RPVCCA_CC_SR_2013_10_01_04_Approve_Purchase_Sale_Agmts_Private_Prop_MalagaCrTYOF
4 o RANCHO FALOS VERDES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED:
HONORABLE MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JOEL ROJAS, COMMUNITY PMENT DIRECTOR
OCTOBER 1, 2013
APPROVAL OF TWO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENTS TO
PURCHASE PRIVATE PROPERTIES IN MALAGA CANYON FOR THE
PURPOSE OF OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION ,
CAROLYN LEHR, CITY MANAGER ~
RECOMMENDATION
1) Refer the issue of consistency of these p·urchases with the City's General Plan to the
Planning Commission;
2) Approve the purchase of approximately 42 acres of open space in Malaga canyon from
Angeles LLC with 100% of the acquisition cost funded by federal grant monies and,
following the Planning Commission's determination regarding General Plan consistency,
authorize·the Mayor to execute the Purchase and Sale Agreement; and
3) Approve the purchase of approximately 16 acres of open space in Malaga canyon from
Ya Yi May with 100% of the acquisition cost funded by federal grant monies and, following
the Planning Commission's determination regarding General Plan consistency, authorize
the Mayor to execute the Purchase and Sale Agreement.
BACKGROUND
In late 2011, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) notified the City and the Palos
Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (PVPLC) about the availability of unspent federal
(section 6) grant monies for the acquisition of open space on the Palos Verdes Peninsula
because of the City's Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP). The USFWS
noted their desire to use said funds before they expire to preserve additional habitat on the
Palos Verdes Peninsula to augment the completed NCCP Preserve. Thus, working with
the USFWS and the State Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB), City and PVPLC staff
identified a number of privately owned open space properties in the City that contain
protected habitat for possible acquisition. After following up with the owners of all the
identified properties, two willing sellers emerged.
4-1
On September 17, 20013, the City Council was being asked to authorize the approval of
purchase agreements with the two sellers so that the City could acquire approximately 58
acres of privately held open space in Malaga Canyon. However, because of questions
raised by some members of the public as to whether the open space that is proposed to be
purchased would be eligible to use in a land exchange (Conversion Process) to maintain
the 5.5-acre agricultural use at Upper Pt. Vicente, the Council continued this item to
tonight's meeting so that Staff could do more research on the questions asked.
DISCUSSION
Proposed Malaga Canyon Acquisitions
As explained in the attached September 17, 2013 Staff Report, the USFWS and WCB are
set to allocate $1, 114,500 in federal grant monies to the City for the purchase of open
space in Malaga Canyon from two willing sellers for fair market value established by State
approved appraisals. Specifically, Dr. Roger Giani (Angeles, LLC) has agreed to sell 41.63
acres to the City for $659,500 and Ya Yi May has agreed to sell 16.25 acres to the City for
$455,000.
The reason the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approached the City with federal monies to
purchase additional open space is to preserve federally protected habitat (Coastal Sage
Scrub) and to add foraging areas for federally protected species that are covered by the
City's NCCP. In previous closed session discussions (the attached September 23, 2013
memo from Kit Fox contains a history of these closed session discussions), the City
Council directed Staff to pursue the acquisitions as the open space would facilitate
implementation of several public trails identified in the City's Conceptual Plan and would
facilitate access to canyon areas when drainage repair projects become necessary.
Furthermore, while the 58 acres of open space is not proposed to be included into the
City's NCCP Preserve at this time, the City may opt to add it to the Preserve in the future if
the PVPLC agrees to fund management of the properties in accordance with the NCCP
and the City/PVPLC Management Agreement.
The Federal grant monies must be approved for disbursement by the State WCB prior to
their expiration in January 2014. Therefore, all efforts are being made to have
disbursement of the monies approved by the WCB at its November 2013 meeting.
Submitting signed Purchase and Sale Agreements to WCB by mid-October is critical for
this to occur. With disbursement of the funds occurring in November, escrow is expected
to close by the end of this calendar year.
Relationship of the Malaga Canyon Acquisitions with the Conversion Process for
Maintaining Agricultural Use at Point Vicente Park
Questions were raised by some members of the public at the September 1 ih City Council
meeting as to whether the Malaga Canyon open space that is proposed to be purchased
would be eligible to use in a land exchange (Conversion Process) to maintain the 5.5-acre
agricultural use at Upper Pt. Vicente. Furthermore, concerns were expressed by some
members of the public and the Council with regards to the City's efforts on a Conversion
4-2
Process related to maintaining the agricultural use at Upper Pt. Vicente. In response to
these questions and concerns, a memo was prepared on September 23rd by Senior
Administrative Analyst Kit Fox that summarizes the City's efforts to date on the Conversion
Process activity related to the agricultural use at Pt. Vicente Park (see attached Memo with
attachments). This memo was provided last week to the City Council and members of the
public. As noted in the memo, one of the next steps identified by Staff is to contact Mr.
David Siegenthaler of the National Park Service to obtain confirmation on whether the
City's acquisition of the Malaga Canyon properties at this time with federal monies would
disqualify such property from consideration as a replacement property. Staff contacted Mr.
Siegenthaler via email on September 23rd and received a response back from Mr.
Siegenthaler via email on September 251h. As noted in the attached email exchange,
because the Malaga Canyon properties are going to be acquired with Federal monies, Mr.
Siegenthaler has made it clear that they are not allowed to be used as Replacement
Property in a Conversion Process. As such, Staff expects to focus its Conversion Process
efforts on ·the City's 5.5-acre Windport Canyon property which the City purchased for
$150,000 in 2010 using City monies in a tax-default sale. Staff will be seeking further
clarification from Mr. Siegenthaler regarding the eligibility of the Wind port Canyon property
as Replacement Property and, if necessary, may need to identify other alternative
Replacement Property and/or Conversion Process scenarios.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
General Plan Consistency
In accordance with the State Government Code, acquisition of real property by the City
must be determined to be consistent with the City's General Plan. If favorable direction is
given by the City Council this evening to acquire said open space parcels, a request to
make a General Plan Consistency Finding for these acquisitions will be presented to the
Planning Commission at its next meeting. Following that determination, the Mayor then will
be authorized to execute the purchase agreements on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
The full cost of the open space acquisition will be funded by a federal grant. Thus, no City
funds will be expended toward the acquisition. The Community Development Department's
approved budget has $38,000 appropriated for consultant costs associated with this open
space acquisition. This far, approximately $25,000 has been expended on consultant costs
related to Phase I studies, surveying, title reports and geologic assessments.
Future maintenance costs of owning the properties would primarily involve costs of
performing annual brush clearance on the properties which is estimated at $5,000 per year
for the Malaga Canyon North parcels and $7,000 per year for the Malaga Canyon South
parcels. This estimate is derived from conversations with both of the willing sellers and a
comparison of current Public Works costs for performing brush clearance on open space
properties of comparable size. If the properties are not enrolled in the NCCP Preserve,
there will also be trail maintenance and trail signage costs that would be borne by the City
associated with the existing trails on the properties. If enrolled in the NCCP Preserve, said
4-3
trail costs would be borne by the PVPLC. Furthermore, if there is a future need to
. construct new trails or trail head improvements on the acquired properties, said projects
would be proposed as part of the City's annual budget process.
ATTACHMENTS
• September 17, 2013 City Council Staff Report without attachments
• Aerial of Malaga Canyon Acquisitions
• Exhibit Map showing area excluded from Angeles LLC acquisition
• September 23, 2013 Memo from Kit Fox
• Email Exchange between Kit Fox and David Siegenthaler
• Public Comments (Late Correspondence from Sept. 1th City Council meeting and
comments received since Sept. 17th)
• PSA for Malaga Canyon South (Ya Yi May)
• PSA for Malaga Canyon North (Angeles LLC)
4-4
· September 17, 2013
City Council
Staff Report
4-5
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
HONORABLE MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JOEL ROJAS, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SEPTEMBER 17, 2013
APPROVAL OF TWO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENTS TO
PURCHASE PRIVATE PROPERTIES IN MALAGA CANYON FOR THE
PURPOSE OF OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION
REVIEWED: CAROLYN LEHR, CITY MANAGER
RECOMMENDATION
1) Refer the issue of consistency of these purchases with the City's General Plan to the
Planning Commission;
2) Approve the purchase of approximately 42 acres of open space in Malaga canyon from
Angeles LLC with 100% of the acquisition cost funded by federal grant monies and,
following the Planning Commission's determination regarding General Plan consistency,
authorize the Mayor to execute the Purchase and Sale Agreement; and
3) Approve the purchase of approximately 16 acres of open space in Malaga canyon from
Ya Yi May with 100% of the acquisition cost funded by federal grant monies and, following
the Planning Commission's determination regarding General Plan consistency, authorize
the Mayor to execute the Purchase and Sale Agreement.
BACKGROUND
In August 2004, the City Council adopted the Rancho Palos Verdes Natural Communities
Conservation Plan (NCCP), which proposed the establishment of a habitat preserve by the
City in exchange for allowing 50 years' worth of City projects (and certain private projects)
that will impact protected habitat in the City on an as needed basis. Since that time,
through the dedication of existing City and PVPLC owned open space properties along with
major open space land acquisitions in 2005 and 2009, the creation of a 1400-acre NCCP
Preserve was completed. With the completion of the NCCP Preserve, the focus shifted
back to updating and completing the final NCCP. The updated draft NCCP is currently
undergoing its final review by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Staff anticipates completion of the Final NCCP
sometime in 2014.
4-6
In late 2011, the USFWS notified the City and PVPLC about the availability of unspent
federal (section 6) grant monies for the acquisition of open space that were eligible to be
spent on the Palos Verdes Peninsula because of the City's NCCP. The USFWS noted
their desire to use said funds before they expire to preserve additional habitat on the Palos
Verdes Peninsula to augment the completed NCCP Preserve. Thus, working with the
USFWS and the State Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB) in 2012, City and PVPLC staff
identified a number of privately owned open space properties in the City that contain
protected habitat for possible acquisition. After following up with the owners of all the
identified properties, two willing sellers emerged. As a result, the USFWS and WCB intend
to allocate $1, 114,500 federal grantforthe purchase of open space from these two willing
sellers at a fair market value established by a State approved appraisal. No City or PVPLC
funds are needed to pay for said acquisitions.
At this time, the City Council is being asked to authorize the purchases and approve the
purchase-agreements with the two sellers so that the City can acquire the properties
described below.
DISCUSSION
Malaga Canyon South (Seller: Angeles LLC)
Malaga Canyon consists of undeveloped open space in the northern part of the City within
the Grandview neighborhood. The Canyon runs primarily in a North-South direction
crossing under Montemalaga Drive and flowing into the City of Palos Verdes Estates. An
entity known as Angeles, LLC (Dr. Roger Giani) owns 48.55 acres of the Canyon consisting
of five separate tax parcels that are grouped into three non-contiguous areas (see attached
aerial). The 48.55 acres owned by Angeles LLC consists of approximately 35.5 acres of
land zoned Open Space Hazard (OH) with approximately 13 acres of Residential zoning
(RS-A-5).
Angeles LLC has agreed to sell 41.63 acres of its holdings to the City, excluding an
approximate 7-acre area that fronts on Montemalaga Drive (see attached Exhibit Map).
Based on an appraisal of the property that was approved by the State in July 2013, the
value of the 41.63 acres of open space that the City will be acquiring is $659,500. A Phase
1 Environmental Assessment, Preliminary Title Report and Geologic Assessment have
been completed for the property, all of which raised no issues of concern. In addition to
providing protection to existing habitat, acquisition of this open space by the City would
provide access to a drainage facility at the top of a small tributary of the canyon near the
terminus of Grayslake Drive that may require future maintenance by the City as well as
facilitate the implementation of the Grayslake Trail (H5) and Finecrest (H 1) and Cityview
(H2) Segments of the Malaga Canyon Trail identified in the City's Conceptual Trails Plan.
As part of the acquisition deal, Dr. Giani is being provided vehicular access from Grayslake
Road to the property that he is retaining via a 15-foot wide access easement over an
existing unused street right-of-way that the City does not intend ever to use. To facilitate a
straight 15-foot wide driveway for shared use by the City and Dr. Giani, the City will provide
a small sliver of access easement area on the property it will acquire from Dr. Giani for the
4-7
exclusive use by Dr. Giani (and any successor owners of the property that he is retaining)
and Dr. Giani will provide a small sliver of access easement area on his property for the
use by the City; its agents, and the public. These reciprocal easements have been
prepared by the City's surveyor and are depicted in a Record of Survey.
In exchange for granting Dr. Giani exclusive access over a portion of the unused street
parcel, Dr. Giani has agreed to fund construction of a 15-foot wide paved access road that
will allow the City and Dr. Giani (and any subsequent owners of his property) to drive
between Grayslake Road and their respective properties. The construction of the paved
access road will include a driveway approach over the existing drainage inlet within the cul-
de-sac of Grayslake Road to the satisfaction of the City's Public Works Department and
the relocation of the existing chain link fencing adjacent to the Grayslake Road cul-de-sac.
Malaga Canyon North (Seller: Ya Yi May)
An individual known as Ya Yi May owns 16.25 acres in the upper (southern) portion of
Malaga Canyon consisting of two separate tax parcels that are landlocked by the Angeles
LLC holdings described above (see attached aerial). The 16.25 acres owned by Ya Yi
May consist of approximately 3 acres of land zoned Open Space Hazard (OH) and
approximately 13.25 acres of residential zoning (RS-a-5).
Ya Yi May has agreed to sell all 16.25 acres of her holdings to the City. Based on an
appraisal of the property that was approved by the State in July 2013, the value of the
16.25 acres of open space that the City will be acquiring is $455,000. A Phase 1
Environmental Assessment, Preliminary Title Report and Geologic Assessment have been
completed on the property, all of which raised no issues of concern. In addition to
providing protection to existing habitat, acquisition of this open space by the City would
facilitate the implementation of the Finecrest (H 1) and Cityview (H2) Segments of the
Malaga Canyon Trail identified in the City's Conceptual Trails Plan.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Relationship to NCCP
Since the City's NCCP Preserve has been completed, the approximate 58 acres of open
space to be acquired in Malaga Canyon is not proposed to be included into the City's
NCCP Preserve at this time. However, because federal grant monies are being used to
purchase the properties, deed restrictions will be recorded that will prevent development of
the property and will ensure its conservation as open space in perpetuity. If the Palos
Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (PVPLC) at some point in the future agrees to fund
management of the properties in accordance with the NCCP (species monitoring, habitat
restoration, etc.) and the City/PVPLC Management Agreement (trail responsibility), the
City could opt to enroll the properties into the NCCP Preserve. This would mean that an
NCCP conservation easement would be recorded on the enrolled properties in favor of the
PVPLC and the City's Management Agreement with the PVPLC would be modified
accordingly.
4-8
Timing
The State is anticipated to disburse the federal funds this November. Thus, escrow is
expected to close by the end of the calendar year.
General Plan Consistency
In accordance with the State Government Code, acquisition of real property by the City
must be determined to be consistent with the City's General Plan. If favorable direction is
given by the City Council this evening to acquire said open space parcels, a request to
make a General Plan Consistency Finding for these acquisitions will be presented to the
Planning Commission at its next meeting. Following that determination, the Mayor then will
be authorized to execute the purchase agreements on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
The full cost of the open space acquisition will be funded by a federal grant. Thus, no City
funds will be expended toward the acquisition. The Community Development Department's
approved budget has $38,000 appropriated for consultant costs associated with this open
space acquisition. This far, approximately $25,000 has been expended on consultant costs
related to Phase I studies, surveying, title reports and geologic assessments.
Future maintenance costs of owning the properties would primarily involve costs of
performing annual brush clearance on the properties which is estimated at $5, 000 per year
for the Malaga Canyon North parcels and $7,000 per year for the Malaga Canyon South
parcels. This estimate is derived from conversations with both of the willing sellers and a
comparison of current Public Works costs for performing brush clearance on open space
properties of comparable size. If the properties are not enrolled in the NCCP Preserve,
there will also be trail maintenance and trail signage costs that would be borne by the City
associated with the existing trails on the properties. If enrolled in the NCCP Preserve, said
trail costs would be borne by the PVPLC. Furthermore, if there is a future need to
construct new trails or trail head improvements on the acquired properties, said projects
would be proposed as part of the City's annual budget process.
ATTACHMENTS
• Aerial of Malaga Canyon Acquisitions
• Exhibit Map showing area excluded from Angeles LLC acquisition
• PSA for Malaga Canyon South (Ya Yi May)
• PSA for Malaga Canyon North (Angeles LLC)
4-9
. Aerial of Malaga
Canyon Acquisitions
4-10
Legend
POTENTIAL ACQUISITION
N CJ Parcels
City Boundary A
lllilllllllllllllllllllllmc::::==Feet
0 300 600
4-11
Exhibit Map showing
area excluded from
Angeles LLC
acquisition
4-12
Parcel One
to remain private
6.922 Acres
15' Access Easement ------
to Parcel One
0 300' 600'
•1 ---1---·1
Traverse PC
EXHIBIT MAP
of a
Parcel Line Adjustment
For
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
APN 7578-002-009, 7578-003-001
Los Angeles County California
Prepared 08/18/2013 by
Michael McGee, PLS3945
McGee Surveying Consulting
4-13
MONUMENT NOTES
(1) Found punched spike & washer embossed ~DRA". No search was made for references.
(2) Found punched spike stamped "LS 5411ft shown on PWFB 0317-683. Found lead & tack in top of curb N65'06'W
14.23' (14.28'). No search was made for other references.
(3) Found punched spike & washer stamped "LS 5411" shown on PWFB 0317-683. Found lead & tacks in top of curb N51"21'W
18.20', N34"1r!W 18.88' and N04"16'E 30.35'. No search was made for other references.
(4) Found punched spike & washer stamped "LS 5411" shown on PWFB 0317-683. Found lead & tacks in top of curb S59"41'W
50.17' (50.22'), and at N50°26'W 11.89' (11.89'). No search was made for other references.
(5) Found punched spike & washer stamped "LS 5411" marking the center of the cul-de-sac shown on PWFB 0317-683. Found
lead & tacks In top of curb al N47"27'W 33.25' (33.25'), N59"51'E 33.86' (33.91'). S05"56'E 34.20' (34.24') and at S47"23'E
33.45'. No search was made for other references.
(6) Set monument on SE side of an an old road bed. The center of a 2' Stormdrain Manhole bears S41°32'E 11.7'.
(7) Set monument In an old road bed. The center of a 2' Sewer Manhole bears S86"05W 19.0'.
(8) Set monument 3' easterly of top of bank.
(9) Set monument on a moderate open north slope
(10) Set monument on a moderate open northeast slope
(11) Set monument on a mild open north slope. The center of a 2' Sewer Manhole bears S41 "03'E ? .6' and a punch hole in the
northwest rim bears S40°53'E 6.59.
(12) Found lead & lack In lop of soulh curb of Monlemalaga Drive and used as a reference for the northeast terminus of the
Rancho Palos Verdes Property line
(13) Found spike & washer shown on ROFB 0317-282 as set at the intersection of the semi-tangent of the main curve of
Montemalaga Drive with the centerline of Grayslake Road. The centerline intersection shown on MB 658-12 ts on the main
curve centerline ofMontemalaga Drive and Is S27"01'15"W 0.39'. Found lead & brass disc "LA CO RO DEPT" on top of south
curb S27°01'15"W 32.67' (32.67'), found lead & tack on top of south curb (see(12)) S26°17'34"E 58.78' (58.79') and lead & tack
N27"01'15"E 29.73' (29.77") In concrete gutter as shown on ROFB 0317-282 and PWFB 0317-763. No search was made for
other references,
(14) Found spike & washer down 0.2'. No search was made for references.
(15) Found punched spike embossed ~oRAM shown on PWFB 0317-712. Found lead & tack In top of curb
S62°56'E 18.76' {18.81'). No search was made for other references.
(16) New Property line begins on the northeast line of the Future Street parcel from which a mag nail & 1.5" brass washer
"PLS3945 MCGEE SURVEYING" bears S44"40'E 10.06'. The nail & washer is set in a concrete footing ofa chain link fence,
0.4' North of lhe center of the post, fence runs SE and SW. 2" IP's per Traci Maps northwest 3.53' and southeast 26.47' not
found.
Utf~ :::;·u ~.~[5'1~:,
:~c;..{},~:c~'/,]c4}:JI
~76'A(l'(l&-E S!:I
1.c,..r..6'1 ~~~~-
1,.1131" \ 0~r.t"lo-2e.· \
40:,.(l()' -\ ~oed 1'1"•·3~a"'""" <,
\,_o\1 1-1 4•t~·ol!l·E. tt~·16!>0"6 1.C"g'l."lr
1,.C"..:i.o.o"l Cet'...,n;ne ~~':.~ :~~: 1
\ ,,..,,zonT : 1 .. A7.9e: I " \ 6 .. ~~~:,r.-i 0~13•s1·oa· 1
~;~~'E"• "\ '
Lot-\1
llR~U54
\ .
60'
.,~s\31f.el4) '""'""""'' '\';;~' .~~ Gf ~;t , ..--_•r,J~<Jc'---;;;;;:J 1
\. .... '!>;q'l.l)~::;-,~1" ---------\,&t9'5'1 .
, l'3) .. ~~(~'-sn1·n1~~,\"~13A-"'ffl 4o;,11{1 ,,,,,-:..t-< ,.,,., ... -:,:,-::,1•••""'' """"'"' \&11"~'2"'1"
I 1.C""4.'!15
\ R""5,11{1
"':A1Sfa" , .. 2!>.94"
o,.s9•ff.>'1'3"
sg•t\'44~~"
1,.C'""Jt.\1" ~
R,.At;,.oct
-~ .. 3i.84'
, .. 11.\9'
0"41•Alr31"
\,.o\70 trln.~il:il@:il
llilllW> ~@~U'ff<B®
l2)_,.,....-:'). .. ~~' \ ..... '!>#')'.1-y \ '1) ~ '~
APN751B-002·009
q..~\ ~ ~~):?o
<b~~-"~o
~,\~L ._.<{;,to ? . \_ \1>G0 ,:-. .,ef? ,, oif''(I
\1)'• "'0(1
\,.o\11
COUNTY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
This map has been examined 1n accordance with Section 8765 or the
Professiona!LandSurveyor'sActthis __ dayof ___ .2012
Deputy County Surveyor
'il'~il®®@~ '~
ll'IIDW> ®@@"®Uil~ ~ .. ,
. o"'~ l1°'1-,..-" 11s1 ~' ~~0/., 'o.,~ -,"", ~e 91""".,., L~1~;· $~~ ~ ~"'ii ~?i~--,r::.,~f'JJ·r::
x. '%-' @(1j, ~,:p-'l<o-r::)
~ ~"'-' -'<-" () .J'o "'l:!'V. ". ~,">.,-'<-/
"-,_ ">i,. Oo. iS'~ ~ .~.:.."'/
k.,$ > "$~/ Cef\\Cfl\!'6ec10EC
...,.:.."""' '·,. ~-11605~) .~~~ ~/~~) I -~~13,~4<!A!f\
60' 120'
0-0'00 e~~
<l'lf-G <("-0~
" ':\_0
/,~\~I
0"3'55'23" ~ ~~ i
l11) "·" ,~..... ~\ ;·""' ~'-' l.t1Z) ""' VNss·51·1u·i:
<({~'lf. ....
~7·<sj9"G . ..s\_........---i ~ _..,,._..-:h,
~' j°
l9)
~·· ... ,-...,~
l:l ""($'-
S37"28"Jt"E
32.55'
~ \10)0
"'(\
·''/, e<cl o0'":J %-<>'~ f?<o~ o ~0<..
4" _,e~ , '\~ ,o<":J
'·v' \" c,0' <('l>'
0~
«'l>" (p-0 <(-.'l>~
o"-
,;>
-~~
DETAIL--.... .... ~-:"'
,.,... -\
-/
\_o\69
--
·-.. .__
SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
This map correclly represents a survey made by me or under my
direction in conformance with the requirements of the Professional
Land Surveyor's Act at the request or the City of Rancho Palos
VerdesmJuly2012.
Michael R. McG&eP:Cs. 3945
SS5"n5'10"E
LC-154.45"
""' R-112t10lT
A=1S4.58'
Tcn.41'
0"7'54"27"
~,.,
.•.
\ ....
\ ;\
LEGEND .,.
0
•
(1)
()
SS
Set 1"x30" Galvanized Iron Pipe up 1/2' with a 2" aluminum cap stamped
~McGee Surveying PLS3945" as described In the Monument Notes". Set a "U"
steel post alongside with a sign "City of Rancho Palos Verdes Property Line"
Found monuments as described in Monument Notes
Refers to Monument Notes symbolized by {1} in Notes
Record information per labeled Tract or Field Notes
Calculated position
Existing Sewer Line
BASIS OF BEARINGS
Bearing shown on this survey are based on TR21353 recorded In M8648-
48/50 based on (3) to (5). The bearings shown on TR19683 recorded in
MB658-9/12 are rotated right 0·01·00· to this survey based on (13) to {14).
Bearing shown on this survey would be rotated left 0°04'03" to obtain
bearing based on geodellc north.
SURVEY NOTE
The purpose of this survey rs to locate, describe and monument a boundary
line adjustment al the request of and for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
that runs from the northeast line of that parcel shown as a •Future Street"
on MB 648-47149 and MB 647-45147 to the south line of Montemalaga
Drive. and a 15' Easement for access over said ~Future Street".
