Loading...
20121218 Late CorrespondenceRancho Palos Verdes City Council Meeting December 18,2012 Extension of Entitlements for Marymount College Permanent Parking Lot Construction-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RECEIVED FR::~'~_4~~~"""" AND MADE A P~T OF T,tl~.RE,CORQ AT THE' COUNCIL MEETING OF~HtO/d).f.I!- OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CARLA MORREALE,CITY CLERK ··re ·!,IN FAVOR OF A MODIFIED AND LIMITED TIME EXTENSION ALLOWING COMPLETION OF THE CURRENTLY-APPROVED PHASE I PERMANENT'PARKING LOT -INCLUDING REMOVAL AND RESTORATION OF THE TEMPORARY PARKING LOT SITE ··SERIOUS QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE COLLEGE'S RECENT "APPLICATION"TO DEFER ALL OTHER PHASE I APPROVED PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS BEYOND 2013 TO 2020. ·:·ACCORDING TO COLLEGE PRESIDENT BROPHY,NO FURTHER APPROVED PHASE I CONSTRUCTION WILL BE BUILT BY SEPTEMBER 2013 ~'CONCLUSION:NO ADDITIONAL EXTENSION OF PHASE I CONSTRUCTION TIME IS JUSTIFIED PENDING NEW CUP /EIR . HEARINGS TO EXTEND NEW ENTITLEMENTS AS REQUIRED ,-:f;fet1'1fj _.m_--r,(M (5f.o (Tflffllt-- Utilities done in September Permanent Parking Lot by Christmas -Waiting for Federal Approval Field by June 1 -Waiting for City ,Council Approval for reduced project Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Meeting December 18,2012 f-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------j •Dr Brophy plans no approved Phase I construction after Permanent Parking Lot completed •Presentation to City Phase 1 •Council September 4 •NAC Meeting Sept 27 Application of October 29,2012 •Deemed "incomplete" November 27th Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Meeting December 18,2012 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------o ----------------------------------------------..----------------------------------------------------------- •The College has not completed any Phase I approved Construction to date and plans to defer most to 2020 and beyond Current Phase I Components (in)completion Status (per Condition #60 (a)and Exhibit 3-8)December 18,2012 Approved Plan per EIR and CUP Resolutions.June I,20 I 0 through September 30,2012:Proposed Future Time completion dates from Application OClOber 29,2012 Construction 12118/2012 Proposed Phase I Ext Construction Future ..Future ...Years Days per Plan COlllplelE~?!O ~ccmber 18.2012 Time Needed Phase?CompletIon Dal~Shifted Demolition of Exlstino Buildings + 1 Nursery School 14 No Not Demolished 14 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 2 Artli 14 No Not Oemolishtd 14 days 'Phase One B Sept 30 202'0 8 3 OookSlore Health Center 14 No Not Demolished 14 dilYS Phase One B Sepr 30 2020 8 4 Malnt Photo Lab 14 No Not Demoli~hed 14 day~Phase One U Sepr 30 2020 8 5 Pool 14 No Not D!mollshed 14 day!!Phase One B Sepr 302020 8 6 Llbrn!)14 No Not DemoU$hed 14 dav>Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 7 VIew Room'Hilll 14 No Not Demolls.hed 14 davs Pha.se One B SeDt 30 2020 8 RernoVi' I Tennis and Handball Courts 1'1 No Not Removed 14 d,W~Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 2 West and South Pa.rkinn lots 14 No Not Removed 14 daY<Phase One B ~1302020 8 Rough G,ad~Es~~!.sh Building Pads for,l_-1 ArhlNlc Facilitv 90 No No Grading 90 days Phase Three Sepr 30 2030 18 2 New Library 90 No No Grading 90 days Phase Two Sept ]0 2025 13 ]Faculty AddItion 90 No No Grading 90 days Phase T\"IO Sept 30 202S 13 4 Administration Addition 90 No No Grading 90 days Phase Three Sept 30 2030 18 S Re\leQi(ate/LandsC.loe new bulldlnQ uads 14 No No reveoitatlon 14 davs undeOned various n a Construc[/Reconfl ure 1 North Pal king lOI 60 No NothIng Done 60 days Phase One B Sepr ]0 2020 8 2 Rct"lnlng Walls 14 No Nothing Done 14 days Phase One B Sepr 302020 8 3 New Cdmpus Entry Drive 60 No Nothing Done 60 dJy!l Phase One B Sept 302020 8 4 New East (Modified)Parking lot Extension 45 No P<UH,ll,East only 80 days Phas~One A Sepr 30 2013 1 4a New \,'o,est Parking lot Extension 45 No Nothing Done 45 days Pha!le One B Sept 30 2020 8 5 Athletic FIeld (Tennis Courts rem oiled 'l 90 No Rejected by College 90 davs Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 Sa Tennis.Coun!>(4)90 No Removed"n/a Removed··ula n/a G Installallon of Utilities not 50ecif,ed No Nothlno Done not soeclflcd 'Nothino Done not soeclflcd not srieclfled Installation of.