UT er wm• ma.ms ~
,_,, ,., \.., t.mCll'D
1a1 All Lt .U:UISllC .. . .
Review of Provided Data/Reports
)i;;>-2004 Master Plan of Drainage (Report)
Determined: Overall aspects of drainage system, land topography, drainage area s/basi ns,
hydrology, and planned CIP improvem ents
)ii;> 2004 Master Plan of Drainage (Atla s Maps)
Determined : 8 Discharge outlets to Ocean
)ii;> Current GIS Data (Spreadsheets)
Dete rm ined : 12 miles of SD lines
(3.4 mi of CMP; 7.2 m i of RCP/RCB ; 0.4 mi of Steel; 0.3 mi of SRP; 0.1 m i of ACP; 0.6 mi "other")
Preliminary Evaluation
Evaluation Criteria:
? Capacity of Infrastructure
As it relates to flood prevention
);;:> Structural Condition of Infrastructure
As it relates to operation and maintenance
~ Environmental Sustainability of Infrastructure
As it relates to preserving the natural land sca pe and wildlife when o pera t ing, ma inta ining, and
improvin g stormwater infrastructure
ATTACHMENTS 3-124
Preliminary Evaluation (cont.)
"Draft" Grades
Capacity of Infrastructure: B (84%)
Structural Condition of Infrastructure: C (74%)
Environmental Sustainability of Infrastructure: B (84%)
Overall Grade: B (81%)
Progress Meeting
July 30, 2013 and August 8, 2013
Progress Meeting were held on above dates.
Data Evaluation and "Draft" Grades were discussed with City staff. Current
condition of storm water system was discussed. Data presented in 2004 Drainage
Update was a little behind/outdated. Some portions of the storm water system
were still lacking and some CIP projects have not yet been implemented . Funding
concerns were also discussed, along with the current user fee status.
Re-Evaluation of Storm Water System, Report Preparation, and Final
Grade Determination
Final Grade of Storm Water System based on review of existing data, site visits,
and discussions with City staff, is shown on spreadsheet breakdown on the
following page:
ATTACHMENTS 3-125
Evaluation of Storm Drain System
Criteria 1: The capacity of infrastructure as it relates to flood prevention
No. Subcriteria Score Comments
1 Overall Coverage of Drainage Facilities 8 Good coverage throughout City
2 Size/sufficiency of storm drain lines
3 Redundancy of storm drain system
4 Culvert coverage on major streets
Cost of current or pending capacity
5 improvements
9
8
8
Only a small % requ ire capacity
upgrades
Multiple medium drains versus
fewer large ones
Good coverage on PVDS
City has made 1.3 mi of
7 improvements since 04
Average Score 8 "B" Grade
Criteria 2: The structural condition of infrastructure as it relates to operation &
maintenance
No. Subcriteria
Overall st ructura l condition of drainage
facilities
Quantity of maintenance/structural
2 problems
Severity of maintenance/structural
3 problems
Safety concerns of
4 structural/maintenance problems
5 Cost of structura l/main te nance problems
Score Comments
8
6
8
7
8
Overall decent co ndition of facil ities
Moderate among of structu ra l
needs
Mostly spot repairs needed ; no t full
replacement
Some torn /cut CMP along
roadways/bike paths
City rout in ely checks and repairs
damaged pipes
Average Score 7.4 "C" Grade
Criteria 3: The environmental sustainability of infrastructure as it relates to
preserving the natural landscape and wildlife when operating , ma intaining , and
improving stormwater infrastructure.
No. Subcriteria
Overall environmental
utilization/optimization
Lo cation of drainage facilities in relation
2 to landscapes
3
4
U se of natural features to extent practical
Drainage improvements protect existin g
landscapes
5 Cost of cleaning/maintenance
Final Grade: "C"
Score Comments
9
9
9
8
7
Overall great
utilization/enhancement
Drainage facilities blend in (not
eyesore)
Great use of na tura l
channels /canyons
Drains both prote ct and affect
landscapes
City routine ly cleans and inspects
ATTACHMENTS 3-126
City of Ranc ho Pal os Ve rdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Part I: Summary of Non -Preserve Trails
Existi ng Non-Preserve Trails Currently Maintained by the City
RANCHO PALOS VERDES TRAILS LENGTH (ft)
1 Crest Ranch Trail 500
2 Crooked Patch Tra il 2800
3 East Crest Road Trail 400
4 Forrestal Road ExtensionTrail 500
5 Gaucho Trail 20
6 Kajima Trail 200
7 ladera Linda Walkinq Trail 300
8 McBride Trail 5550
I
-~ MartinQale Trail 100
10 Portuquese Point Trail 600
11 Pl Vicente Stairway , 100
12 s & s Overtook & Trail 300
13 Seascaoe Trail 1200
14 Tramonte Trail 400
15 Vanderlip Trail 1500
16' Wallace Ranch Trail 100
Total length: 15,370 ft
2.91 miles
1993 Conceptual Trails Plan Summary:
To si mplify the reference and review process, the City of Ranch o Palos Verdes has
been divided Into five geographic areas, and the Conceptual Trails Plan has been
written in five co rres pondin g sections . However, t here are fiv e trall systems !made
up of a ser ies of trail seg ments I which are found in more 'han one geogra ph ic area of
t h e City. In o r der to more easily identi fy these trail systems w i thin each section of
the document. each ~arger t ra i l system Is denoted by a letter:
"A•: Pa los Verdes Loop Trail
"B": Top-of-the·Hi U Tr eil System
"C": Palos Verdes Drive Ttail Systern
"D ": Coast al Bluff Trai l System
"E": Coastal A ccess Tra ils
The Pa los Verdes Loo p Trail. If fully i mplemented , would create a continuous loop
around the Peninsula , passing through the Cities of Rancho Palos Verdes , Rolling Hills
Estates, and Pa los Ve r des Estates. Since this is a Peninsula-wide trail system, i t
should have a uniQue signage program , to dist inguish it from o ther City trails, such as
a unique color scheme. des ign , an d/or logo .
T<ai ls that a r e denoted with the l etters "F" through "L •are either sing le trail segments
t hat do n o t connect to any other t rails. o r they a r e part o f a trail system t h at i s only
found In t tlat partlc ul~u geographi<: area of the City.
Tra il s Data Shee ts Page 1 of 12
ATTACHMENTS 3-127
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Geograph i c
Section A
Palos V e rdes
Loop
Section 1 1 Christmas Tree
Cove Segment
2 Seascape
3 Sunset
4 Baby's Breath
4 City Hall
.. ! ~ __ 1 .... ..:--. ~;;~
7 Seahill
Section 2 -
Trai ls Data Sheets
B
Top-of-th e-
Hill
--
1 Indian
Peak
2
Crestridge
3
c D
Palos Costal B luff
Verdes
Drive
1 Christmas 1 Sunset
Tree Cove Trail
2 Golden 2
Cove Interpretive
Center Trail
3 Sea
Lavender 3 Point
Vicente
4 Point
Vicente 4 Long Point
5 Marin eland 5 Vanderlip
Park
6 Condo
--
Tr ail S stem
E F G H I J K L
C oastal
A c cess
1 Terrace 1 Lunada 1 Point 1 Hawthorne 1 Vista
Canyon Vicente Trail
2 Flower School 2 Vallon
Field 2 Hesse 2 Cafe
Park 2 Celestial 3 Su nset
Ridge
3 Indian 3West
Valley Crest
4Agu a 4
Amarga Clovercliff
Canyon Park
5 Indian
Rock
-Pe nins ula Valmonte Malaga G ran dvie Wallace
Center T rail Canyo n w Pa rk Ranch
Trails System Trail T rails Trail
1 Old 1 Sys tem 1
Eucalyptus Valmonte 1 Finecrest Grandview
Canyon Segment Perimeter
2 Radio
Tower 2 2 Cityview 2 Wildbriar
Birchfield segment Trail
3 Crest
Gatehouse 3
Campesina
4 The segment
Lunchbreak
4 Mossbank
5 Trail
Browndeer
f/I ti
6
Robinview
Page 2 of 12
ATTACHMENTS 3-128
City of Rancho Palos Verd es
Infrastr uct ure Report Card
Geographic
Section A
Palos Verdes
L oop
Section 3 8 Three Sisters
9 Vanderlip
10 Crenshaw
11 Badlands
12 Intrepid
13 Packsaddle
14 St alwart
15 Pirate
16 Ganado
Section 4 17 Radar Dome
18 East Crest
19 Upper
Miraleste Canyon
20 Crownview
Trai ls Data Sheets
B
Top-of-the-
Hill
1 Crooked
Patch
2 McBride
3 Del Cerro
4 Dirt
Crenshaw
5 Fi re
Station
c D
Palos Costal Bluff
Ve rdes
Drive
7 Ta rragon 6
Connecting
8Wayfarers Link
9 Fra ncesca 7
Portuguese
10 Gab ion Point Access
Trail
11 C lub
8 Wayfarers
Trail
9
Portuguese
Cove
10
Connecting
Link
12 11 . Halfway
Conq ueror point
13 Aqua 12 Bl uff Top
Vista
13 Cliff Top
14 Seacliff
14 Park
15 Rotun da
15 South
16 S hore line Shores
17 Lower
Pa los
Verdes Drive
East
Trail Sys tem
E F G H I J K L
Coastal
A cces s
3 C rest Collector/ Top-Of-T he-Collecto r/ Portugu Forrest
Abalone Road Trail Radial Hill T rail Rad ial ese al
Cove System T rails System-Trails Bend Quarry
Access 1 Crest 1 Kajima Loop Trail 1 residenti System
Trai l Ranch Trail Trail Connect ors Barkentine al 1 Fossil
1 Mccarrel Trail Comm u Trail
4 Sacred 2 Canyon nity Trail
Cove Crenshaw 2Annie's Sys t em 2
Access Blvd Trail 2 Jack's Hat Flower 1 Crystal
Trail Stand Charlotte' Trail
3 3 s Hill
5 Pollywog Rattlesnake 3 Zote's 3
l nspiratio Bog Trail Cutacross 2 Pony Quarry
n Point 4 Eagle's Trai l Bowl
Trai l Nest 4 Peacock
3 Bean 4 F lying
5 Lemo nade 5 Field Mane
Berry Bu sh Portugues Trail
e Canyon
6 Ishibashi
6 Klondike
7 Paintbrush
7 Farmers
6 Del Swit chbac Collector/ Miraleste
Mar k Slopes Radial Trail
Tra il T rails System
7 Signal 1 Heroic 1 Forrestal 1 Colinita
Test Trail
2 Seaclaire 2 Lorraine
2
3. Marymoun 3 Nancy
Switchback t Trail
4 San Pedro
4 3
Friendship Wande rer
Park
4 Camelia
5Water
Tank
Page 3 of 12
ATTACHMENTS 3-129
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
Geographic
Section A
Palos Verdes
Loop
Section 5 21 High School
22 Library
23 Clevis
24 English
25 Goldenspur
26 Dodson
Canyon
27 Sol Vista
28 -·-
29 Deadman 's
Curve
Totals 29
8 c D
Top-of-the-Palos Costal Bluff
Hill Verdes
Drive
--18 Upper -
Palos
Verdes Drive
East
7 18 15
Trail Svstem
E F G
Coastal
Access
-Georgette-Eastfield
George F Gate Trail
Canyon System
Trail
System 1 Paper
1 The Gap
2 Old
1'8ffft'<I Wiley
3 Georgette 3Hunter
canyon Trail
4 Cayuse
Canyon
5 Cayuse
Neighborho
od Access
6 Redhead
7 Headland
Neighborho
od Access
8
Sunnyside
Ridge
9 Bronco
Roadside
Loop
10
Marti nga le -7 25 22
Total No. of Trails (as per 1993 Conceptual Trails Plan)= 169 trails (length not available)
------Currently Maintained by the City -In CIP Plan
Trails Data Sheets Page 4of12
H I J K L
Dodson Colt Collecto
Canyon Canyon r/Radial
Trail Trail Trails
System System 1
1 Upper 1 Colt Stonegat
Dodson Trail e
canyon Cutacros
2 Saddle s
2 Lower
Dodson 3 Louise 2 The
canyon Gauch o
C utacros
s
3 Sparta
Neighbor
hood
Access
Link
21 14 7 4
ATTACHMENTS 3-130
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastru ctu re Repo rt Card
Part II: Summary of Preserve Trails
From Council Adopted PUMP Document dated April 2nd, 2013
Name of Reserve No. of Existing/Non Length in Miles Use
Trails Existing
1 • Vista del Norte 2 Existing 0 .5 6 Pedestrian
Reserve
2• Agua Amarga 1 Existing 0.60 Pedestrian/Bicycle
Reserve
3· Alta Vicente Reserve 5 Existing 1.67 4 Multipurpose (Pedestrian,
Equestrian and Bicycle )
1 Pedestrian/ Equestrian
Only
4· Vicente Bluffs 5 Existing 2.2 Pedestrian
Reserve
5• Abalone Cove 15 Only0.10 3.49 9 Pedestrian Only
Reserve Mile Non-4 Pedestrian/Bicycles
Existino 2 Multipurpose
6• Ocean Trails 12 Existing 3.43 . 6 Pedestrian Only
Reserve 6 Pedestrian & Bicycle
7• San Ramon Reserve 5 3 Existing , 2 0.82 All existing & future are
TBD Pedestrian & B icycle
8• Forrestal Reserve 21 Only 0.12 3.93 10 Multipurpose
Mile Non-3 Pedestrian & Bicycle
Existing 6 pedestrian o nl y, and
2 Pedestrian & equestrian
9• Portuguese Bend 23 Ex isting 9 .87 12 Pedestrian &
Reserve Equestrian , 1 1
Mu ltipurpose
1 O· Filiorum Reserve 8 Existing 3 .76 5 Multipurpose, 3
Pedestrian/Equestrian
11 • Three Sisters 4 Existing 1.76 all Multipurpose
Reserve
Total 11 Reserves 101 Trails 28.66 miles
Detailed List
Preserve Map
At this time, the Preserve is approxi mately 1,367 acres in area , consisting of several
parcels owned (or to be owned) by the City and one parcel owned by the PVPLC.
For management purposes , the Preserve is broken down into the following 11 sub -
areas referred to as "Reserves":
1• Vista del Norte Reserve( 0.56 Miles, 2 trails, Pedestrian}
o The 16 . 7 ac re Crestridge property
2• Agua Amarga Reserve (0.60 Miles, 1 trail, Pedestrian/Bicycle)
o The 20 acre Lunada Canyon property owned by the PVPLC
o The 38 .9 acre Agua Amarga Canyon property
T ra ils Data Sheets Page 5of12
ATTACHMENTS 3-131
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
3• Alta Vicente Reserve (1.67 Miles, 5 trails, All Pedestrian, Equestrian and
Bicycle, except one trail: Prickly Pear Trail No Bicycle)
o A 51.3 acre portion of the 73 .3 acre Upper Point Vicente property
4• Vicente Bluffs Reserve (2.20 Miles, 5 trails, Pedestrian)
o A 52 .6 acre portion of the 71.5 acre Ocean Front Estates property
o A 4.5 acre portion of the 27.4 acre Lower Point Vicente property
o A 7 .5 acre portion of the 10 .5 acre Pelican Cove property
5• Abalone Cove Reserve (3.49 Miles, 15 Trails)
9 Pedestrian Only
4 Pedestrian & Bicycles (Via De Camp, Olmstead, Lower Section of Beach
Trail, and Portuguese point Loop
2 Multipurpose: Chapel View & Upper Section of Beach School Trails
o A 63.2 acre port ion of the 80 .0 acre Abalone Cove property
o The 39.9 acre portion of the 45 .1 coastal property formally owned by the RDA
6• Ocean Trails Reserve (3.43 Miles, 12 Trails)
6 Pedestrian Only
6 Pedestrian & Bicycle
o A 66.3 acre portion of the 78 .8 acre Trump National property (eventually to be
owned by the City)
o A 47.4 acre portion of the 52 .8 acre Shoreline Park property
7• San Ramon Reserve (5 trails, 3 existing, 2 TBD, existing 0.82 Miles. All
existing & future are Pedestrian & Bicycle)
o The 94.5 acre Switchback property
8• Forrestal Reserve (21 trails, 3.93 miles, 10 Multipurpose, 3 Pedestrian &
Bicycle, 6 pedestrian only, and 2 Pedestrian & equestrian)
o The 154.9 acre Forrestal property
9• Portuguese Bend Reserve (23 trails, 9.87 miles, 12 Pedestrian & Equestrian,
11 Multipurpose)
o A 398.7 acre portion of the 423 .9 acre Portuguese Bend property
o The 17.4 acre Del Cerro buffer property
10• Filiorum Reserve (8 trails, 3.76 miles, 5 Multipurpose, 3 Pedestrian,
Equestrian)
o The 190 acre Filiorum property
11• Three Sisters Reserve (4 trails, 1.76 Miles, all Multipurpose)
o The 98.5 acre Barkentine property
Tra ils Data Sheets Page 6 of 12
ATTACHMENTS 3-132
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
In frastructu re Report Card
Trails Details
1. VISTA DEL NORTE RESERVE EXISTING
Trail Name Pedestria n Equestrian
Indian Peak loop Yes No Trail
Vista del Norte Trail Yes No
Bicycle Miies Existing
No 0.38 Yes
No 0 .19 Yes
There are no public restroom facilities or drinking fountains a vailable at th is
Reserve.