PRELIMINARY 08103112
RECORD of SURVEY
lo•
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes
;n
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes
County of Los Angeles, State of California
Being a Portion of Lot 'H' of Rancho Los Palos Verdes
Scale: 1 "= 60' July 2012
MCGEE SURVEYING CONSULTING
Sheet I of 1
4-14
=ound spike & washer down 0.2'. No search was made for references.
=ound punched spike embossed "ORA" shown on PWFB 0317-712. Found lead & tack in top of curb
)6'E 18. 78' (18.81 '). No search was made for other references.
New Property Line begins on the northeast line of the Future Street parcel from which a mag nail & 1.5" bras~
3945 MCGEE SURVEYING" bears S44°40'E 10.06'. The nail & washer is set in a concrete footing of a chain
lorth of the center of the post, fence runs SE and SW. 2" f P's per Tract Maps northwest 3.53' and southeast 2
t.ol 7'\
COUNTY SURVEYOR'S ST A'
This map has been examined in accordance with Se
Professional Land Surveyor's Act this _______ day c
---------------------------------~-Deputy County Surveyor
002-009
4-15
September 23, 2013
Memo from Kit Fox
4-16
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
KIT FOX, AICP, SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST
SEPTEMBER 23, 2013
SUMMARY OF CONVERSION PROCESS ACTIVITY
RELATED TO AGRICULTURAL USE AT POINT
VICENTE PARK
Staff understands that the conversion of property subject to the Program of Utilization
(POU) at Point Vicente Park that has historically been used for agricultural purposes is
an issue of concern to the City Council and members of the public and was discussed
again at this past Tuesday's City Council meeting, particularly. as it relates to the City's
acquisition of the Malaga Canyon properties using Federal (Section 6) grant monies.
Staff would like to take this opportunity to summarize Staff's efforts in this regard.
INITIAL REQUEST AND RESEARCH (SPRING 2012 TO FALL 2012)
In May 2012, Mr. Hatano's family made an informal inquiry about extending and
transferring his lease at Point Vicente Park. In the course of reviewing this request,
Staff discovered that the most recent lease had expired in March 2011 and that its
terms prevented it from being transferred. In addition, based upon the City's experience
with the POU use restrictions imposed at Lower Point Vicente (LPV) that became an
issue for the former Annenberg Foundation project, Staff identified the need to
investigate the consistency of continued agricultural use with the POU as well.
Staff met with Mr. Hatano and his family in the summer of 2012 to discuss this issue,
and Mr. Hatano subsequently made a formal request to extend and transfer his lease to
his long-time foreman, Mr. Martinez, on October 1, 2012. In preparation for presenting
this request to the City Council, Staff contacted Mr. Siegenthaler of the National Park
Service's (NPS) Federal Lands to Parks program by telephone and e-mail on November
16, 2012. Staff received an e-mail reply from Mr. Siegenthaler on November 19, 2012,
wherein he stated emphatically that "[agriculture] is not a public park and recreation use
and is not allowed on lands conveyed through the Federal Lands to Parks Program."
Staff followed up with Mr. Siegenthaler by telephone, wherein we discussed the
available options to allow the agricultural use at Point Vicente Park to continue (i.e., the
"conversion" process).
4-17
MEMORANDUM: Conversion for Agricultural Use at Point Vicente Park
September 23, 2013
Page2
As Mr. Siegenthaler explained it to me in November 2012, the "conversion" process
involved replacing the property to be removed from the POU restrictions with a
replacement property of equal fair-market value and reasonable-equivalent recreational
utility and location to the area to be converted. Mr. Siegenthaler also informed me that
the replacement property could not be an existing City park, but would need to be
newly-acquired property.
In his November 19th response, Mr. Siegenthaler also noted that he "[believed] that
early in the history of the land transfer the City inquired about granting a lease for
agricultural use on the park land and was told that it was not consistent with the
purposes of the land transfer." Staff requested any documentation regarding this topic
that NPS might have on November 27, 2012, but none has been provided to date.
In the December 4, 2012, City Council Staff report on this topic, Staff had not identified
replacement property for the conversion, and estimated that such property could cost
roughly $1,500,000 per acre, based upon recent vacant property sales in the City.
However, at that meeting, Sunshine suggested properties that the City was trying to
acquire that might be suitable replacement property for the conversion: Malaga Canyon
and North Windport Canyon.
OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION WITH FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS (2011 TO PRESENT)
In 2011, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) notified the City and the Palos
Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (PVPLC) about the availability of unspent Federal
(Section 6) grant monies for the acquisition of open space that were eligible to be spent
on the Palos Verdes Peninsula because of the City's Natural Communities Conservation
Planning (NCCP) program. USFWS expressed the desire to expend these funds before
their expiration to preserve additional habitat on the Palos Verdes Peninsula to augment
the completed NCCP Preserve.
Working with the USFWS and the State Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB), City and
PVPLC staff identified a number of privately-owned open space properties that
contained protected habitat for possible acquisition and appraisals of the properties
were completed by the State. These included (among others) the ±58-acre Malaga
Canyon properties (owned by Dr. Roger Giani and Ya-Yi May). After contacting all the
property owners of the identified open space properties, Dr. Giani emerged as the only
willing seller as he was interested in selling approximately 42 acres of his property. On
November 1, 2011, in closed session, the City Council directed Staff to pursue said
acquisition of the 42 acres. As a result, an updated appraisal of his property needed to
be completed.
Seeking to find other open space in the City to purchase with the available Federal
grant monies, in May 2012, the City and PVPLC contacted the owner of approximately 8
acres of open space in Windport Canyon that abuts approximately 5 acres of open
space already owned by the City. The owner expressed an interest in selling. Thus, on
July 17, 2012, in closed session, the City Council directed Staff to pursue said
acquisition. As a result, the State agreed to prepare an appraisal of this property.
4-18
MEMORANDUM: Conversion for Agricultural Use at Point Vicente Park
September 23, 2013
Page 3
Subsequently, on September 12, 2012, in open session, the City Council directed Staff
to continue working on the possible acquisition of open space in Malaga Canyon and
Windport Canyon for preservation purposes, and appropriated $38,000 to fund certain
due-diligence tasks associated with the acquisitions.
In October 2012, Staff followed up with the property owner of approximately 16 acres in
Malaga Canyon (Ya:-Yi May) who originally expressed no interest in selling after she
was contacted as part of the original search for open space. This time, the property
owner expressed an interest in selling. As a result, the State agreed to prepare an
updated appraisal.
In July 2013, the updated appraisal of Dr. Giani's property, the updated appraisal of
Ya-Yi May's property and a new appraisal of the Windport Canyon property were
completed and approved by the State. Dr. Giani agreed to sell for the appraised price.
Thus, on July 16, 2013, in closed session, the City Council directed Staff to pursue the
purchase the 42 acres of open space for conservation purposes. Subsequently, Ya-Yi
May notified the City that she was willing to sell for the appraised price. Thus, on
August 6, 2013, in closed session, the City Council directed Staff to pursue the
purchase the 16 acres for open space. Despite repeated inquiries to the owner of the
Windport Canyon property, no response has yet been received as to whether they wish
to sell for the appraised value.
Pursuant to Council direction, Staff and the City Attorney prepared Purchase and Sales
Agreements for the two Mala~a Canyon acquisitions which were presented to the City
Council at the September 1 t meeting. Since the Federal grant monies are going to
expire soon, all parties are working to have the acquisition monies appropriated by the
Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB) at its November 2013 meeting. This will allow the
deals to close by the end of the 2013 calendar year.
FURTHER RESEARCH AND FOLLOW-UP (SPRING 2013 TO PRESENT)
Returning to the issues at Point Vicente Park, by the spring of 2013, Mr. Hatano's "year-
to-year" lease of the farm site was coming up for expiration again. Staff sought the City
Council's authorization to continue to lease the property under the terms of the existing
lease on a "year-to-year" basis, and wished to provide an update since the December 4,
2012, City Council meeting. Staff agendized this issue on March 19, 2013.
In preparation for that meeting, Staff again contacted Mr. Siegenthaler via phone and e-
mail, asking for responses to two (2) specific questions to be addressed in the March
19th Staff report:
1. Do you see a means by which the existing agricultural use could be modified so
as to be consistent with the POU, thereby avoiding the conversion process? For
example, do you think that the provision of additional public access, education
programs, site amenities, modifications to the size/area/activities, etc., could be
found sufficient by NPS to allow the City to reassign and extend the lease?
4-19
MEMORANDUM: Conversion for Agricultural Use at Point Vicente Park
September 23, 2013
Page4
2. In the event that the answer to the first question is "no," what is the process for
initiating the conversion? The City has identified 2 large plots of vacant land (8
acres and 48 acres) for possible acquisition to replace the 5 acres at Upper Point
Vicente to be converted.
Although Staff did not receive a response from Mr. Siegenthaler by the date that the
Staff report was completed, Staff did subsequently speak with him before the March 19th
meeting. He confirmed that the answer to my first question was "no," and we again
discussed the conversion process. He subsequently followed up with an e-mail on
March 14, 2013 (attached), which laid out the basic requirements for pursuing
conversion.
At the March 19th meeting, the City Council expressed support for exploring the
possibility of using the Malaga Canyon or North Windport Canyon properties as possible
replacement properties for the conversion process. However, at that time, negotiations
were still on-going for both Malaga Canyon and North Windport Canyon, and it was not
certain when or if the City would acquire either of these properties. Accordingly, Staff
continued to monitor the status of these acquisitions, but waited to expend additional
City resources preparing a conversion application until it was certain that the City would
acquire at least one of these properties. For example, although we knew that an
appraisal of the farm site would be needed, we did not wish to undertake it so far in
advance of initiating the conversion so that it would no longer be current enough to be
used in connection with the conversion process.
NEXT STEPS
Now that it appears that the acquisition of potential replacement property for the
conversion will be happening, Staff is immediately undertaking the following steps:
• Ordering appraisals of the ±5.5-acre farm site at Point Vicente Park and a 5.45-
acre City-owned property abutting North Windport Canyon, which was previously
purchased though a County tax-default sale and could also possibly serve as
replacement property.
• Contacting Mr. Siegenthaler (who is out of town until September 25th) to get
clarification of whether the City's acquisition of replacement property prior to the
submittal of a conversion application would disqualify such property from
consideration as a replacement property. It appears from the information
Mr. Siegenthaler previously provided to Staff that prior acquisition would not
preclude a conversion, provided that the property was not acquired for parkland
purposes. The City Attorney is also further researching the Federal regulations
in this regard. However, since some of the Park Service rules do not appear to
be available on line, Staff may not be able to provide a definitive answer to that
question until Mr. Siegenthaler returns (the City Attorney spoke with a
representative of the Park Service last Friday who was attempting to locate the
applicable rules.)
4-20
MEMORANDUM: Conversion for Agricultural Use at Point Vicente Park
September 23, 2013
Page5
• Proceeding with the compilation of the necessary items listed in
Mr. Siegenthaler's e-mail of March 14, 2013, so that a conversion application can
be filed.
• Making weekly reports to the City Council on the status of the conversion through
the Weekly Administrative Report.
Attachments:
• E-mail to David Siegenthaler of 11/16/12
• E-mail from David Siegenthaler of 11/19/12
• E-mail to David Siegenthaler of 11/27/12
• E-mail to David Siegenthaler of 3/11 /13
• E-mail from David Siegenthaler of 3/14/13
M:\Municipal Facilities\Hatano Farm Lease Agreement\20130923_HatanoleaseConversionSummary_Memo.docx
4-21
Kit Fox
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
. Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
Kit Fox L
Friday, November 16, 2012 10:23 AM~
David Siegenthaler ·
Carolyn Lehr; Carolynn Petru; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>; Joel Rojas; Ara
Mihranian
Extension of Agricultural Lease at Upper Point Vicente in Rancho Palos Verdes (LADA
Nike Site SS, Point Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA No. 9-D-Calif-1088)
2006 Lease Agreement for UPV.pdf; Hatano Farm at Upper Point Vicente.pdf
This e-mail is a follow-up to the voicemail message that I left for you earlier today. I understand that you will be back in
the office on November 191h.
As I mentioned in my message, the City is considering a request from James Hatano to extend and transfer his
agricultural lease of a 5.5-acre portion of the City's Upper Point Vicente property. A copy of the most-recent lease
agreement and an aerial photograph of the farm site are enclosed. Mr. Hatano, the descendant of the last Japanese
American truck farmers on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, has farmed this property since before the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes incorporated in 1973. At age 85, he wants to retire and pass the operation of the farm on to his longtime foreman,
Martin Martinez.
I have reviewed the Program of Utilization (POU) for the Upper Point Vicente property and found no mention of
agricultural activity whatsoever. However, we know that Mr. Hatano was farming the property at the time that title was
transferred to the City in 1976. Before the City considers extending this lease further and/or assigning it to Mr. Hatano's
foreman, we want to be sure that such action is consistent with the POU. Please let me know how the City can request
that the National Park Service make such a determination.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me at the phone number or e-mail
listed below.
Sincerely,
Kit Fax,AICP
Senior Administrative Analqst
Citq ManCl$er's OHi.ce
Citq o£Ra.nchoPalos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes; CA 90275
T: (310) 544~5226
F:(310)544~5291
B kit£@mv.com
1
4-22
Kit Fox
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hi Mr. Fox,
David_Siegenthaler@nps.gov wtf'
Monday, November 19, 2012 6:15 P
Kit Fox ·
Ara Mihranian; Carolynn Petru; Carolyn Lehr; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>
Re: Extension of Agricultural Lease at Upper Point Vicente in Rancho Palos Verdes
(LADA Nike Site 55, Point Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA No. 9-D-Calif-1088)
2006 Lease Agreement for UPV.pdf; Hatano Farm at Upper Point Vicente.pdf
l'hank you for contacting me. We do need to talk. Agriculture is not a public park and recreation use and is not allowed]
on lands conveyed through the Federal Lands to Parks Program. I believe that early in the history of the land transfer
the city inquired .about granting a lease for agricultural use on the park land and was told that it was not consistent with
the purposes of the land transfer. In addition, leases are not allowed in general.
Are you sure this is on the portion of the land that comes under the Federal Lands to Parks program and is not on the
portion purchased by the City?
Please excuse my haste in this response, I have not had a chance to pull out the file yet. I'll be in the office tomorrow.
Thanks,
David Siegenthaler
Pacific West Region
National Park Service
333 Bush Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104-2828
V: 415-623-2334
F: 415-623-2387
Federal Lands to Parks
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Program
____________ Bringing the NPS Mission Home!
Kit Fox
<KitF@rpv.com>
To
11/16/2012 10:23 David Siegenthaler
AM <David Siegenthaler@nps.gov>
cc
Carolyn Lehr <clehr@rpv.com>,
Carolynn Petru <Carolynn@rpv.com>,
1
4-23
"Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>"
<clynch@rwglaw.com>, Joel Rojas
<JoelR@rpv.com>, Ara Mihranian
<AraM@rpv.com>
Subject
Extension of Agricultural Lease at
Upper Point Vicente in Rancho Palos
Verdes (LADA Nike Site SS, Point
Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA
No. 9-D-Calif-1088)
Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
This e-mail is a follow-up to the voicemail message that I left for you
earlier today. I understand that you will be back in the office on
November 19th.
As l mentioned in my message, the City is considering a request from James Hatano to extend and transfer his
agricultural lease of a S.S-acre portion of the City's Upper Point Vicente property. A copy of the most-recent lease
agreement and an aerial photograph of the farm site are enclosed.
Mr. Hatano, the descendant of the last Japanese American truck farmers on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, has farmed
this property since before the City of Rancho Palos Verdes incorporated in 1973. At age 8S, he wants to retire and pass
the operation of the farm on to his longtime foreman, Martin Martinez.
I have reviewed the Program of Utilization (POU) for the Upper Point Vicente property and found no mention of
agricultural activity whatsoever.
However, we know that Mr. Hatano was farming the property at the time that title was transferred to the City in
1976. Before the City considers extending this lease further and/or assigning it to Mr. Hatano's foreman, we want to
be sure that such action is consistent with the POU. Please let me know how the City can request that the National Park
Service make such a determination.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me at the phone number or e-mail
listed below. ·
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior Administrative Analyst
City Manager's Office
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 9027S
2
'"
4-24
T: (310) 544-5226
F: (310) 544-5291
E: kitf@rpv.com
(See attached file: 2006 Lease Agreement for UPV.pdf)(See attached file:
Hatano Farm at Upper Point Vicente.pdf)
3
4-25
Kit Fox
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
Kit Fox -Ir
Tuesday, November 27, 2012 2:39 PM
David_Siegenthaler@nps.gov ·
FW: Extension of Agricultural Lease at Upper Point Vicente in Rancho Palos Verdes
(LADA Nike Site 55, Point Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA No. 9-D-Calif-1088)
[
Would is be possible to get a copy of any correspondence or other documentation in the Service's files that relates to]
previous City inquiries about continuing agricultural use at Upper Point Vicente? You mentioned in our telephone
conversation last week and in the e-mail below that you believed that there was some record of this.
Thank you very ~uch for your assistance. ·
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior Administrative Analyst
City Manager's Office
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
T: {310) 544-5226
F: (310) 544-5291
E: kitf@rpv.com
-----Original Message----
From: Kit Fox
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 8:33 AM
To: 'David_Siegenthaler@nps.gov'
Cc: Ara Mihranian; Carolynn Petru; Carolyn Lehr; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>
Subject: RE: Extension of Agricultural Lease at Upper Point Vicente in Rancho Palos Verdes (LADA Nike Site 55, Point
Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA No. 9-D-Calif-1088)
Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
(
Attached is a copy of Figure 1 from the POU, showing the general location of the existing farm. I believe that this is the,
portion of Upper Point Vicente that falls under the Federal Lands to Parks program. J
I'll call you shortly.
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior Administrative Analyst
City Manager's Office
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
1
4-26
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
T: (310) 544-5226
F: (310) 544-5291
E: kitf@rpv.com
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Siegenthaler@nps.gov [mailto:David_Siegenthaler@nps.gov]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 6:15 PM
To: Kit Fox
Cc: Ara Mihranian; Carolynn Petru; Carolyn Lehr; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>
Subject: Re: Extension of Agricultural Lease at Upper Point Vicente in Rancho Palos Verdes (LADA Nike Site 55, Point
Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA No. 9-D-Calif-1088)
Hi Mr. Fox,
Thank you for contacting me. We do need to talk. Agriculture is not a public park and recreation use and is not allowed
on lands conveyed through the Federal Lands to Parks Program. I believe that early in the history of the land transfer
· the city inquireCJ about granting a lease for agricultural use on the park land and was told that it was not consistent with
the purposes of the land transfer. In addition, leases are not allowed in general.
Are you sure this is on the portion of the land that comes under the Federal Lands to Parks program and is not on the
portion purchased by the City?
Please excuse my haste in this r,esponse, I have not had a chance to pull out the file yet. I'll be in the office tomorrow.
Thanks,
David Siegenthaler
Pacific West Region
National Park Service
333 Bush Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104-2828
V: 415-623-2334
F: 415-623-2387
Federal Lands to Parks
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Program
____________ Bringing the NPS Mission Home I
Kit Fox
<KitF@rpv.com>
To
11/16/2012 10:23 David Siegenthaler
AM <David_Siegenthaler@nps.gov>
cc
Carolyn Lehr <clehr@rpv.com>,
2
4-27
Carolynn Petru <Carolynn@rpv.com>,
"Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>"
<clynch@rwglaw.com>, Joel Rojas
<JoelR@rpv.com>, Ara Mihranian
<AraM@rpv.com>
Subject
Extension of Agricultural Lease at
Upper Point Vicente in Rancho Palos
Verdes (LADA Nike Site 55, Point
Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA
No. 9-D-Calif-1088)
Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
This e-mail is a follow-up to the voicemail message that I left for you
earlier today. I understand that you will be back in the office on
November 19th. ·
As I mentioned in my message, the City is considering a request from James Hatano to extend and transfer his
agricultural lease of a 5.5-acre portion of the City's Upper Point Vicente property. A copy of the most-recent lease
agreement and an aerial photograph of the farm site are enclosed.
Mr. Hatano, the descendant of the last Japanese American truck farmers on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, has farmed
this property since before the City of Rancho Palos Verdes incorporated in 1973. At age 85, he wants to retire and pass
the operation· of the farm on to his longtime foreman, Martin Martinez.
I have reviewed the Program of Utilization (POU) for the Upper Point Vicente property and found no mention of
agricultural activity whatsoever.
However, we know that Mr. Hatano was farming the property at the time that title was transferred to the City in
1976. Before the City considers extending this lease further and/or assigning it to Mr. Hatano's foreman, we want to
be sure that such action is consistent with the POU. Please let me know how the City can request that the National Park
Service make such a determination.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me at the phone number or e-mail
listed below.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior Administrative Analyst
City Manager's Office
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
3
4-28
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
T: (310) 544-5226
F: (310) 544-5291
E: kitf@rpv.com
(See attached file: 2006 Lease Agreement for UPV.pdf)(See attached file:
Hatano Farm at Upper Point Vicente.pdf)
4
4-29
Kit Fox
From:
Sent:
To:
Kit Fox ~
Monday, March 11, 2013 4:21 P
David_Siegenthaler@nps.gov ·
Subject: Agricultural Use at Upper Point Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes
Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
As· a follow-up to my voicemail, I wanted to send you a brief e-mail as well. As you may recall, roughly 5 acres of our
City Hall property has been used for agricultural purposes since before the City acquired the site in the mid-1970s. The
· current lessee wishes to reassign and extend his lease, and this is supported by our City Council. My questions for you
are:
1. Do you .see a means by which such a use could be modified so as to be consistent with the POU, thereby
avoiding the conversion process? For example, do you think that the provision of additional public access,
education programs, site amenities, modifications to the size/area/activities, etc. could be found sufficient by
the Park Service to allow the City to reassign and extend the lease?
2. In the event that the answer to the first question is "no," what is the process for initiating the conversion? The
City has identified 2 large plots of vacant land (8 acres and 48 acres) for possible acquisition to replace the 5
acres at Upper Point Vicente to be converted.
As I mentioned in my voicemail, I will be updating the City Council on this matter next week, and would appreciate a
response as soon as possible. Thank you very much for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior Administrative Anah1st
City Manager's OHice
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
T: (310) 544--5226
F: (310) 544--5291
E: kitf@rpv.com
1
4-30
Kit Fox
From:
Sent:
To:
Siegenthaler, David <david_siegent~al r ps.gov>
Thursday, March 14, 2013 3:30 PM
Kit Fox ·
Subject: Re: Agricultural Use at Upper Point Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes
Hi Kit,
As we discussed by phone, the agricultural use of the Federal Lands to Parks conveyed parkland does not fit the
requirement that the land be used only for public park purposes. Therefore ifthe City decides it is more
· important to continue the agricultural use than to use the land for public park purposes, it may propose a land
exchange. Another option may be for the City to purchase the portion of the park to be used for agriculture -in
which case the NPS would need to agree to a partial reversion of the property to federal ownership so Rancho
Palos Verdes c.ould negotiate with GSA for its purchase. The price would be at least the appraised market value.
Following are the ...
Federal Lands to Parks
Land Exchange Requirements
A change in property use can, when fully justified, be accomplished by substituting alternative new park and recreation
lands of equal or greater market value and recreation value for the land to be released from restrictive use conditions of
the deed. It requires the prior approval of the NPS Regional Director and the GSA. The procedure of exchanging land
requires·the following measures to fully protect the public interest:
Documentation needed:
A. Properly authenticated documents from the Grantee evidencing desire to substitute land of equivalent fair market and
recreational value.
B. Appraisal reports for both parcels. Replacement property must be of at least equal fair market value and of reasonably
equivalent usefulness and location.
+Replacement property: 1) cannot have been previously used as a public park; 2) if already owned by the
Grantee, it must not have been purchased for the purpose of making it a pµblic park;
1
4-31
+the appraisals must be reviewed and accepted by GSA (or the military, if it is a BRAC disposal property) and
NPS.
+ appraisals must conform to the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions;
C. Justification including assessment of public recreational utility of the land proposed for exchange and its
replacement. This analysis should include an assessment of public need and demographics, similar to that provided in the
original public benefit application. It should also reference City, State or other local comprehensive outdoor recreation
plans in its statement of need. Justification must be provided regarding how the proposed new park(s) will meet an
identified need for public park and recreation opportunities.
D. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of substitute property indicating it is environmentally safe and not latently
contaminated (additional assessment needed if warranted by Phase I).
E. National Environmental Policy Act Assessment of environmental effects of proposed release of park and recreation use
covenants on former surplus property (potential impacts from displacement of recreational opportunities, impacts to
remaining parkland, etc. but not including assessment of potential impacts of future uses of the released site), and
assessment of potential impacts of new park development at the replacement property. A public process and
environmental impact analysis must be conducted by the Grantee -at least equivalent to an Environmental Assessment
under the National Environmental Policy Act, and an Environmental Impact Statement if indicated by the EA. This
compliance should include consultation under the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act (§ 106), analysis
pursuant to the Environmental Justice executive order and Civil Rights Act, and any other federal laws that apply. If
replacement property is contiguous with existing park and the conversion portion is small enough, the action may qualify
under a categorical exclusion.
F. A copy of the State, city, or county recreation map or plan showing the present park land in relationship to the proposed
substitute land.
G. A copy of the legal description for the proposed replacement property and of the proposed property to be converted if it
is to be only a portion of the original grant.