-Modulilr Buildings to replact demo'd facilille~not specified No Removed"'n/iJ n.a Oralnaoe and WaiN Qualltv Facilities not sDf:clfied No Not oerformed not SPECIfied nol soeclfled Total Construction rIme Planned In Phase I in 28 months 90I(Olal Construction time in 31 months with exrenslon to December 18.2012 80 Remaining Construction Time 10 Construct all other unflnlshed Phase I components 10 daY1 Prooosed POH December 18.2012 Phase I CornoonCnl Construction time 7 Di\Vs ..SenaliHt!!Pelf1lit i!J!Jued for U iii I !!Unflrades.not il nilll of Ihe Pha e I A roved Plan No construction Oa a licable to these UtilitIes Uoc rlldes Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Meeting December 18,2012 f----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Q -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------, •College's December 11,2012 letter claims limited notice of student on-street'parking recidivism •Contradicted by evidence submitted at Sept 27 2012 @Neighborhood Advisory Committee Meeting Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Meeting December 18,2012Q-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------j •Continued Student on-street parking evidence submitted for December 4,2012 Tuesday.December 4.2012 - 11 00 AM jE, 6 vehICles III Temporary Lot 1 1.05 AM 21 Vehicles Parked Alon9 PVDE (total) PVDE.South of College Entrance (8 vehicles) See Cars LISted below for this 9rouplng 1 CA SDUG303 (Individual Photos also available) 2 CA 7F83484 3 CA 6jXT314 4 CA 6WjA647 S CA 6EWZ77s 6 CA 6GAV935 CA 6HLS78S 8 CA Not Legible in Photo (Pickup truck top left) PVDE,San Ramon to Calle Aventura (5 vehICles)---....-,_._- 9 ARIZ ATN6844 10 CA 5KDL069 I I CA 6HRU793 12 CA 6WT)(597 13 CA 6MDU592 PVDE.North of College Entrance (8 vehicles) 14 CA 3NCP746 IS CA 6VSP888 16 CA sEWS020 17 CA 3VKZ340 18 CA 3VjM400 19 CA 6MML710 20 CA 4YLD639 21 CA 3PPZ088 Typical Marymount Parkin9 Sticker on PVDE Car (one of many) Rancho Palos Verdes City CouI?-cil Meeting December 18,2012 f---------------------.,------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------, Student vehicles have Marymount parking stickers Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Meeting December 18,2012 f----------------------:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------'0 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------j Example of student walking to campus from PVDE ~~·r:T ~~....,;-'"'Ma-:L~1tI.._~.._~.-.:'~J ••r • Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Meeting December 18,2012CD-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------, •RPVMC 17.60.070 allows for a ONE TIME extension of up to one year 17.60.070 -Time limit. Before approving any conditional use permit,the planning commission shall establish a time limit within which the applicant shall commence upon the permitted use,as that phrase is defined in Section 17.86.070 (Enforcement)of this title.The time limit shall be a reasonable time based on the size and nature of the proposed development.If no date is specified by the planning commission or city council, a conditional use permit shall be valid for one year from the date of final action on the permit or approval.All such permits shall be null and void after that time unless the applicant has commenced upon the permitted use,as that phrase is defined in Section 17.86.070 (Enforcement)of this title.Upon a showing of substantial hardship.delays beyond the control of the applicant,or other good'cause,the- planning commission or city council may extend this period one time for up to one additional year. (Ord.320 §7 (part),1997:Ord.78 (part),1975) 17.60.080 -Failure to comply. If the time limit expires and no extension has been granted,or if any of the conditions to the use or development are not maintained,then the conditional use permit shall be null and void.Continued operation of a use requiring a conditional use permit after such conditional use permit expires or is found in noncompliance with any condition of a conditional use permit shall constitute a violation of this title. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: HONORABLE MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY CLERK DECEMBER 18,2012 ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA** Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented for tonight's meeting: Item No. SS1 H 3 4 5 7 Description of Material Updated Annotated Version of the City Council 2012 Goals & Priorities-Corrected Version Emails from Sunshine Email from Bill James Answers to questions posed by Councilman Knight Email exchange between Staff and Sunshine Email from Councilman Knight;Email from South Bay Cities Council of Government Respectfully submitted, &Cmu~ Carla Morreale **PLEASE NOTE:Materials attached after the color page(s)were submitted through Monday,December 17,2012**. W:\AGENDA\2012 Additions Revisions to agendaS20121218 additions revisions to agenda.doc - From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Carolyn Lehr Tuesday,December 18,20121:41 PM CC Corrected:City Council Goals Annotated 20121218_City Council Goals Priorities Annotated.pdf Mme Mayor and Council Members, Attached is a corrected version of the Council Goals update to be referenced during the Study Session tonight;we had discovered duplicative information in the version