2. AGUA AMARGA RESERVE EXISTING
Trail Name Pedestrian Eque•trlan Bl cycle Mi ies Existing
Lunada Canyon Yes No Yes 0.60 Yes Trail
Restroom facilities and drinking fountains are not available at this Rese rve.
3. AL TA VICENTE RESERVE EXISTING
Trail Name Pedestrian Equestrian Blcy ele Miies Exlatlng
Alta Vicente Trail Yes Yes Yes 1 .04 Yes
North Spur Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.1 2 Yes
South Spur Trail Yes Yes Yes 0 .05 Yes
Nike Trail Yes Yes Yes 0 .10 Yes
Prickly Pear Trail Yes Yes No 0 .36 Yes
A public restroom facility (portable bathroom) is available at the Civic Center
C a mpus, west of the tennis courts . During regular business hours, a public
restroom facility is also available at City Hall. A drinking fountain is avail a ble a t
the Civic Center campus next to the south lawn .
4. VICENTE BLUFFS RESERVE EXISTING
Trail Name Pedeatrlan Eque8trllln Blc yde Miies Existing
Golden Cove Trail
(C.l fomla C...Sl>I Trail Yes No No 0.95 Yes
Seascape Trail Yes No No 0.58 Yes
(C.domla Couta lrall)
Terrace Tra il Yes No No 0.23 Yes
Interpretative T rail Yes No No 0.31 Ye s
(C.lloml• Coastll lrail)
Tom evor Trail Y e s No No 0.1 4 Ye s
Trails Data S heets Page 7of 12
ATTACHMENTS 3-133
C ity of Rancho Palo s Verde s
Infrastructure Report Card
Restroom facilities are available at Lower Point Vicente at the Interpretative
Center and at the Pelican Cove parking lot. Additionally, a portable bathroom is
available at the north end of the Golden Cove Trail adjacent to the public parking
lot at Ocean Front Estates. Drinking fountains are available at the Point Vicente
Interpretative Center and at Pelican Cove adjacent to the restroom facilities .
5. ABALONE COVE RESERVE EXISTING (Only 0.10 Mile Non-Existing)
Trail Name Pedestrian Equestrian Bl cycle Mllea Existing
V ia de Campo Yes No Yes 0.33 Yes
(C.l foml1 Ccontal Traill
Chapel View Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.17 Yes
Abalone Cove Trail Yes No
(Catlfomil Coe stal T,.itl No 0 .20 Yes
Beach School T rail Yes Yes Yes 0 .13 Yes (UppcrS<don)
ICatlfomla Coastll Tr1111l
Beach School Trail Yes No
ILower SttlJall
Yes 0.27 Yes
Sea Dahlia Trail Yes No No 0 .23 Yes
(Calfomll Coastal Trel)
Olmstead Trail Yes No
(Coillofnla COOi.ti Tr.ii)
Yes 0.44 Yes
Portuguese Point
Yes No Yes 0 .28 Yes Loop Trail
tCa'rfomlo Conl.ol Train
Smugglers Trail
(C8tfornUI Coa slal Troll)
Yes No No 0 .10 No
Cave Trai l Yes No No 0 .07 Yes
Sacred Cove View
Trail Yes No No 0.47 Yes
IC.1fomla ColstJI Ttall
Cliffside Trail Yes No No 0 .10 Yes
Inspiration Point
Yes No No 0 .18 Yes Trail
(Cllllomla Could Trail
Bow and Arrow
Trail Yes No No 0 .55 Yes
ICallomlo Coastd Troill
Archery Coastal Yes No No 0 .06 Yes Trail
Restroom facilities are available at the Abalone Cove Shoreline Park at the
parking lot grounds. Portable restrooms are located at Abalone Cove beach
adjacent to the tide pools, along Palos Verdes Drive South adjacent to the
Sacred Cove Trailhead, and at the archery club. Drinking fountains are available
at the Abalone Cove Shoreline Park and off the Beach School Trail adjacent to
the nursery school building.
Trails Data Sheets Page 8of12
ATTACHMENTS 3-134
City of Rancho Palos V erd es
Infrastruct ure Rep ort Card
6. OCEAN TRAI L S RESERVE EXISTING
Trait Name Pedestrian Equestrian
West Portal Trail Yes No 1Ca1fomia Coaslll Tlllill
West Bluff Trail Yes No
(Clllomlt COHiii TllK)
Su nset Trail Yes No
Sunrise Trail
tca41ornl• CoH111 Tr .. ) Yes No
Catalina T rail Yes No twest segmenl)
IC81fomla ComM Tlllill
Catalina Trail Yes No (E••I sogrnent)
icatfomll CoHtl l Ttalll
Dudleya Trail Yes No
Coastal Switchback Yes No Trail
Sagebrush Walk
Yes No Trail
ICa!lomla CoHUI TrwVI
Southshore Coasta l Yes No Trail
Gnatcatcher T rail Yes No
Shoreline Park Trail Yes No
East Bounda ry Trail
(C.llotrJa C01$111 Trail) Ye s No
Access Trails to
Catalina and Yes No
Gnatc atcher Trail
Blcycla Miies Existing
No 0.12 Yes
No 0 .07 Yes
No 0 .1 5 Yes
No 0 .25 Yes
Yes 0.45 Yes
No 0 .57 Yes
No 0 .08 Yes
No 0 .1 9 Yes
Yes 0 .12 Yes
No 0 .07 Yes
Yes 0 .27 Yes
Yes 0 .57 Yes
Yes 0 .32 Yes
No 0 .20 Yes
A public restroom facil ity is ava ilable at the basement lev el of the Trump National
Club House and adjacent to the public parking lot at the en d of La Rotunda Drive. A
dri nking founta in is available at the basement level of the Trump National Club
House, at Founders Park , and next to the public restrooms at the end of La Rotunda .
7. SAN RAMON RESERVE 3 EXISTING and two trails (miles TBD) non-exisiting
Trail Name Pedestrian EquestriM Bicycle MllH Existing
San Ramon Trail Yes No Yes TBD No
Lower Pa los
Verdes Dri ve E ast Yes No Yes 0 .23 Yes
Tra il
Marymount T rail Yes No Yes 0 .23 Yes
Switchback Trail Yes No Ye s 0 .36 Yes
rwest ceaman1l
Switchback T rail Yes No !Easl seamenll
Yes TBD No
There is no public restroom facility at this Reserve. A drinking fountain is
available at the lower segment of the Marymount Trail adj acent to the bicycle
racks off Palos Verdes Drive South.
Trai ls Data Sh eets Page 9of 12
ATTACHMENTS 3-135
City of Ran cho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
8. FORRESTAL RESERVE EXISTING (Only 0.12 Mile Non-Existing)
Trail Name Pedestrian Equestrian Bicycle Miies
Forrestal Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.15 rwesl seomenll
Forrestal Trail Yes No Yes 0.25 reast ..... menll
Quarry Trail Yes No No 0.32
Docent Trail (off Docent No No 0.06 Fossil Trail) Only
Docent Walk Only Docent No No 0.07 (Off Quarry Trail) Only
Basalt Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.05
Crystal Trail Yes Yes No 0.1 2
Pirate Trail Yes No Yes 0.30
Coolheights Trail Yes No Yes 0.06
Cristo Que Vlento Yes No No 0 .22 Trail
Mariposa Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.48
Flying Mane Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.45
Packsaddle Trail Yes Yes No 0.07
Canyon Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.14
Red Tail Trail Yes No Yes 0.05
Dauntless Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.13
Conqueror Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.23
Cactus Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.11
Vista Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.19
Exultant Trail Yes No No 0.15
Purple Sage Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.12
I Intrepid Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.15
Existing
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Restroom facilities a re available at the Ladera Linda Community Center and a port-
a-potty is available at the soccer field s off Intrepid Driv e . A drinkin g fountain is
ava ilable at the Ladera Linda Community Center and off Forrestal Driv e beh ind the
entry gate across from the Quarry Bowl t rail junction (adjacent to the wall enclosi ng
the Verizon mecha ni ca l equ ipm en t).
Trai ls Dat a Sheets Page 10of 12
ATTACHMENTS 3-136
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructu re Report Card
9. PORTUGUESE BEND RESERVE EXISTING
Trail Name Pedestrian Equestrian Blcyc ..
Klondike Canyon Yes Yes Yes Trail
Barn Owl Trail Yes Yes Yes
Panorama Trail Yes Yes Yes
Sandbox Trail Yes Yes Yes
North Sandbox Yes Yes No Trail
Ishibashi Farm Trail Yes Yes Yes IWost...,,mentl
Ishibashi Farm Trail Yes Yes No
(East ""'""'"I)
Peppertree Trail Yes Yes Yes
Landslide Scarp Yes Yes No Trail
Garden Trail Yes Yes No
Toyon Trail Yes Yes Yes
Water Tank Trail Yes Yes No
Vanderlip Trail Yes Yes No
Kubota Trail Yes Yes No
Burma Road Trail Yes Yes Yes
Burma Road Yes Yes Yes Overlook Trail
Rim Trail Yes (uo..,r seomenll Yes No
Trail Name Peclestrtm Equestrian Bl cycle
Rim Trail Yes No No
(lower """mentl
Paintbrush Trail Yes Yes No
Grapevine Trail Yes Yes No
Fire Station Trail Yes Yes No
Ishibashi Trail Yes Yes Yes
Eagle's Nest Trail Yes Yes Yes
Ailor Trail Yes Yes No
Peacock Flats Trail Yes Yes No
Mlln Exletlng
0.26 Yes
0 .17 Yes
0 .34 Yes
0.1 8 Yes
0.13 Yes
0.27 Yes
0.20 Yes
0.57 Yes
0 .25 Yes
0.25 Yes
0.15 Yes
0.21 Yes
0.51 Yes
0.26 Yes
2 .17 Yes
0.1 Yes
0.77 Yes
Mllea Existing
0.23 Yes
0.34 Yes
0.36 Yes
0.20 Yes
0.88 Yes
0.50 Yes
0.30 Yes
0 .26 Yes
A portable restroom is available at the junction between the Fire Station and
Burma Road Trails and at the Gateway Parking Lot located off Pa los Verdes
Drive South. A drinking fountain is not available at this Reserve.
Tra il s Data Sheets Page 11 of 12
ATTACHMENTS 3-137
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card
10. F ILIORUM RESERVE EXISTING
Trall Name Pedestrian Equestrian
Jack's Hat Trail Yes Yes
Pony Trail Yes Yes
Zote's Cutacross Yes Yes
Ford Trail Yes Yes
Kelvin Canyon Trail Yes Yes
Rattlesnake Trait Yes Yes
Eucalyptus Trail Yes Yes
Gary's Gulch Trail Yes Yes
Bicycle Mllea Existing
Yes 0.76 Yes
Yes 0.61 Yes
Yes 0.88 Yes
No 0.33 Yes
Yes 0.35 Yes
Yes 0.32 Yes
No 0.1 7 Yes
No 0.33 Yes
Restroom facilities and drinking fountains are not available at this Reserve.
11. THREE SISTERS RESERVE EXISTING
Trail Name Pedestrian Equestrl11n Bic ycle length Existing
Mccarrell Canyon Yes Yes Yes 0 .41 Yes Trail
Three Sisters Trail Yes Yes Yes 0 .39 Yes
Barkentine Trail Yes Yes Yes 0 .66 Yes
Sunshine Trail Yes Yes Yes 0.31 Yes
Restroom facilities and drinking fountains are not available at this Reserve
Trails Dat a Sheets Pag e 12 of12
ATTACHMENTS 3-138
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Report Card 2013 Summary Cost Estimates
I Category
i
I
! Public Buildings
Park Sites
Trails
j storm Water System
I Citywide Sanitary Sewer System
1Abalone Cove District Sanitary Sewer System
Right-of-Way & Traffic Control Devices
Palos Verdes Drive South Landslide
Notes
1. Categories at Grade A level require only
maintenance and preventative maintenance
activities (not included in this table)
2 . Citywide sewer system costs include only
those identified in 2009 master plan as facilities
potentially requiring up-sizing due to possible
capacity problems
3 . These estimates are preliminary and do not
include ongoing maintenance work or unless
noted the costs to increase use or capacity of the
facility asses sed
Current Grade
D
B
A
c
D
D
A
D
Total
Cost to Improve I Cost to Improve
One Grade Up to Grade A
$3 ,246,738 $27,638,70 3
$3,469,367 $3,469,367
--
$3,150,000 $17,350,000
$1,918,000 $2,418,000
$900,000 $2,000,000
--
$1 ,316,400 $11,479,400
$14,000,505 $64,355,470
ATTACHMENTS 3-139
ATTACHMENTS 3-140
Rancho Palos Verdes lnfrastructure Report Card
HOME GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
PU BLIC WORKS
R.1-NCHO P l.I.OS VERDES INFRAS1RUC1URE REPORl CARD
RESIDENTS
Ukt {ii]
H ISTORY
Page 1of2
EXHIBIT2
Search
CONTACT
Public infrastructure involves planned mainleoance and repa irs. occasiona l alterauon or expansion, and In some slluahons rehabllilation 0< replacement of public Improvements 1n ord•r lo meet
the goals. needs, and expedauons or lhe commoMy When a community add resses aging and delenora11ng infrastructure in e prac11c:al and IJmely manner. tt can result In sign~icant cost
savings tor fulura ll!Sldenls and community members
WI!•! Is 10 hll[!ctruclU'* Rtport Can!?
An lnfrnlrudu<e repOI\ card 1s an assessment ol lhe aml!nl cond1Uon of lhe e1<1sting public improvements of a community It IS a sn1psh0t 1n a moment or umo tt does not evaluate community
needs and J)l1ortl1es nor Is tt an ln-deptn assessment II IS a dala-dnven, objactlve raview or our public improvements Ihm grades the e1<1sting slllle of lhe iofraslruclUre 1n a oty on an
eSlabllshed scate from Exceplionel ("A.) lo Failing ("F'} The grades are selected based on Cf!tenon developed by IM Amencan Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) guidelines lhal tieve been
con!.lstenUy used 1or al most two decades
Tt11s repo!\ catd 1s a aummary of the grading ascertained for all known RPV put>ltc 1mprovemeots It was prepared by SA Assooales. a consuttin~ engineering firm. localed ., Arcadia The
President of the flfll1 has been lnYOIYed Wlln the ASCE lnfrastrudure Report Cards developed fCN' Los Angeles Cou nty and Cald0<0ia. The rope<\ cold is t ailored on samllar report cards
prepared 1or lhe counti es cl Los Angeles, ~. and San Diego The backup doaJmentalion ol lho condition of each item is available (see link$ below SA Auoda\es intficates lhal RPV,.
tho only local mun!opality thal lho rom has prepared a '9port card and pemaps one of lhe fimt oon·Ult>an Cal1omla dtte• to co so
The public improvements graded 1ndude Cl.I" pllblic bu1ld1ngs and pall< sites, lra~s. Slorm waler and sanitary sawer sySlems (including 1116 Abalone Cova Assessment 01stricl). ~ght-or-way and
l raffic control devices. and the Palos Verdes Ollve SOU!h land slide
FEBRUARY 10, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
On February 10, 201 ~. lhe City Council rece ived and doscussed the RPV lnfrastrudu<e Reporl Card
C lick here 10 Vi•W the 211012014 stan Repon
C lick here lo "ew the 2110/20 1 ~ Pcwe< Pein! Pfesenta~cn
Chck here lo view the pnntable pd! vorston of lhe RPV lnfrastruclure Report Cord Assessed CalegO<los (mcludtng evaluauon. atllliySts and support documentaoon -c:liel< on a
C<Jfogory ro \IJCW Assesse<l /nlrasl!uaure Documrmts)
Pi.ase c/lclc on a categoty below to view Assess ltd lnfrutrvcture Oocumt nr.