H. The Program of Utilization and a development schedule for each property proposed for substitution.
I. An official acknowledgement of the requirement to apply, in perpetuity, to the new property, all restrictions contained
in the deed of conveyance of the surplus property.
2
4-32
J. Title history report for the replacement property.
The Deed of Release for the land to be converted to other uses, and the Declaration of Restrictions to impose Federal
Lands to Parks covenants and restrictions on the replacement property will be drafted by the National Park Service.
Please let me know if you have further questions.
Sincerely,
David Siegenthaler
Pacific West Region
National Park Service
333 Bush Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104-2828
v: 415-623-2334
F: 415-623-2387
Federal Lands to Parks
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program
National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Program
Bringing the NPS Mission Home!
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com> wrote:
Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
As a follow-up to my voicemail, I wanted to send you a brief e-mail as well. As you may recall, roughly 5
acres of our City Hall property has been used for agricultural purposes since before the City acquired the site in
the mid-1970s. The current lessee wishes to reassign and extend his lease, and this is supported by our City
Council. My questions for you are:
1. Do you see a means by which such a use could be modified so as to be consistent with the POU, thereby
avoiding the conversion process? For example, do you think that the provision of additional public access,
education programs, site amenities, modifications to the size/area/activities, etc. could be found sufficient by
the Park Service to allow the City to reassign and extend the lease?
3
4-33
2. In the event that the answer to the first question is "no," what is the process for initiating the
conversion? The City has identified 2 large plots of vacant land (8 acres and 48 acres) for possible acquisition
to replace the 5 acres at Upper Point Vicente to be converted.
As I mentioned in my voicemail, I will be updating the City Council on this matter next week, and would
appreciate a response as soon as possible. Thank you very much for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior Administrative Analgst
City Manager's 0££ice
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho P a.los Verdes, CA 90275
T: (310)544~5226
F: (310) 544~5291
:E.: kitf@mv.com
4
4-34
. Email exchange
between Kit Fox and
David Siegenthaler
4-35
Joel Rojas
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hi Kit,
Siegenthaler, David <david_siegenthaler@nps.gov>
Wednesday, September 25, 2013 5:08 PM
Kit Fox
Carolyn Lehr; Carolynn Petru; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>; Cory Linder; Joel
Rojas; Ray Murray
Re: Conversion of a Portion of Point Vicente Park (LADA Nike Site 55, Point Vicente,
Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA No. 9-D-Calif-1088)
rn address your questions according to your numbering:
1) In order to answer this question, I need to know if the City is acquiring the property specifically to
serve as replacement for the proposed conversion area. If it is not -if the City will acquire this
property for use as a park regardless of its eligibility to serve as conversion replacement, its
acceptability may be affected. We may potentially be able to issue a waiver of retroactivity if
acquisition must be done within a certain time-frame. Such a waiver would not guarantee that the
property or the replacement proposal would be approved, only that if the proposal is approved, the
property would not be in~ligible due to its having been acquired before approval. It would be helpful
for us to have more information about the proposed replacement property (e.g. location, boundaries,
the City's intended use, site characteristics, etc.) so that we can better assess its suitability as
replacement.
2) Inclusion of Federal Lands to Parks (FLP) park land in the City's nature preserve system does not
invalidate its status under the FLP program unless it contradicts the requirement for public park and
recreation use of the site and the approved program of utilization for the park. It may even enhance
the park's protection by making the local zoning protections consistent with federal park use
requirements. We'd be glad to look at the nature preserve restrictions and let you know if we see any
conflicts.
3) Before doing appraisals, we need to check with GSA regarding how they would want the appraisal
and appraisal review process to go. You will need further appraisal instructions that supplement (and
in some cases replace) the federal yellow-book requirements. However, for sure the land will need to
be appraised at an economic market value as if no park use restrictions are in place. Before
appraisals are done, we need to agree on the area to be exchanged to insure that the remaining park
does not contain areas rendered useless by the excision. Of course, in addition to the appraised
value, the replacement land must meet the criteria that it be of reasonable equivalence in usefulness
and location.
4) The source of funds for the replacement property does matter -federal funding of the
replacement land is not allowed.
5) So many variables (e.g. appraisals, haz. mat. site assessments, NEPA compliance, consultations)
are involved in accomplishing a conversion that it is hard to estimate the time required, however a
period of one year would be about average.
1
4-36
6) There are no federal regulations that specifically deal with conversions under the Federal Lands to
Parks Program. The legal parameters include the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of
1949 (40 USC§SSO); Federal Management Regulations (41 CFR §102-75); and Federal Lands to Parks
program policy. The National Park Service is not a federal agency with general property disposal
authority. Our authority is limited to sponsorship of applicants under the federal surplus property
program for parks and recreation purposes. The Act allows us some authority to correct deeds, terms
of transfer, etc. to best serve the government's interest and achieve the purposes of the public
benefit conveyance program subject to GSA approval. So any conveyance of property rights,
including land exchanges, require GSA's approval. Our process and requirements closely (but not
entirely) follow the conversion requirements of the Land and Water Conservation Fund State and
Local Assistance Program as specified in 36 CFR §59. I don't think there have been any Land and
Water Conservation Fund grants to Upper Point Vicente, so the LWCF policies and procedures
(requiring State compliance oversight) do not apply to this process.
Please let me know if you need further information.
Thanks,
David
David Siegenthaler
Pacific West Region
National Park Service
333 Bush Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104-2828
V: 415-623-2334
F: 415-623-2387
Federal Lands to Parks
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program
National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Program
Bringing the NPS Mission Home!
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com> wrote:
Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
As you may recall, we have spoken and e-mailed previously about the City's desire to undertake the conversion
of a 5.5-acre portion of Point Vicente Park (LADA Nike Site 55, Point Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA No.
9-D-Calif-1088) that is subject to the POU in order to allow the existing and historical agricultural use on this
site to be maintained. Thank you for forwarding to me information about the application requirements for
conversion this past March. As we begin this process, I have a few question that I hope will assist us in
expediting this process:
2
4-37
1. The replacement property that the City plans to acquire is at least 58 acres of undeveloped, privately-
owned land in the northerly portion of the City. The properties are being acquired for open space,
habitat preservation, trails and drainage/flood control purposes. The current terms of the purchase call
for the transaction to be complete by the end of 2013. Item B on the list that you provided on March
14th states that the "[replacement] property: 1) cannot have been previously used as a public
park; [and/or] 2) if already owned by the Grantee, it must not have been purchased for the purpose of
making it a public park." Given the City's stated purpose of this acquisition listed above (i.e., not a
"public park"), if it is acquired by the City before the conversion application is filed and/or completed,
would it still be eligible to consideration as replacement property?
· 2. Related to Question 1 above, if the replacement property is eventually included as a part of the City's
nature preserve at some time after the conversion is complete, would this invalidate the conversion
and/or require NPS or GSA review and concurrence?
3. For the appraisal of the 5.5-acre site to be converted, should the assessment of the fair market value
assume that the current use restrictions imposed on the property by the POU are not in place?
4. The acquisition of the replacement property is to be paid for entirely with Federal (Section 6) and Los
Angeles County (Measure A) grant funds. Does the source of the funds for the acquisition have any
bearing upon whether or not the replacement property is acceptable to NPS for conversion?
5. Can you provide a "ballpark" estimate of the "typical" timeline and duration for a conversion process?
6. Can you please provide us with a copy of the Federal regulations that apply to this conversion?
I understand that you will not be back in the office until the 24th. I look forward to your reply when you
return. If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me at the phone or·
e-mail listed below.
Sincerely,
3
4-38
Public Comments
(Late Correspondence from Sept. 17th
City Council meeting and comments
received since Sept. 17th)
4-39
From:
Sent:
..... To:
Subject:
Attachments:
L. Bilski <ldb910@juno.com>
Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:02 PM
CC; Carla Morreale; PlanningCommission
Fw:from National Park Service RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agr icultural use
of Pt. Vicente land
20130314_E-mail_Re_ Agricultural Use at Upper Point Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes.pdf
Well, it seems there is a written record regarding Upper Pt. Vicente and the Hatano issue!
I hope you have time to read the attached message from David Siegenthaler at NPS before the meeting tonight.
Thank you. Lenee Bilski
Please note: f01warded message attached
From: Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com>
To: "L.Bilski"<ldb910@juno.com>
Cc: Joel Rojas <JoelR@rpv.com>, Carolynn Petru <Carolynn@rpv.com>, Carolyn Lehr <clehr@rpv.com>,
"Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com>" <Subrooks08@gmail.com>, Carla Morreale <CarlaM@rpv.com>,
Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpv.com>
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 20:54:53 +0000
Dear Lenee:
Since our e-mail correspondence yesterday, I've been scouring my computer files to make sure that I was not missing a
letter or message from David Siegenthaler. As it turns out, the attached e-mail from March 14, 2013-responding to my
e-mail of March 11, 2013-was misfiled in the wrong e-mail folder. I apologize for not finding this yesterday when you
first inquired about it. I believe that this e-mail is what I was referring to in my oral comments to the City Council at the
March 19th meeting.
Again, let me apologize for this oversight. A copy of this message and attachment will be provided to the City Council as
"Late Correspondence" for Item 'F' at tonight's meeting.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Cit':} of Rancho Palos Verdes
(310) 544-5226
kitf@rpv.com
From: L. Bilski [mailto:ldb910@juno.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:12 PM
To: Kit Fox
Cc: Joel Rojas; Carolynn Petru; Carolyn Lehr; Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com>; Carla Morreale; Teresa Takaoka
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente I and
4-40
9/16/2013
Thanks, Kit. One more email needed -
Please forward to me, the Council and Joel Rojas Mr. Siegenthaler's written response to your March 11,
2013 inquiry.
Lenee
----------Original Message -------··--
From: Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com>
To: "L. Bilski" <ldb910@juno.com>
Cc: Joel Rojas <JoelR@rpv.com>, Carolynn Petru <Carolynn@rpv.com>, Carolyn Lehr <clehr@rpv.com>,
"Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com>" <Subrooks08@gmail.com>, Carla Morreale <CarlaM@rpv.com>,
Teresa Takaoka <STeriT@rpv.com>
Subject: RE: 9/1.7 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 20:50:08 +0000
Dear Lenee:
On November 16, 2012, I e-mailed Mr. Siegenthaler with NPS about the farm lease issue. He replied via e-mail
(attached), and I included an excerpt from his e-mail response in the December 4, 2012, City Council Staff report (which
was attached to the March 19th City Council Staff report). I had also had a telephone conversation with Mr. SiegenthaJ~~
regarding this issue at about the same time (late November 2012/early December 2012).
On March 11, 2013, I again e-mailed Mr. Siegenthaler about this issue (attached), posing specific questions that were
cited in the March 19, 2013, City Council Staff report. At the time that the Staff report was completed and distributed, I
had not heard back from Mr. Siegenthaler (as was stated in the Staff report). However, in answer to questions from the
City Council and as reflected in the Minutes of the March 19th meeting (attached, p. 8), I verbally informed the City
Council that I had spoken with Mr. Siegenthaler and that he had confirmed that there was no way to modify the existing
agricultural use to make it consistent with the POU (i.e., without going through the conversion proc1~ss).
Copies of this reply and the one that I sent to you earlier today will be included at "Late Correspondence" for Item 'F' at
tomorrow night's meeting.
Sincerely,
4-41
Kit Fox, AICP
Citt.1 of Rancho Palos Verdes
(310) 544-5226
ki tf@rpv.com
From: L. Biiski [.mailto:ldb9~.9@juno.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 12:27 PM
To: Kit Fox
Cc: Joel Rojas; carolynn Petru
Sul;lject: RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural ~se of pt, Vicente land
..
Thanks, Kit.
There was no information at all from National Park Service (NPS) regarding staffs questions on this.
You wrote "I have received no additional information from NPS since March 2013" -What information did you
receive? None was provided in the 3/19 staff report.
__ Please provide the answers from NPS to staffs questions on this item. Thanks.
Please note: message attached
From: Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com>
To: "L.Bilski"<ldb910@juno.com>
Cc: Joel Rojas <JoelR@rpv.com>, Carolynn Petru <Carolynn@rpv.com>
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 18:39:07 +0000
Click to get NetZero DataShield and stay protected from hackers when using public WiFi.
4-42
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Hi Kit,
Slegentha!~
~
Re: Agrlcu!l1.lra! Use at Upper Point Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes
Thursday, March 14, 2013 3:30:36 PM
As we discussed by phone, the agricultural use of the Federal Lands to Parks
conveyed parkland does not fit the requirement that the land be used only for public
park purposes. Therefore if the City decides it is more important to continue the
agricultural use than to use the land for public park purposes, it may propose a land
exchange. Another option may be for the City to purchase the portion of the park to
be used for agriculture -in which case the NPS would need to agree to a partial
reversion of the property to federal ownership so Rancho Palos Verdes could
negotiate with GSA for its purchase. The price would be at least the appraised
mark~.t value.
Following are the ...
Federal Lands to Parks
Land Exchange Requirements
A change in property use can, when fully justified, be accomplished by substituting
alternative new park and recreation lands of equal or greater market value and rei:reation
value for the land to be released from restrictive use conditions of the deed. It requires
the prior approval of the NPS Regional Director and the GSA. The procedure of
exchanging land requires the following measures to fully protect the public interest:
Documentation needed:
A. Properly authenticated documents from the Grantee evidencing desire to substitute
land of equivalent fair market and recreational value.
B. Appraisal reports for both parcels. Replacement property must be of at least equal fair
market value and of reasonably equivalent usefulness and location.
+ Replacement property: 1) cannot have been previously used as a public park; 2)
if already owned by the Grantee, it must not have been purchased for the
purpose of making it a public park;
4-43
+ the appraisals must be reviewed and accepted by GSA (or the military, if it is a
BRAC disposal property) and NPS.
+appraisals must conform to the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions;
C. Justification including assessment of public recreational utility of the land proposed for
exchange and its replacement. This analysis should include an assessment of public need
and demographics, similar to that provided In the original public benefit application. It
should also reference City, State or other local comprehensive outdoor recreation plans in
its statement of need. Justification must be provided regarding how the proposed new
park(s) .will meet an identified need for public park and recreation opportunities.
D. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of substitute property indicating it is
environmentally safe and not latently contaminated (additional assessment needed if
warranted by Phase I).
E. National Environmental Policy Act Assessment of environmental effects of proposed
release of park and recreation use covenants on former surplus property (potential
impacts from displacement of recreational opportunities, impacts to remaining parkland,
etc. but not including assessment of potential impacts of future uses of the released site),
and assessment of potential impacts of new park development at the replacement
property. A public process and environmental impact analysis must be conducted by the
Grantee -at least equivalent to an Environmental Assessment under the National
Environmental Policy Act, and an Environmental Impact Statement if indicated by the EA.
This compliance should include consultation under the requirements of the National
Historic Preservation Act (§106), analysis pursuant to the Environmental Justice executive
order and Civil Rights Act, and any other federal laws that apply. If replacement property
is contiguous with existing park and the conversion portion is small enough, the action
may qualify under a categorical exclusion.
F. A copy of the State, city, or county recreation map or plan showing the present park
land in relationship to the proposed substitute land.
G. A copy of the legal description for the proposed replacement property and of the
proposed property to be converted if it is to be only a portion of the original grant.
H. The Program of Utilization and a development schedule for each property proposed
for substitution.
4-44
I. An official acknowledgement of the requirement to apply, in perpetuity, to the ne!w
property, all restrictions contained in the deed of conveyance of the surplus property.
J. Title history report for the replacement property.
The Deed of Release for the land to be converted to other uses, and the Declaration of
Restrictions to impose Federal Lands to Parks covenants and restrictions on the
replacement property will be drafted by the National Park Service.
Pleas·e let me know if you have further questions.
Sincerely,
David Siegenthaler
Pacific West Region
National Park Service
333 Bush Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104-2828
V: 415-623-2334
F: 415-623-2387
Federal Lands to Parks
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program
National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Program
Bringing the NPS Mission Home!
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com> wrote:
Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
As a follow-up to my voicemail, I wanted to send you a brief e-mail as well. As
you may recall, roughly 5 acres of our City. Hall property has been used for
agricultural purposes since before the City acquired the site in the mid-1970s. The
current lessee wishes to reassign and extend his lease, and this is supported by
our City Council. My questions for you are:
1. Do you see a means by which such a use could be modified so as to be
consistent with the POU, thereby avoiding the conversion process? For example,
4-45
do you think that the provision of additional public access, education programs,
site amenities, modifications to the size/area/activities, etc. could be found
sufficient by the Park Service to allow the City to reassign and extend the lease?
2. In the event that the answer to the first question is "no," what is the process
for initiating the conversion? The City has identified 2 large plots of vacant land (8
acres and 48 acres) for possible acquisition to replace the 5 acres at Upper Point
Vicente to be converted.
As I mentioned in my voicemail, I will be updating the City Council on this matter
next week, and would appreciate a response as soon as possible. Thank you very
much for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
. Senior Administrative Analgst
City Manager's 0££ice
City 0£ Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
T: (310) 544-5226
P: (310) 544-5291
E: kit£@rpy.CQP1
4-46
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Sept. 17, 2013
Lenee Bilski <leneebilski@hotmail.com>
Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:11 PM
cc
Joel Rojas; Kit Fox; Carla Morreale; Carolynn Petru
9/17 CC Agenda Item F Malaga Canyon properties
Dear Mayor Brooks and Council members Duhovic, Knight, Campbell and Misetich,
I am opposed to this land purchase unless and until negotiations are underway with the National Park Service
(NPS) to pursue a conversion ("land swap") of the land at Upper Point Vicente currently being farmed with
this land. Since there is no mention of the conversion in this staff report, I ask that you continue this item to a
future date. The Staff Report does not address all of the actual issues. We need more answers. That will take
time, but not so much time that the city will miss the opportunity to obtain the federal grant monies!
What happened to the issue of preserving the Hatano agricultural use at Upper Pt. Vicente that was discussed
regarding these properties last Dec. and March??? There's nothing about it in this 109 page staff report!
Where is the staff update on discussions with the NPS to arrange a conversion???
FYI: the Follow-up Agenda for Mar. 19, '13 states:
"Agricultural Use at Upper Point Vicente (Fox)Action Taken:
1) Received and filed the status update on the renewal of the agricultural lease at Upper Point Vicente;
and, 2) Directed Staff to continue the analysis of the process regarding the conversion of the property,
and return with a report at a future Council meeting."
It appears to me that the staff is approaching this purchase in reverse. According to NPS, the conversion
involves review and approval by the NPS to specifically purchase replacement land for the purpose of
conversion. Has this process been done yet? If not, do not purchase land until the conversion process has
been followed. If the City does not pursue a conversion first, then the land purchased could be ineligible for
conversion.
As of now, the City is not in compliance with the contract the city signed for the Pt. Vicente properties. There
is a risk of reversion if the City is not good stewards of the land given by the Federal government. i'm sure no
one wants that! However, if there is no conversion, the historic agricultural use of Upper Pt. Vicente cannot
continue.
In speaking with both Kit Fox and NPS David Siegenthaler, nothing has been done in the last six months
regarding preserving agricultural use of Upper Pt. Vicente·: Please direct staff to work on this. Perhaps the
grant monies cited in this staff report could be used to buy the 5+ acres at Upper Pt. Vicente? Just a thought.
Also, the public should be given the opportunity to comment on support of or opposition to any restrictions on
lands that the city is considering buying. Why was this item put on the Consent Calendar?
I hope you will also consider that the General Plan calls for preserving agricultural land use.
Since there is no mention of the conversion in the staff report, here is the section of the March 2013 staff report
0
4-47
addressing this issue:
MEMORANDUM: Agricultural Use at Upper Point Vicente
March 19,2013
Page 3
Potential Candidate Properties for Conversion
"Based upon the previous response from Mr. Siegenthaler, leasing a portion of the UPV
property for continued commercial farming would require the City to undertake a
"conversion" process to replace the area ofUPV to be leased for the farm with another
property that is suitable for public park and recreation use. The replacement property
would have to be newly and specifically acquired for this purpose, and would need to be
of:.
• Equal fair-market value to the area to be converted; and,
• ;Reasonably-equivalent recreational use and location to the area to be converted.
At the December 4, 2012, meeting, Sunshine suggested property that the City might
possibly acquire i.n exchange for the existing farm area. For some time now, the City
has been negotiating with private property owners and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services
(USFWS) to acquire additional City open space using Federal grant funds. The two (2)
properties are known Malaga Canyon and North Windport Canyon (see attached aerial
photographs):
•Malaga Canyon consists of roughly forty-eight acres (48 ac.) situated on both
sides of Montemalaga Drive between Silver Spur Road and the City boundary
with Palos Verdes Estates. Areas of the property have scenic north-facing views
of Santa Monica Bay. The canyon also could provide opportunities for passive
outdoor recreational use in the form of trails. The Conceptual Trails Plan
identifies several segments of the Malaga Canyon Trail System in this area.
•North Windport Canyon consists of roughly eight acres (8 ac.) located on the
west side of Hawthorne Boulevard between Locklenna Lane and Ocean Crest
Drive, and abutting the south end of Windport Drive. Areas of the property have
scenic west-facing views of the Pacific Ocean and Channel Islands (similar to the
current farm site). The City purchased the abutting South Windport Canyon
property to the south in 2007, and the property abuts the Agua Amarga Canyon
Reserve of the City's Palos Verdes Nature Preserve to the west. The canyon
also could provide opportunities for passive outdoor recreational use in the form
of trails. The Conceptual Trails Plan identifies two (2) segments of the Lunada
Canyon Trail System in this area.
Staff believes that since both of these candidate sites are natural canyon areas that
have never been developed, they would be ecologically, .and recreationally superior to
the current farm site, which has been altered through decades of agricultural use. Staff
will continue to work with Mr. Siegenthaler to determine if either of these properties may
be a suitable candidate for conversion. "
reference
http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/citycouncil/agendas/2013 Agendas/MeetingDate-2013-03-
19/RPVCCA CC SR 2013 03 19 03 Upper Point Vicente Agricultural Use.pdf
4-48
Thank you for all you do for RPV!
Lenee Bilski
4-49
/
\
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
dena friedson <dlfriedson@gmail.com>
Tuesday, September 17, 2013 4:17 PM
CC; dena friedson; Joel Rojas; Kit Fox
Conversion of Land --City Council Meeting on 9-17-13
To: Mayor Susan Brooks and City Council Members Brian Campbell, Jerry Duhovic, Jim Knight, and Anthony
Misetich
and
To: Joel Rojas and Kit Fox
From: Dena Friedson
Re: Acquisition of Conversion Property with respect to 5.5 acres of Agricultural Land
Regarding the purchase of properties for conversion, it is important to understand that land must NOT be
purchased for conversion purposes before it is approved by the National Park Service. Only land that is not
already public parkland can be considered for conversion. Malaga Cove Canyon and North Windport Canyon
are both privately owned and are suitable for public open space enjoyment. Uses in the area that is chosen
should be consistent with the 1979 Quitclaim Deed and the Program of Utilization that apply to the deed
restricted open space of Upper Point Vicente.
Thank you for extending the lease on the 5 .5 acres of agricultural land on deed restricted parcels of Upper Point
Vicente for at least another year. Your approval allows the Planning Staff to work with the National Park
Service to acquire the 5.5 acres of agricultural land from the federal government and also to obtain the
necessary approval for conversion from the National Park Service.
If Rancho Palos Verdes is able to buy the 5 .5 acres from the federal government, the 5 .5 acres could be zoned
for agricultural use and could continue to be farmed by Mr. Martinez or other persons related to the Hatano
family. It would be desirable to give this land a "historical" designation to honor its past usage and to keep it as
open space in perpetuity. Acquiring and keeping open space land in Rancho Palos Verdes is consistent with the
goals and policies of the City's General Plan. If the City's budget is tight, perhaps a grant can be
obtained. Purchasing this land does not set a precedent. Other parcels on Upper Point Vicente, which were
purchased at different times by the City, are now zoned for institutional use. Public buildings and active
recreation are permitted under this category.
Hopefully, representatives of Rancho Palos Verdes and the National Park Service will be able to work together
with respect to keeping the agricultural use on the 5.5 acres of Upper Point Vicente and also with respect to the
conversion of land AFTER it is approved by the National Park Service. Thank you.
1
4-50
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
MEMO from SUNSHINE
..... t': ,. ....
SunshineRPV@aol.com
Saturday, September 14, 2013 7:55 AM
CC; Joel Rojas
PlanningCommission
""' ·•-•-• """"'"' •• •.a"' ••• •••• ••• ••••·~~--""'" ~. -· • • ~ • •• '• <. ••••~ ~-./-• "' -~»>< ..£-. .. "'
9/17 /2013 RPV Council decision on future agriculture, trails and open space
RPV Malaga Canyon trails -0452.pdf
TO: RPV City Council. Copy to Planning Commission, Staff and interested parties.
RE: September 17, 2018 CC Meeting Consent Calendar Item F Approval of Two Purchase and Sale
Agreements to Purchase Private Properties in Malaga Canyon for the Purpose of Open Space Conservation
(Rojas)
http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/citycouncil/agendas/2013 Agendas/MeetingDate-2013-09-1 7 I
Now you see it. A 38 page Staff Report on the Council's Consent Calendar which means there has been no
PUBLIC NOTICE in the PV News and no public notice to adjacent property owners. It is rather like your
approval for the ·grant application to improve the Sunnyside Segment of the Palos Verdes Loop Trail. The Staff
Report does not address all of the actual issues. The Resolutions do not prohibit Staff from manipulating the
unforeseen consequences.
