Loading...
RPVCCA_SR_2010_11_16_06_Ab_Cove_Nature_Center_Response_LetterCITY OF MEMORANDUM RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CAROLYNN PETRU,DEPUTY CITY MANAGER NOVEMBER 16,2010 CITY RESPONSE TO RESIDENT LETTER/PETITION REGARDING ABALONE COVE NATURE EDUCATION GRANT APPLICATION REVIEWED BY:CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER G.9-- Project Manager:Sara Singer,Senior Administrative Analyst@ RECOMMENDATION Provide any comments or changes to the attached draft response letter and direct staff to submit it to the California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Grants and Local Services. BACKGROUND On June 1,2010,the City Council approved Resolution 2010-40,authorizing the City Manager to submit an application for the Abalone Cove Nature Education Center through the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Nature Education Facilities Grant Program.The City completed the grant application forthe submittal deadline date of July 1,2010.Rancho Palos Verdes Resident Eva Cicoria submitted a letter and petition in opposition to the proposed project to the State on October 5,2010. At the October 19,2010 City Council meeting,the Council directed staff to prepare a letter in response to Ms.Cicoria's letter to submit to the California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Grants and Local Services. ATTACHMENT City of Rancho Palos Verdes Response Letter 6-1 November 16,2010 CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER DRAFT California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Grants and Local Services Attn:Sandra Berry 1416 9th Street,Room 918 Sacramento,California 95814 RE:Rancho Palos Verdes Application #Nl-19-006 Abalone Cove Nature Education Center Dear Ms.Berry, This letter serves as the City's response to the letter sent by Ms.Eva Cicoria,dated October 5,20 10,to the California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Grants and Local Services (see Attachment A).The Abalone Cove Nature Education Center grant request is to construct a 5,900 square foot facility with interactive displays and classrooms,renovated public restrooms,and site improvements including habitat restoration and interpretive signage.The Nature Education Center would be sited in City parkland on the outer boundary of a large existing parking lot. In her letter,Ms.Cicoria references the City of Rancho Palos Verdes application for the Nature Education Facilities Program,Abalone Cove Nature Education Center (ref.#N1- 19-006),and makes statements throughout her letter citing various inconsistencies with the proposed improvements at Abalone Cove Shoreline Park and City planning documents.At the October 19,2010 City Council meeting,the Council directed staff to respond to the claims made by Ms.Cicoria. Regarding the inconsistencies Ms.Cicoria references,please see the City's responses below: 30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391 /(310)544-5205/FAX (310)544-5291 E-MAIL:CLEHR@RPVCOM/WWWPALOSVERDES.COM/RPV PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ;: ;':('1 6-2 Page 2 November 16,2010 1.The proposed project is inconsistent with the miSSIOn of the California Department of Parks and Recreation to inspire and to protect its most valued natural and cultural resources. As stated in the California State Parks Mission Statement, To provide for the health,inspiration and education ofthe people of California by helping to preserve the state's extraordinary biological diversity,protecting its most valued natural and cultural resources,and creating opportunities for high- quality outdoor recreation. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes does not find the proposed nature center to be inconsistent with the mission of the Department.The goal of the proposed development is to create a center where visitors of all ages can learn about the diverse ecosystems on the Peninsula,and through this educational experience, promote environmental stewardship.As also stated on the Department's website: The California State Parks contains the largest and most diverse natural and cultural heritage holdings ofany state agency in the nation.The State park units include:underwater preserves,reserves,and parks;redwood,rhododendron,and wildlife reserves;state beaches,recreation areas,wilderness areas,and reservoirs;state historic parks,historic homes,Spanish era adobe buildings, including museums,visitor centers,cultural reserves,and preserves;as well as lighthouses,ghost towns,waterslides,conference centers,and off-highway vehicle parks.These parks protect and preserve an unparalleled collection of culturally and environmentally sensitive structures and habitats,threatened plant and animal species,ancient Native American sites,historic structures and artifacts... the best ofCalifornia's natural and cultural history. The statements highlighted in bold text from the California Department of Parks website describe some of the very same amenities being proposed at Abalone Cove Shoreline Park.This park site is rich with natural resources which include the marine life at the tide pools in the Ecological Reserve,the connection to the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve,the various species of flora and fauna,and the magnificent views.The proposed improvements to the trail system,existing parking lot and the proposed education center do not seem to be inconsistent with other amenities found in other areas of the State.While many residents familiar with this site may be knowledgeable about the unique resources which can be observed at this park site,other visitors may require additional educational experiences to fully appreciate the resources and amenities of this park.The uses proposed for the 79.16-acre site are consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Designation of Passive-Recreational. 6-3 Page 3 November 16,2010 2.The proposed project is inconsistent with land use plans for Abalone Cove Shoreline Park that designate the site for open space passive recreation. In 1973,the County of Los Angeles purchased 57 acres of what is now part of the proposed proj ect area in Abalone Cove Shoreline Park.The County purchased this land with the intent to develop it for outdoor recreational uses. The County acquired the land using a grant through the federal government pursuant to the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965.As a requirement of receiving the grant money,the County entered into a "Project Agreement"(See Attachment B)with the State Department of Parks and Recreation,which is attached for reference to this letter.The property remained under County ownership until 1988,when it was transferred to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency.The City has since formally accepted the transfer and obligations of the pre-existing Project Agreement. Nothing in the agreement prohibits the construction of a building to be used for nature education and recreation purposes.As an example,the City of Rancho Palos Verdes also agreed to similar terms when the City entered into an agreement to accept a Land and Water Conservation grant which was used for the development of the Point Vicente Interpretive Center (PVIC).The PVIC is a facility which explores the natural history of the Peninsula with emphasis on the migration of the Pacific gray whale.This use was not found to be inconsistent with the Land and Water Conservation Fund guidelines. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan provides goals and policies intended to shape the future of the City.The General Plan is divided into elements that are integrated into functional relationships. Recreational activity areas include sites which have been set aside or are proposed for either active or passive use.These sites are structured to various degrees to allow specific site activities to take place.Recreational activity areas can be either private or public.In terms of the Land Use Element,according to the General Plan Land Use Policy Map the project site is designated as Recreational -Passive.Land uses designated as Recreational-Passive are described as follows: Recreational-Passive facilities are mostly unstructured in order to allow natural ecosystems to function with the least amount of human disturbance.Passive sites are usually used for nature studies,hiking trails,limited picnicking areas, etc.Environmental impacts should be low. In 1981,and then again in 1998,the City's decision makers determined that the construction of the Point Vicente Interpretive Center (PVIC)building and the expansion of this same building at Lower Point Vicente is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Designation of Passive-Recreational.In fact,in 1998,the Planning Commission adopted P.C.Resolution No.98-30 making the required findings of facts for Conditional Use Permit No.200 which includes the finding for consistency with the City's General Plan (see Attachment C).In 6-4 Page 4 November 16,2010 making this finding,it implied that structures used for educational purposes, rather than structures used for active recreation like gymnasiums or indoor sports fields,is consistent with the General Plan.The uses proposed at Abalone Cove Shoreline Park are similar to those uses approved at Lower Point Vicente. Moreover,the City's Development Code for the Open-Space Recreation (OR) zoning district,in which the subject property is designated,states under the development standards (see Section 17.34.050)that structures (emphasis added)in the open space recreation district shall comply with the following: •Minimum Lot Size.No lot shall be created with an area of less than one acre, except that the planning commission may permit a smaller lot or may rezone a smaller lot to the open space recreation district upon finding that such smaller lot will provide for an open area which is to be used by the general public or a group of property owners. •Building Height.Institutional buildings erected in the city shall have a building height not greater than sixteen feet and shall not exceed one story,except with the approval of a conditional use permit by the planning commission,pursuant to Chapter 17.60 (Conditional Use Permits). •Lot Coverage.Lot area covered by buildings or structures shall not exceed ten (10%)percent of the total lot area. •Parking.Parking spaces for private uses shall be provided as required by the planning commission.Such requirement shall be based on the requirements of this title for uses similar to the proposed use.