~<1n 11 .iry ~""'t'r
".>V\ll'm
i\bJlonr l ove• Cll \t n c r
"'i~t"r "iY't~rn
• C lick here lo view Sa mples of Infrastructure Report Cards Of Other Agoncies
H1,eht vt 'hft't 111 110
1rtt tt11 -. 011t 1ol (h·vh ~>
Lla10• V•••d t '-l)r ~'.a
"l-11,1tt1 4 ._uuhli 1..h
.$.A
http://v-1ww.palosverdes.com/rpv /publicworks/RPV-1 nfrastru cture-Report-C ard/ 4/18/2014 ATTACHMENTS 3-141
1 ne u ty 01 .Kancno .Palos veraes l'Ubl1c Works D epa rtm ent
HOME GOVERNMENT BUSINESS RESIDENTS
PUBLIC WORKS
OVERVIEW CURRENT FROJECH IN RAN CHO PALO~ VERDES
The Public Work s Dtp1nment Is res ponsible for• wid e • The Palos Ve rdes Orrve East Roadway
variet y o r 1c liv lties, including t he f ollowing:
Maintenance of publot faolilles including park grounds and Rehab ilitation Project FY11 -12
bu1lo1n9s trails, open space, traffic :s<gnats, dra.nage systems • Residen~al Streets Improvement Pro1ect FY11 -12
road s. median~ shouloers and landscaping W1lhin the pLJb l1c right· Area s 3 and 5
ol ·W111· -San Ramon Canyon P roject
Publ<e Worl<s •dm1ni.ira11on including grant adm 1ni>1ral1on • Capital Improvem e nt Plan
unoerground1ng d1S1ncts, lransportatoon coord1nabon , and refuso • C e ll Site Activity Report
O spo .. l and recycl ing program s, RE0"1EST FO R PRE ·OUALIFI CATIONS
• None al this time
City eng 1nc crtnG includ ing pro1ect design kattic saret y, REQUEST FOR QUALI FI CATI ONS
c.on 5truct1on ma.,agemenL and stormwaw q ua••t)' management • None at lh1s ti me
-Pubhc Works Brochure NOTICE INViTIN G SEALE D BIDS
Read more of the speci fic responsrb1/il1es of the · R y a n Park Entrance Realignment a nd Parking Lo i
Public Works Department Expans ion
DEPARTM ENT HOURS£ CONTACT INFORMATI ON
Public Work s
Phone t310) 544·5252
Fa• 13 10) 5-44 ·5292 1,_ti
E ·ma~ pubhcwor ks@rpv com
HOUl"'I :
Monelay 10 Thur>day -7 30a"' lo 5 30pm
Fri day · 7.30am 10 4 30p<n
OVERSIZ.EO I NE IGHBORHOOD VEHICL E
PARKING PROGRAMS
• R es ident Permit Application
• Guest Permit A p plication
• Permit Parking P etit ion
PROGRAMS
ADA -(Am erfc1ns with Dl11 bllltln Act)
·R P V Accessi bility Self Evaluation & Trans1t1on Pian
6-4 -2013
Ho mt Improvem ent Program Sa1uroay & Sunday -Closed
ENC ROACHMENT PERMITS
To well< w.thin lhe Public R19ht of Way . ""''ch can ind ude ; Home Im pro v ement Progra m
s.aewalks , par1<W"y$, drtveway t'lprons and gulters. you w ill need n fraatructure Report Card
an Encroactlment perml1 For mo re ln1ormat1on cJ1dl on lhe • Program l nfo rmatJon .... -s----
cMckhst lino belOW and call C~y staff a1 (310 ) 544 -5252 \!: M1lnttna nce Progr•m.
·Encroachment P ermit Application • Program I nforma tion
·Encroachment P ermit C hec klis t Sewer
·Standard Plans · Program Info rmation
·Encroachment Permit Fees • Sewer Syste m M an agement Plan
·Authori zed List of C ommercia l Ha ulers -2014 Sl dewol k Repa irs
ENFOR CEABLE OBLIGATION PAYM ENT SCHEDULE • Program Information
·Enforceab le Obligati o n Payment Schedule of the Storm wator Pollution tNPD ESJ Prevtnllo n
Redeve lopment Agency of the Crty of R ancho Palos • M S4 Powe r Point Presentabon
V e rdes ·Program Informa tion
• W a te r Conserva tion & Pollutlon Prev ention
• RPVs C lean Bay Restaurant Program
• Vid eo ·l eam more aDOut Stormwate1
·S andbags
Stre et Ligh ts
• Program Informa tio n
• Report Street Light Outa ge to SCE
• Video -SCE Power Linc Safety (English)
• Video ·SCE Powe r Li ne Safety (Spanish)
Slrto t Ovtr1 ay I Slurry
• Program In forma ti o n
·Arteria l S treet Resurfacing Project
Str~•t Swupl ng
• S tree l S w eeping Schedule & Map
Tras h Colloctlon Schedule
·Trash Collection Schedule /Map
Tree Removal/ Planting
· Program Information
Undergrou nd Utilities
·Guid elines
Vohitlt P•rl<lng Programs
·Vehicle Parking Program Information
W1ttr QuaUty i nd Flood Pro lecl ion Progra m
· Program Information
'>01 1 1 (1"""1' 0 1 fl P\ll l014t' t{/.'HfH ORN( l!h .Vt> AAflrC HO PAl OS vtqou C/t to.ilS J ltO J71 DJ60 \~I COl&f\fC: e,
ht t p ://pa lo svc rdes . c om/rpv /publi c work s /
Page 1 of I
lik• [2j
HISTORY CONTACT
WASTE RtJ,lOVAL / RE CYCLING
· Sohd Waste Subcommittee Meeting
Agendas
·Was te Removal
·Recycling Programs
·HHW/E-Waste
·Conservation Programs
TRAFFIC
·11affic Calming Guidelines
·1 raffic Al ert System
·Traffic Commi ssion Q uick Links
CONTACl/C OMMENT
Search
Report a Non-Emergency Service R equest
Submit a Commenl
Join the Listserv
Cl.ck on tne icon
lo download Adobe Reader
USI NG OUR SITE
4118 /20 14 ATTACHMENTS 3-142
3HnlJnHlS\IH:INI
r'I
~
Q
N
ATTACHMENTS 3-143
3
QUEST I 0 115 /A N 5 \'IE RS LOSA NG ELESCOUllTY INFRASTRUCTIJRE _~
Wh at is Infrastructure?
infrastructure [in·fruh·struhk-cher] -noun: the fundamental facilities
and systems serving a country, city, or area, as transportation and
communication systems, power plants, and schools.
Infrastructure refers to the fundamental systems that support our
community cfv!llzation. It encompasses all the basic, underlying facilities
we rely on to conduct our daily business, raise our families and pursue our
dreams. It includes the roadway network that allows you to drive to work
and the grocery store, the underground pipes that bring fresh water to
your kitchen and take waste water away from your bathroom. It includes
the hydroelectric dam that generates electricity, reservoirs and pumps that
provide drinkab le water, and sewage treatment plants that treat wastewater.
Our economy depends on infrastructure to provide power for factories
to transport goods and services, and via telecomm cables to transmit
information to banks and customers. Our health depends on having clean,
potable water to drink and underground p ipes to take human and industrial
waste away to be treated and safely disposed. Lastly, our safety depends on
infrastructure to withstand storms and natural events, keeping our homes
safe from flooding and other damage.
Why Should You Be In t erested in Infrastructure?
All of these infrastructure systems need to be built, maintained and upgraded
on a continuous basis for our community to thrive. Infrastructure system
failures can cau s e d isr uptions to our daily lives, trigger slow-downs in
economic activity, or even be the cause of injury and death. For example, a
bridge failure on a major h ighway could cause widespread traffic jams, disrupt
access to hospitals, and result in fatal injury during its collapse.
We need to take care of our cities, by maintaining our roads, upgrading
storm water and sewer systems to meet growing populations, and having
regularly evaluated and maintained systems. These investments result in
long term savings and positive growth, benefiting our present commun ity for
generations to come.
QUESTI ONS/ANSWE RS
Wh at is This Repo rt Card?
This report card is an assessment of the existing condition of infrastructure
in Los Angeles County.
Infrastructure is designed and maintained by engin eers. Our commun ity relies
on these systems to function and to make our daily lives better.
This report card gauges Los Angeles' infrastructure status a s of 2012 . It
compiles the work of over 50 Individuals representing public and private
sectors who have spent countless hours carefully reviewing and assessing
the condition of ten different infrastructure categories. Th is assessment
included review of reports on existing physical conditions, as well as review
of public agency plans and attendance to meetings and workgroups .
The resu lt of this team effort is presented in this document for each
infrastructure category.
ASCE's Mission : Provide essential value to our members and partners,
advance civil engineering, and serve the public good.
In addition to a written evaluation, a letter grade has been determined for
each category. Grades for these ten categories range from B+ to 0-with a
cumulative average grade of C. A complete discussion of each infrastructure
category and its grade is found in the body of this report.
Why Didn't Los Ange les Earn Any fls?
Whtie we can all agree that these systems are critical to our city, we do not
agree on the cost to invest in them. These systems serve millions of people.
They are large and they are complex. Maintaining our roadways in peak
condition, upgrading our bridges, and replacing an aging sewer system will
cost a lot of money. Infrastructure costs are usually paid for by tax revenues
and fees. These revenue sources do not keep pace with the upgrading and
maintenance expenses these systems require. To compound matters, the
recession of 2008-2009 drained many public coffers and caused s ubstantial
reductions in tax revenues. In short, our infrastructure was already in great
need of attention and the recent economic crisis escalated the problem. Due
A trlf"Y! AIV ~~IC ~N SOC c TY ~r,r 0'"11 ['IGINClP3 4
ATTACHMENTS 3-144
QU ESTIONS /ANSWERS -_LOSAtlGELESCOUNTYl~~UWRE R ~ffilR IDP
5
to these factors, it is impossible for infrastructure to be at high level. As a
result, these systems receive an average grade of C showing an increase in
investment is required.
How Much Does it Cost?
Estimates of annual investments needed to maintain and appropriately
expand our infrastructure are in the tens of billions of dollars. There
are many sources of investments. User fees, issuance of public bond
measures, property and development taxes are not common. These
decisions must be made by politicians and policy makers with public
support. Infrastructure issues impacts all of us, regardless of political
affiliation, level of education or socio-economic status. This Report
Card can be utilized by politicians and policy makers to make informed
choices and used by the public to advocate for investment in the critical
infrastructure that keeps our county thriving.
How Ca n You Help?
Call your loca l city council or county commissioners. Ask for continuous
and timely maintenance of these systems. Join a local planning
commissions or boards. Inform your friends, family and neighbors. Help
them understand the far-reach ing implications of Infrastructure. As you
learn more about these facilities, think long-term. These systems are large
in scale and require long-term solutions.
There are also things you can do in your daily life . Reduce your water usage
to ease demands on our water systems. Take mass transit to reduce your
impact on transportation systems. Make an effort to recycle and reduce the
demands on our solid waste systems.
REPORT CARD SUMMAR Y
Bridges: C
There are 3,552 bridges in Los Angeles County. Each bridge is inspected
every few years. In accordance with National Bridge Inspection Standards,
each bridge received an evaluation and a letter grade; 1,581 received
a grade of C or lower, indicating over 44% of study area bridges are
structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. Bringing all Los Angeles
County bridges out of these substandard conditions, by upgrades or
replacements, is estimated to cost $11.9 billion. Recommendations include
support of increased funding for the Federal Highway Bridge Program and
continued funding for the Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program .
Dams: B-
Los Angeles County has 95 dams, which were evaluated with respect to
facility condition, capacity to meet demands and facility age versus useful
life . All dams were given a letter grade with respect to these factors and
an overall grade of B-was assigned. Many of these dams are over 50 years
old and nearing the end of their useful lives, and many require substantial
maintenance, rehabilitation or major upgrades in the coming years. Costs
for this work are estimated to exceed $200 million . Recommendations
include supporting additional State and Federal funding for required seismic
rehabilitation and upgrades to major dams in Los Angeles County to restore
or increase their flood control and water conservation capabilities and
funding to keep the County's dams in good operating condition .
Drinking Water: C
Many separate water systems, from relatively small to very large, serve the
10 million residents within Los Angeles County. These various systems were
evaluated and then graded with respect to three major factors : condition
(C-), capacity (B) and operations (B-). While capacity and operations both
received B grades, the condition of the systems rece ived a C-, primarily due
to the age of many of these systems and their need for replacement in the
near future . Recommendations include replacement or rehabilitation
A r.,-r M'~~IVltl SOCl n ~r,r 0"''l [•ir,1r,11cF.> 6
ATTACHMENTS 3-145
7
REPORT CARD SUMMARY
of deteriorated systems, identification and implementation of measures
to improve water system reliability, implementation of additional water
conservation measures, increased use of recycled water, and increases in
public and private investment in water supply and distribution system s.
Flood Control: B+
The Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and the cities
within Los Angeles County have constructed a comprehensive and effective
flood control system to protect citizens and property from flood damage.
Since age Is the primary factor determining condition and effectiveness
of flood control systems, the age of the systems provided the baseline
for grading, with newer systems getting a higher grade. The overall grade
was determined to be a B+. It was estimated that an annual investment of
$48 million is needed to keep Los Angeles County's flood control systems
operating In good condition . Recommendations i ncluded support for funding
to keep these systems in good condition and to expand the view of flood
control to include improving water quality and reducing pollution .
Ports: B
The Port of Long Beach and Port of Los Angeles represent the fifth busiest
shipping terminal complex in the world. An infrastructure assessment of the
entire Harbor District consisted of evaluating eight different components of
the Ports' infrastructure, including wharves, railroads, roadways, utilities,
channels and berths, container terminals, other marine terminals, and
gantry cranes . The overall grade for the San Pedro Bay Ports based on an
equal input of each of the eight components is B. The Ports are looki ng to
continue major improvements w ith a projected total investment of $3.5
billion over the next five years .
Solid Waste: B+
In 2011, the County disposed of an average of 28,000 tons of solid waste per
day and in 2009, jurisdictions countywid e collectively achieved a recycling/
reu se d iversion rate of 55%. The economy, recycling and conversion
technologies have r es ulted in steady decl i nes in solid waste disposal since
LOS ANGELES COUNTY INFRASTRUCTURE I~ p I 0 lfil.!
REPORT CARO SUMMAR Y
2006. However, challenges do remain . Diminishing in-County landfill
capacities, increasing disposal demands over the long term due to economic
and population growth, and public opposition towards establishing
new facilities . The overall grade for Solid Waste Management is B+. It is
estimated that over $450 million per year for the next five years is needed
to operate and maintain the solid waste management infrastructure.
Streets & Highways: C-
The assessment of Los Angeles County streets and highways consisted of
evaluations of pavement condition and traffic congestion. Pavement cond ition
was evaluated on pavement segment ratings for 2.65 billion square feet of
street and highway pavement, and a final grade of C+ was derived. Traffic
congestion was scored according to freeway and arterial level-of-service, a
measure of actual traffic volume with respect to roadway capacity, and a final
grade of D was derived. The final grade is based on a 50%-50% split, resulting
in a grade of C-. Over $3 billion of investments are needed in the next five
years to address just pavement cond ition alone, and billions more to relieve
traffic congestion and address constantly increasi ng traffic demands.
Transit: C
Over 536 mil!ion fixed route transit trips are taken each year with 72% of
the t rips provided by Metro, 26% of the trips are provided by municipal
operators, and 2% of the trips are local provided by the local cities' fixe d
route services. While transit se rvices have made improvements of the past
few years, and both facilities and operations received high marks, funding
for continued service is facing the effects of the economic crisi s that will
likely result in service cuts, fare increases, and erosion of current levels
of service. Thus the transit final grade is a C. The Metro 2009 long Range
Plan estimates that over $18 billion is required to fund regional Metro and
Municipal Transit improvement priorities annually, and recommendations
include support for expanding transit funding at all levels of governance.
Ur ban Runoff: D
Most water pollution come s from the untreated water that flows off
rooftops, pavement, streets and parking lots directly into our waterways,
A r~ M'l ~ICMI SOC'. Tr
~or 0'.1l '.llG1N[[RS 8
ATTACHMENTS 3-146
-.
1-1 I r--. 1.
I
-~ ·-. "·-· .. . -. --·-·--i--·-..
I I_ . . ! ' ! i-'-
i
l . -
I -
.L
--
for Los Angeles Cou fy
lnfrastruct•
,,......-_..... -· -
A C i t i z ~rl"s (iuide
EXHIBIT4
ATTACHMENTS 3-147
4
Why Infrastructure Matters
Richard G. Little , AICP
The Kesten Institute fo r Infrastructure
University of Southern California
People living in the United States can count themselves blessed for
many reasons. Among them are clean water to drink , electricity
to power their homes and businesses, instant connectivity almost
anywhere on earth, and a highway network that allows them to drive
safely and at high speed throughout a vast country. This is mostly
taken for granted, which is not surprising. Unless they are intimately
familiar with these services, why would anyone stop to think about
why tap water is clean and safe to drink, why the electric current
drones on reliably and uninterrupted, or a long distance phone call
takes only as long to connect as the time required to enter the desired
number. Most people alive today are too young to remember when it
was not always so. Less than one hundred years ago, people routinely
became sick and often died from water borne diseases, still lit their
homes with candles and oil lamps, personally provided the power for
almost everything done about the home, and communicated only face-
to-face or via the telegraph or postal service.
A question often asked is why infrastructure matters. In our modem
society, this question has become as basic as why air, water, and
food matter. Simply stated, we cannot live the way we do without
infrastructure. More accurately, we cannot live without the services it
provides. In 2003, when the eminent National Academy of Engineering
rated the twenty greatest engineering achievements of the 20th century
that transformed our lives, five infrastructures -electrification, water
supply, the telephone, highways, and the internet -were among them.
If we try to imagine life without the safe tap water or reliable electricity,
communications, or personal mobility that modem infrastructure
provides, we conjure up a place and time very different from where we
are today -simpler, perhaps, but very different.
If we agree then that it is in our own best interests that these vital
services be sustained over the long term, we should also recognize
the need to maintain the systems that deliver them. Just as living
things go through a process of generation , growth, maturation,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Los Angeles Section
ATTACHMENTS 3-148
5
decline , and death , the life cycle of physical infrastructure follows
a similar path. Unlike natural systems, however, physical systems
cannot sustain themselves; they must be renewed from without.
This implies action s on our part in the form of maintenance, repair,
renewal, and replacement on a more or less continuous basis. These
sustaining actions require capital, materials, labor and other resource s.