As I recall, it was me, not Staff, who brought up the fact that Staff was already pursuing the purchase of these
properties when preserving the Hatano Farm needed a "land swap" with National Parks. At that time, the
proposed land purchases were for storm drain maintenance access. 38 pages and no mention of that.
Upper Malaga Canyon (PYE to Hawthorne Blvd.) has an existing trail which is "conceptually" Spoke #7 of the
Peninsula Wheel Trails Network. There is more to the Malaga Canyon trails network than just Trails Network
Plan SECTION TWO Hl and H2. 38 pages and no mention of that.
The northern portion of this property is in an RPV Equestrian Zone. Trail connections are important to back
yard horsekeeping. 38 pages and no mention of that.
The State of California gets to dispense Federal money. What strings are attached? 38 pages and no mention of
that. ·
The existing RPV General Plan (page 95, last paragraph) states that ... The Plan does not propose large
public purchase of passive recreational areas. 38 pages and no mention of that.
I support the purchase of this land as long as "the deal" with the seller retains physically feasible public
trail access to the open space. The Staff Report suggests all sorts of possibilities which would preclude
that.
Please move and support a Staff Action which is severely limited to acquiring "in fee" title of this land. Like
.. the City Hall land, there should be no deed restrictions which the National Parks Service and RPV property
) owners have not been given the opportunity to comment in support of or object to.
Attached is a more informative page F5.
4-51
'·
September 13, 2013
. CifY OF PALOS VERDES ESTATES
Legend
POTENTIAL ACQUISITION
[==:J Parcels 0 N
! 4-52
FW: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
From: Kit Fox
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 11:39 AM
To: L. Bilski
Cc: Joel Rojas; carolynn Petru
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
Dear Lenee:
Prease see my replies below in bold. I have copied Joel on this reply so that he can add any further information and
clarification regarding Item 'F' on tomorrow night's agenda.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior AdministrativeAnah:ist
Cih::J Mana_eer's 0££1ce
City 0£ Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 00275
T: (310) 544-5226
f: (310) 544-5291
:E: kit£@ v.com
From: L. Bilski [mailto:ldb910@juno.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 10:59 AM
To: Kit Fox
Cc: ldb910@juno.com
Subject: 9/17 Consent calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
Hi Kit,
I have some urgent questions regarding land acquisition in Consent item Fon Tuesday's CC Agenda. Would
appreciate your immediate attention and reply.
What is the latest info on the conversion of land to allow continued agricultural farming including farming
education/demonstration at upper Pt. Vicente as noted in the March 19, 2013 CC staff report?
We have been waiting to see if the City would be successful in its attempt to acquire replacement property to allow
the conversion of the portion of Upper Point Vicente (UPV) containing the existing farm to non-recreational use under
the terms of the Program of Utilization (POU). Now that it appears likely that the City will be acquiring the Malaga
Canyon property, I will be working with the National Park Service again to move the conversion process forward. In
0 4-53
,·y ' ,.
"""•·~··--...,_,,,,._,....., .• ,._~;,;,_"'°'"'"'°'"'"''-~'A"-• ""°'""'•'-~ .... ~,;.'"'~'""•'-•••.......,,,,_.,,m<,;.,..,..,~....,.,-,..,;,,,,,.,..,_,...,.H '""""'-'•Y•-'"''~"" .. •"-'•-'•"'° ....... """°'°""''''~""• ... ~""'""•""-""'"'""""' _...,...,_.., •·~"""""'""" ""'"~'-'·~->.Wh "Y•"'"•.,,-,,.~ • ..-~.,._"'' "'-•"--"'>.0>•••"" • ~ v---, "' "" -··v• Y"•'-'°'"' , , ~-" • """ , •Y> v»•v~• """
the meantime, the farm continues to operate on a year-to-year basis until at least March 31, 2014. It should be noted
that the City is not currently proposing to expand the "footprint" of the existing farming operations at UPV through
the conversion process (for the reasons that were articulated in the March 19th Staff report). The farming
education/demonstration facility that has been suggested by Sunshine would conflict with the POU and the City's
NCCP and PUMP, and could be incompatible with adjacent land uses such as homes.
What information have you received from the National Park Service regarding conversion since the date of the
staff report?
I have received no additional information from NPS since March 2013.
Was there a report by staff to City Council since March 19 on this item?
!.'lo, not that I have prepared or am aware of.
Follow-up Agenda for Mar. 19, '13 states:
"Agricultural Use. at Upper Point Vicente (Fox)
Action Taken: · .
1) Received and filed the status update on the renewal of the agricultural lease at Upper Point Vicente; and, 2) Directed
Staff to continue the analysis of the process regarding the conversion of the property, and return with a report at
a future Council meeting."
Thank you.
Lenee
Click to get NetZero DataShield and stay protected from hackers when using public WiFi.
4-54
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Lenee:
Kit Fox
Monday, September 16, 2013 2:17 PM
L. Bilski
Joel Rojas; Carolynn Petru; Carolyn Lehr; Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com>; Carla
Morreale; Teresa Takaoka
RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
~_don't have a record of a written response to the March 11th inquiry.
Kit FC>Xt AICP .
Citq 0£ Rancho P dios Verdes
(310) 544-5226
kitf@rpv.com
From: L. Bilski [mailto:ldb910@juno.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 2:12 PM
To: Kit Fox
Cc: Joel Rojas; Carolynn Petru; Carolyn Lehr; Susan Brooks <SubrooksOS@gmail.com>; Carla Morreale; Teresa Takaoka
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente I and
9/16/2013
Thanks, Kit. One more email needed -
Please forward to me, the Council and Joel Rojas Mr. Siegenthaler's written response to your March 11,
2013 inquiry.
Lenee
----------Original Message ----------
From: Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com>
To: "L. Bilski" <ldb910@juno.com>
Cc: Joel Rojas <JoelR@rpv.com>, Carolynn Petru <Carolynn@rpv.com>, Carolyn Lehr <clehr@rpv.com>,
"Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com>" <Subrooks08@gmail.com>, Carla Morreale <CarlaM@rpv.com>,
Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpv.com>
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 20:50:08 +0000
Dear Lenee:
4-55
On November 16, 2012, I e-mailed Mr. Siegenthaler with NPS about the farm lease issue. He replied via e-mail
(attached), and I included an excerpt from his e-mail response in the December 4, 2012, City Council Staff report (which
was attached to the March 19th City Council Staff report). I had also had a telephone conversation with Mr. Siegenthali;_r,"<·.
regarding this issue at about the same time (late November 2012/early December 2012). l .... 'l'
On March 11, 2013, I again e-mailed Mr. Siegenthaler about this issue (attached), posing specific questions that were
cited in the March 19, 2013, City Council Staff report. At the time that the Staff report was completed and distributed, I
had not heard back from Mr. Siegenthaler (as was stated in the Staff report). However, in answer to questions from the
City Council and as reflected in the Minutes of the March 19th meeting (attached, p. 8), I verbally informed the City
· Council that I had spoken with Mr. Siegenthaler and that he had confirmed that there was no way to modify the existing
agricultural use to make it consistent with the POU (i.e., without going through the conversion process).
Copies of this reply. and the one that I sent to you earlier today will be included at "Late Correspondence" for Item 'F' at
tomorrow night's meeting.
Sincerely,
Kit fox, AICP
Citq of Rancho Palos Verdes
(310) 544-5226
kitf@rpv.con1
From: L. Biiski [mailto:ldb910@juno.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 12:27 PM
To: Kit Fox
Cc: Joel Rojas; carolynn Petru
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of pt, Vicente land
Thanks, Kit.
There was no information at all from National Park Service (NPS) regarding staffs questions on this.
You wrote "I have received no additional information from NPS since March 2013" -What information did y.,. ...
receive? None was provided in the 3/19 staff report.
4-56
Please provide the answers from NPS to staffs questions on this item. Thanks.
Len+e
Please note: message attached
From: Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com>
To: "L.Bilski"<ltib910@juno.com>
Cc: Joel Rojas <JoelR@rpv.com>, Carolynn Petru <Carolynn@rov.com>
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 18:39:07 +0000
Click to get NetZero DataShield and stay protected from hackers when using public WiFi.
4-57
,/"···.·--------.-.--------------------------------..-.! ~ r ._, -From: Kit Fox 1 ,If
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 1:50 PM
To: L. Bilski
Cc: Joel Rojas; Carolynn Petru; Carolyn Lehr; Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com>; Carla
Subject:
Attachments:
Oear Lenee:
Morreale; Teresa Takaoka
RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
610131ED.pdf; 2013031l_E-mail_Agricultural Use at Upper Point Vicente, Rancho Palos
Verdes.pdf; 20130319_CC_MINS.pdf
On November 16, 2012, I e-mailed Mr. Siegenthaler with NPS about the farm lease issue. He replied via e-mail
(attached), and I in'duded an excerpt from his e-mail response in the December 4, 2012, City Council Staff report (which
was attached to th~ March 19th City Council Staff report). I had also had a telephone conversation with Mr. Siegenthaler
regarding this issue at about the same time (late November 2012/early December 2012).
On March 11, 2013, I again e-mailed Mr. Siegenthaler about this issue (attached), posing specific questions that were
cited in the March 19, 2013, City Council Staff report. At the time that the Staff report was completed and distributed, I
had not heard back from Mr. Siegenthaler (as was stated in the Staff report). However, in answer to questions from the
City Council and as reflected in the Minutes of the March 19th meeting (attached, p. 8), I verbally informed the City
Council that I had spoken with Mr. Siegenthaler and that he had confirmed that there was no way to modify the existing
agricultural use to make it consistent with the POU (i.e., without going through the conversion process).
Copies of this reply and the one that I sent to you earlier today will be included at "Late Correspondence" for Item 'F' at
tomorrow night's meeting.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Cit1:J 0£ Ra.ncho Palas Verdes
(310) 544-5226
kit£@rpv.com
From: L. Bilski [mailto:ldb910@juno.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 12:27 PM
To: Kit Fox
Cc: Joel Rojas; Carolynn Petru
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
Thanks, Kit.
There was no information at all from National Park Service (NPS) regarding staffs questions on this.
You wrote "I have received no additional information from NPS since March 2013" -What information did you
receive? None was provided in the 3/19 staff report.
Please provide the answers from NPS to staffs questions on this item. Thanks.
4-58
Lenee
Please note: message attached
From: Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com>
To: "L. Bilski" <ldb91 O@juno.com>
Cc: Joel Rojas <JoelR@rpv.com>, Carolynn Petru <Carolynn@rpv.com>
Subject: RE: 9/17 Consent Calendar item F and agricultural use of Pt. Vicente land
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 18:39:07 +0000
,click to get NetZero DataShield and stay protected from backers when using public WiFi.
4-59
From:
To:
Dayld 51egenthaler@nps.qoy
.ISlt..Esl2I.
Cc: Ara M!hranlan; Carolynn petru; carolyn Lehr; carol Lynch <c!ynch@rwglaw.com>
Subject: Re: Extension of Agricultural Lease at Upper Point Vicente In Rancho Palos Verdes (LADA Nike Site SS, Point
Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA No. 9-D-Callf-1088)
Date: Monday, November 19, 2012 6:15:10 PM
Attachments: 2006 Lease Aareement for !IPV.odf
Hatano Farm at Upper Point Vlcente.pdf
Hi Mr. Fox,
Thank you for contacting me. We do need to talk. Agriculture is not a
public park and recreation use and is not allowed on lands conveyed through
the Federal Lands to Parks Program. I believe that early in the history of
the land transfer the city inquired about granting a lease for agricultural
use on the park land and was told that it was not consistent with the
purpqses of the land transfer. In addition, leases are not allowed in
generar.
Are you sure this is on the portion of the land that comes under the
Federal Lands to Parks program and is not on the portion purchased by the
City?
Please excuse my haste in this response, I have not had a chance to pull
out the file yet. I'll be in the office tomorrow.
Thanks,
David Siegenthaler
Pacific West Region
National Park Service
333 Bush Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104-2828
V: 415-623-2334
F: 415-623-2387
Federal Lands to Parks
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program
National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Program
Bringing the NPS Mission Home!
Kit Fox
< KitF@rpv.com >
11/16/2012 10:23
AM
To
David Siegenthaler
<David_Siegenthaler@nps.gov>
cc
carolyn Lehr <clehr@rpv.com>,
Carolynn Petru <carolynn@rpv.com>,
"Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>"
<clynch@rwglaw.com>, Joel Rojas
<JoelR@rpv.com>, Ara Mihranian
4-60
<AraM@rpv.com>
Subject
Extension of Agricultural Lease at
Upper Point Vicente in Rancho Palos
Verdes (LADA Nike Site 55, Point
Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes, GSA
No. 9-D-calif-1088)
.. Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
This e:mail is a follow-up to the voicemail message that I left for you
earlier today. I understand that you will be back in the office on
November 19th.
As I mentioned in my message, the City is considering a request from James
Hatano to extend and transfer his agricultural lease of a 5.5-acre portion
of the City's Upper Point Vicente property. A copy of the most-recent
lease agreement and an aerial photograph of the farm site are enclosed.
Mr. Hatano, the descendant of the last Japanese American truck farmers on
the Palos Verdes Peninsula, has farmed this property since before the City
of Rancho Palos Verdes incorporated in 1973. At age 85, he wants to retire
and pass the operation of the farm on to his longtime foreman, Martin
Martinez.
I have reviewed the Program of Utilization (POU) for the Upper Point
Vicente property and found no mention of agricultural activity whatsoever.
However, we know that Mr. Hatano was farming the property at the time that
title was transferred to the City in 1976. Before the City considers
extending this lease further and/or assigning it to Mr. Hatano's foreman,
we want to be sure that such action is consistent with the POU. Please let
me know how the City can request that the National Park Service make such a
determination.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free
to contact me at the phone number or e-mail listed below.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior Administrative Analyst
City Manager's Office
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
T: (310) 544-5226
F: (310) 544-5291
E: kitf@rpv.com
(See attached file: 2006 Lease Agreement for UPV .pdf)(See attached file:
Hatano Farm at Upper Point Vicente.pdf)
4-61
,,,.,
-~~'''' ~;.._._._.-,,..~-"'"''""' ....... '""""'"""""''*"•"*".;;,,_,"''"'"'""'"'''""''~~-"Y,,,.,, ............. ,,$:.,l;,,~,_, .. ,., .. ~,., .... ~.~ ...... "<-W,.;,.,...·~~;,.,,..,,.,,;,_·, •• "'"'" ~_.~ ............................ ~ ....... ~.....-·¥•""'"""'"''~"~'"'',_ "'' '"'' M"'""'"°'~"""'""''' --·~·-·•<"•-'""' '~""-""'••., ,
From: KiUmS.
To: pay!d S!egenthaler@nps poy
Subject:
Date:
Agricultural Use at Upper Pellot Vicente, Rancho Palos Verdes
Monday, March 11, 2013 4:20:00 PM
Dear Mr. Siegenthaler:
As a follow-up to my voicemail, I wanted to send you a brief e-mail as well. As yoJ may recall,
roughly 5 acres of our City Hall property has been used for agricultural purposes since before the
City acquired the site in the mid-1970s. The current lessee wishes to reassign and extend his lease,
and this is supported by our City Council. My questions for you are:
1. Do you see a means by which such a use could be modified so as to be consistent with the
.· POU, thereby avoiding the conversion process? For example, do you think that the provision
. of additional public access, education programs, site amenities, modifications to the
size/area/activities, etc. could be found sufficient by the Park Service to allow the City to
· reassign and extend the lease?
2. In the event that the answer toithe first question is "no," what is the process for initiating
the conversion? The City has identified 2 large plots of vacant land (8 acres and 48 acres) for
possible acquisition to replace the 5 acres at Upper Point Vicente to be converted.
As I mentioned in my voicemail, I will be updating the City Council on this matter next week, and
would appreciate a response as soon as possible. Thank you very much for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Kit Fox, AICP
Senior Administrative Analgst
Cit11 Manager's Offtce
Citlj 0£ Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 9027.5
T: (310) .544-5226
P: (310) 544-.5291
:E.: kitf®wv.com.
r~ 0
~·····
4-62
f
\
MINUTES
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 19, 2013
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P .M. by Mayor Brooks at Fred Hesse Community Park,
29301 HawthorP.e Boulevard.
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION:
At 6:00 P.M. the meeting was recessed into Closed Session, with all Council Members present.
RECONVENE TO REGULAR SESSION FOR A STUDY SESSION:
At 6:59. P .M., Mayor Brooks reconvened the meeting to Regular Session for a City Council
Study Session. ·
City Council roll call was answered as follows:
PRESENT: Campbell, Duhovic, Knight, Misetich, and Mayor Brooks
ABSENT: None
Also present were Carolyn Lehr, City Manager; Carolynn Petru, Deputy City Manager/Interim
Director of Recreation and Parks; Carol Lynch, City Attorney; Dennis Mclean, Director of
Finance/Information Technology; Joel Rojas, Community Development Director; Les Jones,
Interim Director of Public Works; Deputy Community Development Director Ara M ihranian; Kit
Fox, Senior Administrative Analyst; and, Carla Morreale, City Clerk.
PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED ON THE AGENDA FOR THE STUDY SESSION:
None.
DISCUSSION TOPICS:
Review of Tentative Agendas in Light of City Council Goals, lnclud ing Questions of Staff
Discussion ensued among Council Members, staff, and City Attorney Lynch regarding items on
the upcoming Council Meeting agendas as listed on the Tentative Agendas.
Items were moved from the April 2, 2013 Council meetings to the May 21, 2013 Council
meeting. Possible dates were discussed for the Ribbon-Cutting Ceremony for the San Ramon
Canyon Stabilization Project and the Budget Workshop.
Future Agenda Items Proposed by Council Members to be Prioritized:
None.
Mayor Brooks moved, seconded by Councilman Misetich, to receive and file the Tentative
Agendas as amended.
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013
Page 1 of 11
4-63
(
Without objection, Mayor Brooks so ordered.
RECESS AND RECONVENE:
Mayor Brooks called a brief recess from 7:01 P.M. to 7:11 P.M.
REGULAR s-=:SSIOM:
City Council roll call was answered as follows:
PRESENT: Campbell, Duhovic, Knight, Misetich, and Mayor Brooks
ABSENT: None
Also present were Carolyn Lehr, City Manager; Carolynn Petru, Deputy City Manager/Interim
Director of Recreation and Parks; Carol Lynch, City Attorney; Joel Rojas, Community
Development Director; Dennis Mclean, Director of Finance/Information Technology (IT); Les
Jones, Interim Director of Public Works; Deputy Community Development Director Ara
Mihranian; Kathryn Downs, Deputy Director of Finance/IT; Kit Fox, Senior Administrative
Analyst; Katie Howe, Administrative Analyst II; Emilio Blanco, Maintenance Supervisor; and,
Carla Morreale, City Clerk.
Also present were the following: Andrea Vona, Executive Director, Palos Verdes Peninsula
Land 'Conservancy (PVPLC) and Danielle Lefer, Conservation Di rector, PVPLC.
FLAG SALUTE:
The Flag Salute was led by Boy Scout John Hilden, Troop No. 257.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS:
John Hilden, Boy Scout Troop No. 257, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that he was working
towards earning his Citizenship Merit Badge, noting that one requirement was to attend and
observe a Town Meeting.
RECYCLE DRAWING:
Mayor Brooks announced Recyclers of the Month from the March 5, 2013 City Council meeting:
Cheng-Long Kuo and D arlene Paris. She indicated that al I winners receive a check for $250
representing a year of free refuse service and urged everyone to participate in the City's
Recycling Program.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA:
Counc.ilman Misetich moved, seconded by Councilman Knight, to approve the agenda, as
amended.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Campbell, Duhovic, Knight, Misetich, and Mayor Brooks
(j)
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013
Page 2of11
4-64
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS: (Audience Comments regarding Items Not on the Agenda)
Ronald Williams, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that he has concerns regarding the noise and
venting of the exhaust from a neighbor's furnace and hot water heater.
Minas Yerelian, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that he would like the City Council to plant trees in
the medians along Hawthorne Blvd., which will help improve the view, environment, and climate
change. He added that street lights could be tur ned off after midnight to save energy and fund
this project.
Sunshine, Rancho Palos Verdes, provided comments.
CITY MANAGER REPORT:
Deputy City Manager Petru announced that on March 7, 2012, the City received a donation of a
Ham Radio Repeater Donation from Harris Assured Communications for the City's Emergency
Communications Center and congratulated Peninsula Volunteer Alert Network (PVAN)
members for their efforts in identifying the donation opportunity.
Brief comments were made by PVAN Members Diana Feinberg (also a member of the City's
Emergency Preparedness Committee), Alan Soderberg and Dale Hanks and acknowledgments
made for the efforts of Gary Lopes and Denzel Dyer.
Captain Blaine Bolin, Lomita Station, Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department, provided a brief
status report regarding a recent home invasion robbery in the City. He noted that Sheriffs
personnel have been talking with neighbors in the area and there ·has been an increase in
patrols of the neighborhood since the incident.
City Manager Lehr provided a brief update regarding the City's 4oth Anniversary, including the
Gala at Terranea on May 5, 2013; events for the 4th of July celebration; and, VIP event to be
held on September 7, 2013 at Trump National Golf Club.
NEW BUSINESS:
APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR:
Councilman Misetich moved, seconded by Councilman Knight, to approve the Consent
Calendar, as presented.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Campbell, Duhovic, Knight, Misetich, and Mayor Brooks
None
None
Motion to Waive Full Reading
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013
Page 3of11
4-65
Adopted a motion to waive reading in full of all ordinances presented at this meeting with
consent of the waiver of reading deemed to be given by all Council Members after the reading
of the title.
Approval of Minutes
Approved the Minutes of the February 19, 2013 Regular Meeting; March 5, 2013 Adjourned
Regular Meeting (Interviews); and March 5, 2013 Regular Meeting.
Approve the Purchase of Two Vehicles with Air Quality Management District (A QMD)
Funds for the Community Development Department (Supports 2013 City Council Goal
No. 5: Government Efficiency, Fiscal Control and Transparency)
Authorized the City Manager to execute a purchase contract with Wondries Chevrolet of
Alhamtira in the amount of $54,892.40 for the purchase of two Chevrolet Equinox, All Wheel
Drive (AWD) vehicles and associated accessories, such as light bars and front door City logos.
2012 Annual Report on the Implementation of the Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan
(Supports 2013 City Council Goals and Priorities as identified under Additional
Information)
Directed Staff to forward the City's Annual Progress Report on the implementation of the
Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan in calendar year 2012 to the State Governor's Office of
Planning and Research and to the Department of Housing and Community Development.
2012 Annual Report on the Implementation of the Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Element
Directed Staff to forward the City's Annual Progress Report on the implementation of the
Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Element for the 2012 calendar year to the Department of
Housing and Com munity Development (HCD) and the State Office of Planning and Research
(OPR).
Household Hazar~ous and Electronic Waste Collection Program Site Liability Agreement
with County of Los Angeles
Authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Household Hazardous and Electronic Waste
Collection Program Site Liability Agreement with the County of Los Angeles and County
Sanitation District No. 2 of Los Angeles County.
Register of Demands
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2013-13, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AND
SPECIFYING FUNDS FROM WHICH THE SAME ARE TO BE PAID.
# # # # # #
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013
Page 4of11
4-66
'""' <--'• , •-.-••··•••'""'•' .-..-••··""~,...,.,,,~ ....... ~.><"'"''-"•"~..,,·""-•""""u.-....... n.-•-·~""'-·~•-----··--·•· ··"••·••,.••••••"' •••rn•••"'•'"•"'"•"'''"~ • •• .. , . .,.._ """" "''''" '""'""'"'"' ·••> ~~·"~'' ., •. .__ -•· _._,...,~,. • •-"·"~ ,,...,.......,.~~ ~•···---........... ,.,.,,
REGULAR BUSINESS:
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve -Adoption of the Public Use Master Plan (PUMP)
(Supports 2013 City Council Goal -Tr ail System Enhancement)
City Clerk Morreale reported that late car respondence was distributed prior to the m eating and
there were 4 requests to speak regarding this item.
Deputy Community Development Director Mihranian provided a brief summary of the two
agenda items related to the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve. H e then gave a staff report and
PowerPoint presentation regarding the adoption of the PUMP document. He noted that staff
would like to incorporate additional comments received from the public and return with an
updated PU MP document on the April 2, 2013 Council meeting.
John Wessel, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that he was generally pleased with the PUMP
document, and noted the purpos_e of the Preserve is to enjoy nature, restore the area, and all ow
the public to enjoy the Preserve. He com mended staff for their work over the years.
Troy Braswell, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that he was on the PUMP Committee and is
generally in favor of the PUMP document, although he would like to see a few minor changes.
He thanked the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy for their commitment of repair to
trail work in the Preserve, acknowledged the importance of volunteers; and made a few minor
suggestions regarding the PU MP document.
Eva Cicoria. Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that she was on the PUMP Committee and submitted
her comments to staff. She noted that her desire is to curtail activity in the Preserve that would
limit access for everyone.
Sunshine, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that the PUMP is not a state mandated element of the
Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP). She opined that it overrides the City's Parks
Master Plan and Trails Network Plan.
Community Development Director Rojas stated that the NCCP does require the creation of a
Public Use Master Plan and added that when the PUMP is completed Deputy Community
Development Director Mihranian will begin working on the update to the City's Trails Network
Plan.
Discussion ensued among Council Members, staff, and City Attorney Lynch.