(For parking area development standards,see Chapter 17.50 (Nomesidential Parking and Loading Standards). Based on the above development standards for the OR zoning district,it too implies that structures are permitted in open space recreation areas.Moreover, the proposed project covers approximately 0.002%of the total 79.16 acre site and the proposed building does not exceed 16-feet in height as measured from existing grade. In regards to the proposal,the Project does not propose to change the current land use,but rather,proposes to expand the recreational and educational facilities for the public's use.The proposed building will operate as an educational center and the existing grounds will be improved and will continue to be used for passive recreational use.The General Plan also lists examples of passive recreational uses as "nature studies,hiking trails,limited picnicking areas,etc."Trails,areas for nature study and amenities for picnicking are all features of the proposed project.The proposed education center would be a recreational resource similar to the PVIC.Thus,although a new facility is proposed and the intensity of recreational and educational use on the site would be increased,the overall use itself would not be substantially changed. 6-5 Page 5 November 16,2010 Based on the foregoing discussion,it is Staffs opinion that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Designation of Open Space - Passive. 3.The project summary in the application does not paint an accurate picture of the larger context ofthe project. The proposed project summary captures exactly what staffhas included as part of the project which includes the following amenities:a Nature Education Center, educational/interpretive signage,parking lot improvements,improved restrooms, landscaping and habitat restoration,construction of exhibit galleries and installation of classroom AlV hardware.While there are other nature centers in the Los Angeles metropolitan area,this site offers a unique learning experience given its proximity to the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve and the Ecological Reserve.Visitors can experience the various terrestrial and marine ecosystems of the Preserve and the tide pools,learn about the flora and fauna native to the Peninsula,and learn about their role in preserving these delicate habitats. 4.Nature education and environmental stewardship needs for this region would be beUer served with a more minimalist,outdoor format including interpretive signage and a webcam. The City's proposed Project has the overriding goal to demonstrate challenges to the habitat and the urgency of environmental stewardship.As the site is currently used,the visitors wade through the tide pools crushing shellfish and collecting shells and sea life which may disturb the marine ecosystem.The City experiences frequent problems with poachers in the tide pools.Not only would the Abalone Cove Exhibit in the Nature Education Center help the public understand how these behaviors damage the marine habitat,but the presence of an administrative office for the City's park rangers will discourage any harmful behaviors.The Palos Verdes Nature Preserve Exhibit will explain how the landscape suffers from degradation,will feature displays on locally threatened wildlife,and through education,visitors will learn how to be respectful ofthis resource.The Sustaining the Earth Exhibit will encourage visitors to not only think of the Palos Verdes landscape surrounding them,but how to implement environmental stewardship to benefit their local communities and global environment. The proposed webcam and interpretive signage is only a small part of the overall vision for the proposed educational programming.Through the development of an educational facility and program,the City hopes to encourage environmental stewardship. 5.Current educational opportunities at the site focus on the unique,outdoor experience,and future educational opportunities may be enhanced by a web cam 6-6 Page 6 November 16,2010 on the site without the adverse impacts of a large building and substantial pavement and hardscape. The proposed educational program has many different components which will work in conjunction to provide a well-rounded experience for all individuals.The primary component of the educational experience will still be the hands-on outdoor experience in the park,at the tide pools and on a hike through the Preserve.However,the outdoor experience will be richly supplemented by the educational programming offered through the Nature Education Center.The physical presence of the building will also offer supporting amenities such as a central gathering place,a food concession area,small gift shop,classroom gathering space,restrooms,and central staffed information area.It provides a public safety component through the addition of space for the Sheriffs deputies and the City's park rangers.The ratio of proposed building structure to open space will be 0.002%,which is far less than what is required by the City's 10% building lot coverage requirement for the open space zoning district. 6.The project proposal was hastily produced,suffers lack ofpublic input,and will suffer from significant public opposition to this fundamental change to the unique character ofthis natural resource. If the grant funding is approved,the project will be subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)process and the City's adopted CEQA Guidelines.This process includes requirements for public comment periods and public hearings,so there would be several opportunities for the public to comment on the proj ect. In conclusion,the City wanted to ensure that some of the statements made in Ms. Cicoria's letter were addressed with factual information and supporting documentation.If you have any further questions or concerns regarding the information that has been presented,please contact Sara Singer,Senior Administrative Analyst at (310)544-5204. Sincerely, Carolyn Lehr City Manager 6-7 Page 7 November 16,2010 Enclosures Cc:Eva Cicoria Patty Keating,Chief,California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Grants and Local Services Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Carol Lynch,City Attorney Joel Rojas,Director of Community Development Ara Mihranian,Deputy Director of Community Development Sara Singer,Senior Administrative Analyst 6-8 ATTACHMENT A OCT·13 2010 Califomia Del*tment of Parks and Recreation Office of Grants and Local Services Attn:Sandra Berry,Supervisor 1416 9th St Rm.918 Sacramento,CA 95814 Eva Cicoria (310)547-5689 28981 Palos Verdes Drive East Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 October 5,2010 Re:Ref #N1-19-006;Abalone Cove Nature Education Facility Grant Application Dear Ms.Berry, Enclosed are 2,076 petition signatures (1,467 paper petition signaturEts plus 609 online petition signatures)opposing the Nature Education Facility Grant Application submitted by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (ref.#N1-19-006 per City staff)to build a 5,900 square foot nature center in Abalone Cove Shoreline Park.Not knowing whether the Application would progress from the review phase to evaluation, Save Our Shoreline continued its efforts to inform the public about the Grant proposal after submitting our initial letter and $at of petition signatures on July 31,2010.As you can see from the number of signatures and the comments of signers,the public shares our concern that the building is unnecessary and inappropriate for this site and the Application should be denied. We would like to point out a number of Inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the City's proposed project and we want to highlight some competing considerations. •The proposed project is inconsistent with the mission of the Califomia Department of Parks and Recreation to inspire and to protect its most valued natural and cultural resources. •The proposed project is inconsistent with land use plans for Abalone Cove Shoreline Park that designate the site for open space passive recreation. •The project summary presented in the Application does not paint an accurate picture of the larger context of the project:It is not necessary or desired,because the site Js currently well used and there are already five indoor nature centerS within a nine mile stretch of this coastline. e Nature education and environmental stewardship needs for this region would be better served with a more minimalist,outdoor fonnat including interpretive signage and a webcam,whereas the proposed building and its interior contents at this site would send conflicting messages regarding our stewardship responsibilities and protecting our natural resources. •Current educational opportunities at the site focus on the unique,outdoor experience,and future educational opportunities may be enhanced by a web cam on site without the adverse impacts of a large building and substarJtial pavement and hardscape., •The project proposal was hastily produced,suffers from lack of public input,and will suffer from significant public opposition to this fundamental change to the unique character of this natural resource. 6-9 InqQnsistencies with the Mission of tilt california State Department of Parks and ,Recreation liThe mission of Califomia State Department of Parks and Recreation is to provide for the health, ins_on.and eaucation of the people of C8lifomla by helping to preselVe the state's extraordinaay. biological diversity,PfOteetioaitar ¥slYed malYC!I·1P9 ,00_1 ~~and creating oppo~u~ltles for higl!Kluality olifdoor recreatioA.·~4i1ph8sis added,)ThiS open bI~p eXists as an ever-climinlshtn~ natural resource within a short ciatence from one of the WOiId's largest cities.No matter how educational or Inspiring the contents of a building at this site might be,they cannot replace what would be lost by inserting a large buDding in the middle of the bluff top.The vista stretches 1!0m Portugues~Point out .to CatallnalsJand and up Ileceadii'1e.Indeed,this vista is Qne.of the attIr$_ens to the Peninsula.Dally commuters and occaSional viSitOrsdriJing,along the adjpnt,...y {Pales Verdes Drive SOuth}; thousands of visitORS to the beaeh,,~tfde pool$and picnic areas at Abalone Cove;as well as artists setting up their easels.aD have been insptl"e'd by this taste Of Wild coast. Inconsit1MpieS:.,Lan"VB fJans The preposed bOildiflgand hard••1lJ6 are incensisteAt with Land and water Conservation Fund requll"$mem for ",-tone Cove Shoreline Park and RanCho Palos Verdes plaMing documents for this site.When Los Mgelee County first a.iredb property,one-half of tlltepurchase price was provided by the Land and water ConservatlOfl Fund With the flpeeific ccmclitlon that the land be used for outdoor recre.