Depriving a physical system of funding for maintenance and repair,
for example, will have a similar effect to depriving a natural system of
food or water -it will decline and ultimately, cease to function.
Despite our obvious dependence on infrastructure, we often fail
to make the mental and physical connections between the desired
services and the projects necessary to provide them. Because of
this, we are skeptical of calls for increased investment to maintain
existing systems and build new ones to replace the old. We balk at
providing the funding for this or that agency or wonder why rates for
what we consider a public service increase over time. We don't seem
to find it illogical to argue against the physical manifestation or cost
of infrastructure while sti11 demanding its services . We tend to think
that new systems are needed just to support new growth. However,
it is not a question of whether we wm grow or by how much . Even
if we don't grow at all, we will continue to demand a high quality of
services -services that will be provided by infrastructure of all types.
Infrastructure professionals around the country are engaged in efforts
to measure and assess the condition and capacity of these systems.
This process provides a snapshot in time of the state of the systems
on which we depend. Fortunately, the world is not crumbling around
us. Unfortunately, this does not necessarily mean that all is well.
Infrastructure by its nature is robust and resilient. Catastrophic
failures are rare and almost always preventable if detected in a timely
manner. However, complacency can lead to disaster. In the l 980's
there were a rash of collapses of major U .S. highway bridges that
resulted in many deaths and considerable economic disruption. In
most instances, the warning signs of failure were missed because of
cutbacks in funds for routine inspection, maintenance, and repair.
But these warning signs are subtle. The figure below shows that
infrastructure condition can degrade considerably before performance
is noticeably affected. This creates a "tipping point" situation where
the build-up to failure is lengthy, but once begun, it proceeds rapidly
American Society of Civil Engineers . Los Ange/es Section
ATTACHMENTS 3-149
6
and iITeversibly. In other words, once the bridge starts falling, it is too
late to consider repairs .
There are other reasons to be concerned with the physical state of our
infrastructure. First, failures rarely occur in a vacuum. A leaking
sewer or water main can produce consequences that extend well
b eyond the point of damage; a water main break in Laurel Canyon
Boulevard in July disrupted traffic between the San Fernando
Valley and Hollywood for several days. Many systems are also
interdependent. A failure in one may cause serious and unexpected
failures in another. For example, in May, 1998 a communication
satellite rotated out of its orbital position and over 80 per cent of
the digital pagers in the U .S. went off-line. Cable and broadcast
tran smissions were affected, as were credit card authorizations and
ATM transactions. This event could have had even more serious
human impacts as many hospitals and health care providers faced
a crisis in emergency communications when they could not page
doctors and other care givers .
--~ ---"tipping point"
Infras tructure Condition
Infrastructure Condition Noticeably Affects Performance
Only at the Extremes
In his recent book "Collapse," Jared Diamond writes perceptively and
eloquently about the failure of ancient societies. To a greater or lesser
degree, these societies all failed to establish a sustainable balance
between consumption and renewal of vital resources . In essence,
they "mined" water, food, and timber at rates that nature could not
replenish. As the resources necessary for survival were consumed,
the societies themselves lost the ability to function . The point being
that keeping the systems on which we depend so completely in a
good state of repair is not a luxury, but prudent self-interest. Without
American Society of Civil Engineers . Los Angeles Section
ATTACHMENTS 3-150
7
a continued and reliable flow of infrastructure services, the viability
of modern society as defined by our quality oflife and economic
well-being, is put at risk. How much we value these aspects of our
lives will, in large part, determine why and how much infrastrncture
matters to us.
Richard G. Little is a professional planner and director of the Keston
Ins titute for Infrastructure at the University of Southern Cal~fornia,
a center of infi·astructure policy research. He has over thirty years
experience in planning, management, and policy development relating
to public facilities including.fifteen years with local government.
American Society of Civil Engineers, Los Angeles Section
ATTACHMENTS 3-151
8
Who Pays for Infrastructure?
As stated in the ASCE National Report Card, "Our public work s
are public assets . We all have a stake in their upkeep and operation ,
and we all share in the e xpense of construction and maintenance.
Sometimes, those who actually use the infrastmcture most must pay
for it through tolls , utility bills, or special taxes on gas, airline tickets,
and other item s. But because infrastructure improvements affect us
all by supporting our economy and providing fundamental community
services, the public usually bears a portion of the cost through general
tax revenues."
All levels of government, from federal to state, county, regional ,
municipal and special districts share in the responsibility for
collecting and distributing funds for infrastructure improvements. At
the local level, funds are often raised through the issuance of bonds
or the collection of general, property or sales taxes or user fees. As
noted in the National ASCE Report, "This places responsibility for
infrastructure renewal and development squarely with the individual
voters , who must approve bond issues and elect political leaders who
will make our infrastructure needs a priority."
Preserving Our Infrastructure
Los Angeles County is comprised of 88 cities and communities, some
dating back over two centuries , while others have been in existence
for only a few decades . Yet the infrastructure everywhere, even in the
relatively newer areas, requires continuous attention, maintenance and
ongoing replacement and expansion. As previously noted, we take
many of these public works systems for granted, despite the fact that
we so heavily rely on them to maintain our economic prosperity and
quality of life.
This Los Angeles County Infrastructure Report Card and Citizens
Guide is intended to serve as a vehicle to engage our community
and civic leaders in a call to action for stronger investment in our
region's vital infrastructure. This has never been more important,
as we stand on the brink of tremendous projected growth over the
American Society of Civil Engineers , Los Angeles Section
ATTACHMENTS 3-152
9
next few decades . Please use this guide to get involved in protecting
our infrastructure investments and planning for the future . It's your
community and your future at stake.
Grading of Our Infrastructure
Over 80 individuals contributed to the working groups and assigned
letter grades to eleven categories of Los Angeles County public
infrastrncture . An Executive Review Committee reviewed the grades
and made adjustments up or down as they deemed appropriate for the
infrastructure category being considered.
The grading is on a scale of "A" to "F" with an average grade being
"C." The Report Card, reprinted on the following pages, shows how
public infrastructure in Los Angeles County measures up .
American Society of Civil Engineers , Los Angeles Section
ATTACHMENTS 3-153
10
Report Card Summary
Bridges-C
Over 40% of the County's bridges rate a C or lower
including many structurally deficient or functionally obsolete
bridges. The work needed to improve the condition of the
bridges includes upgrading of older safety rail , adding lanes
(widening), and major replacements.
Dams-B--
Many of the County's 96 dams are over 50 years old and their
auxiliary mechanical and electrical components are nearing
the end of their useful life. If the existing dams are not kept
in safe operating condition, their structural and functional
condition will deteriorate placing the public's flood protection
and water conservation benefits in jeopardy.
Drinking Water -C+
While, water quality and capacity generally rate well, facility
condition does not with a large percentage of the County's
water systems constructed prior to 1950 and nearing the end of
their useful lives. The replacement of these aging distribution
systems poses a major problem for water agencies.
Flood CoAtrol -~ .. ' .
Although the County's flood control system perfonned
well during historic rains earlier this year, it is nevertheless
important to continue improvements to the aging system
including measures to protect water quality and reduce
pollution. Without this additional funding , the County's flood
control system will deteriorate and flood protection for the
general public will be at risk.
American Society of Civil Engineers. Los Angeles Section
ATTACHMENTS 3-154
11
Parks-C+
The City and County of Los Angeles operate over 700
recreational facilities. Some of these facilities are below
desirable operating standards while others are in need of
upgrade or replacement. Additional funding is also required
for land acquisition to acquire and develop new park facilities.
Ports-~
The San Pedro Ports comprise the fifth busiest shipping
tenninal in the world. Given the important role they play in
our local economy, a good on-going maintenance program
in addition to regular assessment and upgrade of the port's
infrastructure are vital to ensuring the continued reliable
movement of cargo.
Solid Waste -"+
Los Angeles County has the largest and most complex solid
waste system in California. Despite the numerous available
disposal facilities, solid waste managers are faced with various
challenges, including decreasing landfill capacity, overcoming
public opposition to establishing new facilities , recycling and
disposal constraints, and tran sportation issues.
Traffic congestion and local pavement conditions have
continued to worsen during recent years. Without significant
additional funding, congestion problems will only get
worse and the overall condition of pavement in Los Angeles
County will continue to decline each year. This decline will
result in increases in vehicle repair costs , traffic delays , fuel
consumption, and vehicle emissions.
American Society of Civil Engineers, Los Angeles Section
ATTACHMENTS 3-155
Legend
Manholes
• Abalone Cove Pump Stations
• LA county Mainta ined Pump Stations
Sanrtation Oistnct Facilrties
--Abalone Cove Collection System
--LA County Mainta ined Collection System
~-San itation District Trunk Mains
--Major Roads
RPV Parcels
CJ RPV Crty Boundary
CSMD Parcels
W.l
s
w
('j
~
:f
t
j
I
Pi1ciflcCoasl
~ ......
tx:i ......
>-:]
Ul
25TH
ATTACHMENTS 3-156
I
I
RESOUJTlON NUMBER 49
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF nm CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES GRANTING CONSENT AND JURISDICTION TO THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR THE INCLUSION OF CERTAIN
TERRITORY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES WITHIN A
COUNTY SEWER MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes does not have the forces nor
equipment necessary to 11\aintain sanitary sewers; and
WHEREAS, sanitary sewers have been or are scheduled to be constructed
within the City; and
WHEREAS, it appears in the public interest and convenience that certain
territory of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes be included within a Cowity sewer
maintenance district.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Cowicil of the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes as follows:
Section 1. That the public interest and convenience require the inclusion
of certain territory within the bowida.ries of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
within a County sewer maintenance district formed for the purpose of maintaining
local and lateral sanitary sewers pursuant to Chapter 4, Part 3, Division S of the
Health and Safety Code, as amended, or Chapter 26, Part 3, Division 7 of the
Streets and Highways Code, as atnended, of the State of California.
Section 2. That pursuant to the authority vested in it by Section 4895 of
said Health and Safety Code, or Section 5837 of said Streets and Highways Code,
the City Council, being the legislative body of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
hereby consents to the inclusion of Parcels 102-73, 107-73, 108~73, 110-73 within
a Col.Dlty sewer maintenance district, and to the exercise of exclusive jurisdiction
by the Board of Supervisors of said Col.Dlty of Los Angeles over all proceedings
necessary thereto for the purpose of consununating the same.
Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution
and shall deliver three certified copies thereof to the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council this 24th day of October,
1973, by the following:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CITY CLERIC
Buerk, Dyda, Ruth, M. Ryan
None
R. Ryan
J HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution
No. 49 passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes a t
a meeting thereof held on the 24th day of October, 1973.
EXHIBIT 6
ATTACHMENTS 3-157
/ ...
f
RESOLUTION NO. 95-33
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING
CONTINUOUS CONSENT AND JURISDICTION TO THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR THE INCLUSION OF
PORTIONS OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS ~DES
WITHIN A COUNTY SEWER MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
EXHIBIT 7
WHEREAS, portions of the city of Rancho Palos Verdes are
already included in a County sewer maintenance district; and
WHEREAS, additional sewers have been or are scheduled to
be constructed within the City; and
WHEREAS, currently the City does not have the forces nor
the equipment necessary to maintain sanitary sewers; and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest and convenience
that all areas served by sanitary sewers in the city of Rancho
Palos Verdes be included in a county sewer maintenance district.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Couneil of the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes as follows:
SECTION 1. That the public . interest and convenience
require all territory served by sanitary sewers within the
boundaries of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes to be included in a
County sewer maintenance district formed for the purpose of
maintaining local sanitary sewers pursuant to Chapter 4, ~art 3,
Division 5 of the Health and Safety Code, as amended, or .Chapter
26, Part 3, Division 7 of the streets and Highways Code, as
amended, of the state of California.
SECTION 2. That pursuant to the authority vested to it
by Section 4895 of said Health and Safety, or Section 5837 of
legislative body of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby
consents to the inclusion of any city territory within a County
sewer maintenance district as soon as said City territory is
serviced by sewers, and to ·the exercise of exclusive jurisdiction
by the Board of supervisors of said county of Los Angeles over all
proceedings necessary thereto for the purpose of consummating the
same pursuant to applicable laws.
SECTION 3. That said consent and jurisdiction granted to
the Board of Supervisors as set forth in Secti.on 2 of this
Resolution shall not be construed to request, require or permit the
immediate inclusion of all territory within the City ~f Rancho
Palos Verdes in a County sewer maintenance district, but only to
request or permit the immediate inclusion of areas that are now
served by sewers. Additional areas may be included in a sewer
maintenance district as sewer service is extended to such areas by
annexation proceedings from time to time without securing further
consent and grant of jurisdiction from this Council.
ATTACHMENTS 3-158
SECTION 4. That the Director of Public Works is hereby
~uthorized and directed, on behalf of the city council, to request
that additional areas in the City be annexed to a county sewer
maintenance district as service is extended to such areas.
SECTION 5. That the City Clerk shall certify the
adoption of this Resolution, and shall deliver three (3) certified
copies thereof to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the
County of Los Angeles.
PASSED I APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of April I
1995.
Attest:
/SI JO PURCELL
city Clerk
State of California
County of Los Angeles
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
)
)ss
)
/SI LEE B. BYRD
Mayor
~ ! ·:: '),'. ... ., .
I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 95-33 was duly
and regularly passed and adopted by the said City council at a
regular meeting thereof held on April 18, 1995.
. ~. .
.~ (: '
. ~; ':i
·£k,fi1d~
. ,= :3~~1NoW3tH ·s onu )
.. ·: : ~-l0081lf\i.w'·. '.. ::.
1.z ;9 : ~tv ·:.\~·i :lldV . 5.661
s~wot:-,2Ji~·\<l.~o ··J_d~o ·,
G3/\138;U:i
Ir
1 •••
~ I .-' o
(:· ,· .. ·
Resol. 95-33
ATTACHMENTS 3-159
Page 1 of 1
HEAL TH AND SAFETY CODE -HSC
DIVISION 5. SANITATION (4600 -6127] (Divis ion 5 enacted by Stats. 1939, Ch. 60 .)
PART 3. COMMUNITY FACILITIES (4600 -6127] (Heading of Part 3 amended by
Sta ts. 1970, Ch. 420.)
EXHIBIT 8
CHAPTER 4. Sewer Maintenance Districts (4860 -4927] (Chapter 4 enacted by Stats.
1939, Ch. 60.)
ARTICLE 3. Officers and Powers [4885-4889) (Article 3 enacted by Stats. 1939, Ch. 60.)
The board is the governing body of the di stri ct and may make and enforce all ru les and
488s. re gulation s nece ssary for the administrati o n and governme nt of the di strict and for the cleaning,
repair , recon struction , renewal , rep lacement, operation , an d maintenance of lateral and co ll ecting
se wer s in it.
(Added by S tats. 1986, Ch. 195 . Sec. 38.)
http ://legi nfo. Jegi s lature .ca.gov /faces /p rintCodeSecti on Wind ow .x htm l 4/2 1/2014 ATTACHMENTS 3-160
SEWER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN
SEWER MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS OF
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
May 2013
EXHIBIT9
ATTACHMENTS 3-161
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... .