Councilman Misetich moved, seconded by Councilman Knight, to continue its review of the
Public Use Master Plan (PU MP) document for the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve to the April 2,
2013 Council Meeting to allow Staff to update the document with comments received from the
public.
Without objection, Mayor Brooks so ordered.
RECESS AND RECONVENE:
Mayor Brooks called a brief recess from 8:09 P.M. to 8:22 P.M.
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013
Page 5of11
4-67
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve-Minimizing Trail User Conflicts (Supports 2013 City
Council Goal -Trail System Enhancement)
City Clerk Morreale reported that late car respondence was distributed prior to the meeting and
there were 7 requests to speak regarding this item.
Administrative Analyst II Howe provided a staff report and PowerPoint presentation regarding
this item. She noted that staff would like to return with a revised Volunteer Trail Patrol Program
for the Preserve at a future Council meeting.
Discussion ensued among Council Members, staff, City Attorney Lynch, and PVPLC
representatives.
Deputy' City Manager Petru, in response to a Council question, clarified that vandalism is a
misderneanor, and the maximurri penalty for a misdemeanor is a $1,000 fine or 6 months in
prison. She clarified that this language is on the draft Preserve Rules Signage.
Danielle Lefer, Conservation Director, PVPLC, in response to a Counci I question, stated that
there is damage or defacing of signs in the Preserve on a weekly basis.
Barbara Ailor, PVPLC, Palos Verdes Estates, stated that she encouraged the Council to
approve the Volunteer Trail Patrol Program (VTPP) since habitat protection is wholly dependent
upon enforcement to be effective. She reminded everyone of the following: 1) The Preserve is
not a park, but a nature preserve; 2) conservation is the prime direction under the NCCP; 3) the
Preserve should be enjoyed by all; 4) volunteer trail patrols work well in other preserves, and
should work well in our area; and, 5) many have expressed interested in volunteering to make
the VTPP a success.
Minas Yerelian, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that the Preserve should be protected; noted
concern with the use of bells and whistles which could frighten horses; and, opined that there
should not be bikes allowed on the Preserve trails.
Troy Braswell, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that he is concerned with trail oversight and public
input. He was in favor of the sign program, updating of trail markers, and noted that there is
mixed opinion regarding the bell program. He provided suggestions and opined th at a Trails
Advisory Board could assist the City regarding issues that arise, s o that the voice of the trail
users is represented.
Eva Cicoria. Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that the reason the Forrestal Advisory Committee
was successful was that the concerns were shared with the mountain biking community and
those bikers moved over to the Portuguese Bend Reserve, which resulted in the reduction in
equestrian use in that particular area. She stated that kiosks would be something to incorporate
into the plan, and noted that the project is generally moving in the right direction.
Sharon Yarber, Rancho Palos Verdes, asked if the VTPP would be under the auspices of the
Community Development Department or the Recreation and Parks Department. She stated that
she was in support of members of the public from the hiking, biking, and equestrian community
participating on a Trails Advisory Committee with staff and the PVPLC.
City Council Minutes (_ •
March 19, 2013
Page 6of11
4-68
City Manager Lehr stated that the program would probably be under the Recreation and Parks
Department, which is also the department that manages the Mountains Recreation and
Conservation Authority Ranger contract.
Nancy Wildman, Palos Verdes Peninsula Horseman's Association (PVPHA), Rolling Hills
Estates, stated that the PVPHA supports the VTPP and will help to recruit volunteers for the
program.
Ken Swenson, PVPLC, Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that the PVPLC submitted a comment
letter, noting that the purpose of the Preserve was for the habitat restoration and
encouragement of endangered and threatened habitat. H e stated he was in favor of hearing the
concerns of the Preserve users; sup ported staffs recommendations; and noted signage,
education and enforcement were critical to the success of the Preserve.
Discussion ensued among Council Members, staff, and City Attorney Lynch.
Councilman Knight moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Duhovic, to adopt the staff
recommendation to: 1) Receive and file an update report on the management tools used in the
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve to minimize trail user conflicts; 2) Return with a revised Volunteer
Trail Patrol Program for the Preserve; 3) Direct staff to convert un-program med interpretive
hours in the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority Contract to Preserve patrol
hours; and, 4) Authorize staff to augment the PVPLC's trail signage responsibilities by including
$10,500 of City monies in FY 13.;.14 toward improving trail signage in the Preserve.
Councilman Misetich offered an amendment directing staff to return with a plan to include public
participation quarterly during meetings with staff and the PVPLC.
Councilman Knight, as the maker of the motion, and Mayor Pro Tern Duhovic, as the seconder
of the motion, accepted the amendment.
The motion as amended was to adopt the staff recommendation to: 1) Receive and file an
update report on the management tools used in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve to minimize
trail user conflicts; 2) Return with a revised Volunteer Trail Patrol Program for the Preserve; 3)
Direct staff to convert un-programmed interpretive hours in the Mountains Recreation and
Conservation Authority Contract to Preserve patrol hours; and, 4) Authorize staff to augment the
PVPLC's trail signage responsibilities by including $10,500 of City monies in FY 13-14 toward
improving trail signage in the Preserve; and, 5) Direct staff to return with a plan to include public
participation quarterly during meetings with staff and the PVPLC.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Campbell, Duhovic, Knight, Misetich, and Mayor Brooks
None
None
RECESS AND RECONVENE:
Mayor Brooks called a brief recess from 9:34 P.M. to 9:48 P.M.
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013
Page 7of11
4-69
FY13-14 Budget Policy Issues
Deputy Director of Finance/IT Downs provided a staff report and PowerPoint presentation
regarding this item. She noted that staff is asking for direction on the following: Budget Policy
Issues, Revision to the City Council's Reserve Policy, and Services to be added to the Budget
Menu exercise.
Discussion ensued among Council Members, staff, and City Attorney Lynch as the different
policy issues were presented.
Median Maintenance Funding
Mayor Pro Tern Duhovic moved, seconded by Mayor Brooks, to: 1) Proceed with Palos Verdes
Drive West median improvements; and, 2) Defer Hawthorne median improvements.
Without objection, Mayor Brooks so ordered.
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013
Page 8of11
4-70
Councilman Misetich moved, seconded by Mayor Brooks, to use the Beautification fund balance
to backfill FY13-14 median maintenance.
Without objection, Mayor Brooks so ordered.
ADA Compliance Project Funding
Councilman Knight moved, seconded by Councilman Misetich, to use Excess General Fund
Reserves of $225,000 for FY 13-14; plan for FY14-15 and FY15-16 subsidies of $150,000 per
year if no other funding source is identified.
Without objection, Mayor Brooks so ordered.
Right~f-Way Rehabilitation as part of Residential Street Projects
Councilman Misetich moved, seconded by Councilman Knight, to use Excess General Fund
Reserves in the amount of $335,000 for FY13-14 subsidy; and plan for ongoing funding decision
in 2014.
Without objection, Mayor Brooks so ordered.
Improvement of the Quality of Live City Council Meeting Broadcasts
Council and staff discussion ensued regarding the following: 1) Use of Excess General Fund
Reserves in the amount of $185,000 to improve quality of broadcasts for replacement of lighting
and backdrop, cameras, and mixing equipment; 2) Exploration of the early termination of Cox
commitment, and begin broadcast responsibility prior to Oct 2015; and, 3) Begin analysis for
possible PEG fee.
Council decided that Improvements of the Quality of Live City Council Meeting Broadcasts could
appear as a menu option during the Budget workshop.
Without objection, Mayor Brooks so ordered.
Councilman Campbell left the meeting at 10:56 P. M., after the discussion of this item.
Abalone Cove Sewer Maintenance Subsidy
Discussion ensued among Council Members and staff regarding this Budget Policy issue.
Councilman Knight recused himself from this discussion and left the dais at 11 :02 P.M.
By acclamation, the Council decided to discuss the Abalone Cove Sewer Maintenance Subsidy
budget policy issue during the Budget Workshop.
At 11 :03 P.M. Councilman Knight returned to the dais.
Restoration of Public Works Deputy Director
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013
Page 9of11
4-71
Discussion ensued among Council Members and staff regarding this Budget Policy issue.
By acclamation, the Counci I deferred further discussion of this item until after the Matrix Report
comes to the Council.
Reserve Policy
Discussion ensued among Council Members and staff regarding this Budget Policy issue.
Councilman Misetich moved, seconded by Mayor Brooks, to approved staff recommendation to:
1) Amend Reserve Policy to require transfer of prior year favorable General Fund expenditure
variances to the CIP Reserve; and, 2) Transfer $1.2 million to the Capital Improvement Projects
Reserve for the FY11-12 favorable expenditure variance.
Without objection, Mayor Brooks so ordered.
Current Service Levels
Discussion ensued among Council Members and staff regarding this Budget Policy issue.
Councilman Misetich moved, seconded Mayor Brooks, to repeat the 2012 City Council direction
regarding which service level expenditures should be placed on the Menu for the City Council's
Hybrid Zero-Based Budget exercise on April 30, 2013. In summary, the direction was to include
the following: 1) Expenditures increasing more than 5% and $25,000 from the prior year; 2)
Discretionary items, including current service levels of a discretionary nature; 3) Proposals to
support the City Council's goals; 4) Other changes identified by staff; and, 5) Expenditures of
$250,000 or more.
Without objection, Mayor Brooks so ordered.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
The following items were raised by Council Members as future agenda items:
Councilman Misetich requested an item be placed on a future agenda regarding an outreach
program to residents to incorporate 100% participation in the Neighborhood Watch Program.
CITY COUNCIL ORAL REPORTS:
Mayor Brooks provided a brief report regarding items discussed at the recent West Vector
Control Board meeting. Other Council Members deferred their reports to the next meeting.
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013 \.,"
Page 10of11
4-72
CLOSED SESSION REPORT:
City Attorney Lynch reported that with respect to the threat of litigation regarding Cherine
Medawar, and the existing litigation case titled Monks v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes, reports
were provided to Council and no action was taken.
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION:
At 11 :19 P .M., City Attorney Lynch reported that the Council would be recessing to Closed
Session to meet with the City's designated labor negotiators, Mr. Brown and Mr. Larson.
RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION:
At 11 :40 P .M., the Council reconvened to Open Sessi on.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT:.
Labor Attorney Brown reported that the Council gave direction to its Labo r Attorney and there
was no reportable act ion taken.
ADJOURNMENT:
At 11:41P.M., the meeting was adjourned.
Attest:
Isl Carla Morreale
City Clerk
W:\City Council Minutes\2013\20130319 CC MINS.doc
Isl Susan Brooks
Mayor
City Council Minutes
March 19, 2013
Page 11 of 11
4-73
Joel Rojas
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Carolynn Petru
Tuesday, September 17, 2013 8:01 AM
Joel Rojas; Lauren Ramezani
FW: Trash Cans and Property Acquisition
FYI -the Clerk already has this for late correspondence.
CP
From: sharon yarber [mailto:momofyago@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 10:15 PM
To: CC
Cc: Carolyn Lehr
Subject: Trash Cans and Property Acquisition
Dear Council,
I was happy to see the Mayor propose a future agenda item re: trash cans in our City. A few years ago, right
after the new contract went into effect, I wrote to the Council to complain about the fact that (i) once a week
collection required larger, unwieldy and often difficult to store containers, and (ii) the requirement of placing
the bins in the street, instead of at curbside, significantly reducing street parking and, frankly, making our City
look undesirable. I was met with ridicule by then Council Member, now Judge, Stem.
The fact of the matter is, reducing the number of hours our streets can be cluttered is a step in the right
direction, but woefully inadequate to address the degradation of our community resulting from the switch from
our prior trash hauler. I know we are now stuck with a long term contract, but please do not renew it, at any
price (or with any price concessions) and when the contract is up let's go back to twice a week pick up at least
with a hauler who will allow bins to be placed on driveways and sidewalks. This will reduce stench that
emanates from trash accumulating for a week, and heaven forbid for two weeks if the owner happens to forget
to put out their trash or be out of town, and will not adversely impact street parking access.
Many properties in RPV do not have sideyards large enough to put the bins outside of view, and this has
resulted in lots of bins being out front instead of in the sideyards of homes. What can you do about that? Force
people to remodel to accommodate trash cans? I think not.
PVE has it right. NO trash cans ever. I would pay extra for that. Instead of the Council deciding what the people
want, why not have a survey (that would be a good use of the quarterly newsletter) and see if others are like-
minded and would pay extra to have what PVE has - a community that does not look disgraceful on trash day
(and the days leading up to and a few days following). I see too many people just leave the green bins, in
particular, out after the gardener comes. And since we only have pick up once a week we need more bins than
would otherwise be needed. Some people put 5 humongous bins in the street weekly.
Now -as far as the purchase of the properties on Montemalaga Drive is concerned: First, this should NOT be a
consent calendar item. This has never been agendized, except as a Closed Session matter. No negotiations
should have been conducted until the residents agreed that this property should be acquired by the City.
This property is essentially worthless. I think the staff believes that as long as federal funds are used, it's OK to
just go out an buy property for open space. As I have said before and will say again, whether funds are federal,
1
4-74
state, county or city they are all TAXPAYER dollars and waste at any level of government is unacceptable. The
fact of the matter is (i) the property already is and will remain open space because it is largely zoned Open
Space Hazard and the cost of development would be prohibitive, (ii) we do not need to take on the
responsibility for brush clearance ofthis property, and (iii) we do not need the liability for injuries occurring
there. The current owners pay for brush clearance now and the City does not require an easement to clear it if
the owners fail to do so. Through the exercise of police power, the City can clear the property if the owners fail
to do so and impose a lien on the property to recoup the cost of same. I am sure the City could acquire, by
condemnation if necessary, an easement to take care of whatever drainage issue is posed as the ruse for
requiring fee title.
If you really want( ed) to spend money for open space, habitat preservation and view preservation it would have
been far better to have negotiated with Raju Chhabria to acquire the lot at Crest and Hawthorne that is now
occupied by yet another Chase office.
Once again, this matter is another example of why our whole agenda process if flawed. Staff has been working
for who knows how many months on this deal, and I finally got to open the staff report Friday evening after
work at which point I promptly sent an email to Joel Rojas asking for a copy of the appraisals that support the
purchase price. Needless to say, I did not hear from him over the week-end, received a response this afternoon,
and will pick up a CD tomorrow morning. This is not adequate time for residents to receive, review, analyze
and digest agenda items.
This may or may not be a good idea -the jury is out, though I lean toward not buying the property as I see no
need to do so. I also think that the parcel that the Dr. Giani wants to retain should also have been appraised as
that property is the one that, if developed, will block views.
Please table/postpone this matter until at least the next Council meeting to give residents a chance to get better
informed about the whole matter.
And again, this should NOT be a consent calendar item. This is a violation, again, of the Rules of Procedure that
require that matters on the Consent Calendar have been previously agendized and acted upon by Council. Please
comply with your own Rules that we struggled so hard to "improve".
Sharon Yarber
2
4-75
.................................................................... -................. ~·········~······ ................................................................ ~iu·a-;;;ix···iu·1-o·d'.·-.:1;£a:ai=:i. -
i 4 J a~tll
~ ii ~ ii ~ ~!
!
!
i
I
I
!
l
l
i
!
i
i
I
i
i
!
i
I
i
i
I
l
!
I
' E
i
!
!
i
I
I
!
i
!
j
!
i
!
i
' ~
I
!
i • i
f
j
!
f
.. i
::0 c
II
-~J
4-76
Joel Rojas
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
FYI
-,---Original Message-----
Carolynn Petru
Wednesday, September 18, 2013 8:59 AM
Joel Rojas
FW: Open space at any price
From: Minas Yerelian [mailto:yerelian@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 8:42 AM
To:CC
Subject: Open space at any price
Good morning
The purchase of any land for open space at any price or any reason is justified Even if takes to issue a bond
Thank you
Sent from my iPhone
1
4-77
Joel Rojas
To: Teresa Takaoka
Subject: RE: Conversion Process for Agricultural Use in RPV
From: L. Bilski [mailto:ldb910@juno.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 12:50 PM
To: Kit Fox
Cc: CC; SunshineRPV@aol.com; dlfriedson@gmail.com; momofyago@gmail.com; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>;
Joel Rojas; PlanningCommission; jmesorto@cox.net; momofyago@gmail.com; cicoriae@aol.com
Subject: Re: Conversion Process for Agricultural Use in RPV
Thank you, Kit.
The regulations are on the NPS website at
http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/lwcf/manual/lwcf.pdf
starting on page 110 Chapter 8 for Conversion info
I remember reading those pages 2 years ago regarding lower Pt. Vicente/ Annenberg application after the link.
was provided in an NPS letter commenting on the DEIR.
Seems the appraisal of the acreage where now there is commercial farming is one required document that the
city does not have yet. Glad you're now working to get this appraisal accomplished.
What happened to the city's efforts to purchase Malaga Canyon land for the purpose of storm water runoff
control as presented to the City Council last year? Your current summary does go back that far.
Is there another possible site for the farming activity if it needs to be moved from the current position on Upper
Pt. Vicente? And/Or a possible site for the interpretive-demonstration farming area? Perhaps next to Golden
Cove Center? Or Windport canyon area? Or does staff have some other possible sites for agricultural use in
RPV? The farming equipment has been preserved in working condition, and there are volunteers willing and
able to demonstrate farming activity, especially valuable for children to learn. Unfortunately, the city re-
zoned the agricultural zone (next to Terranea) in the coastal zone some years ago at the request of a
developer. That area remains vacant -on Nantasket Dr. next to Flowerfield Trail -despite city approval of a
subdivision there.
Is there anywhere in the city that is still zoned for agricultural use? If so, where?
Is the Windport area suitable for farming? I'm not familiar with that area's geography.
What conditions/restrictions could the city place on any new acquisitions for open space that would ensure the
property could not be sold by the city and developed at some future date? Something to secure open space in
perpetuity? Is that possible?
Please keep me informed.
Lenee
1
4-78
Please note: message attached
From: Kit Fox <KitF@rpv.com>
To: CC <CC@rpv.com>
Cc: "L.Bilski"<ldb910@juno.com>, "Sunshine (SunshineRPV@aol.com)" <SunshineRPV@aol.com>, dena
friedson <dlfriedson@gmail.com>, Sharon Yarber <momofyago@gmail.com>, "Carol Lynch
<clynch@rwglaw.com>" <clynch@rwglaw.com>, Joel Rojas <JoelR@rpv.com>, Cory Linder
<CoryL@rpv.com>
Subject: Conversion Process for Agricultural Use at Point Vicente Park
Date: Mon, 23 Sep ?013 21 :33:51 +0000
One Weird Trick
Could add $1,000s .to Your Social Security Checks! See if you Qualify ...
newsmax.com
2
4-79
PSA for Malaga
Canyon South
(Ya Yi May)
4-80
AGREEMENTFORPURCHASEANDSALEOFREALPROPERTY
AND JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
THIS AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY AND
JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS ("Agreement") is made and entered into this day of
[September], 2013 ("Effective Date''), by and between YA YI MAY, an individual ("Seller"),
and the CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, a municipal corporation ("Buyer").
RECITALS
(a) Seller owns that certain real property (the "Land") in the County of Los
Angeles, State of California, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and any
and all improvements thereon (the "Improvements").
. . (b) All rights (including water and mineral rights), privileges, easements,
tenements, rights of way, and appurtenances which benefit or pertain to the LW\d are hereinafter
referred to as the "Appurtenances".
(c) The Land, Improvements (if any) and Appurtenances are collectively
referred to herein as the "Property."
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and other
consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Buyer and Seller agree that the
terms and conditions of this Agreement and the instructions to First American Title Insurance
Company ("Title Company" and "Escrow Holder") with regard to the escrow ("Escrow")
contemplated hereby are as follows:
1. SALE OF PROPERTY.
Seller agrees to sell the Property to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to purchase
the Property from Seller, upon the terms and conditions herein after set forth.
2. PURCHASE PRICE.
The total purchase price ("Purchase Price") for the Property shall be Four
Hundred Fifty-Five Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($455,000,00).
3. ESCROW.
3.1 Opening of Escrow.
Within three (3) business days following the Effective Date hereof, Buyer
and Seller shall open Escrow with Escrow Holder and shall deliver a copy of this executed
Agreement to Escrow Holder. In addition, Buyer and Seller agree to execute, deliver, and be
bound by any reasonable or customary supplemental escrow instructions of Escrow Holder or
other instruments as may reasonably be required by Escrow Holder in order to consummate the
transaction contemplated by this Agreement. Any such supplemental instructions shall not
-1-
4-81
conflict with, amend or supersede any portions of this Agreement. If there is any inconsistency
between such supplemental instructions and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control.
3.2 Close of Escrow.
For purposes of this Agreement, the "Close of Escrow" or "Closing" shall
be deemed to occur upon, and the "Closing Date" shall be the date of, the recordation of the
Grant Deed conveying the Property to Buyer in the Official Records of Los Angeles County,
California. The Close of Escrow, Closing and Closing Date must occur no later than December
31, 2013. Possession is to be delivered to Buyer at 2:00 p.m. on the date of "Close of Escrow",
in all events vacant and free from all claims to possession or title by third parties.
3 .3 Funding Condition.
. The Close of Escrow and Buyer's obligations under this Agreement are
condition¢d, for the benefit of Buyer, upon the Buyer's receipt of federal funding (as authorized
by the California Wildlife Conservation Board) for the entire amount of the Purchase Price.
Buyer shall use good faith efforts to cause the satisfaction of such condition as soon as
reasonably possible, but in no event shall Buyer's failure to obtain such funding be a breach of
this Agreement.
4. TITLE INVESTIGATION.
4.1 Title Report.
Buyer has received a preliminary title report dated August l, 2013, 1;•
Order No. NCS-480165-SAC4 for a Standard Form CLTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance for
the Property ("Preliminary Report"), together with copies of all documents relating to title
exceptions referred to in the Preliminary Report ("Title Exceptions"). Buyer hereby approves
the Preliminary Report and Title Exceptions, subject to Section 4.2 below.
4.2 Monetary Title Exceptions.
It is understood and agreed that, notwithstanding Section 4.1, any
encumbrances, security interests, liens, deeds of trust, and/or mortgages which secure, in whole
or in part, any monetary indebtedness not arising by, through or under Buyer shall be deemed to
be disapproved, and shall be paid off, satisfied, released, and/or discharged by Seller (or insured
over by the Title Company) at or prior to Closing. Seller agrees to execute any agreements
(including indemnity agreements) in favor of the Title Company and deliver such other
documents to the Title Company as may be reasonably required by the Title Company to remove
recorded Documents 79-924702 and 81-708021. ($39,999 deed of trust dated in 1979 and
assignment thereof) as exceptions to title so that Buyer's title policy can and will be issued
without such exceptions.
4.3 Title Policy.
Seller shall cause the Title Company to issue its Standard CTLA
Owner's form Policy of Title Insurance ("Title Policy") in the amount of the Purchase Price
-2-
4-82
showing good and marketable title to the Property vested in Buyer subject only to the exceptions
to title approved in Section 3.1 but with no exceptions to title for any liens (as required by
Section 4.2).
5. SELLER'S DELIVERIES.
Prior to the Close of Escrow, Seller shall deposit or cause to be deposited into Escrow for
delivery to Buyer at Closing the following:
(a)
(b)
(c)
A duly executed and acknowledged Grant Deed;
A Certification of Non Foreign Status (FIRPTA Affidavit); and
Any other document provided for herein, or reasonably required by
Escrow Holder.
6. BUYER'S DELIVERIES.
Prior to the Close of Escrow, Buyer shall deposit or cause to be deposited
into Escrow, to be delivered to Seller upon the Closing, the following:
(a) The Purchase Price;
(b) A Certificate of Acceptance for the Grant Deed; and
( c) Any other document provided for herein or reasonably required by Escrow
Holder.
7. TAX WITHHOLDING; AUTHORIZATION TO RECORD
DOCUMENTS AND DISBURSE FUNDS.
Escrow Company shall withhold a portion of the purchase price under
California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 18662 and shall otherwise comply therewith (as
well as with Section 15.17 below regarding reporting under IRC Section 6045(e)).
Escrow Holder is hereby authorized and directed to record and/or deliver
the documents and disburse the funds called for hereunder, subject to the above withholding and
payment of costs and expenses as provided for herein and otherwise pursuant to the written
closing instructions, if any, of Buyer and Seller delivered prior to Closing, provided each of the
following conditions have been or will concurrently with the Close of Escrow be fulfilled:
(a) Title Company has committed to issue to Buyer the Title Policy with
liability equal to the Purchase Price, in accordance with Section 4.3 above;
(b) Seller shall have deposited in Escrow the documents and instruments
required of it under Section 5;
( c) Buyer shall have deposited into Escrow the documents, and instruments
required of it under Section 6;
-3-
4-83
( d) Escrow Holder has received any documents necessary or proper for the
issuance of the Title Policy referretl to above.
8. COSTS AND EXPENSES.
The Seller shall pay one-half of the Escrow Holder's Escrow fee and that
portion of the premium for the title policy equal to the cost of a CL TA standard coverage title
policy in the amount of the Purchase Price, plus the cost of any endorsements obtained in
connection with Disapproved Exceptions. The cost of any endorsements requested by the Buyer,
shall be borne by the Buyer. Buyer agrees to pay all other usual fees, charges, and costs which
arise from Escrow.