~onin .~.(See P"".ct Number ~iR your ......m.)When the land was transferred to Rar.teho Pe..VerEkts,the City fotmlldlyaceepted this agreement. The Rancho Pslos Ver.des Gert«taIPlan,Gene.Plan Map,Open ~Rect"EHltion loning Ordinance, and ZoniR8 MfA,.,all ct.isn@te ~~tl:U1e Cove a$,.~.q~n _pace with a $OCio-culturalovertay.The General'tan ••94)c(••·;~e".ive~(l)n ae••llltdbit:....ft1O$tIY ul'lStl'uetured .In order to allow natural ec«$~,to fuNtien Wfth the kfaSt ambuht Of human diSturbance."The Open Space Recreation Zoning Otdinance proVides for areas of ~oor recreation,Pillticularly for park and recreation purposes.It dGe8 not include bulldiillgs.leI8t,the City's recently adOpted Coast Vision Plan does not include any building at Abalone Cove Shoreline Park. E;»rQj,Gt Sum.rv The Grant Guidelines indicate that the project summary in the grant application "is to facilitate the Deparlmenfs understanding of the proposed project within its larger context.·The City's Application aptly describes AbatoRe Cove In the larger context (in the opening statement of its project summary)as "an area of .••exp8Asive views of the Pacific Ocean amonG'the coner:ete and 8$phalt of urbaniZed Los Angeles"How fronlc that the CilY proposes to add a large building and haFdscape.Abalone Cove is a natural treasure and the fact that it is on the border of vast urban sprawl uncferscores the urgency of leaving It as close to its naturalatate as possible.Many of the current visitors to Abalone ·Cove are from urbanized neighboring areas.TheY,like most of us,visit Abalone Cove for a partfculartype of experience away from concrete and asphalt and bundlngs.Their attraction to this place should serve as further justification for minimizing the disturbanCe of nattire at Abalone Cove. The Project Summary statement that the Park is underutDized is inaccurate.By the City's own admission (page 25 of the Grant Application),the Park has 20,000 visitors annually.Those visitors presumably paid a fee to park at Abalone Cove;others park on nearby City streets and walk to the COve.Moreover,these numbers don't reflect the thousands of people who enjoy the vista when driving along the coast or those who linger awhile at the viewing area just southeast of the proposed building site. Last,the Project Summary paints a misleading or inaccurate picture of the availability of other sites nearby for the public to leam about the unique flora and fauna in the area.There are five existing nature centers in the Vicinity.The pt.Vicente Interpretive Center is an Indoor museum and is well known for its whale~ 2 6-10 ,ATTACHMENT A watching activities.Indoor exhibit areas at Ladera Unda Nature .Center feature examples of flora,fauna and other materials found on the Palos Verdes Peninsula.White Point Nature Center,only 5.2 miles from Abalone Cove,though in Los Angeles,has Indoor and outdoor displays of coastal sage and other native plants.The Cabrillo Marine Aquarium provides exciting exhibits of ocean life. N@ed for Nature Eduqption.Environmental Stew@tdsbip and 0ufrearo To be clear,we wholeheartedly agree with the Grant Application that there is a need for nature education and environmental stewarclship--both with respect to the intertidal marine environment at Abalone Cove and with respect to the Coastal Sag~Scrub habitat of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.We also believe that the site is an ideal location for interpretive signage that expl~ins the unique biodiver8lty-the different types of marine life as well as the adjacent Coastal Sage Scrub habitat,that alerts visitors to the harm that can be done and has been done to these ecosystems,and that describes what we can all do to help protect the habitat.The proposed building and contents,however,stand to get in the way of education and send the public conflicting messages regarding environmental stewardship.Indoor exhibits featuring sustainable practices in building design,while important,are not coastrine dependent,would distract from where the focus ought to be,and would be more appropriate in more populated,urban inland areas. The Grant Application also contemplates indoor classrooms at this site,yet Abalone Cove has proven effective as an outdoor classroom where programs like those led by the Docents of Los Serenos de Point Vicente and by Sierra Club's Inner City Outings offer children from many d'lfferent areas an opportunity to actively explore and learn about Abalone Cove's amazing tide pools,fragile geology and other natural wonders. At a time when we should be sending a very clear message about the need to take better care of our environment and cherish what remains of dwindling natural open spaces,particularly so close to urban areas,erecting a building on this bluff top sends the pubIc mixed messages:We want to protect the habitat and teach the public about the degradation of land use,but we'll put up a building and hardscape that reduce the open space corridor;we'll install rlQhtlng that may adversely impact wildlife;we'll grade the bluff top possibly undermining the fragile geology;and we'll install exhibits on energy usage and conservation at a site far from the populace so they have to drive further to learn these things. Structures should be limited to restrooms.On-location Interpretive slgnage,paired with a patrolling park ranger presence and webcam,would meet the need for nature education,while focusing the attention of visitors to the bluff,beach and tide pools on what is important here--exploring the sights,sounds,and smells of nature's rich biodiversity in a sustainable,responsible way. educat~nalOpportynmes Educational opportunities that the City proposes for outside the building are listed on page 31 of the Application.They include many of the things that the Application describes in other partS,underscoring that the bUilding contents will either be duplicative of outdoor information or inappropriate at this site.An exception to this is the installation and monitoring of the tide pools by web cam.On that point,we don't !'bject to the City's plans.Strategies and Methods on page 35 indicates an outreach program Incorporating web cam feed will be developed to take to classrooms and elsewhere.These types of opportunities that the City's Application outlines for off-site education make sense.The Application indicates that teachers 'Will receive materials prior to the visit for suggested in-class activities before and after a visit."Then why have indoor classrooms on site at Abalone Cove?Better to learn material suited for the classroom at school and save the time at AbalOne Cove for outdoor education. The Project proposed is not Consistent with Sustainable Practices We take issue with the City's repeated statements that Abalone Cove Shoreline Park is "the City's most sustainable choice"for the 5,900 square foot facility.The site is close to the tide pools of Abalone Cove 3 6-11 ATTACHMENT A Ecological Reserve.That much is true.Should the fact:that there is already a parking lot there be justification for adding a building?And once there is a building,will that Justify yet more developme!'t to "improve access"?If the parking capacity proves insufficient to handle the additional traffic to the site on bUSy summer weekends,will the response be to pave over even more of the bluff top? A fundamental planning concept for any natural area of importance is to consolidate the infrastructure in one location.This makes sense from a maintenance and operating cost perspective.It also relieves stress on unspoiled locations.other locations a short distance from Abalone Cove already have the infrastructure for indoor nature education. The proposed exhibit for "Sustaining the Earth'"is out of place here.Why invest in such an important theme at a location on the edge of the Peninsula,far from the public that would benefit from the information?Better to put up that type of display In a more centralized urban location. Project Readiness As stated above,the City's proposal to build at Abalone Cove Shoreline Park suffers from lack of public support and will encounter significant hurdles if it were to be approved by the Department It does not comply with the City's General Plan and zoning and seeks a fundamental change to RPV's public parkland.Page 6 of the General Plan states,"careful planning and management of a natural environmental resource must be comprehensive and anticipatory in order to preclude irreversible and irretrievable commitments of this resource made on a piecemeal and expedient basis at future dates.· The City Council gave authority to proceed With completing and submitting the Grant Application at the Council meeting of June 1,2010.A draft of the Application was not available for review by City Council Members or the public until just prior to the meeting and several members said they had not had time to review it At that meeting,and through June,residents objected to the building proposal and offered alternative ideas that would be consistent with CIty planning documents.The final proposal was completed just prior to the July 1 submission deadline and is,at best,a conceptual outline of the proposed building project. Just two years ago,the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted its "Coast VISion Plan.·The Coast Vision Plan represents over two years of planning,including considerable staff hours and public input The Plan is touted on the City website as "an informational planning document for the City's coastal areas ...with public access,interpretive materials,recreational amenities,and other facilities to improve the experience of the coast and open space for residents of and visitors to the Peninsula.