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.3.4
2.3.5
Chapter 3
3.1
3. 1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1 .4
3.1.5
Chapter 4
4.1
4.1.1
4.1 .2
4.1 .3
4.1.4
4.1.5
4.1.6
4.1.7
4.1.8
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.3
4.4
Chapter 5
5.1
5.2
Goals and Actions .......................................................................................... 2
Description of Organization............................................................................. 3
Management................................................................................................ 3
Authorized Representative .............................................................................. 3
Organizational Chart and Responsibilities ........................................................... 3
Organizational Chart for the Sewer Maintenance Districts ...................................... 4
Description of Responsibilities .......................................................................... 7
Key Support Divisions..................................................................................... 8
Chain of Communication for SSO Reporting....................................................... 9
SMD SSO Procedures Flow Chart .................................................................... 10
Legal Authority ............................................................................................. 11
Legal Authority ............................................................................................. 11
Legal Authority to Prevent Illicit Discharges into the Sanitary System ....................... 11
Legal Authority to Require that sewers and Connections be Properly Designed
and Constructed... .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . . .. .. 11
Legal Authority to Ensure Access for Maintenance , Inspection, or Repairs ................ 12
Legal Authority Limiting the Discharge of Fats , Oil , and Grease and other Debris that
may Cause Blockage ..................................................................................... 12
Legal Authority to Enforce any Violation of Sewer Ordinances................................ 12
Operation and Maintenance Program ... .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. 13
Preventive Maintenance Program ..................................................................... 13
Sewer Line and Manhole Inspection .................................................................. 13
Gas Trap Manholes and Siphons...................................................................... 13
Drop Manholes ............................................................................................. 13
Sewer Line Cleaning ...................................................................................... 13
Vermin and Rodent Control............................................................................. 13
Sewage Pump Stations.................................................................................. 14
Work Scheduling ........................................................................................... 14
SMD Mapping System .................................................................................... 14
Rehabilitation and Replacement Plan................................................................ 14
Accumulative Capital Outlay Program of the Consolidated Sewer Maintenance
District... . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. .. . 14
Marina Sewer Maintenance District -Capital Project............................................ 15
Condition Assessment Program ........................................................................ 15
Equipment Maintenance Replacement Policy ...................................................... 16
Training for Field Operations Personnel and Contractors....................................... 17
Design and Performance Provision ................................................................... 18
Design and Construction Standards and Specifications ......................................... 18
Procedures and Standards for Inspection and Testing New and Rehabilitated
Collection Sewer Facilities.............................................................................. 18
ATTACHMENTS 3-162
Chapter 6
6.1
6.1 .1
6.1.2
6.1.3
6.1.4
6.1.5
Chapter 7
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
Chapter 8
8.1
8.2
8.3
Chapter 9
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.4.1
9.4 .2
Chapter 10
10.1
10.2
10.3
Chapter 11
11.1
11.2
Chapter 12
12.1
12.2
12.3
Overflow Emergency Response Plan ................................................................. 19
Overflow Response Procedure ......................................................................... 19
Regulatory Agenc ies Notification and Time Frame ................................................ 20
Agencies Telephone /Fax Numbers ................................................................... 21
Procedure to Ensure that Staff and Contractors are Appropriately Trained to
Follow the Emergency Response Plan ...... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . 22
Procedures to Address Emergency Operat ions such as Traffic, Crowd Control ,
and other Necessary Response Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Program to Elim inate or Min imize the Discharge of SSOs into Waters of the
United States ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. 22
FOG Control Program .................................................................................... 23
Public Education Outreach Program .................................................................. 23
Disposal Methods for FOG Generated within the SMD Service Area ........................ 23
The Legal Authority to Prohibit Discharges to the System and Identify Measures
to Prevent SSOs and Blockages Caused by FOG............................................... 23
Requirements to Install Grease Removal Devices , Design Standards for Grease
Removal Devices , Maintenance Requirements , BMP Requirements, Recordkeeping ,
and Reporting Requirements ............................................................................ 24
Authority to Inspect Grease Producing Facilities, Enforcement Authorities, and
Evidence of Adequate Staffing to Inspect and Enforce the FOG Ordinance ............... 24
Cleaning Schedule for Identified FOG Prone Sewer Segments ............................... 25
System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan................................................. 26
System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance ....................................................... 26
Adequate Capacity and Correct Design.............................................................. 26
Capacity Enhancement Plan ............................................................................ 27
Monitoring , Measurement , and Modification Program ...... .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 28
Monitoring .................................................................................................... 28
SSMP Program Effectiveness Evaluation ........................................................... 28
Program Modifications . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. 28
SSO Location Mapping and Trends ................................................................... 28
Location Map ... .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . 28
Mapping of SSO Frequencies .......................................................................... 28
SSMP Program Audit and Certification............................................................... 29
SSMP Program Audit..................................................................................... 29
SSMP Certification ........................................................................................ 29
SSMP Modification and Recertification ............................................................... 29
Communication and SSMP Availability ............................................................... 30
Communication ............................................................................................. 30
SSMPAvailability .......................................................................................... 30
CSMD and City Responsibilities Under the WDR ................................................. 31
CSMD Versus City Responsibilities................................................................... 31
Sewer-Related Services Provided to the 39 CSMD Cities ....................................... 32
Roles for the CSMD and Cities under the Waste Discharge Requirements................ 33
ii Revised 5/1/20 13
ATTACHMENTS 3-163
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendi x H
Appendi x I
Append ix J
Appendix K
Appendix L
Appendix M
APPENDICES
Waste Discharge Requirements
Inventory of Sewer Maintenance Districts Equipment
Location Map For Sewer Maint enance Districts Yards and Pump
Stations
Inventory of Sewer Maintenance Districts Collection Facilities -
Revenues and Population Estimate
Accumulative Capital Outlay Program Projects
Condition Assessment Work Schedule
Sanitary Sewer Overflow Response Instruction Manual
Sewer Maintenance Productivity Report
Performance Measure Indicators
Sanitary Sewer Overflow Data
Sanitary Sewer Overflow Graphs
Collection Systems by Treatment Plant/Region
Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements Applications and
Permits
iii Re vis ed 5/1/201 3
ATTACHMENTS 3-164
AGO
APWA
GADD
Cal EMA
CAL OSHA
CCTV
CSMD
DPW
FOG
GIS
I/I
LAGO CODE
LAGO PLUMBING CODE
LVMWD
MARINASMD
MMS
RWQCB
SMD
SSMP
SS Os
WDRs
ABBREVIATIONS/ ACRONYMS
Accumulative Capital Outlay Program
American Public Works Association
Computer Aided Design and Drafting
California Emergency Management Agency
California Occupation, Safety and Health Administration
Closed-Circuit Television
Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District
County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works
Fats, Oils, and Grease
Geographical Information System
Infiltration Inflow
Los Angeles County Code Title 20 -Utilities
Los Angeles County Plumbing Code -Title 28
Las Virgenes Metropolitan Water District
Marina Sewer Maintenance District
Maintenance Management System
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Sewer Maintenance Districts
Sewer System Management Plan
Sanitary Sewer Overflows
Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements
iv Revised 1/17/2012
ATTACHMENTS 3-165
DEFINITIONS
Geographical Information System (GIS) -A database linked with mapping , which
includes various layers of information used by government officials . Examples of
information found on a GIS can include a sewer map and sewer features such as pipe
location , diameter, material, condition, and last date cleaned or repa ired . The GIS also
typically contains base information such as streets and parcels .
Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) -Infiltration is generally considered to be extraneous water that
enters the sewer system over longer periods of time, such as groundwater seepage
through cracks in the sewer. Inflow is generally considered to be extraneous water that
enters the system as a direct result of a rain event, such as through defects in the
sewer. While it is impossible to control all 1/1 , it is certainly desirable to reduce I/I when
cost-effective .
Lateral -The portion of sewer that connects a home or business with the mainline in
the street.
Stoppage -A build up of debris in the sewer, which stops the flow of wastewater and
allows the water to back up behind the stoppage, sometimes causing an overflow. Also
called blockage .
Blockage -A build up of debris in the sewer, which stops the flow of wastewater and
allows the water to back up behind the stoppage , sometimes causing an overflow. Also
called a stoppage .
Wastewater Collection System -All pipelines, pump stations , and other facilities
upstream of the headworks of the wastewater treatment plant that transport wastewater
from its source to the wastewater treatment plant.
v
ATTACHMENTS 3-166
SEWER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE CONSOLIDATED AND
MARINA SEWER MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS
INTRODUCTION
On May 2, 2006 , the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted
Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements and Monitoring and Reporting
Program (WDRs) by issuing Order No. 2006-0003 (Appendix A). The regulations in
Order No. 2006-0003 were born out of growing concern about the water quality impacts
of Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs), particularly those that cause beach closures or
pose serious health and safety or nuisance problems. Two major components of the
WDRs are the requirements that owners and operators of publicly-owned collection
sewer systems a mile long or greater apply for coverage under the WDRs and that they
develop and implement a Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP).
This document has been broken down into 12 chapters and organized to be closely in
line with the requirements contained and as they appear in the WDRs. Every section or
subsection of each chapter addresses one of the key elements of the SSMP guidelines
of the WDRs.
This document and other existing Department of Public Works ' Programs referenced
herein constitute the SSMP for the Sewer Maintenance Districts (SMD) of the County of
Los Angeles. We are confident that by practicing the procedures contained in the
SSMP, the occurrence of SSOs should decrease throughout the SMD.
1
ATTACHMENTS 3-167
CHAPTER 1
GOALS AND ACTIONS
The goals of this SSMP are to ensure :
1. The SMD 's sanitary sewer collection system facilities are properly operated ,
maintained, and managed to reduce frequency and severity of sanitary sewer
overflows (SSOs) and their potential impacts on public health , safety, and on
the environment.
2. When SSOs occur, prompt action is taken to identify, contain, remove the
cause , promptly report the event to appropriate regulatory authorities, and the
public is adequately and timely notified.
3. All SSOs and system deficiencies and remedial actions taken are well
documented.
4. The SMD 's sewer system operators , employees, contractors, responders, or
other agents are adequately trained and equipped to address an SSO event.
5 . The SMD's sewer system is adequately designed, constructed, and funded to
provide adequate capacity to convey base flows and peak flows while meeting
or exceeding applicable regulations, laws, and the generally acceptable
practices relative to sanitary sewer system operations and maintenance.
The actions to be taken under this SSMP are to ensure accomplishment of the goals:
1. Conduct a planned and scheduled maintenance program that will minimize the
risk and occurrence of SSOs, in support of the SSMP goals.
2 . When SSOs do occur, respond to the reported site in a timely manner and
undertake feasible remedial actions to contain the overflow impacts, including
stopping the flow from reaching the storm drain, if possible .
3 . Stop the overflow as soon as possible and limit public access to the overflow
area to prevent public contact with any wastewater contamination .
4 . Completely recover the overflow and return it to the sewer system and then
clean up the contaminated area.
5 . Gather and compile all pertinent information regarding the overflow event,
investigate as necessary to determine probable cause , document findings,
report to the appropriate regulatory agencies in a timely manner, and file the
comp leted report.
2
ATTACHMENTS 3-168
2.1 Management
CHAPTER 2
DESCRIPTION OF ORGANIZATION
The County of Los Angeles SMD are made up of the Marina Sewer Maintenance
District (Marina SMD), the Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District (CSMD), and its
9 zones. The SMD serve a population of over 2.5 million people within the County
unincorporated area and 39 cities . The SMD are managed by the County of
Los Angeles Department of Public Works (DPW), Sewer Maintenance Division. The
total annual budget for system operation, maintenance, and administration is over
$36 million . The collection system consists of over 5,200 miles of gravity sewer lines
and 153 pump stations. About 95 percent of flows from these local sewers discharge
into the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County facilities for treatment and
disposal. A small percentage of the total sewage generated within SMD is treated at
the City of Los Angeles, Las Virgenes Municipal Water District (LVMWD), and four small
SMD owned facilities .
The SMD have 191 budgeted positions . The distribution of the SMD personnel is
depicted in the organizational chart presented in Section 2 .3.1 of this chapter. These
personnel provide engineering evaluation of proposed and existing sewer facilities,
administer the County's sewer service charge ordinance , carry out annexation
proceedings for new territories, form and dissolve service zones, maintain facility record
plans , and administer preventive maintenance and sewer construction programs .
2.2 Authorized Representative
The Assistant Deputy Director for the Sewer Maintenance Division is responsible for the
execution of the compliance actions required under the WDRs. This includes, but is not
limited to, signing and certification of all reports and correspondence as required under
this order. The Principal Engineer and Senior Civil Engineers in the
Sewer Maintenance Division may also perform these duties on behalf of the
Assistant Deputy Director.
2.3 Organizational Chart and Responsibilities
The organization chart showing the structure and relationships of all SMD
administrative, management, and field positions is presented in Section 2.3.1 and the
description of responsibilities is presented in Sections 2 .3.2 and 2 .3 .3 .
3 Revised 4/15/2013
ATTACHMENTS 3-169
2.3.1(a) ORGANIZATIONAL CHART FOR THE SMD
Board of Supervisors
I
Director of Public Works
I
Assistant Director
I
Deputy Director
I
Assistant Deputy Director
Sewer Maintenance Division
I
Principal Engineer
I
I I
Senior Civil Engineer Senior Civil Engineer Senior Civil Engineer
Support Divisions
Office Engineering & Budget Field Operations -Field Operations
(Pump Stations) (Gravity System) -Administrative Service Division
I I
I I -Building and Sarety Division
Sewer Plan Check Unit Sewer Maintenance
I Office Engineering Electro-Mechanic Superintendents -Construction Divis ion
Mapping & Annexation Staff Supervisor I -Design Division
Unit I Sewer Maintenance
Supervisors -Environmental Program Division
I Electro-Mechanic I
Working Supervisors -Flood Maintenance Division
Procurement Unit Sewer Maintenance
I Crew Leaders -Human Resources Division
I
I Electro-Mechanics -Information Technology Division
Pub lic Works
Direct Assessment Unit I Maintenance Worke rs -Land Development Division
Assistant I -Mapping and Property Division
I Electro-Mechanics Clerical Support Staff
Clerical Support Staff I
Helper, Electricals Accumulative Capital
'------Outlay/Condit ion
Assessment Unit
4 Revised 2/13/2013
ATTACHMENTS 3-170
2.3.1(b) ORGANIZATIONAL CHART WITH NAMES AND PHONE NUMBERS
Board of Supervisors John Hernandez. Helper, Electrical (562) 941 -7011
EMEa!'QC.entral