9. PRORATION.
. The following prorations shall be made between Buyer and Seller by
Escrow Holder at the Close of Escrow, computed as of the closing date:
9.1 Taxes.
Seller shall pay all property taxes for the tax bill period in which
the Closing occurs (i.e., January 1 through June 30, or July 1 through December 31, as
applicable), and Seller acknowledges that since Buyer is exempt from property taxes, Seller may
secure a refund of the property taxes paid by Seller for the portion of such "tax bill period"
during which Buyer will own the Property, but there shall be no increase in the funds required to
be deposited by Buyer into escrow due to property taxes. Special taxes, and assessments shall be
prorated as of the Close of Escrow based upon the latest available tax information. Seller shall
be responsible for all special taxes and assessments accrued against the Property to and including
the day prior to the Close of Escrow based upon payment of such assessments in installments to
the greatest extent permitted. Unless any special tax or assessment payment or installment
specifies the time period for which such payment is owed, it shall be presumed that such
payment is for the full year immediately preceding the day upon which such payment is due.
10. WAIVER BY SELLER.
,SELLER KNOWINGLY AND VOLUNTARILY WAIVES THE
FOLLOWING RIGHTS: THE RIGHT TO SEEK ANY COMPENSATION FOR THE
ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY IN ANY AMOUNT GREATER THAN THAT SET
FORTH IN SECTION 2 HEREIN; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM RELOCATION BENEFITS OR
ASSISTANCE; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM DAMAGE OR INJURY TO BUSINESS
GOODWILL; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM LOSS OF RENT; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM
SEVERANCE DAMAGES; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM FIXTURES AND EQUIPMENT; OR
ANY SIMILAR RIGHT OR CLAIM ARISING OUT OF THE ACQUISITION OF THE
PROPERTY.
11. SELLER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES.
In consideration of Buyer entering into this Agreement and as an
( inducement to Buyer to purchase the Property, Seller makes the following representations and
""·
-4-
. ,.,
4-84
warranties, each of which (i) is a condition to Close of Escrow, (ii) is true as of the Effective
Date and will be true as of the Closing, and (iii) is material.and is being relied upon by Buyer.
11.1 Authority.
Seller has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement
and to consummate the transactions contemplated herein without obtaining the consent or
approval of any other person, entity, or governmental authority. The persons whose names are
set forth below hereby personally represent and warrant that they have full power and authority
to sign the name of Seller to this Agreement and to cause this Agreement to be a binding
obligation of Seller.
11.2 Litigation.
. There is no litigation, bankruptcy, or receivership proceeding or
any other' proceeding pending, or, to Seller's knowledge, threatened against, relating to, or
involving Seller's interest in the Property, nor does Seller know or have any reasonable ground
to know of any basis for any such action. No consents or waivers of or by any third party are
necessary to permit the· consummation by Seller of the transactions contemplated pursuant to this
Agreement.
11.3 Compliance With Laws.
Seller has received no notice and has no actual knowledge of any
violation of any applicable law, ordinance, rule, regulation or requirement of any governmental
agency, body or subdivision affecting or relating to the Property, including, without limitation,
any subdivision, building, use or environmental law, ordinance, rule, requirement, or regulation.
Seller agrees to disclose any potential violations of applicable City
building codes on any properties that abut the Property that is a part of this transaction.
11.4 Governmental Notices.
Seller shall deliver to Buyer each and every notice or
communication Seller recejves from any governmental body relating to the Property or any
portion thereof upon Seller's receipt of the same.
11.5 Leases.
Seller acknowledges that there are no leases or other agreements
(either oral or written) affecting or relating to the ,tjght of any party with respect to the possession
of the Property, or any portion thereof.
11.6 Future Action.
From and after the date hereof, without the prior written consent of
Buyer, Seller shall not execute nor consent to the execution of any lease of any portion of the
Property or any other instrument which may result in an alteration of the condition of title.
-5-
4-85
11. 7 Hazardous Materials.
To the best of Seller's actual knowledge there are no Hazardous
Materials in existence on or below the surface of the Property, including, without limitation,
contamination of the soil, subsoil or ground water, which constitute a violation or any law, rule,
or regulation of any government entity having jurisdiction thereof or which expose Buyer to
liability to third parties, and Seller has not used, nor permitted use of, the Property for the
generation, treatment, storage, or disposal of Hazardous Materials, or other condition or use that
could result in or cause a discharge of any Hazardous Materials on or below the Property.
"Hazardous Materials" as used herein means hazardous, toxic, or radioactive substances or
materials, as the same are defined or described by applicable federal laws or regulations
(including, without limitation, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. Section
6901 et seq., and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act,
42 U.S.C. Section 9601 et seq., and any regulations adopted and publications promulgated
pursuant 'to said laws), California laws or regulations (including, without limitation, those
substances defined as "Hazardous Substances" in Section 25316 of the California Health &
Safety Code, and any regulations adopted and publications promulgated pursuant to said laws).
Further, Seller has received no notification, warning or citation within the last five (5) years
regarding any violation, or potential or pending violation, of any Hazardous Materials
regulations or laws or any other law, statutory provision or regulation regarding the use,
condition or status of the Property and Seller has no knowledge of any condition or activity on
the Property which, if un-remedied prior to the Close of Escrow, will or could, upon passage of
time, constitute a violation.
11.8 Environmental Violations.
Seller has no knowledge of any condition or use of the Property
that constitutes, or if un-remedied prior to the Close of Escrow, with the passage of time would
constitute, a violation of (i) Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Section
2344); (ii) the Federal Clean Air Act (33 U.S.C. Section 7401, et seq.); (iii) the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. Section 1251, et seq.); (iv) any State of California law of
similar substance or nature controlling or regulating the use or condition of land, water or air
(including the California Environmental Quality Act) or (v) any federal or California laws or
regulations relating to use of or conservation of wetlands or other natural topographical
conditions. Further, Seller has received no notification, warning or citation within the last five
(5) years regarding any violation or potential or pending violation, of any of such laws or
regulations.
11.9 Work and Materials Furnished.
Bills for work done. and materials furnished with respect to the
Property have been paid in full by Seller or will be discharged and paid in full by Seller by the
date of Closing.
-6-
4-86
11.10 Tax Withholding for Foreign Person.
Seller is a citizen of the United States, and is not a "foreign
person" under IRC Section 1445.
11.11 Declaration, Covenants, Restrictions.
Other than as identified in the Title Report, there are no
declarations or covenants affecting the use of the Property; and there is no association which has
been formed for the purpose of managing any portion of the Property.
11.12 Contracts.
Except as may be disclosed by the Title Documents, there are no
contracts or agreements relating to the operation, development, management, or ownership of the
Property. or any portion thereof.
11.13 Truthfulness at Closing.
Except as expressly herein otherwise provided, the representations
and warranties of Seller set forth in this Agreement shall be true on and as of the Close of
Escrow as if those representations and warranties were made on and as of such time.
12. BUYER'S REPRESENTATIONS.
In consideration of Seller entering into this Agreement and as an
inducement to Seller to sell the Property to Buyer, Buyer makes the following representations,
each of which is material and is being relied upon by Seller:
12.1 Authority.
Buyer has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to
consummate the transactions contemplated herein without obtaining the consent or approval of
any other person, entity or governmental authority. The person(s) whose name(s) are set forth
below hereby personally represent and warrant that they have full power and authority to sign the
name of Buyer to this Agreement and to cause this Agreement to be a binding obligation of
Buyer.
12.2 Truthfulness at Closing.
The representations of Buyer set forth in this Agreement shall be true on
and as of the Close of Escrow as if those representations and warranties were made on and as of
such time.
13. SELLER'S DEFAULT.
In the event that Seller shall fail to perform Seller's obligations
hereunder, Buyer shall have the option to: (i) extend the Closing for such time as Buyer chooses
-7-
4-87
to allow Seller to remedy such default, (ii) waive such default in writing, "or" (iii) pursue all
legal or equitable remedies available to it, including, without limitation, terminating this
Agreement by written notice to Seller prior to cure of the default.
14. MISCELLANEOUS.
14.1 Risk of Loss.
The risk of loss or damage to the Property until the Closing is
assumed by Seller. If any damage occurs to the Property prior to Closing, Seller shall promptly
give Buyer written notice of the occurrence thereof and of the amount of any insurance proceeds
available for the repair of such damage. Buyer at its sole option may terminate this Agreement
by written notice given to Seller within thirty (30) days of Buyer's receipt of such notice, in
which case the funds and documents deposited with Escrow Holder shall be returned to Buyer
and this Agreement shall be null and void. If Buyer does not give such notice, or gives notice
that it w.Hl nonetheless proceed with the Closing, then this Agreement will remain in full force
and effect and Seller shall assign any available insurance proceeds to Buyer at or before the
Closing.
14.2 Notices.
All notice or other communications required or permitted
hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered; sent by certified mail, postage
prepaid, return receipt requested; or delivered or sent by overnight courier and shall be deemed
received upon the earlier of (i) if mailed by certified mail, three (3) business days after the date
of posting by the United States Post Office, or (ii) if sent by overnight courier, when delivered to
the specified address.
To Buyer:
With a copy to:
To Seller:
To Escrow Holder:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Attn: City Manager
Richards, Watson & Gershon
355 South Grand Avenue, 40th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
Attn: Carol W. Lynch, Esq.
Ms. Ya Yi May
c/o Julie Pun
First American Title Insurance Company
777 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Attn: Sylvia Meldonian (213/271-1764)
-8-
..
4-88
Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner detailed in this
Section. Rejection or other refusal to accept or the inability to deliver because of changed
address of which no notice was given shall be deemed to constitute receipt of the notice, demand,
request, or communication sent.
14.3 Assignment.
Buyer may not assign, transfer, or convey its rights or obligations
under this Agreement without the prior written consent of Seller. However, that Buyer shall in
no event be released from its obligations hereunder by reason of any assignment. No assignment
or transfer, if permitted, shall be effective unless each assignee or transferee expressly agrees in
writing to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Any purported assignment,
transfer, or encumbrance in violation of the foregoing may, at the option of Seller, be deemed
null and void or be a default hereunder.
14.4 Seller's Use of Property.
From and after the date of Seller's execution hereof, Seller shall
maintain the Property in the same condition and state of repair as on the Effective Date, and
Seller shall not grant or convey any easement, lease, license, permit, encumbrance, lien, or any
other legal or beneficial interest in or to the Property, improvements thereon, mineral or water
rights appurtenant thereto, or any other property rights whatsoever without the prior written
consent of Buyer, nor shall Seller violate, or allow the violation of any law, ordinance, rule, or
regulation affecting the Property. Seller shall do or cause to be done all things reasonably within
its control to preserve intact and unimpaired any and all easements, grants, appurtenances,
privileges, and licenses in favor of or constituting any portion of the Property.
14.5 Delivery of Materials .
. Seller shall deliver to Buyer, at no expense to Buyer, within ten 10)
days of Seller's execution hereof, copies of any and all· contracts affecting the Property
(including service and materials contracts), soils investigations and reports, water and sewer
studies, topographic maps, photographs, mapping, platting, and other materials, if any,
concerning the Property, which are owned by Seller or are in Seller's possession (collectively,
the "Materials").
14.6 Survival and Conditions Precedent.
Agreements, representations, covenants, and warranties contained
in this Agreement or any amendment or supplement hereto shall survive Closing and delivery of
deed hereunder and shall not be merged thereby; and, in addition to any effect any of the same
have in law or in equity, all of the same will be deemed to be conditions precedent to the Buyer's
obligations hereunder, whether so expressed or not. Seller acknowledges that all of the
conditions to this Agreement which are for the sole benefit of the Buyer may unilaterally be
waived by the Buyer only in writing.
-9-
4-89
15. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
15 .1 Required Actions of Buyer and Seller.
Buyer and Seller agree to execute such further instruments and
documents and to consummate the purchase and sale herein contemplated, and to effectuate the
intent of this Agreement.
15.2 Time of Essence.
Time is of the essence of each and every term, condition,
obligation, and provision hereof.
15.3 Counterparts.
. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed an original, but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same
instrument. Faxed copies of signed documents may be considered as originals if agreed to by
each of the parties hereto.
15.4 Captions.
Any captions to, or headings of, the paragraph or subparagraphs of
this Agreement are solely for the convenience of the parties hereto, are not a part of this
Agreement, and shall not be used for the interpretation or determination of the validity of this
Agreement or any provision hereof.
15.5 No Obligations to Third Parties.
Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the execution and
delivery of this Agreement shall not be deemed to confer any rights upon, nor obligate any of the
parties hereto, to any person or entity other than the parties hereto.
15.6 Exhibits.
The Exhibits attached hereto are hereby incorporated herein by this
reference.
15. 7 Amendment to this Agreement.
The terms of this Agreement may not be modified or amended
except by an instrument in writing executed by each of the parties hereto.
15.8 Waiver.
The waiver or failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement
shall not operate as a waiver of any future breach of any such provision or any other provision
hereof.
-10-
4-90
15.9 Awlicable Law.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California, excluding California's choice of law rules.
15.10 Fees and Other Expenses.
Except as otherwise provided herein, each of the parties shall pay
its own attorneys', consultants' and other fees and expenses in connection with this Agreement.
15.11 Entire Agreement.
This Agreement supersedes any prior agreements, negotiations and
communications, oral or written, and contains the entire agreement between Buyer and Seller as
to the subject matter hereof. No subsequent agreement, representation, or promise made by ether
party hereto, or by or to an employee, officer, agent, or representative of either party shall be of
any effect unless it is in writing and executed by the party to be bound thereby.
15.12 Successors and Assigns.
Subject to any limitations on assignment contained herein, this
Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of
the parties hereto.
15.13 No Presumption.
Each provision of this Agreement has been independently and
freely negotiated· by both parties as if this Agreement were drafted by both parties. In the event
of any ambiguity in this Agreement, the parties waive any presumption or rule requiring or
permitting interpretation of said ambiguity against or in favor of either party.
15.14 Attorneys' Fees.
In the event that either party is required to commence any action or
proceedings against the other in order to enforce the provisions hereof, or in order to obtain
damages for the alleged breach of any of the provisions hereof, the parties agree that both parties
shall bear their own costs in connection with said action or proceedings and that no award of
costs or attorney's fees shall arise out of any such action or proceedings.
15.15 Brokerage Fees.
Each party represents to the other that it has not engaged any
broker, finder or salesperson in connection with this matter.
15 .16 Survival.
Except as otherwise provided herein, all covenants, agreements,
representations, and warranties set forth in this Agreement or in any certificate or instrument
-11-
4-91
executed or delivered pursuant to this Agreement shall survive the Closing and shall not merge
into any deed, assignment, or other instrument executed or delivered pursuant hereto.
15 .17 IRS Real Estate Sales Reporting.
Buyer and Seller hereby appoint Escrow Agent as, and Escrow
Agent agrees to act as "the person responsible for closing" the transactions which are the subject
of this Agreement, pursuant to Internal Revenue Code of 1986 Section 6045( e ). Escrow Agent
shall prepare and file the informational return (IRS Form 1099-S) required by and otherwise
comply with the terms of IRS Section 6045( e ).
15.18 Authority of City Manager.
The City Manager shall have the authority to make all
determimi~ions and give all consents and approvals hereunder on behalf of City provided they are
in writiµg. The City Manager may also waive provisions hereof and make non-substantial
amendments to this Agreement on behalf of City provided the waiver(s) and amendment(s) are in
writing.
15.19 Jurisdiction and Venue.
Seller hereby agrees that for purposes of disputes in connection
with this Agreement, Seller shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of
California in Los Angeles County, and that the venue for any dispute arising between the parties
hereto shall be such courts in Los Angeles County. No actions, proceedings or lawsuits regarding
this Agreement shall be commenced or maintained in the courts of Taiwan.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day
and year first above written.
This Agreement creates certain legal rights and responsibilities as described herein and
all parties should consider obtaining legal advice prior to execution of it.
"BUYER":
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
By: ______________ _
Susan Brooks,
Mayor
ATTEST:
Carla Morreale,
City Clerk
-12-
. '
4-92
"SELLER,;":
' '
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Carol W. Lynch of Richards, Watson &
Gershon, City Attorney
YA YI MAY,
an individual
-13-
4-93
DRAFT
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Real property in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, County of Los Angeles, State of California,
described as follows:
PARCEL 1:
THAT PORTION OF LOTS 23, 41AND43 OF L.A.C.A. NO. 51, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES, IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS
PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1 PAGE 1 OF ASSESSORS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF
THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 47, TRACT 21353, AS PER
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 648 PAGES 48 TO 50 OF MAPS, OFFICIAL RECORDS, OF
SAID COUNTY THENCE NORTH 70° 00' 00" EAST 212.61 FEET TO THE WESTERLY
BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO ASH LAND CO., ET AL.,
RECORDED ON JUNE 29, 1955 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2462 IN BOOK 48207 PAGE 168,
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY AND
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LAND SOUTH 20° 32' 00" EAST 136.13 FEET AND
NORTH DEGREES 05' 05" EAST 359.86 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY,
SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO M. Z.
CORPORATION, ET AL., RECORDED JULY 06, 1956 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2271 IN
BOOK 51659 PAGE 168 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE LAST
MENTIONED DEED NORTH 89° 34' 30" EAST 97.71 FEET TO THE WESTERLY
BOUNDARY OF TRACT 21351, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 598, PAGES 32 TO
38 OF MAPS OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY SOUTH 9° 48' 07" WEST 71.79 FEET, SOUTH 1° 09'
26" EAST 151.57 FEET AND SOUTH 4° 3' 01" EAST 27.27 FEET TO THE WESTERLY
BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO BEVERLY
REALTY CO., RECORDED ON JUNE 15, 1956 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2360 IN BOOK
51464 PAGE 380, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG LAST MENTIONED WESTERLY BOUNDARY SOUTH 5° 5' 42" WEST
259.05 FEET AND SOUTH 39° 19' 50" EAST 263.76 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY
BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO OSAGE LAND CO., ET AL.,
RECORDED ON DECEMBERlO, 1957 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1667 IN BOOK 56217 PAGE
198, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY
AND EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LAST MENTIONED LAND NORTH 86° 58' 40"
WEST 24.94 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 430 FEET, WESTERLY ALONG SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24° 44' 03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 185.63
FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCA VE NORTHERLY AND
-14-
4-94
HAVING A RADIUS OF 210 FEET, WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 69° 35' 03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 255.04 FEET, NORTH 42° 07'
42" WEST 500.20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHWESTERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 450 FEET, NORTHWESTERLY
ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 37° 16' 48" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 292.80 FEET AND NORTH 79° 24' 30" WEST 17.34 FEET TO THE
EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO OSAGE LAND CO.
ET AL., RECORDED ON JUNE 29, 1955 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2467 IN BOOK 48207
PAGE 182, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID LAST
MENTIONED EASTERLY BOUNDARY NORTH 19° 06' 50" WEST 135.49 FEET TO THE
SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF A CERTAIN LINE AS HA VINO A BEARING AND
DISTANCE SOUTH 71° 11' 51" WEST 443.68 FEET IN SAID FIRST MENTIONED DEED
RECORDED IN BOOK 48207 PAGE 166, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE· ALONG SAID LINE NORTH 71° 11' 51" EAST 100.12 FEET TO THE
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 21353;
THENCE ALONG SAID LAST MENTIONED SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY SOUTH 58° 46'
54" EAST 211.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF INCLUDED WITHIN LOT 4 OF
TRACT 30635, PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 798 PAGES 68 AND 69 OF MAPS,
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
-15-
4-95
PARCEL2:
NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS FOR ROAD PURPOSES, PUBLIC UTILITY, DRAINAGE
PURPOSES AND SEWER LINE PURPOSES (INCLUDING WITHIN SAID PUBLIC
UTILITY, DRAINAGE AND SEWER LINE PURPOSES, THE USE OF POLE LINES AND
CONDUITS FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY FOR LIGHTING, HEATING,
POWER AND/OR TELEPHONE AND PIPE LINES AND MAINS FOR WATER, HEATING,
GAS, SEWERS AND/OR DRAINAGE, AND ALL NECESSARY FACILITIES,
ATTACHMENTS AND EQUIPMENT IN CONNECTION WITH ANY SUCH PURPOSES)
ON, OVER, UNDER AND ACROSS THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED STRIP OF LAND
WITH THE RIGHT TO GO UPON SAID STRIP OF LAND AND CONSTRUCT, REPAIR
AND MAINTAIN ROADS, POLE LINES, CONDUITS AND LINES, MAINS, SEWERS,
STORM DRAINS AND ALL IMPROVEMENTS, FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT USED IN
CONNECTION WITH ANY OF THE FOREGOING EASEMENTS OF RIGHTS OF WAY;
SAID STRIP OF LAND BEING SITUATED IN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES,
IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THAT PORTION OF LOT "H" OF THE RANCHO LOS PALOS VERDES, IN THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ALLOTTED TO JOTHAM BIXBY BY DECREE OF PARTITION IN THE
ACTION "BIXBY, ET AL., VS. BENT, ET AL.," CASE NO. 2373 IN THE DISTRICT
COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF SAID STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN AND
FOR SAID COUNTY AND ENTERED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 57 OF JUDGMENTS, IN THE
SUPERIOR COURT OF SAID COUNTY, INCLUDED WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND 60 FEET
WIDE, LYING 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTER
LINE:
BEGINNING AT THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THE CENTERLINE OF MOSSBANK
DRIVE AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT 21351 RECORDED IN BOOK 598, PAGES
32 TO 38 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY CONTINUATION OF SAID CENTER LINE, BEING A
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING RADIUS OF 155 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9° 51' 22" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.66 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 86° 58' 40 1' WEST 121.25 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCA VE SOUTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 400 FEET;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24° 44'
03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 172.68 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE
CONCA VE NORTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 240 FEET;
THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE WESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 69° 35'
01" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 291.47 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 42° 07' 42" WEST 500.20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
\. CURVE CONCA VE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 420 FEET;
-16-
"
4-96
(
THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE NORTHWESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 37° 16' 48" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 273.28 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 79° 24' 30" WEST 103.08 FEET.
THE SIDE LINES OF SAID STRIP OF LAND ARE TO BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED
SO AS TO TERMINATE EASTERLY IN THAT CERTAIN BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID
MOSSBANK DRIVE, SHOWN ON SAID LAST MENTIONED MAP AS HA VINO A
BEARING AND LENGTH OF NORTH 31° 37' 40" WEST 66.43 FEET .
. .
-17-
4-97
·.
PARCEL3:
THAT PORTION OF LOT 41 OF L.A.C.A. NO. 51 IN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP
RECORDED IN BOOK 1 PAGE 1 OF ASSESSORS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 54 OF TRACT 22794 AS PER
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 621 PAGES 51 TO 53 OF MAPS OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT
22794, SOUTH 52° 05' 50" WEST 142.04 FEET AND NORTH 65° 30' 00" WEST 77.63 FEET
TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF TRACT 22200, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 639
PAGES 19 TO 23 OF MAPS, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE-ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH 34° 51' 52" EAST 125.62 FEET TO THE
MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO OSAGE LAND
CO., ET AL., RECORDED DECEMBER 10, 1957 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1667 IN BOOK
56217, PAGE 198, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID
LAND NORTH 30° 00' 00" EAST 311.18 FEET TO A POINT ON A NONRADIAL CURVE
CONCA VE NORTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 270.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE
TO SAID POINT HA VINO A BEARING OF NORTH 11° 20' 45" EAST, EASTERLY
ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33° 03' 30" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 155.78 FEET TO THE REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY AND
HAVING A RADiusioF 370.00 FEET, EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24° 44' 03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 159.73 FEET AND SOUTH 86°
58' 40" EAST 79.64 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN
PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO BEVERLY REALTY CO., RECORDED ON JUNE 15, 1956
AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2360 IN BOOK 51464 PAGE 380, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID
COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH 39° 19' 50" EAST 699.97 FEET TO THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT 21350 AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 599, PAGES
90 TO 95 OF MAPS, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 50° 28' 52" WEST 305.04 FEET AND
SOUTH 38° 51' 38" WEST 249.29 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT
22794;
THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY AND NORTHERLY LINES OF SAID TRACT, NORTH
15° 27' 04" EAST 71.08 FEET, NORTH 39° 30' 00" WEST 240.44 FEET, NORTH 27° 48' 3"
WEST 188.49 FEET, NORTH 8° 25' 06" WEST 73.21 FEET, NORTH 45° 51' 22" WEST 75.28
FEET, NORTH 71° 00' 00" WEST 71.50 FEET AND NORTH 86° 30' 44" WEST 131.63 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
-18-
..