·The Plan's goal was to "identify program,design and linkage concepts for the entire area."yet,nowhere in the Vision Plan is there mention of a nature education center,or any building for that matter,in Abalone Cove or at Abalone Cove Shoreline Park. The Coast Vision Plan for Abalone Cove identifies new park amenities with picnic tables,shade features, benches,trash receptacles,an ADA accessible bluff-top trail,and trail signage.A program to remove Invasive species and plant low-profile shade trees is contemplated.That's it. The Vision Plan does identify other locations for nature education within the City.It identifies Lower Point Vicente (1.7 miles up the road from Abalone Cove and the site of Point Vicente Interpretive Center)as a key location for connecting the community to the ocean and land.The VISion Plan identifies an area referred to as "Gateway Park"immediately adjacent to the Portuguese Bend Reserve (m the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve)as the site for connecting the community to the Preserve.This vision contemplated an outdoor education center at that iocation,immediately adjacent to the largest and most frequently visited/hiked swath of preserve lands-the contiguous reserves of Forrestal,Portuguese Bend,Upper Filliorum,and Three Sisters.The plan was for an outdoor pavilion and interpretive signage to educate the visiting public about the value of Coastal Sage Scrub and the public'S role in protecting and restoring it. 4 6-12 ••••"~r ,~A ~,~••,,'"_.,.'.'",".....'" .ATTACHMENT"A""" That plan would reach 50,000 annual visitors to the PreHNe,most of whom are unlikely to hike or ride their bikes or horses down the road to Abalone Cove to learn about Coastal Sage SCrub and stewardship. Abalone Cove ShoreRne Park fulfills a unique function on the coastline as it is.Yes,it would benefit from improvements to parking,restrooms,interpretive slgnage and trails.But a large building would unnecessarily alter its character and is not what the public wants for this site as evident from the response to Save Our Shoreline's petition drive.Once again,we request that you deny the Rancho PalOS Verdes Nature Education Facilities Grant Application. Very truly yours, ~~ Eva Cicorla,for Save Our Shoreline co:Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Carolyn lehr,City Manager 5 6-13 Say NO to a Proposed Building at Abalone Cove Shoreline Park Save Our Shoreline! Background:On June 30,2010 the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,founded to rein in coastal development,submitted a grant application to the State of California to erect a 5,900 square foot "nature education center"in Abalone Cove Shoreline Park,on the only remaining stretch of undeveloped coastal blufftop in the City.This building would be •Destructive to the stunning view and the natural experience. •Wasteful govemment spending:$7,000,000 +maintenance and operating costs. •There are already 5 existing indoor nature centers in this 9 mile stretch of coastline. A BETTER ALTERNATNE:Improve what we already have-trails,vegetation,information kiosks-for far less money,without the building. We,the undersigned,oppose the proposal to erect a building in Abalone Cove Shoreline Park . Signature Printed Name ....if Street Address and City Email Address Date18+ ~ ~:cs::mz -I» 6 - 1 4 94-15q-99 15:93 .::.-3...h .ATTACHMENT B ID- r"·..STATE OF CALIFORNIA ,,(""'"-··L...n-",_,f p.......t.o.1lI.•.....'\"",',."'""'t--ent 0 ....A.lI and nJ::creatlon ".,.' AMENDMENT TO PROJECf AGREEMENT Land and Water Conservation Fund Program PdH3 Project Namo:__~A~baI'llWo.u:neii,;C:..:Qw.;vt:ii~\-IBoCieaiCiIcill.lh....AQ;clllllQUilUU.iijmlU·tt~·gwD _AmcndmcntNo.__QlW6.00~"'lI2..99",,-_ This Amendment to Project Agreement No.06=00299 is hereby made and a~upon by the State Liaison Officer for the Land and Water Conservation Fund and by the County of Los ADe-eles , .Participant pursuant to the Land and flater Conservation Fund Act of 1965,78 Stat.891 (1964),and the Federal/State Project Agreement. The State Liaison Officer and Participant,in mutual consideration ofthe promises made herein and in the agreem.ent of which this is an amendment,do promise as follows, The County ofLos Angeles he..eby transfers all obligations imposed on the County by the terms of said agreement to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. The City of Rancho Palos VeMCS hereby acCeplS said transfer and thereby accepts all of the participants obligations under the terms and conditions of said agreement. In all other respectS,the Project Agreement of which this is an amendment,and the plans and speci:flcations relevant thereto.shall remain in full force and effeet.In witness whereof the parties hereto have executed this amendment as of the date entered beloW'. Cguntv grLos Aniel;! Participant BY~W~ STATE LIAISON OFFICER ,"W'/7 ~_/:?~B~~~r ? Director,Department of Parks D1reetor of Beaches and Harbors Title City ofRanebq Palos Verdes Participant ~ MAYOR Title Date May 19,1999 Date;__.S"__....._7-__..5_-_--_Cf'_7'__-- APPROVED AS TO FORM: DEWITT W.CLINTON ::~EL f,.?yt Francis E.Scott Principal Deputy County Counsel 6-15 ....~~T~ACHMENT B -'-0:..'.'.............."....(..m ..,c..•·.•.•·.···\..,. STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Parks and Recreation PROJECT AGREEHENT--LOCAL PARTICIPANT Land and Water Conservation Fund Program 22l8D APR 29 ]999 ( .......... Proj C'c t Ti t 1e __.:.:Ab:;.::al::.;o:.::n.::.::e:..-.:C;.;:o~ve.;;...:B;.,;e;.,;a;.,;c:.:.:h~A::.;:;;:.cq;l.:u:.::i;.,;s;.:;i;.:;t.::i~o.::n _ PcJrt i ci pant .:;.Co;:,;w::.:n.:.;t:..:}·--=o.:;.f...;L;;;.;o;.:;s~A::.;:n~g.::.e.::.le::.:s~Project tJo._0_6_-_00_2_9_9 _ Project Period __--=6...;-.::.3::.;0-_7~3~t~o~10::.;-_1~-~7~7 Period Covered by Agreement 6-30-73 to 10-1-77 Project Scope: The .County of Los Angeles '.rill acquire 57+acres of sandy beach and upland to be later developed for public outdoor recre~tion. A'private beach·club holds a lease to a portion of the proposed acquisition. No relocation costs are involved. Stage Covered by This Agreement C_o_m~pl_e_t_e_~--------__---------------------- Project Cost: Total Estimated Direct Project Cost (as shown in Project ProposClI) Surcharge--State Administrative Assessment 2 %of line (I) Total Project Costs Eligible for Federal Funding Federa1 Participation--50%of line (3)or 50%of actual costs \·,hi chever is the lesser. $2,800,000 (1 $56,000 {? \'. $2,856,000 U $1,428,000'(If .~StATE DEPARTM~NT'OF -PARKS'AND :RECREATI ON aie made a part of and incorporated into County of Los Angeles Ti t 1e CHAIRMAN.BOARD o~SU?~R·"I;:::>RS iE"S';.;'Date DEC 11 1973 ::i'lt !5 II ~=:a._ii' y _-'::::!::QY..::.cm~~~*~;S~~~-19.h-a -.B!:7 .Y .;.....•_ ,_._IA· •CII ....'1:51atc__.::.....:::;.....;,;;:.:.-.:_-:.----:~__,;;.....-'.::.---4-1f'~"~8:'H-I-!.Ti t Ie _ Date _ 6-16 ..A~TACHMENT B r.."······· ,~ CONTRACT TEBHS, " I The State Liaison Officer for the Land and Water Conservation Fund and the COU:ITY OF LOS i\lIGr:r.J;;s ,hereinafter referred to as the Participant,mutually agree to perform this agreement in accordance with the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965,78 Stat.897 (1964). The State of California hereby promises,in consideration of the promises made by the Participant herein,to accept appropriated Federal ~~ds for the purpo~es of the Project and disburse the same to reimburse the Participant 50 percent of the eligible Project cost not to exceed 50 percent of the direct Project cost shown in this agreement;except for a 2 percent surcharge of administrative costs to be applied to the total estimated direct Project costs as shown above. The surcharge is to be deducted froe the reimbursements received from the Federal Government applicable to this Project.It is understood by the parties heret~ that this agreement shall not obligate State of California funds for the Project costs described herein.The Participant hereby promises,in consideration of the promises made by the Liaison Officer herein,to execute the Project stage described herein,in accordance with the terms of this agreement.A~y disbursement hereunder shall not be made unless and until funds·therefore are received by the Liaison Officer from the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. The follo\~ing special Project teros and conditions were added to.this a~eement before it was signed by the parties hereto and any deviations from or changes in the Project shall be accomplished only throuSh written co~~ent of the parties concerned; The Participant will'permanently display in a conspicuous place which acknOWledges Land and Water Conservation Fund assistance. be provided by the State Department of Parks and Recreation and by the Participant will be required upon initial develop~ent of a bronze plaque The plaque will its installation the property. The Participant agrees to comply with the terms and intent of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act 0'£1970,84 Stat.1894 (1970) and California's Braithwaite Act,Chapter 1574,Statutes of 1971 and related statutes. 6-17 ~.'ATTACHMENT B A.'DEFINITIONS C'" ...~,I ..... 1.The term "BOR"as used herei n means the Bureau of Outdoor Recreati on, United States oepartment of the Interior. 2.The term lIDi rectorll as used herei n means the Oi rector of the Bureau of Outdoor Recre&tion,or any representative lawfully delegated the authority to act for such Director. 3.The term lILiaison Officer"as used herein means the California Director of Parks and Recreation,or other State officer as designated by the Governor from time to time and authorized by the State Legislature. 4. .Manua I. The term IIManual"as used herein means the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation (Outdoor Recreation Grants-In-Aid Manual) 5.The term "Guide"as used herein means "Procedural Guide,Part I--Appli- ca,tion Procedures and Part II--Fiscal Procedures"issued by the oepartment of Parks and Recreation. 6.The term "Projectll as used herein means the project or project segnent which is the subject of this agreement as defined in the project proposal. 7.The term "Project Proposal"as used herein means the form and all supplemental attachments used to describe and estimate the cost of a planning, acquisition,or development project filed with the Liaison Officer in support of an application for federal financial assistance. 8.The term "State"as used herein means the State of California and/or its official repres~ntative,the Department of Parks and Recreation. 9.The term "Participant'l as used herein shall mean the recipient of the federal funds to be disbursed in accordance with the terms of this agreement. 