Gloria Molina Supervisor, First District (213) 974-4111 Rav Pereida, EM NorWW•st Heloer, Electrical 661) 942-6042
Mark Ridley-Thomas Supervisor, Second District (213) 974-2222 James Herrington, Helper, Electrical (661) 222-2569
EMNorth"Nest
Field Ooe rations -GravliV Svstem
Zev Yaroslavskv Supervisor, Third District (2 13) 974-3333 Robert Swartz Senior Civil Enaineer 626 300-3367
Don Knabe Supervisor, Fourth District (213) 974-4444 Mike Garcia, cen•oJ SM Superintendents 562 941-7011
James Prvor, East SM Suoerin tendents 626 446-5227
Michael D. Antonovich Supervisor, Fifth District (2 13) 974-5555 Paul Bradford , SOJ~ SM Suoerintendents 323 233-3330
John Feese, i•Ol1h SM Suoerintendents 661 942-6042
Public Worlls Tim Bohannon, c.o .. 1 SM Supervisors 562 941-7011
Gail Farber Director 16261 458-40 02 Juan Alonso, c .. ua SM Suoervisors 562 941-7011
Mark Pestrella AssisJant Director (6261 458-40 01 Jim Vives, East SM Suoervisors 626 446-5227
Massood Eftekha ri Deputy Director (6261 458-4016 Chris Pena , Eost SM Supervisors 626 446-5227
Sewer Maintenance Division Jesse Cisneros , SOJ1h SM Suoervisors 323 233-3330
Raiesh Patel Assistant Deputy Director (6261300-3304 Caoice Simms , '""'"' SM Suoervisors 323 233 -3330
Martin Moreno Principal Engineer (626) 300-3312
(Office Enaineerina & Budaetl
Nicholas Aabobu Senior Civil Enaineer 16261300-3382
Michael Duncan , tt0!1h SM Suoervisors 661 942-6042
Stephen Vincent, SM Supervisors (661) 222 -2569
SantaCtaril.8
Sewer Plan Check Unit Accumulative Caoital OuHav/Condition Assessment Unit
Kari Eskridg e 16261300-3390
Mappina & Annexation Unit
Fernando Villaluna Civil Ena in eer (626 300-3380
SM Crew Leaders
Jennie Tenq (626) 300-3366
Procurement
Central
Francisco Arellano Jr SM Crew Leader (5621941 -7011
Cvnthia Phan (6261300-3322 Jaime Ochoa SM Crew Leader (562) 941-7011
Direct Assessment Unit Gerald S Obera SM Crew Leader (562 941-7011
Unh La Staff Assistant 1626) 300-3340 Dia ne Giles SM Crew Leader (562) 941-7011
Clerical Su pport Staff Isaac R Leal SM Crew Leader (562) 941-7011
Sandra Brenes Secretarv V 1626l 300-3309 Daiuan N Clark SM Crew Leader (562 941-7011
(Field Ooerati ons-Pump Stations) East
Jeff Bouse Senior Civil Engineer (626) 300-3373 Edward A Martinez SM Crew Leader (626 446-5227
Terrv H Tavlor SM Crew Leader (626 446-5227
Alex Villarama Civil Engineer (626) 300-337 4 Michael T Coooer SM Crew Lea der (626 446 -5227
Mark Ramirez Electro-Mechanic Supervisor 1626) 300-4682 Vidal A Tovar SM Crew Leader (626 446-52 27
Gilbert Nelson, EM· South Electo.Mechanic Worlclng SUperv5o<s 1323) 233 -2015 Marc A Ruiz SM Crew Leader 1626 446-5227
George Modlin, EM-ta>t Electo.Mechanic Worlclng SUperv5o<s 1626l 446-3271 Darrell Carter SM Crew Leader (626 446-5227
Georoe Modlin, rnc.o•~ e1ect .. Mochanic Wortc ing superv5o<s 15621941-7011 Ernesto Duran SM Crew Leader (626 446-5227
Young Park, EM-North Electo.Mochanic Wortcing supervisors (661) 940-8484 Ricardo Montano Jr SM Crew Leader 626 446-5227
Electro-Mechanics Ernie C Aleman SM Crew Leader 626 446-5227
Jose Portillo, EM Soo..<h Electro-Mechanic 1323) 233-2015 South
Julio Gonzalez, EM SoJ11 Electro-Mechanic (323) 233-2015 Jerome A Murrav SM Crew Leader 323 233 -3330
William Martinez, EM South Electro-Mechanic 1323l 233-2015 Dennis C Walton SM Crew Leader (323) 233-3330
Alfredo Duran. EM South Electro-Mechanic 13231233-20 15 Dewavne E Moore SM Crew Leader 323 233-3330
Dave Perrv. EME "1/Ceo~ Electro-Mechanic 1562) 941-7011 Claude Redwine SM Crew Leader 323 233-3330
Jeffrey Kreck low, El ectro-Mechanic (626 ) 446-3 271
EME~tntri!ll
Jerrv D Mc Ghee SM Crew Leader 323 233-3330
Leo Sanders SM Crew Leader 323 233-3330
Ruben Chavi ra, Electro-Mechanic (626 ) 446-3271
EME~ntral
Po-Tin Chou , Electro-Mechanic (562) 941-7011
EMEost/Ce'1!ral
Anaelo Quihuiz SM Crew Leader 323 233-3330
Dan II A Carrillo SM Crew Leader 323 233-3330
Alfonso M Munoz SM Crew Leade r 323 233-3330
Luis Bernal, EME .,vc.n~ Electro-Mechanic (626 ) 446-327 1 Donald R Moore SM Crew Leader 323) 233-3330
Filiberto Delgado, Electro-Mechan ic (661) 222-2569 North
EMnortl\IWest
Kirk Sennett, EM t<orWW•~ Electro-Mechanic (66 11942-6042
Anthony Valles, Electro-Mechanic (661) 222-2569
EMNortl'\IWest
Donald W Allen SM Crew Leade r 661) 942-6042
Deraold Dolittle SM Crew Leader 661l942-6042
Darvl S Richardson SM Crew Leader (6 61 ) 942-6042
Assistant Electro-Mechanic Santa Clarita
Raul Torres, EM NO<tMv ... Asst Electro-Mechanic (66 1) 942-6042 Rico A Nunlev SM Crew Leader 661 222-2569
Noe Delgado, EM South Asst Electro-Mechanic 1323l 233-2015 Michael Nicholson SM Crew Leader (661 ) 222-2569
Mariano Copado, Asst Electro-Mechanic (626 ) 446-3271
EM EasUC&n:rlJ
John Chiang ,EM E8SllCeo•o1 Asst Electro-Mechanic (562) 941 -7011
Charles R Padaet SM Crew Leader (661 222-2569
Georae Y Sanchez SM Crew Leader 661 222-2569
Public Works Maintenance Workers
Helper, Electricals
Jeffrey Saveela, EM Sooth Helper, Electrical (323) 233-2015
Luis Rodriouez, EM south Helper, Electrical (323) 233 -2015
Zaven Thomassian, EM s""" Heloer, Electrical 1626 l 446 -3 271
Bryin Goodman, Helper, Electrical (626 ) 446-3271
EME~enlraJ
Central
Miauel Revnoso Public Works Mailtenanco Workers (562) 94 1-7011
Joel Cameos Public WO!l<s Maintenance Workers 562) 941-7011
Jose A Moreno Pub lic Work s Maintenance Workers 1562) 941-7011
Timothv J Banue los Pub lic Works Maintenance Workers (562 ) 941-7011
5
ATTACHMENTS 3-171
Adrian Mendez Pubic Woos Maintenance Wooers 562 941-7011 Antonio Ochoa Public Works Laborer (323) 233-3330
Manuel E Mares Pubic Woos Maintenaooe Worlcers 562 941-7011 Corv Tolliver Public Works Laborer (323 ) 233-3330
YaoR Guan Pubic Woos Maintenance Worlcers 562 941 -7011 Juan Torres Public Works Laborer (323) 233-3330
Zion D Sanchez Pubic Woos Maintenance Worlce" 562 941-7011 Edward S Sorensen Bricklaver (323) 233-3330
Daniel A Segovia Pubic Worl<s Mlintenance Worl<ers 562 941-7011 Sr. Equipment Maintenance (323 ) 233-3330
Gabriel R Pon ce Pubic Works Maintenanoe Workers 562 941-7011 Johnnv Mc Dowell Worker
Gabriel Guajardo Pubic Works Maintenance Workers 562 941-7011 North
Saul P Hernandez Pubic Works Maintenance Workers 562 941 -7011 Nickolaus J T riaueiro Public Works Main tenance Work ers (661} 942-6042
Vince L Sutherland Public Works Maintenance Wooers 562 941-7011 Frank J Fernandez Public Works Mantenanoe Workers (661) 942-6042
William F Hawkins Public Works Maintenance Workers 626 446 -5227 Enriaue F. Martin Public Works Mantenanoe Workers (66 1) 942-6042
Paul Guerrero Public Works Laborer 562 941-7011 William Kenvon Public Works Mantenenoe Worke<s (66 1) 942-6042
Alfredo Beltran Public Works Laborer 562 941-7011 Shannan M An astasi Public Works Maintenance Work ers (661) 942-6042
Oliver W Llovd Bricklaver 562 941 -7011 Rodnev Roberson Bricklaver (66 1) 942-6042
Sr. Equipment Maintenance Sr. Equipment Maintenance (66 1) 942-6042
Frank E Benson Worker 1562l 941-7011 Virail D Fowler Worker
East Santa Clarita
Merrill DPrice Pubic Works Maintenance Worlcers 626 446-5227 Brian C Tethers Public Works Maintenance Workers (661\ 222-2569
Daniel G Johnson Public woos Maintenanoe Workers 626 446 -5227 Corev Stowe Public Works Maintenance Workers (661) 222-2569
Mark Peifer Public Woos Maintenance Workers 626 446-5227 Eric A Beam Pubic Works Maintenance Workers (661) 222-2569
Jesus Medina Public Works l.l<mtenance Workers 626 446-5227 Christian Jensen Pubic Works Maintenance Workers (661) 222-2569
Eric R Briones Public Woos Maintenance Worlcers 626 446-5227 Eddie Terrv Jr Pubk Woits Mailtenance Workers (661) 222-2569
Donald L Banks Pubic Woos Maintenance Wooers 626 446-5227 Kevin Mvers Public Works Laborer (66 1) 222-2569
James Gray Pubic Woos Maintenanoe Wooers 626 446-5227 Clerical Sunnntt Staff
Antonio B Nieto Jr Pubic Worl<s Maintenance Workers 626 44 6-5227 Jim Prem, c.o.., Senior Clerk (562) 941-7011
Torus S Stepnev Pubic Worl<s Maintenance WorkOfs 626 446 -5227 Jennifer Garcia, c....i Intermediate Tvo ist Clerk (562) 941-7011
Hope Nwachuku Pubic Woos Maintenance Workers 626 44 6-5227 Chris Pussman , Eosi Intermediate Clerk (626) 446-5227
Jason R. Tella Pubic Works Maintenance Workers 626 446-522 7 Zamir Zvada, Eas• Intermediate Clerk (626) 446-5227
Brian LJe ffe ries Pubic Worl<s Maintenance Workers 626 446 -5227 Norma Val dez. South Interme diate Tvoist Clerk (323) 233-3330
Michael T Shelton Pubic Works Maintenance Workecs 626 446 -5227 Anita Carver, NO<th Intermediate Tvoisl Clerk (661\ 942-6042
Dwavne L Edmond Pubic Works Maintenance Workers 626 446 -5227
Sr. Equipment Maintenance (626) 446 -5227
Jesus R Garcia Worker
Charles Richards Public Works Laborer 626 44 6·5227
Shaun Skvarca Public Works Laborer 626 446 -5227
Jonathan De Leon Public Works Laborer 626 446 -5227
Vernon E Wingo Bricklayer 626 446-5227
Anoe! V Cuevas 626 446-5227
Luis M Velarde 626 446-5227
Kevin L Richardson 62 6 446-5227
South
Anthony Gardiner Jr Pubic Works Maintenance WorkOfS 323 233-3330
Ernesto Flores Pubic Works Maintenanoe Workers 323 233-3330
Jose ZunKia Jr Pubic Worts !/oailtenanoe WorkOfs 323 233 -3330
Jeffrey P Jackson Pubic woos Maintenance Workers 323 233 -3330
Patrick Pandy Pubic Works Maintenance Workers 323 233-3330
Kevin R Gibson Pub ic Works Maintenance Workers 323 233-3330
Keith M Cotlaoe Pub ic Works Maintenance Workers 323 233-3330
Dewayne Johnson Pub ic Works Maintenance Workers 323 233-3330
Anoel Villafana Pub ic Works Maintenance Workers 323 233-3330
Jorge Nevarez Pub ic Works Maintenanoe Workers 323 233 -3330
Derrick L Dennis Jr Pub ic Works Maintenanoe Workers 323 233 -3330
Charles Bernard Iv Pubic Works Maintenance Worke<s 323 233 -3330
Lindsey Bennet (661) 222-2569
Santa Clarita
&inrWI Divisions
Administrabve Service Division
Ghavane Zakarian Division Chief (626) 458-4078
Buiklina and Saii!iV Division
Hector Bordas Suoerintendent of Buildina (626) 458-6385
Construction DMSIOO
James T. Soarks Asst. Deoutv Director (626) 458-3100
IJeslan Dt\oision
Rossana D'Antonio Assl Deoutv Director (626) 458-7800
Environmental DMsion
Pat Proano Asst. Deoutv Director (626) 458-3500
Flood Maritenance O.VISion
SreeKumar Asst. Deoutv Director (626)458-4145
Human Resources D1VISiori
Barbara Kniahton Divisio n Chief (6261458-2100
Information T echnoloav Dr.;sion
Isaac Gindi Division Chief (626) 458-41 07
Land Develooment 01\oision
Anthonv Nvivih Asst. Deoutv Director (626) 458-4900
MaDDIM and Prooert'I DiV1Sion
Steven Steinhoff Asst. Deou!V Director (626) 458-7000
Neftali A Juarez Pubic Works Maintenance Workers 323 233-3330
Justin Ellis Public Works Laborer 323 233-3330
Brandon Washinaton Public Works Laborer 323 233-3330
6
ATTACHMENTS 3-172
2.3.2 Description of Responsibilities
The description of the responsibilities or roles of each position , especially as related to
SSOs, are as follows :
• Board of Supervisors -Responsible for establishing new and amending existing
laws governing the operations of the SMD and approving all SMD contracts and
agreements.
• Director of Public Works -Establishes SMD policy within the scope of the
Board of Supervisors' policy and legal requirements , directs its execution, and
evaluates work accomplished by SMD. Directs the development and enactment
of new Ordinances and directs the enforcement of Plumbing Codes involving
illegal connections , upkeep of sewer house laterals, and the design and
construction of new and rehabilitation of existing sewer collection systems.
• Assistant Director of Public Works -Assists in establishing SMD policy within the
scope of the Board of Supervisors' policy and legal requirements and in directing
its execution, and in evaluating work accomplished by SMD. Reports to and can
act on behalf of the Director of Public Works.
• Deputy Director -Respons ible for formulating SMD policies and procedures.
Directs emergency sewer repair activities, special studies, investigations, and
reports concerning SMD sewer infrastructure, claims, and litigations against the
SMD. Reports to and can act on behalf of the Chief Deputy Director of
Public Works .
• Assistant Deputy Director -Assists in the formulation of SMD policies and
procedures. Directs studies, investigations, and the preparation of reports,
budget, and contractual agreements with private firms for SMD . Responsible for
the day-to-day management and operation of the SMD . Reports to the
Deputy Director.
• Principal Engineer -Assists the Assistant Deputy Director in directing
engineering and management activities relating to the maintenance of the sewer
collection system . Acts as the Assistant Deputy Director.
• Senior Civil Engineer -Has oversight of office engineering, clerical, and field
operation and maintenance staff. Reports to and can act on behalf of the
Principal Engineer.
• Regional Sewer Maintenance Superintendent -Responsible for the sewer
collection system operation and maintenance activities at specific field yards,
with the exception of pump stations, for the SMD. Reports to a Senior Civil
Engineer.
7
ATTACHMENTS 3-173
• Sewer Maintenance Supervisor -Responsible for the oversight of the
Sewer Maintenance field maintenance personnel including the construction
crews, gravity sewer system operation , and maintenance crews, etc. Reports to
a Regional Sewer Maintenance Superintendent.
• Public Works Crew Leader -Responsible for assigning work and has oversight
for the activities of a crew of at least two field personnel. Reports to the Sewer
Maintenance Supervisor.
• Field Crews -These include the Public Works Laborers and Public Works
Maintenance Workers and are responsible for maintenance activities of the
sanitary sewer collection system including response to SSOs , sewer cleaning ,
construction, and other activities as needed . Reports to a Crew Leader.
• Electro-Mechanic Supervisor -Responsible for the operation and maintenance
of the SMD pump stations and force mains . Reports to a Senior Civil Engineer in
charge of field pump station operations.
• Electro-Mechanic Working Supervisor -Responsible for pump stations operation
and maintenance activities . Also has oversight of the work of lower level
Electro-Mechanics and their staff. Reports to an Electro-Mechanic Supervisor.
• Electro-Mechanic/Assistant Electro-Mechanic/Helper, Electrical -In crews of two .
These personnel carry out the operation and maintenance activities of the SMD
pump stations and force mains.
• Office Administrative and Clerical Assistants -Assist in the preparation of the
SMD budget, Board letters , and other correspondence and are responsible for
the sewer service charge direct assessments.
2.3 .3 Key Support Divisions
Other divisions within the DPW are currently and will continue to be responsible for
carrying out some of the compliance actions called for by the WDRs for the SMD . The
key support divisions and their responsibilities are described below:
• Administrative Services Division -Responsible for procuring equipment and as
needed contract services for emergency sewer repair projects, printing and
mailing of public education outreach program materials, and for procuring
material and supplies needed for the day-to-day operation and maintenance
activities.
• Building and Safety Division -Responsible for issuing permits for sewer
connection and for the enforcement of the Plumbing Codes involving proper
connection, maintenance of sewer house laterals , and illegal discharges into the
public sewers .
8
ATTACHMENTS 3-174
• Construction Division -Responsible for administrating the SMD's sewer
rehabilitation and reconstruction contracts.
• Environmental Programs Division -Responsible for enforcing the SMD 's Fats,
Oils, and Grease program including point source control , inspection of industrial
waste and grease generating facilities, and investigation of illicit discharge of
chemicals , debris, etc., into the public sewer.
• Design Division -Responsible for developing standard plans and preparing
plans and specifications for SMD sewer rehabilitation and reconstruction
projects.
• Flood Maintenance Division -Assists SMD in tracing, containing, and cleaning
up of SSOs that reach a storm drain system.
• Information Technology Division -Responsible for operating the Emergency
Operation Center for the entire DPW including service calls, SSOs, and pump
station malfunction calls for the SMD.
• Human Resources Division -Responsible for staffing the SMD and training of
personnel.
• Land Development Division -Responsible for subdivision plan checks to ensure
compliance with the DPW's standards for construction of new sewer collection
systems. Plan checks sewer capacity studies to size proposed SMD lines and
sets requ irements to ensure adequate capacity in existing systems .
• Mapping and Property Management Division -Responsible for processing
access easement documents and procuring easements for public sewer facilities
located in private properties. Also responsible for investigating SSOs related
claims and litigations against the SMD.
2.3 .4 Chain of Communication for SSO Reporting
The chain of communication for reporting SSOs, from receipt of a compla int or other
information to reporting to appropriate regulatory agencies, is presented in
Section 2.3 .5. The SMD Overflow Emergency Response Plan will be discussed in more
detail in Chapter 6 of this document.
9
ATTACHMENTS 3-175
2.3.5 SMD SSO PROCEDURES FLOW CHART
Nearest
Sewer Maintenance
crew investigation
Crew Leader
NO
DPW Radio Room receives SSO
calls from the Public or Telemetry
System Dispatch
Stop SSO and notify appropriate
agency for Clean -up and
Reporting
NO Crew Leader calls the
Radio Room
Sewer Maintenance Crew
-Stops SSO
YES -Cleans up
* Note : Flood Maintenance
is only notified when the
SSO has entered a storm
drain system .
-Prepares report
-Reports to radio room (dispatch)
Crew Leader
-Call Hea lth Department
-Call RWQCB
-Call Cal EMA
-Call *Flood Maint.
Crew Leader
Written Report to :
-RWQCB (upon request)
-SWRCB Web Page
Senior Civil Engineer
10
YES
NO
Superintendent or Supervisor
on Emergency call list
Standby crew
investigates
Crew Leader
YES
Revi sed 1/17/2012
ATTACHMENTS 3-176
3.1 Legal Authority
CHAPTER 3
LEGAL AUTHORITY
The SMD were formed pursuant to Chapter 4 of the State of California Health and
Safety Code (Section H4870 -8) with the County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors
acting as their governing body. The Board of Supervisors , by law, may make and
enforce all rules and regulations necessary for the administration of the SMD and for the
cleaning, repair, construction , reconstruction, renewal , replacement, operation, and
maintenance of collection sewers within the SMD . Consistent with the law, several
ordinances have been established by the Board of Supervisors to govern all aspects of
the SMD operations . The legal authorities for the specific areas stipulated in the WDRs
are covered in various sections of the Los Angeles County Plumbing Code (LACO
Plumbing Code), and Chapters 20.20 , 20 .24, 20.26, 20.32, 20 .34 , 20.36 , and 20.40 of
the Los Angeles County Code Title 20 -Utilities (LACO Code) some of which are
discussed below.
3.1.1 Legal Authority to Prevent Illicit Discharges into the Sanitary System
The LACO Plumbing Code Title 28 (Sections 306 .2, 714 .2, and 1101 .2) prohibits the
unauthorized discharge of rain, surface, or subsurface water into the collection system.
The illegal dumping of offensive or damaging substances such as chemicals , debris,
etc ., which are considered inflows, are prohibited by LACO Code, Section 20 .36.010 .