' \
4-98
PARCEL4:
NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS FOR ROAD PURPOSES, PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES,
DRAINAGE PURPOSES AND SEWER LINE PURPOSES (INCLUDING WITHIN SAID
PUBLIC UTILITY, DRAINAGE AND SEWER LINE PURPOSES, THE USE OF POLE
LINES AND CONDUITS FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY FOR LIGHTING,
HEATING, POWER AND/OR TELEPHONE AND PIPE LINES AND MAINS FOR WATER,
HEATING, GAS, SEWERS AND/OR DRAINAGE, AND ALL NECESSARY FACILITIES,
ATTACHMENT~ AND EQUIPMENT IN CONNECTION WITH ANY SUCH PURPOSES)
ON, OVER, UNDER AND ACROSS THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED STRIP OF LAND,
WITH THE RIGHT TO GO UPON SAID STRIP OF LAND AND CONSTRUCT, REP AIR
AND MAINTAIN ROADS, POLE LINES, CONDUITS AND LINES, MAINS, SEWERS,
STORM DRAINS AND ALL IMPROVEMENTS, FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT USED IN
CONNECTION WITH ANY OF THE FOREGOING EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS OF WAY;
SAID STRIP OF LAND BEING SITUATED IN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES,
IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THAT PORTION OF LOT "H" OF THE RANCHO LOS PALOS VERDES, IN THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ALLOTTED TO JOTHAM BIXBY BY DECREE OF PARTITION IN THE
ACTION "BIXBY, ET AL., VS. BENT, ET AL.," CASE NO. 2373 IN THE DISTRICT
COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF SAID STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN AND
FOR SAID COUNTY AND ENTERED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 57 OF JUDGMENTS, IN THE
SUPERIOR COURT OF SAID COUNTY, INCLUDED WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND 60 FEET
WIDE, LYING 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTER
LINE:
BEGINNING AT THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THE CENTER LINE OF MOSSBANK
DRIVE AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT 21351 RECORDED IN BOOK 598 PAGES
32 TO 38 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG .THE WESTERLY CONTINUATION OF SAID CENTER LINE, BEING A
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING RADIUS OF 155 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9° 51' 22" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.66 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 86° 58' 40" WEST 121.25 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCA VE SOUTHERLY AND HA YING A RADIUS OF 400 FEET;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24° 44'
03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 172.68 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE
CONCA VE NORTHERLY AND HA YING A RADIUS OF 240 FEET;
THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE WESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 69° 35'
01" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 291.47 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 4° 07' 42" WEST 500.20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCA VE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HA YING A RADIUS OF 420 FEET;
-19-
4-99
THENCE ALONG A CURVE NORTHWESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
37° 16' 48" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 273.28 FEET. •
THE SIDELINES OF SAID 60 FEET STRIP OF LAND TO BE PROLONGED OR
SHORTENED SO TO TERMINATE EASTERLY IN THAT CERTAIN COURSE IN THE
WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF TRACT NO. 21351 AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 598
PAGES 32 TO 38 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAID COUNTY, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TRACT NO. 21351 AS HA VINO A
BEARING AND LENGTH OF "NORTH 31° 37' 40" WEST 146.20 FEET" AND IT'S
SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION AND SO AS TO TERMINATE WESTERLY IN
THAT CERTAIN COURSE IN THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF TRACT NO. 30635 AS
PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 798 PAGES 68 AND 69 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF
THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT NO.
30635 AS HA VINO A BEARING AND LENGTH OF "NORTH 19° 06' 50" WEST 83.62
FEET" AND IT'S SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION.
APN: 7578-003-004 & 7578-003-007
-20-4-100
EXHIBIT "B"
FORM OF GRANT DEED
(Attached.)
(.
\. •..
4-101
RECORDING REQUESTED BY,
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO
(AND MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO):
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
APNs: 7578-003-004 and 007 (portions)
[SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY]
This document is exempt from the payment of a recording fee
pursuant to Government Code Section 27383
Exempd.Tom Documentary Transfer Tax; conveyance to a public entity.
GRANT DEED
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, YA
YI MAY, an individual (the "Grantor") hereby grants to the CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES ("Grantee") the land in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, County of Los Angeles, State
of California, more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and all improvements
thereon (the "Property").
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Grant Deed as of the date set forth
below.
Dated: , 2013 -----
YA YI MAY,
an individual
\,'
' .
4-102
State of California
County of Los Angeles
)
)
[DISCUSS]
On _______ ~ ___ ,beforeme, _____________ ~·
(insert name and title of the officer)
Notary Public, personally appeared---------------------
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I c~rtify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature ______________ _ (Seal)
4-103
EXHIBIT "A" TO GRANT DEED
Legal Description of the Land
Real property in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, County of Los Angeles, State of California,
described as follows:
PARCEL 1:
THAT PORTION OF LOTS 23, 41AND43 OF L.A.C.A. NO. 51, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES, IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS
PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1 PAGE 1 OF ASSESSORS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF
THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 47, TRACT 21353, AS PER
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 648 PAGES 48 TO 50 OF MAPS, OFFICIAL RECORDS, OF
SAID COUNTY THENCE NORTH 70° 00' 00" EAST 212.61 FEET TO THE WESTERLY
BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO ASH LAND CO., ET AL.,
RECORDED ON JUNE 29, 1955 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2462 IN BOOK 48207 PAGE 168,
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY AND
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LAND SOUTH 20° 32' 00" EAST 136.13 FEET AND
NORTH DEGREES 05' 05" EAST 359.86 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY,
SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO M. Z.
CORPORATION, ET AL., RECORDED JULY 06, 1956 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2271 IN
BOOK 51659 PAGE 168 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE LAST
MENTIONED DEED NORTH 89° 34' 30" EAST 97.71 FEET TO THE WESTERLY
BOUNDARY OF TRACT 21351, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 598, PAGES 32 TO
38 OF MAPS OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY SOUTH 9° 48' 07" WEST 71.79 FEET, SOUTH 1° 09'
26" EAST 151.57 FEET AND SOUTH 4° 3' 01" EAST 27.27 FEET TO THE WESTERLY
BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO BEVERLY
REALTY CO., RECORDED ON JUNE 15, 1956 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2360 IN BOOK
51464 PAGE 380, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG LAST MENTIONED WESTERLY BOUNDARY SOUTH 5° 5' 42" WEST
259.05 FEET AND SOUTH 39° 19' 50" EAST 263.76 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY
BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO OSAGE LAND CO., ET AL.,
RECORDED ON DECEMBER 10, 1957 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1667 IN BOOK 56217 PAGE
198, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY
AND EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LAST MENTIONED LAND NORTH 86° 58' 40"
WEST 24.94 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 430 FEET, WESTERLY ALONG SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24° 44' 03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 185.63
FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCA VE NORTHERLY AND
4-104
HAVING A RADIUS OF 210 FEET, WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 69° 35' 03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 255.04 FEET, NORTH 42° 07'
42" WEST 500.20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHWESTERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 450 FEET, NORTHWESTERLY
ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 37° 16' 48" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 292.80 FEET AND NORTH 79° 24' 30" WEST 17.34 FEET TO THE
EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO OSAGE LAND CO.
ET AL., RECORDED ON JUNE 29, 1955 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2467 IN BOOK 48207
PAGE 182, OFHCIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID LAST
MENTIONED EASTERLY BOUNDARY NORTH 19° 06' 50" WEST 135.49 FEET TO THE
SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF A CERTAIN LINE AS HA VINO A BEARING AND
DISTANCE SOUTH 71° 11' 51" WEST 443.68 FEET IN SAID FIRST MENTIONED DEED
RECORDED IN BOOK 48207 PAGE 166, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE" ALONG SAID LINE NORTH 71° 11' 51" EAST 100.12 FEET TO THE
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 21353;
THENCE ALONG SAID LAST MENTIONED SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY SOUTH 58° 46'
54" EAST 211.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF INCLUDED WITHIN LOT 4 OF
TRACT 30635, PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 798 PAGES 68 AND 69 OF MAPS,
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
4-105
PARCEL2:
NON-EXCLUSNE EASEMENTS FOR ROAD PURPOSES, PUBLIC UTILITY, DRAINAGE
PURPOSES AND SEWER LINE PURPOSES (INCLUDING WITHIN SAID PUBLIC
UTILITY, DRAINAGE AND SEWER LINE PURPOSES, THE USE OF POLE LINES AND
CONDUITS FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY FOR LIGHTING, HEATING,
POWER AND/OR TELEPHONE AND PIPE LINES AND MAINS FOR WATER, HEATING,
GAS, SEWERS AND/OR DRAINAGE, AND ALL NECESSARY FACILITIES,
ATTACHMENTS AND EQUIPMENT IN CONNECTION WITH ANY SUCH PURPOSES)
ON, OVER, UNDER AND ACROSS THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED STRIP OF LAND
WITH THE RIGHT TO GO UPON SAID STRIP OF LAND AND CONSTRUCT, REPAIR
AND MAINTAIN ROADS, POLE LINES, CONDUITS AND LINES, MAINS, SEWERS,
STORM DRAINS AND ALL IMPROVEMENTS, FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT USED IN
CONNECTION WITH ANY OF THE FOREGOING EASEMENTS OF RIGHTS OF WAY;
SAID STRIP OF LAND BEING SITUATED IN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES,
IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THAT PORTION OF LOT "H" OF THE RANCHO LOS PALOS VERDES, IN THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ALLOTTED TO JOTHAM BIXBY BY DECREE OF PARTITION IN THE
ACTION "BIXBY, ET AL., VS. BENT, ET AL.," CASE NO. 2373 IN THE DISTRICT
COURT OF THE l 7TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF SAID STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN AND
FOR SAID COUNTY AND ENTERED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 57 OF JUDGMENTS, IN THE
SUPERIOR COURT OF SAID COUNTY, INCLUDED WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND 60 FEET
WIDE, LYING 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTER
LINE:
BEGINNING AT THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THE CENTERLINE OF MOSSBANK
DRIVE AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT 21351 RECORDED IN BOOK 598, PAGES
32 TO 38 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY CONTINUATION OF SAID CENTER LINE, BEING A
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HA VINO RADIUS OF 155 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9° 51' 22" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.66 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 86° 58' 40" WEST 121.25 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 400 FEET;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24° 44'
03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 172.68 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 240 FEET;
THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE WESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 69° 35'
01" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 291.47 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 42° 07' 42" WEST 500.20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCA VE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 420 FEET;
4-106
THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE NORTHWESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 37°16' 48" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 273.28 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 79° 24' 30" WEST 103.08 FEET.
THE SIDE LINES OF SAID STRIP OF LAND ARE TO BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED
SO AS TO TERMINATE EASTERLY IN THAT CERTAIN BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID
MOSSBANK DRIVE, SHOWN ON SAID LAST MENTIONED MAP AS HAVING A
BEARING AND LENGTH OF NORTH 31° 37' 40" WEST 66.43 FEET.
)
4-107
.·•
PARCEL3:
THAT PORTION OF LOT 41 OF L.A.C.A. NO. 51 IN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP
RECORDED IN BOOK 1 PAGE 1 OF ASSESSORS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 54 OF TRACT 22794 AS PER
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 621 PAGES 51 TO 53 OF MAPS OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT
22794, SOUTH 52° 05' 50" WEST 142.04 FEET AND NORTH 65° 30' 00" WEST 77.63 FEET
TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF TRACT 22200, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 639
PAGES 19 TO 23 OF MAPS, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCB•ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH 34° 51' 52" EAST 125.62 FEET TO THE
MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO OSAGE LAND
CO., ET AL., RECORDED DECEMBER 10, 1957 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1667 IN BOOK
56217, PAGE 198, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID
LAND NORTH 30° 00' 00" EAST 311.18 FEET TO A POINT ON A NONRADIAL CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 270.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE
TO SAID POINT HA VINO A BEARING OF NORTH 11° 20' 45" EAST, EASTERLY
ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33° 03' 30" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 155.78 FEET TO THE REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY AND
HA VINO A RADIUS OF 370.00 FEET, EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24° 44' 03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 159.73 FEET AND SOUTH 86°
58' 40" EAST 79.64 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN
PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO BEYERL Y REALTY CO., RECORDED ON JUNE 15, 1956
AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2360 IN BOOK 51464 PAGE 380, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID
COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH 39° 19' 50" EAST 699.97 FEET TO THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT 21350 AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 599, PAGES
90 TO 95 OF MAPS, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 50° 28' 52" WEST 305.04 FEET AND
SOUTH 38° 51' 38" WEST 249.29 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT
22794;
THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY AND NORTHERLY LINES OF SAID TRACT, NORTH
15° 27' 04" EAST 71.08 FEET, NORTH 39° 30' 00" WEST 240.44 FEET, NORTH 27° 48' 3"
WEST 188.49 FEET, NORTH 8° 25' 06" WEST 73.21 FEET, NORTH 45° 51' 22" WEST 75.28
FEET, NORTH 71° 00' 00" WEST 71.50 FEET AND NORTH 86° 30' 44" WEST 131.63 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
4-108
PARCEL4:
NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS FOR ROAD PURPOSES, PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES,
DRAINAGE PURPOSES AND SEWER LINE PURPOSES (INCLUDING WITHIN SAID
PUBLIC UTILITY, DRAINAGE AND SEWER LINE PURPOSES, THE USE OF POLE
LINES AND CONDUITS FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY FOR LIGHTING,
HEATING, POWER AND/OR TELEPHONE AND PIPE LINES AND MAINS FOR WATER,
HEATING, GAS, SEWERS AND/OR DRAINAGE, AND ALL NECESSARY FACILITIES,
ATTACHMENTS AND EQUIPMENT IN CONNECTION WITH ANY SUCH PURPOSES)
ON, OVER, UNDER AND ACROSS THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED STRIP OF LAND,
WITH THE RIGHT TO GO UPON SAID STRIP OF LAND AND CONSTRUCT, REPAIR
AND MAINTAIN ROADS, POLE LINES, CONDUITS AND LINES, MAINS, SEWERS,
STORM DRAINS AND ALL IMPROVEMENTS, FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT USED IN
CONNECTION WITH ANY OF THE FOREGOING EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS OF WAY;
SAID STRIP OF LAND BEING SITUATED IN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES,
IN THE' COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THAT PORTION OF LOT "H" OF THE RANCHO LOS PALOS VERDES, IN THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ALLOTTED TO JOTHAM BIXBY BY DECREE OF PARTITION IN THE
ACTION "BIXBY, ET AL., VS. BENT, ET AL.," CASE NO. 2373 IN THE DISTRICT
COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF SAID STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN AND
FOR SAID COUNTY AND ENTERED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 57 OF JUDGMENTS, IN THE
SUPERIOR COURT OF SAID COUNTY, INCLUDED WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND 60 FEET
WIDE, LYING 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTER
LINE: .
BEGINNING AT THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THE CENTER LINE OF MOSSBANK
DRIVE AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT 21351 RECORDED IN BOOK 598 PAGES
32 TO 38 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY CONTINUATION OF SAID CENTER LINE, BEING A
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING RADIUS OF 155 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9° 51' 22" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.66 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 86° 58' 40" WEST 121.25 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCA VE SOUTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 400 FEET;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE rHROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24° 44'
03" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 172.68 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 240 FEET;
THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE WESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 69° 35'
01" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 291.47 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 4° 07' 42" WEST 500.20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCA VE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HA VINO A RADIUS OF 420 FEET;
4-109
. ;: ~
THENCE ALONG A CURVE NORTHWESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
37° 16' 48" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 273.28 FEET.
THE SIDELINES OF SAID 60 FEET STRIP OF LAND TO BE PROLONGED OR
SHORTENED SO TO TERMINATE EASTERLY IN THAT CERTAIN COURSE IN THE
WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF TRACT NO. 21351 AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 598
PAGES 32 TO 38 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAID COUNTY, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TRACT NO. 21351 AS HAVING A
BEARING AND LENGTH OF "NORTH 31° 37' 40" WEST 146.20 FEET" AND IT'S
SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION AND SO AS TO TERMINATE WESTERLY IN
THAT CERTAIN COURSE IN THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF TRACT NO. 30635 AS
PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 798 PAGES 68 AND 69 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF
THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT NO.
30635 AS HA VINO A BEARING AND LENGTH OF "NORTH 19° 06' 50" WEST 83.62
FEET" AND IT'S SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION.
APN: 7578-003-004 & 7578-003-007
4-110
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
(California Government Code Section 27281)
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by that certain Grant Deed
dated in , 2013, from YA YI MAY, an individual, to the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, which is a political corporation, is hereby accepted by the undersigned officer on behalf
of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes pursuant to the authority conferred by action of the City
Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes on , 2013, and the grantee consents to
recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Dated: _____ , 2013
Carolyn Lehr
City Manager
Error! Unknown document property name. 4-111
PSA for .Malaga
Canyon North
(Angeles LLC)
4-112
AGREEMENTFORPURCHASEANDSALEOFREALPROPERTY
AND JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
THIS AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY AND
JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS ("Agreement") is made and entered into this day of
September, 2013 ("Effective Date"), by and between ANGELES, LLC, a Nevada limited
liability company ("Seller"), and the CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, a municipal
corporation ("Buyer").
RECITALS
(a) Seller owns that certain real property (the "Land") in the County of Los
Angeles, State of California, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and any
and all improvements thereon (the "Improvements").
(b) All rights (including water and mineral rights), privileges, easements,
tenements, rights of way, and appurtenances which benefit or pertain to the Land are hereinafter
referred to as the "Appurtenances".
( c) Land that is described on Exhibit "A" as the portion to be conveyed to
Buyer, the Improvements thereon (if any) and Appurtenances are collectively referred to herein
as the "Property."
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and other
consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Buyer and Seller agree that the
terms and conditions of this Agreement and the instructions to First American Title Insurance
Company ("Title Company" and "Escrow Holder") with regard to the escrow ("Escrow")
contemplated hereby are as follows:
1. SALE OF PROPERTY; POST-CLOSING LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT.
Seller agrees to sell the Property to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to purchase
the Property from Seller, upon the terms and conditions herein after set forth. Buyer will process
a lot line adjustment to create the boundaries of the portion of the Land to be retained by Seller
and the portion of the Land to be conveyed to Buyer within thirty (30) days after the execution of
this Agreement, at no cost to Seller.
2. PURCHASE PRICE.
The total purchase price ("Purchase Price") for the Property shall be Six
Hundred Fifty-Nine Thousand Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($659,500.00).
3. ESCROW.
3.1 Opening of Escrow.
-1-
R687 6-000 I \I 606297v6.doc 4-113
Within three (3) business days following the Effective Date hereof, Buyer
and Seller shall open Escrow with Escrow Holder and shall deliver a copy of this executed
Agreement to Escrow Holder. In addition, Buyer and Seller agree to execute, deliver, and be
bound by any reasonable or customary supplemental escrow instructions of Escrow Holder or
other instruments as may reasonably be required by Escrow Holder in order to consummate the
transaction contemplated by this Agreement. Any such supplemental instructions shall not
conflict with, amend or supersede any portions of this Agreement. If there is any inconsistency
between such supplemental instructions and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control.
3 .2 Close of Escrow.
For purposes of this Agreement, the "Close of Escrow" or "Closing" shall
be deemed to occur upon, and the "Closing Date" shall be the date of, the recordation of the
Grant Deed conveying the Property to Buyer in the Official Records of Los Angeles County,
Califomi'!-. The Close of Escrow, Closing and Closing Date must occur no later than December
31, 2013. Possession is to be delivered to Buyer at 2:00 p.m. on the date of"Close of Escrow",
in all events vacant and free from all claims to possession or title by third parties.
3 .3 Special Conditions Precedent.
The Close of Escrow and Buyer's obligations under this Agreement are
conditioned, for the benefit of Buyer, upon the Buyer's obtaining approval of this Agreement and
approval of funding of the Purchase Price by the California Wildlife Conservation Board, and
receipt of federal funding for the entire amount of the Purchase Price on or before December 31,
2013, but Buyer shall use good faith efforts to cause the satisfaction of such conditions as soon
as reasonably possible. In no event shall Buyer's failure to secure such funding be construed as a
breach of this Agreement.
4. TITLE INVESTIGATION.
4.1 Title Report.
Buyer has received a preliminary title report dated August 1, 2013, Order No.
NCS-480162-SAC4 for a Standard Form CLTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance for the
Property ("Preliminary Report"), together with copies of all documents relating to title
exceptions referred to in the Preliminary Report ("Title Exceptions").
Buyer hereby approves the Preliminary Report and Title Exceptions, subject to
Section 4.2 below.
4.2 Monetary Title Exceptions.
It is understood and agreed that, notwithstanding Section 4.1, any
encumbrances, security interests, liens, deeds of trust, and/or mortgages which secure, in whole
or in part, any monetary indebtedness not arising by, through or under Buyer shall be deemed to
be disapproved and shall be paid off, satisfied, released, and/or discharged by Seller at or prior to
Closing.
-2-
R6876-000 I\! 606297v6.doc 4-114
4.3 Title Policy.
Seller shall cause the Title Company to issue its Standard CTLA
Owner's form Policy of Title Insurance ("Title Policy") in the amount of the Purchase Price
showing good and marketable title to the Property vested in Buyer subject only to the exceptions
to title approved in Section 3 .1 (subject to Section 4 .2 and the contemplated easement( s) [REA]
to be recorded at closing).
5. SELLER'S DELIVERIES.
Prior to the Close of Escrow, Seller shall deposit or cause to be deposited into Escrow for
delivery to Buyer at Closing the following:
(a) A duly executed and acknowledged Grant Deed in the Title Company's
usual form;
(b) A Certificate of Non-Foreign Status required under Section 1445(b) of the
Internal Revenue Code;
(c) A Certificate pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section
18662 pertaining to Seller's status as a resident of California or as having a corporate permanent
place of business in California;
( d) A counterpart of the Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement in
the form attached hereto as Exhibit "D" (the "REA"), duly executed by Seller and
acknowledged;
( e) Real Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement;
(f) Natural Hazard Disclosure Statement; and
(g) Any other document provided for herein or reasonably required by Escrow
Holder.
6. BUYER'S DELIVERIES.
Prior to the Close of Escrow, Buyer shall deposit or cause to be deposited
into Escrow, to be delivered to Seller upon the Closing, the following:
(a) The Purchase Price;
(b) A Certificate of Acceptance for the Grant Deed;
and
( c) A counterpart of the REA, duly executed by Buyer and acknowledged;
Holder.
( d) Any other document provided for herein or reasonably required by Escrow
-3-
R687 6-000 I \l 606297v6.doc 4-115
7. HOLDBACK FOR SELLER WORK.
Buyer and Seller shall direct Escrow Holder to deliver to Buyer
$130,000 (the "Holdback Amount") from the Purchase Price. The Holdback Amount is the
estimated cost of Seller's performing the work to design and construct a driveway entrance at the
cul-de-sac and the common driveway described on Exhibit "C" (the "Seller Work"). Seller shall
complete the Seller Work to Buyer's satisfaction within six (6) calendar months after the Close
of Escrow, whereupon Buyer shall deliver the Holdback Amount directly to Seller. If Seller
does not timely complete the Seller Work, Buyer may (but shall not be obligated to) perform the
portion(s) of the Seller Work not yet completed and may use the Holdback Amount to pay the
costs thereof, and Buyer shall then return any remaining portion of the Holdback Amount to
Seller. If Buyer so elects to complete the Seller Work, and the cost incurred by Buyer to
complete the Seller Work exceeds the remaining Holdback Amount, Seller shall reimburse
Buyer for the excess costs within ten (10) days after written demand from Buyer.
8. AUTHORIZATION TO RECORD DOCUMENTS AND DISBURSE
FUNDS.
Escrow Holder is hereby authorized and directed to record and/or deliver
the documents and disburse the funds called for hereunder pursuant to the written closing
instructions, if any, of Buyer and Seller delivered prior to Closing, provided each of the
following conditions have been or will concurrently with the Close of Escrow be fulfilled:
(a) Title Company has committed to issue to Buyer the Title Policy with
liability equal to the Purchase Price, in accordance with Section 4.3 above;
(b) Seller shall have deposited in Escrow the documents and instruments
required of it under Section 5;
( c) Buyer shall have deposited into Escrow the funds, documents, and
instruments required of it under Section 6; and
( d) Escrow Holder is authorized to record any instrument delivered through
this Escrow if necessary or proper for the issuance of the Title Policy referred to above.
9. COSTS AND EXPENSES.
The Seller shall pay one-half of the Escrow Holder's Escrow fee and that
portion of the premium for the title policy equal to the cost of a CL TA standard coverage title
policy in the amount of the Purchase Price, plus the cost of any endorsements obtained in
connection with Disapproved Exceptions. The cost of any endorsements requested by the Buyer,
shall be borne by the Buyer. Buyer agrees to pay all other usual fees, charges, and costs which
arise from Escrow.
10. PRORATION.
The following prorations shall be made between Buyer and Seller by
Escrow Holder at the Close of Escrow, computed as of the closing date:
-4-
R6876-000J \J 606297v6.doc 4-116
10.l Taxes.
Seller shall pay all property taxes for the tax bill period in which
the Closing occurs (i.e., January 1 through June 30, or July 1 through December 31, as
applicable), and Seller acknowledges that since Buyer is exempt from property taxes, Seller may
secure a refund of the property taxes paid by Seller for the portion of such "tax bill period"
during which Buyer will own the Property, but there shall be no increase in the funds required to
be deposited by Buyer into escrow due to property taxes. Special taxes, and assessments shall be
prorated as of the Close of Escrow based upon the latest available tax information. Seller shall
be responsible for all special taxes and assessments accrued against the Property to and including
the day prior to the Close of Escrow based upon payment of such assessments in installments to
the greatest extent permitted. Unless any special tax or assessment payment or installment
specifies the time period for which such payment is owed, it shall be presumed that such
payment is for the full year immediately preceding the day upon which such payment is due.
11. WAIVER BY SELLER.
SELLER KNOWINGLY AND VOLUNTARILY WAIVES THE
FOLLOWING RIGHTS: THE RIGHT TO SEEK ANY COMPENSATION FOR THE
ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY IN ANY AMOUNT GREATER THAN THAT SET
FORTH IN SECTION 2 HEREIN; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM RELOCATION BENEFITS OR
ASSISTANCE; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM DAMAGE OR INJURY TO BUSINESS
GOODWILL; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM LOSS OF RENT; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM
SEVERANCE DAMAGES; THE RIGHT TO CLAIM FIXTURES AND EQUIPMENT; OR
ANY SIMILAR RIGHT OR CLAIM ARISING OUT OF THE ACQUISITION OF THE
PROPERTY.