10.The term IIFederal Funds"as used herein means those monies made avai lable by the United States of America as matching money for projects under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965,78 Stat.897 (1964). B.PROJECT EXECUTION' 1.The Participant shall at no cost to the State execute,complete,operate and maintain the approved Project in accordance with the Manual,the Guide,the Project Proposal,and the plans and specifications applicable,which documents are On file in the office of the Liaison Officer and made a part hereof.Failure to render satisfactory progress or to'complete this or any other project which is the subject of Federal assistance under this program to the satisfaction of the Director or Liaison Officer may be cause for the suspension of all obligations of the United States and the State under this agreement. 2.The Participant shall indemnify the State of California and its officers, agents and employees against and hold the same free and harmless from any and all claims,demands,damages,losses,costs,and/or expenses of liability due to,or arising out of,either i~whole or in part,whether directly or indirectly,the organization,development,construction,operation,or maintenance of the Project. -3- 6-18 .... ... 'f'•...'.. '..~1 C'"(' "..:-.. ..ATTACHMENT B', 3.In the ev~nt of default by the Participant which default is not cured by the Participant within.thirty (30)days after receipt of written notice from the Liaison Officer,the State may in addition to any other remedies take posses- sion of the Project and construct,operate or maintain the Project as the State may deem necessary to fulfill requirements of the Federal Government,and the Participant agrees to reimburse the State for any costs or expenses incurred by the State thereby. 4.Construction contracted for by the Participant shall meet the following requirements: (a)Contracts for construction in excess of $10,000 shall be awarded through a process of competitive bidding.Copies of all bids and a copy of the contract shall be retained for inspection by the Director or Liaison Officer. (b)The Participant shall inform all bidders on contracts for con- struction in excess of $10,000 that Federal Funds are being used to assist in construction. (c)Written change orders to contracts for construction in excess of $10,000 Shall be issued for all necessary changes in the facility.Such orders shall be made a part of the project file and shall be kept available for audit. (d)The Participant agrees to comply with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive Order No.11246 and shall incorporate,or cause to be incorporated,into all construction contracts the following provisions: "During the perform~ce of this contract,the contractor agrees as follows: "(1)The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race,creed,color, religion,sex,or national origin.The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed,and that employees are treated during employment,without regard to their race,creed,color,religion,sex,or national origin. Such action shall inclUde,but not be limited to,the following: employment,upgrading,demotion or transfer;recruitment or recruitment advertising;layoff or termination;rates of pay or other forms of compensation1 and selection for traininq, including apprenticeship.The contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places,available to employees and applicants for employment,notices to be provided by the contracting officer setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. n(2)The contractor will,in all solicitations or advertise- ments for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race,creed,color,religion, sex,or national oriqin. -4- 6-19 ... "''," ..'.ATTACHMENT B .• .. ."(3)The «'~.'1 .ctor will send to each lab(,.;···.I ,n or .repre- sentative ot workers with which he has a c(1;;Li.e~liive bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding,a notice,to be provided by the 88ency contracting officer,advising the labor union or workers'representative of the contractor's comit- ments under Section 202 of Executive Order No.11246 of September 24,1965,and shall post copies of the notice in con- spicuous places availa'Dle to employees and applicants for employment. n(4)The contractor will comply with all provisions of Execu- tive Order No.11246 ot September 24,1965,and ot the rules, regulations,an~relevant orders ot the Secretary ot Labor. n (5)The contractor will furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order No.11246 of Sep'tember 24,1965, and by the rules,regulations,and orders ot the Secretary of Labor,or purswmt thereto,and will permit access to his books,records,and accounts by the contracting agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules,regulations,and orders. "(6)In the event of the cOn-tractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or With any of such rules,regulations,or orders,this contract may be canceled, terminated,or suspended in whole or in part and the con- tractor may be declared ineligible for turther Govern:ment contracts in accordance with procedures auttDrized in Execu- tive Order No.11246 ot September 24,1965,and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order No.11246 ot September 24,J.965,or by rule, regulation,or order of the Secretary ot Labor,or as other- wise provided by law. "(7)The contractor will include the provisions of Paragraphs (1)through (7)in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules,regulations,or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 ot Executive Order No.11246 of September 24,1965,so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor.The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontracl"or pur- chase order as the contracting 88ency may direct as a ID!!BnS ot entorcing such provisions,including sanctions tor noncom- pliance:Provided,however,That in the event the contractor becomes involved in,or is threatened with,litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the contracting agency,the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States." -5- 6-20 ..ATTACHMENT B (:" (e)The participant shall: (1)comply with the above provisions in construction work carried out by itself, (2)assist and cooperate ,actively with the BOR and the Secre- tary of Labor in obtaining the compliance of contractors and suQqontractors with the above contract provisions and with the rules,regulations,and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor, (3)obtain and furnish to the BOR and to the Secretary of Labor such information as they may require for the super- vision of such compliance, (4)enforce the obligation of contractors and subcontractors under such provisions,rules,regulations and orders; (5)carry out sanctions and penalties for violntion of such obligations imposed upon contractors and subcontractors by the Secretary of Labor or the BaR pursuant to Part 11,Sub- part D,of Executive Order No.11246 of September 24,1965; and (6)refrain from entering into any contract with a contractor debarred from Government contracts under Part 11,Subpart 0, of Executive Order No.11246 o~September 24,1965. 5.The participant shall secure completion of the work in accordance with the approved construction plans and specifications,and shall secure compliance with all applicable Federal,State and local laws and regulations. 6.The Participant shall permit periodic site visits by the Liaison Officer and/or Director to ensure work progress in accordance with the approved project,including a final inspection upon Project completion. 7.In the event funds should not be available for future stages of the project,the Participant shall bring the Project to a point of usefulness agreed ~pon by the State and BOR. 8.All significant deviations from"the project proposal shall be sub- mitted to the Liaison Officer prior to approval. 9.The acquisition cost of real property shall be based upon the appraisal of a competent appraiser.The reports of such appraisers shall be available for inspection by the Liaison Officer upon request. 10.Development plans and specifications shall be available for review by the Liaison Officer upon request. 11.If any tract or parcel of,or interest in,real pronerty subject to being purchased under the provi!';i.ons of this agreement,but 'not identi fied her""i n, is found by the Director for any reason not to be suitable for Federal assistance. all obligations of the unithd States hereunder shall cease as to such parcel, tract or interest. -6- 6-21 .' ",,ATTACHMENT B C.PROJECT COS'l'S ( \.4 ••••.. Disallowances.The Participant c;,.]r; for any disallowances of costs or expen~' are disclosed through auditor inspectic,:. or the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation.' Project'C!bsts eligible for assistanc' the criteria set forth in the Manual and ~ D.PROJECT ADMINISTRATION 1.The Participant shall promptly !:': the Liaison Officer may request. 2.Property and facilities acquired shall be available for inspection by th~: 3.Interest earned on funds grantc:i be available for expenditure by the Part~~ to instructions issued by the Director. E.PROJECT TERMINATION 1.The Participant may upon written , ally rescind this agreement at any tillS p,' After Project commencement,this aqreemeni~ amended only by mutual agreement.A proj~ Participant makes any expenditure or inc\u, Project. 2.Failure by the Participant to co~ or any similar aareement may be cause for the United States or the state hereunder. 3.Fai,lure by the Participant to cc~: shall not be cause for the suspension of ;, or State hereunder if,in the judgment of no fault of the Participant.In such case, minimum costs any irrevocable obligations for assistance under this agreement. 4.Because the benefit to be derivec compliance by the Participant with the ter. tion,protection,and the net increase in . outdoor recreation facilities and resourCE of the State and of the United states,an~ immeasurable and unascertainable extent t~ United States by way of assistance under ~ Participant agrees that payment'by the Pa~ amount equal to the amount of assistance ~ United States would be inadequate compensc breach by the Participan~of this agreemen therefore,that the appropriate remedy in pant of this agreement shall be the,specif~ -7- immediate monetary restitution ':authorized activities which ~ntatives of the Liaison Officer determined upon the basis of ,reports and in such form as ?ed pursuant to this agre~ment .d the Liaison Officer. 