The SMD have an 111 control program under the SMD 's ongoing sewer line cleaning and
maintenance program, which includes closed-circuit television (CCTV) and other
mechanisms to detect 1/1. By ordinance, the Board of Supervisors has established a
financial plan to ensure capital replacement or rehabilitation of sewer lines prone to I/I
within the CSMD (LACO Code , Section 20.40 .045). The Marina SMD provides
adequate funding to eliminate 1/1 sources in the mainline sewers and manholes. The
LACO Code, Section 20.24.080 requires that property owners be responsible for
maintenance of their house lateral, including the elimination of cracks, tree roots, and
other debris. A similar law is also found in Section 101 .3.2 of the LACO Plumbing Code
Title 28 .
3.1.2 Legal Authority to Require that Sewers and Connections be Properly
Designed and Constructed
The LACO Code Sections 20 .32 .330 and 20 .32.340 require that the design of new
mainline sewers and pumping plants, respectively, be in conformity with requirements of
Part 3 of Chapter 20.32 of the Code. Similarly, Section 20.32 .350 of the LACO Code
requires that the design of new house laterals conform to the requirements of Part 3 ,
Chapter 20 .32 of the Code unless otherwise covered by the LACO Plumbing Code ,
Title 28. The construction of a collection sewer system , by law (LACO Code
20.32 .580), is required to conform to all the requirements prescribed by Division 2 of the
LACO Code , by the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green
Book) and by the Special Provisions and Standard Plans , all on file in the office of the
11
ATTACHMENTS 3-177
Director of Public Works (County Eng ineer). The inspection and construct ion of
mainline sewers and pumping plants to ensure proper construction is covered under
Section 20.32 .590 of the LACO Code. The construction of house laterals is covered
under the LACO Plumbing Code .
3.1.3 Legal Authority to Ensure Access for Maintenance, Inspection, or Repairs
Title 20 , Division 2 of the Los Angeles County Code gives DPW the legal right to set
requirements that allow unrestricted maintenance access to the public sewer
infrastructure . This access is secured through the DPW's unwavering enforcement of
the requirement for sewer easements around all public sewer appurtenances located in
private properties . These easements are detailed by the designer on the sewer
construction plans and are reviewed through the iterative plan check process . Plan
checkers take special care to ensure that maintenance crews will have room for access
and equipment usage for both routine maintenance and replacement or repair
construction as necessary. The Title 20 requirements to leave these easements free of
obstruction are also reiterated on all sewer plans that contain easements and the
potential for conflict or restriction of access is reviewed exhaustively during plan check.
3.1.4 Legal Authority Limiting the Discharge of Fats, Oil, and Grease and other
Debris that may Cause Blockage
The Director of Public Works under the LACO Plumbing Code , Title 28, has the legal
authority to require the installation of grease interceptors at restaurants and other food
estab lishment s t hat generate grease. Section 20 .36.560 of LACO Code also gives the
Director of Public Works the authority to require the installation of treatment facil ities ,
including grease interceptors, at any facility that generates FOG in the amount that will
damage or increase the maintenance costs of the sewer collection system.
The LACO Code Section 20 .24.090 gives the Director of Public Works the legal
authority to inspect ma inline sewers, sewage pumping plants, interceptors , etc., as often
as he deems necessary, to ascertain whether such facilities are maintained and
operated in accordance with the provisions of Division 2 of the LAGO Code. Section
20 .36.400 of the LACO Code prohibits the d ischarge of Fats, Oils , and Grease (FOG)
and other substances that may, among other things, clog , obstruct, fill , or necessitate
frequent repairs, cleaning out, or flushing of sewer facilities in the sewer system .
3.1.5 Legal Authority to Enforce any V iolation of Sewer Ordinances
Under Section 20 .24.100 of the LACO Code , the Director of Public Works is empowered
to enforce all of the requirements prescribed in Division 2 -Sanitary Sewers and
Industrial Waste of the Code and in acco rdance with Section 20 .24 .110 may delegate
th is authority. LACO Code Section 20 .24 .160 allo w s criminal penalties for any
violations of the Sewer and Industrial Waste Ordinances .
The Codes, standard plans, specifications , and other materials cited in this chapter are
filed at the office of the Director of Public Works .
12
ATTACHMENTS 3-178
CHAPTER4
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
4.1 Preventive Maintenance Program
The SMD's maintenance services are provided from five maintenance yards
strategically located within the County of Los Angeles for efficient management of
maintenance activities including SSOs and other emergencies . The maintenance crews
are equipped with standard industry technologies including radio equipped trucks for
easy communication , cellular phones , heavy and light construction equipment, vacuum
trucks, pumps, generators , trucks equipped with closed-circuit television units for interior
inspection of sewer lines, and various types of safety equipment. A complete inventory
of the SMD equipment is presented in Appendix B.
The cornerstone of the SMD 's maintenance operation is the preventive maintenance
program as described in the DPW's training guide maintained in each of the field
maintenance yards . This program consists of regular inspection of the sewer system
including manholes, pipes, siphons, pump stations, treatment plants , regular cleaning,
repair, and related activities . This program is designed and carried out to detect and
correct potential problems before they develop into major problems . The following is a
summary of the key preventive maintenance activities (Details are contained in the SMD
Maintenance and Operations manual), and where applicable, frequencies for these
services have been included:
4.1.1 Sewer Line and Manhole Inspection -The interior and exterior of manholes
are inspected semi-annually for any structural defects, sewage flow condition ,
presence of vermin or rodents, deleterious industrial waste, odors , and any signs
of unusual settlement around or evidence of debris within the manholes and
along sewer alignments.
4.1.2 Gas Trap Manholes and Siphons -On a monthly basis , these facilities are
inspected and cleared of any stoppages or flow restrictions.
4.1 .3 Drop Manholes -These facilities are inspected and cleared of stoppages and
flow restrictions on variable frequencies based on prior inspection records .
4.1.4 Sewer Line Cleaning -Sewer lines are cleaned by hydro jet or rodding .
Frequency of cleaning is based on inspection records . Sewer lines known to
accumulate grease, garbage grinds , or sand are put on monthly, quarterly, or
semi-annual cleaning schedule , and those prone to root growth are periodically
rodded or chemically treated .
4.1.5 Vermin and Rodent Control -Sewers infested by insects are chemically
treated . Those infested by rodents are baited .
13
ATTACHMENTS 3-179
4.1.6
4.1.7
4.1.8
Sewage Pump Stations -All pump stations are equipped with telemetry/alarm
syst ems and are inspected at least once a week. Pumps and motors are
lubricated , control mechan isms and val ves are checked and adjusted as
necessary, and equipment is repaired or modified as required. Revised 2/13/2013
Work Scheduling -Most work orders are generated and tracked by using the
DPW's Maintenance Management System (MMS). Field crew activities are
recorded in various forms such as service requests, cleaning reports, sewer
maintenance daily reports, manhole adjustments, overflow report forms, etc., and
are stored in the MMS .
SMD Mapping System -As-built plans of the SMD facili t ies are ma i ntained
either by the DPW or cities within the CSMD . Data on the plans, such as system
locations and alignment, pipe material , size , etc., are stored in the SMD 's
Computer-Aided Design and Drafting (CADD) System. Information generated by
the CADD is printed on 369 map sheets stored in the Mapping and Annexation
Unit of the Sewer Maintenance Division located at 1000 South Fremont Avenue ,
Alhambra , California. These maps are also distributed to the SMD 's field crew ,
for work scheduling and responding to emergencies, and to cities and other
agencies . The maps are updated to reflect any changes in the system .
DPW is currently working on plans to convert the CADD mapping system to
Geographical Information System (GIS). This will create a mapping system that
includes a sewer map and sewer features such as pipe location, diameter , material,
condition , last date cleaned or repaired, flow direction , etc. The system includes base
information such as streets and parcels . This database linked with mapping also
includes various layers of information such as the storm dra in systems , trunk sewer
lines , etc ., used by the DPW and other governmental agencies.
A map showing the locations of SMD field maintenance yards and pump stations is
presented in Append ix C . Following the map is an inventory of the SMD 's collection
system facilities (Appendix D). The sewer lines are presented by size, type of material ,
and total length within each of the 42 cities served by the SMD and the unincorporated
County area . Also shown (Appendix D17) are the approximated total revenues
generated in the cities and un incorporated County area based on current sewer service
charge rates and total number of sewage units .
4.2 Rehabilitation and Replacement Plan
Sewer facilities assessment and rehabilitation are an integral part of the SMD's
preventive maintenance program . The historical background of the capital improvement
programs of SMD , work that has been completed or planned , short-and long -term
projects , and the SM D's newly created Condition Assessment Program for the collection
sewer system are discussed below.
4.2.1 Accumulative Capital Outlay Program of the Consolidated Sewer
Maintenance District
14
ATTACHMENTS 3-180
In 1987, the County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors established the Accumulative
Capital Outlay (ACO) Fund to finance sewer rehabilitation projects within the CSMD.
The interior of about 127 miles of sewer lines, most of which were made of cement pipe
materials and over 60 years old, had been inspected by a closed-circuit television
camera and found to be deteriorated. These lines were prioritized for rehabilitation
based on the degree of deterioration. To date , 88 miles of the cement pipe sewers and
14 pump stations have been rehabilitated by lining or reconstruction . The rehabilitation
of the remaining 31 miles of cement pipe sewers is scheduled to be completed within
the next four years. A list of the current and future ACO projects through Fiscal
Year 2009-2010 are presented in Appendix E
In addition, some deteriorated lines are discovered during preventive maintenance of
our sewer l ines. These lines are either immediately repaired by force account, use of
emergency contractors , or are added to the list of future ACO projects.
In compliance with the WDRs , all sewer pipe segments within the SMD found to have
structural deficiencies will continue to be rehabilitated or reconstructed under our
current ACO program .
However, most hydraulic deficiency-related issues will be referred to cities , if located
within their boundaries, or to the County, if located within unincorporated County, for
appropriate remedial actions .
4.2.2 Marina Sewer Maintenance District -Capital Project
A consulting engineering firm was hired in 1992 to identify sources of sea water
infiltration into the Marina SMD sewers and other deficiencies in the system and to
recommend appropriate remedial actions. Most of the sewer lines were televised and
ranked for repair based on extent of deterioration. To date, 8.2 miles of sewer lines and
123 manholes have been rehabilitated by lining at the cost of $3 .3 million. Lining of the
remaining 3.1 miles of sewer lines and lining of the remaining 7 4 manholes is schedule
to be completed by the end of the Fiscal Year 2008-09.
4.2.3 Condition Assessment Program
Most pipelines within the SMD are made of vitrified clay and range in diameter from 8 to
15 inches. As the sewer collection system ages, the risk of failure increases. Issues of
concern include deterioration , collapse, blockage, excessive inflow and infiltration,
overflow, and other potential service interruptions.
In an effort to overcome these challenges and to improve the quality of the SMD 's
sewer infrastructure, DPW has developed and implemented a new Condition
Assessment Program to televise and structurally rate approximately 500 miles of sewer
infrastructure each year. The complete cycle is scheduled to last a total of 10 years .
The televising will be prioritized to focus on those sewers thought to have the most
urgent repair needs. Maintenance history, past overflow records , sewer locations, and
15
ATTACHMENTS 3-181
age will be some of the factors used to priorit ize the televising schedule . The
assessment program cons ists of two parts : 1) Closed-circuit television inspection crews
gather video and data for each pipe segment within the CSMD , and 2) Engineers in the
office generate reports and manage a database with the gathered information and
incorporate it with ArcGIS . A software package called WinCan V7 from WinCan
America is used to video and log events , allowing for quick retrieval of video clips ,
photos, and observations. The software lends itself to easy creation of itemized reports
for engineering analysis . This system digitizes analog video output from the inspection
camera while being digitally recorded and displayed on a computer monitor in the
camera van . While the video is being captured, a crew member views and logs events
such as defects and observations using Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program
observation codes. The digital video inspections files are transferred to a computer
server fo r storage allowing access at any networked location thereby eliminating the
need for cumbersome VHS video tapes .
The first project, which was launched in September 2005 , televised and inspected
38 miles of sanitary sewer lines. The CCTV inspection reports revealed that 2 percent
of pipe segments have maintenance problems and /or structural defects , whereas
98 percent of the system televised was shown to be in good condition . A priority list has
been established to address the identified deficiencies based on the severity of the
deficiency and the need for action . Gathered data is currently being analyzed to assess
the condition of the sewer system and resu lts will be used for preparing and
implementing our maintenance schedule and proactive priority repairs . By the end of
2007 , a total of 531 miles of sanitary sewers have been televised in areas throughout
the County . The cities involved in these projects include : La Mirada , Santa Fe Springs,
Duarte , Industry, La Puente, Lakewood , Pico Rivera, Palos Verdes Estates, Lancaster,
and Glendora . The completed and scheduled projects are shown in Appendi x F .
4 .3 Equipment Maintenance and Replacement Policy
The SMD have a comprehensive equipment maintenance program . Equipment is
regularly checked, adjusted , repaired, or replaced as necessary. However, major fixed
assets are replaced when they meet or exceed the DPW's established fixed assets
replacement criteria based on age of the equipment, mileage , hours of use , repair
history, etc .
Equipment categorized as Class 9 (less than ~ ton) or lower, is automatically replaced
by the Fleet Management Group of the Administrative Services Division of the DPW
when it meets the replacement criteria . The request to replace equ ipment higher than
Class 9 is made as part of the SMD's annual budget. In addition to the above
replacement criteria , an analysis and recommendation by trained staff of the DPW and
approval by DPW administration is required to replace equipment higher than Class 9 .
These criteria notwithstand ing , a piece of equipment can also be replaced if its reliability
or safety of operation becomes questionable. New and additional equipment are also
acqu ired when fully justified based on increased workload , new activity, additional
16
ATTACHMENTS 3-182
personnel, technological improvements, time and cost savings , employee or public
safety requirements , etc .
4.4 Training for Field Operations Personnel and Contractors
The SMD staff responsible for the operation and maintenance of the sewer collection
system and the DPW inspectors attend formalized collection training classes or
seminars given by other agencies including Californ ia Occupational , Safety and Health
Administration (CALOSHA), California Water Environment Association , International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers , etc. This training will keep them abreast with the
latest technology in the industry on how to safely and efficiently carry out their tasks.
The District also utilizes informal training approaches, such as tailgate meetings,
monthly safety meetings, and apprenticeship training programs from higher-level staff.
Additionally, only companies with well-trained and experienced staff are considered for
either emergency SSO mitigation or sewer construction and rehabilitation work.
17
ATTACHMENTS 3-183
LINE NO MANHOLE 1
1 1544-0265
2 1544-0135
3 1544-0940
4 1544-0188
5 1544-0142
6 1544-0169
7 1544-0360
8 1544-0176
9 1544-0203
10 1544-0362
ACCUMULATIVE CAPITAL OUTLAY PROGRAM
LINING: MANHOLE TO MANHOLE
FISCAL YEAR 2013-1014
MANHOLE2 STREET
1544-0266 Easement South of Via Campesina
1544-0362 Flambeau Dr
1544-0939 Easement South of Montemalaga
1544-0189 Easement between Ironwood & Barkstone
1544-0141 Spring Creek Rd
1544-0170 Whitestone Rd
1544-0359 Easement of Finecrest
1544-0367 Finecrest Dr
1544-0202 Easement East of Grayblake
1544-0361 Flambeau Dr
TOTAL LENGTH (FT)
EST. LENGTH (FT)
56
298
227
190
350
282
198
178
59
335
2 ,173
~ :r: -co -....,
......