12. SELLER'S REPRESENTATIONS.
In consideration of Buyer entering into this Agreement and as an
inducement to Buyer to purchase the Property, Seller makes the following representations, each
of which (i) is a condition to Close of Escrow, (ii) is true as of the Effective Date and will be true
as of the Closing, and (iii) is material and is being relied upon by Buyer.
12.1 Authority.
Seller has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement
and to consummate the transactions contemplated herein without obtaining the consent or
approval of any other person, entity, or governmental authority. The persons whose names are
set forth below hereby personally represent and warrant that they have full power and authority
to sign the name of Seller to this Agreement and to cause this Agreement to be a binding
obligation of Seller.
12.2 Litigation.
There is no litigation, bankruptcy, or receivership proceeding or
any other proceeding pending, or, to Seller's knowledge, threatened against, relating to, or
involving Seller's interest in the Property, nor does Seller know or have any reasonable ground
-5-
R687 6-000 I \1606297v6.doc 4-117
to know of any basis for any such action. No consents or waivers of or by any third party are
necessary to permit the consummation by Seller of the transactions contemplated pursuant to this
Agreement.
12.3 Compliance With Laws.
Seller has received no notice and has no actual knowledge of any
violation of any applicable law, ordinance, rule, regulation or requirement of any governmental
agency, body or subdivision affecting or relating to the Property, including, without limitation,
any subdivision, building, use or environmental law, ordinance, rule, requirement, or regulation.
Seller agrees to disclose any potential violations of applicable City
building codes on any properties that abut the Property that is a part of this transaction.
12.4 Governmental Notices.
Seller shall deliver to Buyer each and every notice or
communication Seller receives from any governmental body relating to the Property or any
portion thereof upon Seller's receipt of the same.
12.5 Leases.
Seller acknowledges that there are no leases or other agreements
(either oral or written) affecting or relating to the right of any party with respect to the possession
of the Property, or any portion thereof.
12.6 Future Action.
From and after the date hereof, without the prior written consent of
Buyer, Seller shall not execute nor consent to the execution of any lease of any portion of the
Property or any other instrument which may result in an alteration of the condition of title.
12.7 Hazardous Materials.
To the best of Seller's actual knowledge there are no Hazardous
Materials in existence on or below the surface of the Property, including, without limitation,
contamination of the soil, subsoil or ground water, which constitute a violation or any law, rule,
or regulation of any government entity having jurisdiction thereof or which expose Buyer to
liability to third parties, and Seller has not used, nor permitted use of, the Property for the
generation, treatment, storage, or disposal of Hazardous Materials, or other condition or use that
could result in or cause a discharge of any Hazardous Materials on or below the Property.
"Hazardous Materials" as used herein means hazardous, toxic, or radioactive substances or
materials, as the same are defined or described by applicable federal laws or regulations
(including, without limitation, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. Section
6901 et seq., and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act,
42 U.S.C. Section 9601 et seq., and any regulations adopted and publications promulgated
pursuant to said laws), California laws or regulations (including, without limitation, those
substances defined as "Hazardous Substances" in Section 25316 of the California Health &
-6-
R687 6-000 I \I 606297v6.doc 4-118
Safety Code, and any regulations adopted and publications promulgated pursuant to said laws).
Further, Seller has received no notification, warning or citation within the last five (5) years
regarding any violation, or potential or pending violation, of any Hazardous Materials
regulations or laws or any other law, statutory provision or regulation regarding the use,
condition or status of the Property and Seller has no knowledge of any condition or activity on
the Property which, if un-remedied prior to the Close of Escrow, will or could, upon passage of
time, constitute a violation.
12.8 Environmental Violations.
Seller has no knowledge of any condition or use of the Property
that constitutes, or if un-remedied prior to the Close of Escrow, with the passage of time would
constitute, a violation of (i) Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Section
2344); (ii) the Federal Clean Air Act (33 U.S.C. Section 7401, et seq.); (iii) the Federal Water
Pollution .Control Act (33 U.S.C. Section 1251, et seq.); (iv) any State of California law of
similar substance or nature controlling or regulating the use or condition of land, water or air
(including the California Environmental Quality Act) or (v) any federal or California laws or
regulations relating to use of or conservation of wetlands or other natural topographical
conditions. Further, Seller has received no notification, warning or citation within the last five
(5) years regarding any violation or potential or pending violation, of any of such laws or
regulations.
12.9 Work and Materials Furnished.
Bills for work done and materials furnished with respect to the
Property have been paid in full by Seller or will be discharged and paid in full by Seller by the
date of Closing.
12.10 Not a Foreign Person.
Seller is not, and never has been, a "foreign person" within the
meaning of Sections 1445(t)(3) and 7701(a)(30) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as
amended, or California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 18662, and Seller will furnish to
Buyer, prior to the Closing, an affidavit in form satisfactory to Buyer confirming the same.
12.11 Declaration, Covenants, Restrictions.
Other than as identified in the Title Report, there are no
declarations or covenants affecting the use of the Property; and there is no association which has
been formed for the purpose of managing any portion of the Property.
12.12 Contracts.
Except as may be disclosed by the Title Documents, there are no
contracts or agreements relating to the operation, development, management, or ownership of the
Property or any portion thereof.
12.13 Truthfulness at Closing.
-7-
R6876-000 I\! 606297v6.doc 4-119
Except as expressly herein otherwise provided, the representations
and warranties of Seller set forth in this Agreement shall be true on and as of the Close of
Escrow as if those representations and warranties were made on and as of such time.
13. BUYER'S REPRESENTATIONS.
In consideration of Seller entering into this Agreement and as an
inducement to Seller to sell the Property to Buyer, Buyer makes the following representations,
each of which is material and is being relied upon by Seller:
13.l Authority.
Buyer has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to
consummate the transactions contemplated herein without obtaining the consent or approval of
any other person, entity or governmental authority. The person(s) whose name(s) are set forth
below hereby personally represent and warrant that they have full power and authority to sign the
name of Buyer to this Agreement and to cause this Agreement to be a binding obligation of
Buyer.
13.2 Truthfulness at Closing.
The representations of Buyer set forth in this Agreement shall be true on
and as of the Close of Escrow as if those representations and warranties were made on and as of
such time.
14. SELLER'S DEFAULT.
In the event that Seller shall fail to perform Seller's obligations
hereunder, Buyer shall have the option to: (i) extend the Closing for such time as Buyer chooses
to allow Seller to remedy such default, (ii) waive such default in writing, "or" (iii) pursue all
legal or equitable remedies available to it, including, without limitation, terminating this
Agreement by written notice to Seller prior to cure of the default.
15. MISCELLANEOUS.
15.1 Risk of Loss.
The risk of loss or damage to the Property until the Closing is
assumed by Seller. If any damage occurs to the Property prior to Closing, Seller shall promptly
give Buyer written notice of the occurrence thereof and of the amount of any insurance proceeds
available for the repair of such damage. Buyer at its sole option may terminate this Agreement
by written notice given to Seller within thirty (30) days of Buyer's receipt of such notice, in
which case the funds and documents deposited with Escrow Holder shall be returned to Buyer
and this Agreement shall be null and void. If Buyer does not give such notice, or gives notice
that it will nonetheless proceed with the Closing, then this Agreement will remain in full force
and effect and Seller shall assign any available insurance proceeds to Buyer at or before the
Closing.
-8-
R687 6-000 I\ l 606297v6.doc 4-120
15.2 Notices.
All notice or other communications required or permitted
hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered; sent by certified mail, postage
prepaid, return receipt requested; or delivered or sent by overnight courier and shall be deemed
received upon the earlier of (i) if mailed by certified mail, three (3) business days after the date
of posting by the United States Post Office, or (ii) if sent by overnight courier, when delivered to
the specified address.
To Buyer:
W~th a copy to:
To Seller:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Attn: City Manager
Richards, Watson & Gershon
3 5 5 South Grand A venue, 40th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
Attn: Carol W. Lynch, Esq.
Angeles, LLC
3444 Whittier Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90023
To Escrow Holder: First American Title Insurance Company
777 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Attn: Sylvia Meldonia (213/271/1764)
Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner detailed in this
Section. Rejection or other refusal to accept or the inability to deliver because of changed
address of which no notice was given shall be deemed to constitute receipt of the notice, demand,
request, or communication sent.
15.3 Assignment.
Buyer may not assign, transfer, or convey its rights or obligations
under this Agreement without the prior written consent of Seller. However, that Buyer shall in
no event be released from its obligations hereunder by reason of any assignment. No assignment
or transfer, if permitted, shall be effective unless each assignee or transferee expressly agrees in
writing to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Any purported assignment,
transfer, or encumbrance in violation of the foregoing may, at the option of Seller, be deemed
null and void or be a default hereunder.
15.4 Seller's Use of Property.
From and after the date of Seller's execution hereof, Seller shall
maintain the Property in the same condition and state of repair as on the Effective Date, and
Seller shall not grant or convey any easement, lease, license, permit, encumbrance, lien, or any
-9-
R687 6-000 I\ l 606297v6.doc 4-121
other legal or beneficial interest in or to the Property, improvements thereon, mineral or water
rights appurtenant thereto, or any other property rights whatsoever without the prior written
consent of Buyer, nor shall Seller violate, or allow the violation of any law, ordinance, rule, or
regulation affecting the Property. Seller shall do or cause to be done all things reasonably within
its control to preserve intact and unimpaired any and all easements, grants, appurtenances,
privileges, and licenses in favor of or constituting any portion of the Property.
15.5 Delivery of Materials.
Seller shall deliver to Buyer, at no expense to Buyer, within ten 10)
days of Seller's execution hereof, copies of any and all contracts affecting the Property
(including service and materials contracts), soils investigations and reports, water and sewer
studies, topographic maps, photographs, mapping, platting, and other materials, if any,
concerning the Property, which are owned by Seller or are in Seller's possession (collectively,
the "Materials").
15.6 Survival and Conditions Precedent.
Agreements, representations, covenants, and warranties contained
in this Agreement or any amendment or supplement hereto shall survive Closing and delivery of
deed hereunder and shall not be merged thereby, and, in addition to any effect any of the same
have in law or in equity, all of the same will be deemed to be conditions precedent to the Buyer's
obligations hereunder, whether so expressed or not. Seller acknowledges that all of the
conditions to this Agreement which are for the sole benefit of the Buyer may unilaterally be
waived by the Buyer only in writing.
16. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
16.1 Required Actions of Buyer and Seller.
Buyer and Seller agree to execute such further instruments and
documents and to consummate the purchase and sale herein contemplated, and to effectuate the
intent of this Agreement.
16.2 Time of Essence.
Time is of the essence of each and every term, condition,
obligation, and provision hereof.
16.3 Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed an original, but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same
instrument. Faxed copies of signed documents may be considered as originals if agreed to by
each of the parties hereto.
16.4 Captions.
-10-
R6876-000I \! 606297v6.doc 4-122
Any captions to, or headings of, the paragraph or subparagraphs of
this Agreement are solely for the convenience of the parties hereto, are not a part of this
Agreement, and shall not be used for the interpretation or determination of the validity of this
Agreement or any provision hereof.
16.5 No Obligations to Third Parties.
Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the execution and
delivery of this Agreement shall not be deemed to confer any rights upon, nor obligate any of the
parties hereto, to any person or entity other than the parties hereto.
16.6 Exhibits.
The Exhibits attached hereto are hereby incorporated herein by this
reference.
16. 7 Amendment to this Agreement.
The terms of this Agreement may not be modified or amended
except by an instrument in writing executed by each of the parties hereto.
16.8 Waiver.
The waiver or failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement
shall not operate as a waiver of any future breach of any such provision or any other provision
hereof.
16.9 Applicable Law.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California, excluding California's choice of law rules. Venue for
any lawsuit that is filed to enforce the provisions of this Agreement shall be in Los Angeles
County Superior Court.
16.10 Fees and Other Expenses.
Except as otherwise provided herein, each of the parties shall pay
its own attorneys', consultants' and other fees and expenses in connection with this Agreement.
16.11 Entire Agreement.
This Agreement supersedes any prior agreements, negotiations and
communications, oral or written, and contains the entire agreement between Buyer and Seller as
to the subject matter hereof. No subsequent agreement, representation, or promise made by ether
party hereto, or by or to an employee, officer, agent, or representative of either party shall be of
any effect unless it is in writing and executed by the party to be bound thereby.
-11-
R6876-000l\1606297v6.doc 4-123
16.12 Successors and Assigns.
Subject to any limitations on assignment contained herein, this
Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of
the parties hereto.
16.13 No Presumption.
Each provision of this Agreement has been independently and
freely negotiated by both parties as if this Agreement were drafted by both parties. In the event
of any ambiguity in this Agreement, the parties waive any presumption or rule requiring or
permitting interpretation of said ambiguity against or in favor of either party.
16.14 Attorneys' Fees.
In the event that either party is required to commence any action or
proceedings against the other in order to enforce the provisions hereof, or in order to obtain
damages for the alleged breach of any of the provisions hereof, the parties agree that both parties
shall bear their own costs in connection with said action or proceedings and that no award of
costs or attorney's fees shall arise out of any such action or proceedings.
16.15 Brokerage Fees.
Each party represents to the other that it has not engaged any
broker, finder or salesperson in connection with this matter.
16.16 Survival.
Except as otherwise provided herein, all covenants, agreements,
representations, and warranties set forth in this Agreement or in any certificate or instrument
executed or delivered pursuant to this Agreement shall survive the Closing and shall not merge
into any deed, assignment, or other instrument executed or delivered pursuant hereto.
16.17 IRS Real Estate Sales Reporting.
Buyer and Seller hereby appoint Escrow Agent as, and Escrow
Agent agrees to act as "the person responsible for closing" the transactions which are the subject
of this Agreement, pursuant to Internal Revenue Code of 1986 Section 6045( e ). Escrow Agent
shall prepare and file the informational return (IRS Form 1099-S) required by and otherwise
comply with the terms ofIRS Section 6045(e).
16.18 Authority of City Manager.
The City Manager shall have the authority to make all
determinations and give all consents and approvals hereunder on behalf of City provided they are
in writing. The City Manager may also waive provisions hereof and make non-substantial
amendments to this Agreement on behalf of City provided the waiver( s) and amendment( s) are in
writing.
-12-
R6876-000I \l 606297v6.doc 4-124
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day
and year first above written.
This Agreement creates certain legal rights and responsibilities as described herein and
all parties should consider obtaining legal advice prior to execution of it.
"BUYER":
"SELLER":
R6876-000J \J 606297v6.doc
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
By: _____________ _
Susan Brooks,
Mayor
ATTEST:
Carla Morreale,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Carol W. Lynch of Richards, Watson &
Gershon, City Attorney
ANGELES, LLC,
a Nevada limited liability company
By: _____________ _
Print Name:
----------~ Title: --------------
-13-4-125
R6876-000I \l 606297v6.doc
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(Attached.)
-14-4-126
R6876-000l\1606297v6.doc
EXHIBIT "B"
FORM OF GRANT DEED
(Attached.)
4-127
RECORDING REQUESTED BY,
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO
(AND MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO):
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
[SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY]
This document is exempt from the payment of a recording fee
pursuant to Government Code Section 27383
Exempt from Documentary Transfer Tax; conveyance to a public entity.
GRANT DEED
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
ANGELES, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (the "Grantor") hereby grants to the CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ("Grantee") the land in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
County of Los Angeles, State of California, more particularly described on Exhibit A attached
hereto and all improvements thereon (the "Property").
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Grant Deed as of the date set forth
below.
Dated: _____ , 2013 ANGELES, LLC,
a Nevada limited liability company
By: ______ ~--~~---
PrintName:
-------~---Title:
-~---~-~-----
R6876-000 I \l 606297v6.doc 4-128
State of California
County of Los Angeles
)
)
On __________ ~ before me,---------------
(insert name and title of the officer)
Notary Public, personally appeared ____________________ _
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENAL TY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature ______________ _
State of California
County of Los Angeles
)
)
(Seal)
On __________ ~, before me, ______________ _
(insert name and title of the officer)
Notary Public, personally appeared---------------------
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature ______________ _ (Seal)
R6876-000I \I 606297v6.doc 4-129
R687 6-000 I\ l 606297v6.doc
EXHIBIT "A" TO GRANT DEED
Legal Description of the Land
(Attached.)
4-130
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
(California Government Code Section 27281)
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by that certain Grant Deed
dated in , 2013, from ANGELES, LLC, to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
which is a political corporation, is hereby accepted by the undersigned officer on behalf of the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes pursuant to the authority conferred by action of the City Council of
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes on , 2013, and the grantee consents to
recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Dated: ------·' 2013
R6876-0001 \1606297v6.doc
Carolyn Lehr
City Manager
4-131
EXHIBIT "C"
DESCRIPTION OF SELLER WORK
Seller shall construct to Buyer's satisfaction a driveway entrance at the cul-de-sac and the
common driveway ("Driveway") that shall be used by both Buyer and Seller to access the
Property and for Seller to access the adjacent property that is owned by Seller. Prior to the
commencement of construction of the Driveway, Seller shall submit engineered plans for the
construction of the Driveway for review and approval by Buyer's Department of Public Works.
Seller shall revise the design of the Driveway, if so directed by Buyer. Seller shall construct the
Driveway in accordance with the approved plan to Buyer's satisfaction and shall obtain final
approval of the construction from Buyer's Department of Public Works.
R6876-000J \J 606297v6.doc 4-132
R6876-000l\1606297v6.doc
EXHIBIT "D"
RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT
4-133
RECORDING REQUESTED BY,
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, California 90275
Attn: City Clerk
RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
THIS RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
("Agreement") is dated as of the_ day of , 2013, and is entered into by and between
the CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, a California municipal corporation ("City") and
ANGELES, LLC, a California limited liability company ("Angeles"). City and Angeles and
their successors-in-interest are hereafter referred to collectively as the "Owners" and individually
as an "Owner".
RECITALS
A. The City is the owner of the land legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto
(collectively, the "City Property").
B. Angeles is the owner of the property described on Exhibit "B" (the "Angeles
Property").
C. The City Property and the Angeles Property are adjacent to one another, and the
Owners would like to create a roadway for joint access by both Owners to their respective
properties (the "Joint Access Right of Way"). A depiction of the Joint Access Right of Way is
attached hereto as Exhibit "C."
D. This Agreement is being executed and recorded concurrently with the conveyance
by Angeles to City of the City Property pursuant to and as required by an "Agreement for
Purchase and Sale of Property and Joint Escrow Instructions" between Angeles, as seller, and
City, as buyer, dated September_, 2013 (the "PSA").
E. The PSA requires, among other things, that Angeles construct roadway
improvements over the Joint Access Right of Way after the sale, and the parties desire to
allocation herein the responsibility for maintaining such improvements.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the PSA and the obligations therein, and the
covenants and easements contained herein, the Owner hereby agrees as follows:
1. Access Easements. Angeles hereby grants to City an easement for ingress
and egress over the portion of the Arigeles Property described on Exhibit "D". City hereby
grants to Angeles an easement for ingress and egress over the portion of the City property
described on Exhibit "E".
1 4-134
2. Improvements by Owners. Each Owner agrees that it will not impair
ingress and egress over the Joint Access Right of Way.
3. Maintenance. Following the construction of the Roadway Improvements,
City shall maintain the Roadway Improvements in good condition and repair and shall make any
improvements thereto as may be required by law or changes in laws. The cost of such
maintenance shall be shared equally by Owners. Accordingly, following any required
maintenance or improvements performed by City, City shall send an invoice to Angeles or its
successor in interest for fifty percent (50%) of the costs of the required maintenance or
improvements, and Angeles or its successor in interest shall pay the invoice within thirty (30)
days after its given as a notice under Section 9(c) below.
4. Property Taxes and Assessment. Each Owner shall pay, or cause to be
paid, directly to the appropriate governmental agencies, prior to delinquency, all real property
taxes and.Qther special taxes and assessments and/or charges, if any, including taxes, assessments
or charges levied in lieu of property taxes, which may be levied or assessed against such
Owner's Property, including, any assessment, charge or tax increase attributable to its interests
created by this Agreement. Each Owner shall nonetheless have the right to contest such taxes
and assessments in any manner provided by law.
5. Indemnity. Each Owner shall defend, indemnify, hold harmless the other
Owner from any liabilities, costs, losses, claims, damages and expenses arising out of its
operation, use, repair or improvement of the Joint Access Right of Way by it or its tenants,
agents or contractors.
6. Covenants Shall Run With the Land. All the agreements, rights,
obligations, covenants, and grants contained in this agreement shall run with the land and shall
be binding upon or inure to the benefit of (as the case may require) the Owners, and their
successors, assigns, successors-in-interest. The easements granted herein are appurtenant
easements, and the easement( s) burdening each Owner's property shall be for the benefit of the
other Owner's property.
7. Authority of City Manager. The City Manager of the City shall have the
authority to amend this Agreement on behalf of City provided the amendment is in writing.
8. Enforcement. In the event of a default or breach by an Owner in the
performance of any of the obligations or agreements herein, the other Owner shall have the right,
but not the obligation, to cure such default for the account and at the expense of the defaulting
Owner who shall reimburse the curing Owner for all costs and other sums expended in
connection therewith within ten (10) days after written demand. In addition, in the event of any
default, the non-defaulting Owner may pursue any remedies or proceedings available to it at law
or in equity against the defaulting Owner, including injunctive relief.
9. Miscellaneous.
(a) Assignment. The rights and privileges hereunder shall be
f transferable only in connection with a transfer of the property to which they are appurtenant.
,, Subject to the foregoing, all terms of this Agreement shall be binding upon, inure to the benefit
2
4-135
of, and be enforceable by or against the Owners and their respective successors, assigns, and
successors in interest.
(b) Termination of Liability. Whenever a bona fide transfer of any
interest in any of the Parcels takes place, the transferor shall not be liable for breach of a
covenant occurring thereafter with respect to the transferred interest.
(c) Notices. All notices, demands or other communications given
shall be in writing, and shall be delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage
prepaid and addressed as follows (and shall be deemed delivered on the date of delivery, or
attempted delivery, shown on the return receipt):
To City: City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Attn: City Manager
To Angeles: Angeles, LLC
3444 Whittier Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90023
Any Owner (or successor-in-interest to an Owner) may change its address for
notices by a written notice to the other Owner(s) given pursuant to this Section.
(d) No Third-Party Beneficiaries. No person or entity (including any
tenant) shall have any enforceable rights under this Agreement other than the Owners and their
respective successors-in-interest to fee title.
( e) Representations as to Title. Angeles hereby represents and
warrants to City that no deed of trust, mortgage or other lien (other than potential lien for taxes
and assessments not yet delinquent) encumbers the Angeles Property.
(f) Non-Partnership. Norte of the terms or provisions hereof shall be
deemed to create a partnership between the Owners, nor shall it cause them to be considered
joint venturers, or members of any joint enterprise.
(g) Entire Agreement. This instrument contains the entire agreement
of the Owners as to the specific subject matter hereof.
(h)
in which time is a factor.
Time of Essence. Time is of the essence of each provision hereof
(i) Attorneys' Fees. In the event any Owner shall commence any
action against any other Owner relating to this Agreement or for the breach of any obligation
contained herein, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party
reasonable attorneys' fees, expenses, and court costs.
3 4-136
(
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Owners have executed this Agreement as of the date and year
first above written.
CITY OF RANC.HO PALOS VERDES ANGELES, LLC
By: ~------------
Print Name:
--------~-
Title: ------------
Attest:
City Clerk
4 4-137
State of California
County of _________ _
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
)
)
)
On __________ before me,-----------------------
(insert name and title of the officer)
personally appeared-------------------------------
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed ·the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies),
and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENAL TY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true
and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature. _______________ _ (Seal}.
Signature of Notary Public
State of California
County of _________ _
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
)
)
)
On----------before me,-----------------------
(insert name and title of the officer)
personally appeared-------------------------------
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies),
and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENAL TY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true
and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature _______________ _ (Seal)
Signature of Notary Public
5
4-138
(.
\ ....
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
(California Government Code Section 27281)
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed to the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes by that certain Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement dated _____ _
2013, between ANGELES, LLC, and the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which is a political
corporation, is hereby accepted by the undersigned officer on behalf of the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes pursuant to the authority conferred by action of the City Council of the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes on , 2013, and the grantee consents to recordation thereof by its duly
authorized officer.
Dated: , 2013 ------
Carolyn Lehr
City Manager
6
4-139
EXHIBIT "A"
DESCRIPTION OF THE CITY PROPERTY
(Attached.)
7
4-140
EXHIBIT "B"
DESCRIPTION OF THE ANGELES PROPERTY
(Attached.)
(
\
8
4-141
EXHIBIT "C"
DEPICTION OF THE JOINT ACCESS RIGHT OF WAY
.·
9
4-142
EXHIBITD
DESCRIPTION OF THE PORTION OF THE
JOINT ACCESS RIGHT OF WAY
LOCATED ON THE ANGELES PROPERTY
(Attached.)
-10-4-143
EXHIBIT "E"
DESCRIPTION OF THE PORTION OF THE
JOINT ACCESS RIGHT OF WAY
LOCATED ON THE CITY PROPERTY
(Attached.)
11
4-144