70 this agreement shall not shall be disposed of according the Liaison Officer uni1ater- ~commencement of the Project. .escinded,modified,or be deemed commenced when the ',igation with respect to the the terms of this agreement nsion ~f all obligations of the t~rms of this agreement .tions of the United States ·tor,such failure was due to ·unt required to settle at incurred shall be eligible :~ited States from the full ,9 agreement is the preserva- ,ity and quality of public re available to the people such ~enefit exceeds to an of money furnished by the of this agreement,thp. to the United States of an 'hder this agreement bV the ~he UDited States for any .'artic:ipant further agrees, ~of a breach by the Partici- ;:-:nance of this aqreement. 6-22 .':.ATTACHMENT B"(,,,.., ~,.. F.CONFLICT OF INTEREST :.-.'.:1':.."\"...... .. 1.No official or employee of the State or Participant who is authorized in his official capacity to negotiate,make,accept,or approve,or to take part in such decisions regarding a contract or subcontract in connection with this Project shall have any financial or other personal interest in any such contract or subcontract. 2.No person performing services for the Participant in connection with this Project shall have a financial or other personal interest other than his employment or retention by the Participant,in any contract or subcontract in connection with this Project.No officer or employee of such person retained by the Participant shall have any financial or other personal interest in any real property acquired for this Project unless such interest is openly disclosed upon the public records of the participant,and such officer,employee or person has 'not participated in the acquisition for or on behalf of the participant. 3.No member of or delegate to Congress shall be admitted to any share or part of this agreement,or to any benefit to arise hereupon,unless such benefit shall be in the form of an agreement made with a corporation for its general benefit. 4.The Participant shall be responsible for enforcing the above conflict of interest provisions. G.HATCH ACT No officer or employee of the Participant whose principal employment is in connection with any activity which is financed in whole or in part pursuant to this agreement shall take part in any of the political activity prescribed in the Hatch Political Activity Act,5 U.S.C.118 k,with the exceptions therein enumerated. H.FINANCIAL RECORDS 1.The participant shall maintain satisfactory financial accounts,docu- ments,and records,and shall make them available to the State and/or BOR for aUditing at reasonable times.Such accounts,documents,and records shall be retained by the Participant for three years follOWing project termination. 2.The Participant may use any generally accepted accounting system, provided such system meets the minimum requirements set forth in the Manual and the Guide. I.USE OF FACILITIES 1.The Participant shall not at any time convert any property or facility acquired or developed pursuant to this agreement to other than a public outdoor recreation use without the prior approval of the Liaison Officer and the Director. 2.The Participant shall maintain all property so as to appear attractive and inviting to the public.Sanitation and sanitary facilities shall be main- tained in accordance with ~pplicable State and local public health standards. Properties shall be kept reasonably safe for public use.Fire ~revention, -8- 6-23 "... ':'ATTACHMENT B 4 • lifeguard and similar activities shall be maintained at levels reasonable to prevent loss of the lives of users.Buildings,roads,trails and other struc- tures and improvements shall be kent in reasonable repair throughout their estimated lifetime so as to prevent undue deterioration.All maintenance and operations shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in the Manual and the Guide. 3.The~articipant shall not discriminate against any nerson on the basis of race,color,or national origin in the use of any property or facility acquired or developed pursuant to this agreement,and shall com~ly with the terms and intent of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,P.L.88-352 (1964), and of the regulations promulgated pursuant to such Act by the Secretary of the Interior and contained in 43 erR 17. 4.The Participant shall not discriminate against any perRon on the basis of residence. J.MANUAL The Participant shall comply with the policies and procedures set forth in the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation Manual and the Guide.Said Manuals are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this agreement I and are on file . with the parties hereto • .( -9- .'.. 6-24 ... .c .•.I'LTZ·:lllllAl.g O.JlI:':'O.... (' <,~i4i:..'" NTY 'OF LOS ANG~t--c,., DEPARTMENT Of'DEAOtES '.. aeoo 'TIIA~'O MA"'HATTAN .IACH.CALI'OltNIA loa •• August 30,1973 a\lalftrl.""O'"C: 14lS ••SQ2 I 77:&.'1"i I·S CM&II.:1CNC:Y""ONe· I'Z·':':::.""S. •I .', Hon.·Bocard of Supervisors County of Los .\ngeles 383 Hall of Ad.ministr=!:ticn ~s Angeles,CA 90012 Gentlemen: RESOLUTION APPROvnTG EXECUTIOI\'OF AGRE3,1EI'IT S'rATS PAR..tt3 AIm"Rl::CREATIO~t COtr.rRACT,1,nn"$tR 06-00299. On Jur.e 27,1972,your boar<i apprc.,.~eci filing of an application :lor acquisitiO:1 cf..r.Abalone Cove and '.tpland properties.On Augus-c 14th, the Ca11fo.mia State Department of Par:ts end Recreation notified t.."'e Depari:lnent of Beaches that the appJ.ica:t10n had.been approved and f~ds totaling ~1.4 million will b~granted. L'l order t~implece:lt this pro;ram,the agreements 1tlith the s'tate must now be'execu"ted.The exeou'tion of thts contract ..../ill provide the Federal financial assict~ce to the Coun~. The cost of the acquisition is es'timated to be ~2.a millior.of which $1.4 milli'Jn ~"lill be prOVided from "'lols Land and ~'la.ter CO!'ls~.::-vation Fund Progr~.Buraau of Outcoor Recreation,Dep~ent of Interior. ~~::::'~-:'!:':'z..'!.:'t'!.~"'.~O.":"~~~"";.n';~"'I':,r:."'fll';h~T 'the (;;:lli forniA Ur:l1):;,,,t.lIlel.Li, of Parks a:1d Recreation.~o Coun-4:y t'lor'tion o£the acouisj.tion funds is inclu~ei in the 1973/74 bUdget.•- IT IS,THE:tEFORE ,RECO:.rr~-m:D THA~'I:HE BOARD: Adopt the at'tachcd resolution npprovu1g the contrnct and e.utbor.i.ze and direct the chairwrn to e:"e::ute the attached copies of that ag':"eemer.t iiitt~·the Cc~i!onlia Dapartment of Parks and Recreation. ...... DF:JF:jf •~,:l;taci".mcnts " ","'"..~. .. 'II ..". 6-25 .''k:ATTACHMENTaB RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES APPROVING AND PROVIDING FOR ' THE EXECUTION FOR PROJECT AGREEMENT FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND,PROJECT NO.06-00299,ABALONE COVE ACQUISITION BY AND BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,RESOURCES AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION WHEREAS,the County of Los Angeles is desirous of acquiring fifty-seven acres of sandy beach and upland on the Palos Verdes Penninsula for development as a public beach;and WHEREAS,the United States Government has made available 'the sum of $1,~00,000 under provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 for the acquisition of said beach and uplands;and WHEREAS,in order to receive said funds,it is necessary that the County of Los Angeles enter into an agreement with the State of California,Resources Agency,Department of Parks and Recreation; NOW,THEREFO?~,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS FOLLOWS: 1.The Project Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A between the County of Los Angeles~and the State of California, the terms of which provision is made for federal reimbursement of an amount not to exceed $1,400,000 under provision of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 for the acquisition of Project No.06-00299,Abalone Cove Acquisition,as described below: The acquisition by the County of Los Angeles of fifty-seven acres of sandy beach and upland on the Palos Verdes Penninsula to be developed for public outdoor recreational use is hereby approved in all respects. 2.The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles is hereby authorized and directed to execute five copies of said Project Agreement. I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of LO$Angeles,State of California on the 11th day of December,1973. APPROVED AS TO FORM: JOHN H.LARSON County Counsel _._--~ ; ."'" ArrEST:JAMES S.MIZE EXECUTIVE OFFICER - CL.ER~OF THE ~9Ai1D 0;:S~PERVISORSBY"'~~~PUty 6-26 .ACHMENTC •• P.C.RESOLUTION NO.98-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.200,COASTAL PERMIT NO. 143,AND GRADING PERMIT NO.1993,FOR A 7,437 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE POINT VICENTE INTE;RPRETIVE CENTER INCLUDING OTHER SITE AMENITIES LOCATED AT 31601 PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST WHEREAS,on October 9,1997,the City of Rancho Palos Verdes submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit No.200,Coastal Permit No.143,and Grading Permit No. 1993,to allow the construction of a 7,437 square foot addition to the existing Point Vicente Interpretive Center,an outdoor amphitheater,teaching terraces,walls and fences,139 new parking spaces,driveways,new landscaping,and other amenities to the Point Vicente Interpretive Center Site located at 31501 Palos Verdes Drive West;and, WHEREAS,pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et.seq.