0 ATTACHMENTS 3-184
LINE NO MANHOLE 1
1 1601-0076
2 1600-0098
3 1546-0192
4 1545-0427
5 1546-0111
6 1545-0073
7 1655-0013
8 1601-0102
9 1546-0167
10 1654-0142
11 1545-0282
12 1601-0020
13 16 55-0011
14 1601-0149
15 1546-0184
16 1601-0066
17 1601-0043
18 1654-0328
19 1545-0210
20 1600-0089
21 1546-0166
22 1599-0106
23 1654-0166
24 1599-0103
25 1546-0113
26 1601-0134
27 1546-0059
28 1546-0239
29 1546-0248
30 1600-0016
31 1600-0009
32 1654-0181
33 1546-0196
34 1546-0197
35 1545-0436
36 1601-0074
ACCUMULATIVE CAPITAL OUTLAY PROGRAl\I
LINING : MANHOLE TO MANHOLE
FISCAL YEAR 2014-1015
MANHOLE2 STREET
1601 -0077 EASEMENT
1600-0116 EASEMENT
1546-0191 BARKENTINE RD
1545-0426 EASEMENT
1546-0105 EASEMENT
1545-0072 EASEMENT
1655-0014 EASEMENT
1601-0103 EASEMENT
1546-0168 EASEMENT
1654-0141 MIRALESTE DR
1545-0281 EASEMENT
1601-0019 EASEMENT
1655-0012 EASEMENT
1601-0150 PALOS VERDES DR S
1546-0185 PALOS V ERDES DR S
1601-0065 HIGHIDE DR
1601-0044 GANADO DR
1654-0329 MIRALESTE DR
1545-0209 CREST RD
1600-0090 GANADO DR
1546-0167 EASEMENT
1599-0107 EASEMENT
1654-0165 PALOS VERDES DR E-EASEMENT
1599-0104 EASEMENT
1546-0114 EASEMENT
160 1-0133 CONQUEROR DR
1546-0044 EASEMENT
1546-0238 BEACHVIEW DR
1546-0247 EASEMENT
1600-0015 DAUNTLESS DR
1601 -0149 PALOS VERDES DRS
1654-0186 EASEMENT
1546-0197 ARROWROOTLN
1546-0196 ARROWROOT LN
1545-0435 EASEMENT
1601-0081 EASEMENT
TOTAL LENGTH (FT)
EST. LENGTH (FT)
112
293
239
112
182
87
322
103
145
354
265
283
162
234
203
310
327
225
350
298
141
355
32
176
288
223
159
149
145
196
336
132
159
159
184
229
7 ,669
ATTACHMENTS 3-185
EXHIBIT 11
PRESERVING LAND AND RESTORING HABITAT FOR THF EDUCATION AND ENJOYMENT Of All
February 24, 2014
The Honorable Jerry Duhovic, Mayor
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
32415 Nautilus Drive
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
The Honorable Jim Knight, Mayor Pro Tern
The Honorable Susan Brooks, Councilwoman
The Honorable Brian Campbell, Councilman
The Honorable Anthony Misetich, Councilman
At:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Re: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Infrastructure Report
Dear Mayor Duhovic, Mayor Pro Tern Knight , Councilwoman Brooks, Councilman Campbell and
Co uncilman Misetich:
The recent written review of the status of infrastructure as presented in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Infrastructure Report Card, stated that "[t]he Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (PVPLC) is
responsible for maintenance and repair of existing unimproved trails in the Preserve." As the President of the
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy's board, I want to correct this misstatement. The Management
Agreement between PVPLC and the City of Rancho Palos Verdes gives PVPLC the discretion but NOT the
obligation to repair and maintain trails. To be clear, neither party is assigned this responsibility . Essentially,
the agreement is silent on the obligation of trail maintenance, reflecting the concerns of each party that were
discussed during the negotiations . While PVPLC undertakes efforts with respect to trail work, through
volunteers , staff and contractors, this work is not part of PVPLC's obligations under the Management
Agreement.
The issue is important to the PYPLC because its role must be clearly understood not only by the City Council
but also by the public at large. In order to carry out our mission, PVPLC relies on community support.
Confusion over PYPLC's role jeopardizes that support. It is damaging if reports are released that misstate our
responsibility for trail maintenance. We believe that the City Staff is aware of the scope of our management
agreement, and we have requested in the past that our scope as related to trails be more accurately reflected.
We need the City's support to preserve these lands, to keep them open, and to satisfy both of our obligations
that came with the acquisition of the lands. Part of the support is recognizing and communicating what the
PVPLC does (and does not do) in the Preserve
If you have questions about this or any other aspect of PVPLC's work, please let me know or call our
Executive Director, Andrea Vona at 310-541-7613.
Sincerely,
;?_,// s~~...,_
William Swank
President, Board of Directors
916 SILVER SPUR ROAD# 207. ROLLING HILLS ESTATES. CA 90274-3826 T 310.5~ 1.7613 F 310.541.7623 WWWPVPLC ORG
ATTACHMENTS 3-186
C ITY OF
March 17, 2014
William Swank
President, Board of Directors
916 Silver Spur Road# 207
Rolling Hills Estates , CA 90274-3826
Dear Mr. Swank,
RANC HO PALOS VERDES
PUBLIC WOR l<S DEPARTMENT
Thank you for your correspondence dated February 24, 2014 regarding the Rancho
Palos Verdes Infrastructure Report Card and specifically Sectio n 8: Trails . As I
understand it, the PVPLC would like to clarify the record to reflect the November 1,
2011 Preserve Management Agreement between the City and t he PVPLC as it relates
to the maintenance and repair of existing unimproved trails in the Preserve.
After reviewing the Management Agreement, I agree that clarification is warranted . As
such , the first bulleted paragraph on Page 22 of the Report Card will be revised to read
as follows :
101 Preserve trails about 29 mi les in length . The Preserve Trails are with the Palos
Verdes Nature Preserve . Accord ing to the Novembe r 1, 2011 Preserve Management
Agreement between the C ity and the PVPLC, any "trail maintenance" and "trail repair"
on unimproved trail s in the City Council app roved Preserve Trails Plan (PTP) is neither
the C ity's or the PVPLC's obligation , but rather a perm issive activity as determined .
necessary by the PVPLC and as funding becomes avai lable as stated in Exhi b it B-3 .
On behalf of the City, I would like to thank you and the Board for providing feedback on
the accuracy of the report card .
Michael Throne, P .E.
Director of Public Works
cc: City Coun cil
Joel Rojas, Director of Community Development
Carolynn Petru , City Manager
30940 HAWTHORNE 8 0Ul.E\IARD I RANCHO f1\LOS VE.ROES. l~A 9 0275-5391 I (310) 544·5252 /FAX (310) 544 ·5292 I WWWPALOSVERDESCOM/RPV
l)Rll'ITEO ON l~EcYCLEO rAPER
ATTACHMENTS 3-187
Michael Throne
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hi M ichael-
Caro lynn Petru
Monday, February 17, 2014 8:21 AM
Michael Throne
Sia ma k Motahari; Joel Rojas ; Ara Mihranian
FW: Infrastructure Report Card re Trails
Comments to CC re Infrastructure Report Card .docx
This ema il came i n after the Infrastructu re W orkshop last week, but I wanted to make sure you were aware of Ms.
Cicoria's comments .
Than ks !
CP
From: cicoriae@aol.com [mailto:cicoriae@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 8:40 PM
To: CC
Subject: Infrastructure Report Card re Trails
Mayor Duhovic, Mayor Pro Tern Knight and Council Members Brooks , Campbell , and Misetich,
Regarding the Infrastructure Report Card . . . I don't know much about some of the areas covered in the Report, but I
know about the trails . With regard to the trails, I found the Report somewhat confusing and inaccurate. That left me with
two concerns : 1) whether the report on the trails will be used in support of future City action or inaction; and 2) whether
the inaccuracies and confusion that characterize the trails section of the Report is also true for the other
sections . Attached are some points of confusion as well as what I believe may be errors with respect to the trails .
Eva Cicoria
ATTACHMENTS 3-188
Comments on the Infrastructure Report Card
Points of confusion:
Trail Condition--What does the Report cover; what aspects contributed/didn't contribute to the ''A" grade awarded trails in
the Report?
On page 5 (1-11 ), the Report states that it covers ''101 Preserve Trails/29 Miles" and "16 Non-Preserve Trails/3 miles".
On page 8 ( 1-14) the Report states that the assessment of the trails was based on access points and trail
markers/signage, available parking , connectivity , and maintenance and that the assessment showed "the trails in very
good condition". Together this information leads one to believe that the Report covers all trails , whether in or out of the
Preserve; whether improved or not improved, including their condition, right?
Then , on page 23 (1-29), the Report states that the "trails network in the City is mainly comprised of natural trails , and the
implementation of any new trails will strictly preserve the existing ecosystem . As such , physical condition is not an
evaluation factor." This leads one to believe that the Report does not evaluate the condition of the trails.
On the other hand, maintenance is repeatedly recited as one of the factors evaluated in the Report and how can
maintenance be assessed without considering physical condition?
So, was trail condition considered for all trails, only improved trails , or not at all?
The bottom line is that some percentage of the unimproved trails are in very poor condition . Based on the comments of
Mr. Nelson, that's not unlike the sewer system . It's not clear , then , why the sewer system gets a "D" grade and the trails
get an "A".
Report Recommendation--Conduct a survey.
One of the Report's recommendations, from page 25 ( 1-31 ), is that the City:
"3 . Perform a Visitor Survey/Study to find out the number of current trail users , the type of use (hike,
bike, equestrian), and the expected increase in the number of visitors . Such a study will guide in
planning future projects , their order of priority, and the need for new regulations to prevent any
unintended consequences that may arise from the increase in the number of users."
While it is important to keep tabs on use and carrying capacity of the Preserve , PVPLC conducted such a survey within
the last couple of years . It revealed that, on the Saturday that the survey was conducted (at the Burma Rd entrance to the
Preserve and one other location on Fire Station Trail near the entrance to Rolling Hills), approximately 500 pedestrians
and approximately 30 each of cyclists and equestrians entered Portuguese Bend Reserve. (I don't recall the exact
numbers .) I believe that this survey is cited as a source in the document at page 26 (1-32). Did the authors of the Report
forget that this survey was available or do they think an additional survey or follow up survey should be conducted?
Errors :
The Report states that "All trails within the City are accessible .... " That is definitely not true if this is the now-common
usage meaning "ADA accessible". The improved trails may all be accessible and this adds to the confusion regarding
whether the Report grade for trails applies only to the improved trails, perhaps because these are the trails for which the
City has maintenance responsibility.
The Report states, on page 8 ( 1-14 ), that the PVPLC "is responsible for the maintenance and repair of existing
unimproved trails in the Preserve while the City is responsible for the construction of new trails and maintenance of
improved trails ." The latter part is true; as I understand it, however, although PVPLC has been doing some clearing of
unimproved trails, the Management Agreement is silent regarding which entity bears responsibility for maintenance of
unimproved trails .
ATTACHMENTS 3-189
Michael Throne
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Ms. Cicoria:
Mich ae l Th rone
Monday, May 05, 2014 9:32 AM
'cicoriae@ aol.co m '
Carol y nn Petru; Si ama k Motahari; Ara Mih ran ian; Jo el Roja s
Follow Up o n Co mment s to 2013 RP V Repo rt Ca r d
I would like to thank you for the comments forwarded to me regarding the February infrastructure report card
workshop, and would like to offer the following responses to your observations.
The trail network as a system was evaluated and included those considered Preserve and non-Preserve. Public
Works reviewed the Trai l s section of the report card and have revised the paragraph at the top of page 23
clar ifying that design criteria (width, size, materi als) was not an evaluation factor because as you properly
po inted-out, physical condition is reflected in maintenance and the explanations on that page were in conflict .
It was a challenge to grade trai l s as there are improved and un-i mproved facilities, and what could be
considered "A" in the un-improved category might be the exact opposite if looked at as improved.
Regarding the visitor survey, the intent was a recommendation for the future to conduct another survey as
follow up.
The phrase "trai ls are accessible" on page 23 was rev ised to read "trails can be accessed". The term accessible
has the general meaning that those with mobility constraints can use some or all of a facility. What was meant
was that people can get to the trail heads from other means of transport, therefore "can be accessed" is a
more precise descri ption.
Public Works also revised the informati on about trai l maint enance responsibilities vis -a-vis the City and PVP LC.
The revised report card w i ll be available on the city's website later this week and will be revised at the City
Council meeting of May 14, 2014.
Again, I am appreciat ive of your co m me nts as t hey hav e i m proved this document.
Regards,
M ichae l T hro ne, PE
Di r ecto r of Pub li c Wo rks
City of Ra ncho Pa los Verdes
309 40 Hawthorne Blv d
Ra ncho Pa l o s Ve rdes Ca liforn ia 90275
310 544-5252
ATTACHMENTS 3-190
Michael Throne
From:
Sent:
Jerry Du h ov ic <co unci lman du hovic@ hotma il.com >
Thursd ay, April 03, 2014 12:17 PM
To: Michael Thron e
Subject: FW: 2/10/14 CC M tn g : Nelson Ha ndout Ex p lanation
Michael ,
Just wanted to make sure you got this.
Thanks.
Regards,
Jerry
Jerry V. Duhovic
Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
jeriy.duhovic@rpv.com
City Hall:(310)544-5207
Cell:(310 502-8036
To : cc@ rpv.com ; caro lynn@rpv.com; car lam@rpv.com
Subject: 2/10/14 CC Mtng: Nel son Ha n dout Explanati on
From : nelson gang@aol.com
Dat e: Tue, 11 Fe b 2014 12 :28 :23 -0500
1
ATTACHMENTS 3-191
Council , Acting City Manager, City Clerk
Thank you for the opportunity to address you last night as a private citizen . But time ran short so:
Explanation of Bob Nelson's Handout last night at Infrastructure Meeting:
It's smple:
1 . First page: Summarized are all 4 County of Los Angeles, Dept of Public Works reports to RPV's
Public Works (2 in 2009, 1 each in 2012, 2013). Of our 139 miles of sanitation sewers , the County
has CCTV'd 98 for both Maintenance (Capacity, Blockages) and Structural (time to failure) and this
summarizes those reports . That leaves 32% (41 miles) to go and that report is due to RPV Public
Works NL T June 5, 2014 according to the county.
It is important to know the County fixes Maintenance (capacity -515 issues in their 2103 report) and
Structure (broken pipe -119 in 2013 report) as it as it goes along .
Because of the detail in these reports (manhole to manhole analysis of the CCTV and resulting
summaries) they are lengthy. The 2013 is 391 pages but covers over 50 miles of sanitation sewers.
2. Remainder: Sample pages from the County's 2013 report to RPV:
Cover letter (clearly states Maintenance and Structure are LA jobs)
Area covered (note: numbers are manhole number, orange pipe indicates County
maintained sewers, look at map legend for more details).
Maintenance and Structural maps; each has sample page of details found and date fixed, again , look
at the legend.
Water Infiltration maps
Barkentine's manhole to manhole detail. Sample of how far down LA goes in detail.
In toto these reports show you the depth of the County's analys is , ie , what we get for the Sanitation
dollars we pay with our Property Taxes (in my case over $140) that maintain RPV's sanitation
sewer system .
Note RPV Public Works should , per County cover letter, have all these reports in our city's 'Sewer
System Management Plan as a reference in Chapt. 8.0 System Evaluation and Capacity
Assurance Plan.'
As I stated this is all good material but RPV 's Sanitation Sewer Statement of Work (SOW) is
contained in their contract with Los Angeles Dept of Public Works . We should not even attempt to
do or even propose work found in LA 's SOW. Per their cover Jetter Maintenance and Structure
are clearly Los Angeles's SOW, not RPV's.
Last night appeared not to meet expectations but it did provide our community another milestone in
what will be a long , challenging road.
Bob Nelson
31 0-544-4632
2
ATTACHMENTS 3-192
Michael Throne
From: Michael Throne
Sent: Monday, Apri l 14, 2014 4:52 PM
'n elso ngang@aol.com' To:
Cc: Carolynn Petru; Ron Dragoo; Carla Morreale; 'CC@rpv.co m '
Subject: RE: From Nelson: 4/15/14 Consent Ca lendar Item G: San itation Sewers
CC Re so 95-33 .pdf Attachments:
Dear Mr. Nelso n :
I was forwarded your comme nts to Mayor Duhovic. After reading them, I w o uld like to provide the fo l lowi ng
responses . The numberi ng re fle ct s your numbering be low.
1) Pu bl ic Works has met with maintena nce district personne l re lated to roles and responsib il ities of
maintenance and ope rat i ons. It i s clear from t h e st ate regu lat i ons regarding what work the
maintenance dist rict is req ui r ed to do does not i nvo lve i ncreasing sewer ma i n sizes due to inadequat e
capacity caused by di scretionary infi ll development approve d by the City. Sewer mains that are too
smal l in diameter pose a si gnificant risk of overflowi ng into t he streets and storm drain system, which
presents a signifi cant hea lt h/envi ronmenta l r isk and reg ulatory compliance concern that the City must
bare. To summarize , we asked and they said "No."
2) As there have been questions regarding a maintenance "contra ct " between the City and the
Consolid at ed Sewer Maintenance Dis trict (a function of the LA County Department of Pub li c Works), I
have attached a copy of City Coun cil Resolution 95-33 that assigns the operat ions and maintenance
res po nsi bility of our sewer mains to the ma intenance district. Pursua nt to the Californ ia Health and
Sa fety Code Div. 6, Part 3, Chapt er 4, Article 3, Section 4885 (referenced in the Reso lutio n) the sewer
maintenance d istrict board is responsibl e to make and enforce all rules an d re gula tion s necess ary for
" ... the cleaning, repa i r, re construction, renewal, r ep la ce ment, operation, and maintenance of lateral and
co ll ectin g sewers in it.11 This resolution and th e state codes that were used to form the mai ntenance
district is the ba sis of the "contra cf' between the City an d the maintenance district.
3) A. A rep resentative of District 5 of the Sanitation Dist ricts of LA County wil l be making a presentation
Tuesday night on the subject of the se rvice s provided and the associated costs of those services. I would
li ke to invite you to attend . Public Works has broached the subject of a maintenan ce status presentation
to the sewer maintenance d istrict and this wil l be something your Pub lic Works department will be
pursuing with them after they have completed the full clean i ng/i nspect ion cycle as you note.
B. W e to o are lo o king forwa rd to r ecei vi ng t heir report and encourag in g t he m ainten an ce dist rict to
sh a re th e ir overa l l res ul ts, impr ess ions an d ac t io n pl an for the f ut ure with the RPV co m m uni t y .
Than k you fo r you r comment s and yo ur i nt eres t i n t h e m anage m ent an d operati ons of ou r co ll ec ti on syst em .
Rega r ds,
Michae l Th ron e, PE
Dir ect o r of Pub li c Wo rk s
City of Ra ncho Palos Verd es
30940 Hawthorne Blvd
Ranc h o Pa l os Ve rde s Ca l iforn ia 90275
3 10 544-525 2
ATTACHMENTS 3-193