("CEQAIt ),the State's CEQA Guidelines,California Code of Regulation,Title 14,Section 15000 et.seq.,the City's Local CEQA Guidelines,and Government Code Section 65962.5(1)(Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement),a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project has been submitted and adopted as found in P.C. Resolution No.98-29;and, WHEREAS,after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code,the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on September 8,1998,at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW,THEREFORE,THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND,DETERMINE,AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1:That the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and for all of the yards,setbacks,walls,fences,landscaping and other features required by this title or by conditions imposed under this section to Integrate said use with those on adjacent land and within the neighborhood because the total lot coverage,which includes the existing and proposed portions of the interpretive center structures,terraces,and amphitheater area makes up only 1.3%of the total site area,and Is therefore consistent with the lot coverage requirements of the Open Space Recreation district standards which require that the total lot coverage of all bUildings and structures not exceed 10%of the total lot area.Additionally,although the Open Space Recreation district does not establish any required setbacks for buildings,the proposed project will be located well away from other surrounding land uses and Palos Verdes Drive West. Additionally,the owner is also proposing various aesthetic improvements to the site that will also be compatible with the existing Interpretive Center. Section 2:That the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways sufficient to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use as the traffic stUdy prepared for the project concluded that although the project will generate sOJ'lle additional traffic to the area 6-27 s. ATIi'CHMENT C roadway system,the amount of additional traffic will be insignificant and can be handled adequately by the existing roadway system. Section 3:That,in apprOVing the sUbject use at the specific location,there will be no significant adverse effect on adjacent property or the permitted use thereof because given the central location of the proposed structure,large distance between the structure and adjacent properties,and relatively quite use of the facility by visitors,the only potential issue effecting adjacent properties would be the proposed request for an increase in building height and how that request may effect views from adjacent properties.However,since a majority of the proposed structure would be constructed at a slightly lower height than the existing structure,only a small portion would exceed the height of the existing structure,and the proposed addition will be relatively insignificant as viewed from neighboring uses that are well over 500'away from the proposed addition as their primary view is more directly west than towards the south over the site, there will be no significant impairment to existing views. Section 4:That the proposed use is not contrary to the general plan,as the proposed interpretive center addition is consistent with the uses permitted within the Open Space Recreational zoning district and is therefore consistent with the Zoning Code and the Recreational/Passive land use designation of the General Plan. Section 5:That,the proposed project is consistent with the applicable requirements of the Natural,Socio/Cultural,and Urban Overlay Control Districts. Section 6:That conditions necessary to protect the health,safety and general welfare, have been imposed as the proposed project has been designed and conditioned through this Resolution and the mitigation measures defined within the Mitigated Negative Declaration so that the proposed project will not cause an impact to the health,safety and general welfare of the site' nor surrounding area residents.For example;the proposed project is setback a great distance from the property lines,therefore redudng any impacts to neighboring lots,the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP)requires that exterior lighting be low intensity and directed downward, and potential noise and air quality impacts resulting from the construction activities have been mitigated through the MMP. Section 7:That the proposed development is In conformance with the coastal specific plan as the project site is located within Subregion 2 of the Coastal Specific Plan,and in reference to Subregion 2,the Specific Plan indicates,'7his Subregion's character is that of an affractor/generator to the vast majority of the populace which resides outside the Peninsula" (Page 52-5).The proposed project is in conformance with this statement as the proposed project will improve the existing "attractor/generator"use of the existing interpretive center and provide a resource for those persons residing on and off of the peninsula.Additionally,the project is consistent with the Coastal Specific Plan policy to "Facilitate justifiable coastal-dependent development in a manner that is compatible with he City and surroundings,while allowing a positive utilization ofcoastal resources"(Page V-18),as the proposed project has been designed to be compatible with the existing surroundings at the subject site,and consistent with the policy that indicates,"Provide mitigating measures where possible to control surface runoff that might P.C.Resolution No.98-30 Page 2 of 10 6-28 ATIACHMENTC /' be degrading to the natural environment"(Page N-46),as the proposed project includes the installation of a new drainage system that will focus the on-site drainage into one system instead of allowing the drainage to flow freely over the bluff edge,where it currently erodes the bluff face and causes damage to the marine environment as a result of the urban type pollutants associated with the run-off. Section 8:That the proposed development,which is located between the sea and the first public road,is in conformance with applicable public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act as the proposed project only involves the construction of an addition to an existing structure and other site improvements and will not impede any existing trails or access points,but instead will actually allow for greater pUblic use and access of the site as additional parking spaces are being constructed. Section 9:The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the permitted primarY use of the lot,as defined in Section 17.96 of this title because given the large site, focused grading areas,and purpose of the proposed project,the proposed project grading does not exceed that which·is necessary for the permitted primary use of the lot. Section 10:The grading and/or related construction does not significantly adversely affect the visual relationships with,nor the views from,neighboring properties because although a small portion of the proposed structure will protrude into a very small portion of existing views of the ocean,the impairment is so slight given the distance between the proposed structure and neighboring uses that the proposed grading does not significantly adversely affect the visual relationships with,nor the views from,neighboring properties. section 11:The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural contours,and finished contours are reasonably natural because the proposed contours will still maintain the general configuration and sloping character of the natural contours between Palos Verdes Drive West and the Bluff face. Section 12;The grading takes into account the preservation of natural topographic features and appearances by means of land sculpturing so as to blend any man-made or manufactured slope into the natural topography because,although the proposed project will change the existing natural contours to create a level building pad and parking lot,the proposed man made slopes adjacent to the proposed addition,at the sides of the parking lot and within the parking lot will blend into the natural topography which is in the form of small gently sloping hills. Section 13:The grading utilizes street designs and improvements which serve to minimize grading alternatives and harmonize with the natural contours and character of the hillside because although the proposed project does not include any new streets,it does include a parking area and service driveway;both of which blend into the natural contours and character of the existing site. Section 14:The grading would not cause excessive and unnecessary disturbance of natural landscape or wildlife habitat through removal of vegetation because as identified in the P.C.Resolution No.98-30 Page 3 of 10 6-29 ATT~CHMENT C biological analysis,the subject construction sites do not contain any sensitive plant or wildlife habitat. Section 15:The Grading conforms to all of the standards within Development Code Section 17.76.040E except for "Bb.No finished slopes greater than thirty-five perr;ent shall be created,except at the point of vehicular access adjacent to driveway,as per subsection (E)(B)(f) of this section'~and "Be.Except for the excavation of a basement or cellar,a fill or cut shall not exceed a depth of five feet at any point except where the director or the Planning Commission determines that unusual topography,soil conditions,previous grading or other circumstances make such grading reasonable and necessary", The proposed project deviates from standard (b)because there are some slopes that will be created that are 2:1 or 50%,and deviates from standard (c)because the project will have areas where the depth of a fill or cut exceeds five feet.However,these deviations are permitted because a.criteria of No's.1 through 7 have been met;and b.The approval is consistent with the purposes set forth in subsection A of this section ,(17.76.040);and c.The departure from the standards in criteria No.8 do not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity;and d.The departure from the standards of criteria No.6 are not be detrimental to the public safety nor to other property. Section 16:Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council.Pursuant to Section 17.56.070 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code,any such appeal must be filed with the City,in writing,and with the appropriate appeal fee,no later than fifteen (15)days following September 8,1998,the date of the Planning Commission's finat action. SectIon 17:For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings Included in the Staff Report,Minutes and other records of proceedings,the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No.200.Coastal Permit No.143,and Grading Permit No.1993,thereby approving the construction of a 7,437 square foot addition to the existing Point Vicente Interpretive Center,an outdoor amphitheater, teaching terraces,walls and fences,139 new parking spaces,driveways,new landscaping,and other amenities to the Point Vicente Interpretive Center Site located at 31501 Palos Verdes Drive West.subject to the conditions of approval contained in Exhibit "A",attached hereto and made a part-thereof,which are necessary to protect the public health,safety and welfare. P.C.Resolution No.98-30 Page 4 of 10 6-30 Anf.CHMENT C PASSED,APPROVED,AND ADOPTED this 8th day of September 1998,by the following vote: AYES:Gommissioners Paris.Vannorsdall.Vice Chairman Cartwright, and Chairman Clark. NOES:None. ABSTENTIONS:None. ABSENT:Commissioners Alberio.Lyon,and Slayden. Lawrence E.Clark Chairman P.C.Resolution No.98- Page 5 of 10 6-31 ATTt\CHMENT C EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL for CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.200, COASTAL PERMIT NO.143, GRADING PERMIT NO.1993, POINT VICENTE INTERPRETIVE CENTER General 1.All construction shall be completed in substantial conformance to the plans approved by the Planning Commission on September 8,1998. 2.This approval is for the construction of a 7,437 square foot addition to the existing Point Vicente Interpretive Center,an outdoor amphitheater,teaching terraces,walls and fences, 139 new parking spaces,driveways,new landscaping,and other amenities to the Point Vicente Interpretive Center Site. 3.These approvals shall expire one year from the date of this action unless application for building permits is made.Extensions of up to one year may be granted by the Planning Commission if requested prior to expiration. Mitigation Measyres 4.The development shall comply with all mitigation measures found in the Mitigated Monitoring Program as adopted through P.C.Resolution No.98-29. Conditional Use Permit No.200 5.The building setbacks shall not be less than 95'to the west property line,512'to the east property line,560'to the northern property line,and 480'to the southern property line. 6.The maximum height of the proposed facility shall not exceed 30'-6"as measured from the point where the lowest foundation or slab meets finished grade,and 22'-0"from the highest elevation of existing grade to be covered by the structure.Prior to installation of roof sheathing,Ridge Height Certification shall be submitted by the developer. 7.Parking and security lighting shall be kept to minimum safety standards and shall conform to City requirements within the Development Code.Fixtures shall be shielded so that only the sUbject property is illuminated;there shall be no spillover onto neighboring properties. P.C.Resolution No.98-30 Page 6 of 10 6-32 ATTACHMENT C 8.SUbject to review and approval by the Director of Planning,Building and Code Enforcement,all block wall fences shall be composed of a decorative material such as slumpstone. 9.During construction activity,the contractor shall protect the existing Botanical Garden as much as possible.A chain link fence will be installed around the construction area to restrict equipment and employees to the immediate construction area.Any plant species destroyed in the Garden in conjunction with project construction will be replaced in another location near the Center upon completion of the project.Although some existing plants will have to be removed to allow for the expansion of the Center,those plants shall be replaced with plants in-kind.The contractor shall work with the California Native Plant Society to replace said plants removed during construction and to re-establish the Garden in the immediate vicinity of the Center.Subject to review and approval by the Director of Public Works,the contractor shall minimize potential impacts to the soil by taking all feasible precautions to prevent pollution by construction waste,and minimize soil compaction and loss of suitable soil for re-planting areas. Grading permit No.1993 10.Grading activity shall be limited to a total of 10,679 cubic yards of cut,389 cubic yards of fill,and 10,260 cubic yards of export.The applicant may also clean and grub the site of existing landscaping. 11.An as-graded soils and geologic report,complete with geologic map,will be submitted and reviewed prior to issuance of a bUilding permit. 12.All grading shall be monitored by a licensed engineering geologist and/or soils engineer in accordance with applicable provisions of the Municipal Code and the recommendations of the Director of Public Works and/or City Engineer. 13.Grading actiVity on the site shall occur in accordance with all applicable City safety standards. 14.Graded slopes shall be propeJ1y planted and maintained.Plants shall be selected that are capable of developing deep root systems.Watering shall be done on cycles that will promote deep rooting.Watering shall be diminished or stopped just prior to and during the rainy season. 15.All manufactured slopes shall be contour graded. 16.The use of a rock crusher is not permitted on the site. 17.All drainage swales and any other on-grade drainage facilities,including gunite,shall be of an earth tone color,as deemed necessary by the Director of Planning,Building and Code Enforcement. p.e.Resolution No.98-30 Page 7 of 10 6-33 ATTACHMENT C 18.Prior to issuance of any Grading Permits,and subject to review and approval by the Director of Public Works,a haul route permit shall be obtained by the contractor to move earth material off of the site.Additionally,the contractor shall be responsible for repairs to any neighboring streets which may be damaged during development of the site, including,but not limited to,the designated haul truck route.Prior to issuance of grading permits,the contractor shall post a bond,cash deposit or combination thereof,in an amount sufficient to cover the costs to repair any damage to streets and appurtenant structures as a result of this development.In addition to providing a bond or cash deposit. the developer shall pay for a pavement analysis of the streets to be used as the designated haul truck route prior to the start of construction and at completion of construction.The developer shall provide compensation for any loss of pavement life along the designated haul truck route as a result of this development. 19.Prior to the issuance of grading permits,the developer shall submit an Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.The Storm Water Pollution Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Works.The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall incorporate by detail or reference appropriate post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs)to: a.Implement,to the maximum extent practicable,requirements established by appropriate govemmental agencies under CEQA,Section 404 of the Clean Water Act,local ordinances and other legal authorities intended to minimize impacts from storm water runoff on the biological integrity of natural drainage systems and water bodies; b.Maximize to the maximum extent practicable,the percentage of permeable surfaces to allow more percolation of storm water into the ground; c.Minimize.to the maximum extent practicable,the amount of storm water directed to impermeable areas; d.Minimize,to the maximum extent practicable,parking lot pollution through the use of appropriate BMPs,such as retention,infiltration and good housekeeping. e.Establish reasonable limits on the clearing of vegetation from the project site inclUding,but not limited to,regulation of the length of time during which soil may be exposed and,in certain.sensitive cases,the prohibition of bare soil;and, f.Provide for appropriate permanent controls to reduce storm water pollutant load produced by the development site to the maximum extent practicable. Further,the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall contain requirements to be adhered to during project construction.These practices should: P.C.Resolution No.98-30 Page 8 of 10 6-34 "•'-:'T1ACHMENT C (a.Include erosion and sediment control practices; (b.Address multiple construction activity related pollutants; (c.Focus on BMPs such as source minimization,education,good housekeeping,good waste management,and good site planning; (d.Target construction areas and activities with the potential to generate significant pollutant loads; (e.Require retention on the site,to the maximum extent practicable,of sediment, construction waste,and other pollutants from construction activity; (f.Require,to the maximum extent practicable,management of excavated soil on site to minimize the amount of sediment that escapes to streets,drainage facilities,or adjoining properties; (g.Require,to the maximum extent practicable,use of structural drainage controls to minimize the escape of sediment and other pollutants from the site; (h.Require,to the maximum extent practicable,containment of runoff from equipment and vehicle washing at t construction sites,unless treated to remove sediments and pollutants. 20.The hours of operation for construction and grading activities shall be limited from Monday to Saturday,7:00 a.m.to 7:00 p.m.No work on-site,eqUipment or vehicles shall be permitted before or after the hours indicated.No truck queuing or warming up of equipment or vehicles shall occur before 7:00 a.m.;flagmen shall be used during all construction activities as required by the Director of Public Works. 21.Prior to the issuance of a grading permit,a final grading plan shall be approved by the Director of Public Works and City Geologist.This grading plan shall be based on a detailed engineering,geology and/or soils engineering report and shall specifically be approved by the geologist and/or soils engineer and show all recommendations submitted by them. 22.A note shall be placed on the approved grading plan that requires the Director of Planning,Building and Code Enforcement approval of rough grading prior to final clearance.The Director (or a designated staff member)shall inspect the graded sites for accuracy of pad elevations and created slope gradients.The developer or their designee shall provide certification for all grading related matters. P.C.Resolution No.98-30 Page 9 of 10 6-35 •••4\TJ:ACHMENT C 23.All of the recommendations made by the Director of Public Works and the City Geologist during their on-going review of the project shall be incorporated into the approved grading plans. 24.Unless otherwise provided in these conditions of approval or permitted by the Director of Planning,Building and Code Enforcement,the project shall comply with all appropriate provisions of the City's grading ordinance (Chapter 17.50 Grading). N:\GROUP\PLANNING\RESOS\PCIRECP143.RES P.C.Resolution No.98-30 Page 10 of 10 6-36