sent yesterday.Kindly replace with this revised copy.There will also be hard copies provided at the meeting tonight if you do not wish to print this document. Thank You, Carolyn 1 RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL 2012 GOALS &PRIORITIES Adopted March 20,2012 (Updated December 18,2012) 1)PUBLIC SAFETY AND TRAFFIC ISSUES •Focus on Crime Prevention:Prioritization of "Crime Watch,"notification of the public,Neighborhood Watch (Score =14) •At the February 21 st City Council meeting,Deputy Will Bartlett made a presentation on residential crime prevention tips and offered to make similar presentations to interested homeowners groups.; •RPV staff immediately posts Breaking News notices on the City website regarding significant traffic accidents,road closures,emergencies etc.on a 24/7 basis as we are notified (a level of service not found in most other cities); •The Summer 2012 City Newsletter focused on Crime Prevention; • A New Law Enforcement web page was added to City's web site to provide the public with more information and resources on crime trends and prevention;and o At the November 20 th City Council meeting,Sgt.Rozas of the Lomita Sheriff's Station provided a status report and PowerPoint presentation regarding FY 12-13 Crime Prevention Enhancements,which included neighborhood patrols by Volunteers on Patrol (240 hours)and the Sheriff's Reserve Deputies (243 hours);a directed patrol along Palos Verdes Drive South (92 hours)that resulted in a significant drop in property crimes along with arterial corridor;increased Community Outreach in the form of attending HOA meetings,Neighborhood Watch meeting and block parties; producing public service announcements (PSAs),conducting tours of the Lomita Station;staffing an information booth at the City's July 4 th Celebration event;participating in Read Across America and Yellow Ribbon Week at local elementary schools;and conducting teen safety/driving classes at Marymount College. •Forge Closer City Relationship with Sheriff's Department:Improve communication with leadership at the Lomita Sheriff's station (Score =9) o Staff engaged in greater communication with new Captain re:goals of the Council,unacceptable incidents of non-communication or lack of follow- thru such as correcting speed traps. •Increase Sheriff's Presence on South and West Sides of the City:Consider creation of Sheriff's Department substation on City property (Score =6) City Council Goals &Priorities Page 1 of 15 o Preliminary discussions held with ambulance,Park Rangers and Sheriff re:potential locations at Point Vicente Park or Ladera Linda Community Center.Will follow as master plans develop or new opportunities arise. •Review Sheriff's Department's Allocation of Assets:Promote better focus the Department's efforts in the City (Score =5) o Staff worked with Regional Law subcommittee and Peninsula cities to re- design allocation of CORE,traffic and patrol units to best meet safety needs as well as budgetary conditions. •Notification of Public Safety Issues:Formalize system to notify City Staff of public safety issues,review communications policy and guidelines (Score =5) o See above. •Create Joint Powers Agency for Emergency Management for the Peninsula:Pre- arrangements to share resources during natural disasters (i.e.,wildfire, earthquake,tsunami,flooding,etc.)and for other hazards (Score =4) o Staff met with Mayor Misetich and the Area G Disaster Services Coordinator on October 15,2012.It was discussed that the initial effort would begin "Mayor to Mayor"by introducing the concept of the four Peninsula cities sharing resource inventory lists with each other. •Focus on Traffic Enforcement:Eliminate "speed traps"&replace with speed warning signs/units,target perceived erratic driving related to Marymount College (Score =3) o Allocated additional 30%to traffic enforcement in FY12-13 Budget o City Traffic Engineer will update all remaining speed zone surveys to be compliant and defensible by the courts o The City's consulting traffic engineer has completed the remaining speed zone surveys which are currently being reviewed by staff.After review the surveys will be presented to the Traffic Safety Commission for a recommendation to City Council for approval and adoption. •Palos Verdes Drive East Safety:Improve roadway safety (Score =2) o Public Works preparing to hold public workshops on PVDE safety improvements of public rights-of-way.The TSC has tentatively scheduled three workshops for Thursday,November 15 th at 7pm,Monday,December 10th at 7pm,and Saturday,February 2 nd at 10am.;Staff will recommend awarding design of PVDE at the September 18,2012 Council meeting. o The Palos Verdes Drive East public workshops have been rescheduled to Monday,December 10,2012 at 7pm,Saturday,February 2 nd ,2013 City Council Goals &Priorities Page 2 of 15 10:00am and Wednesday March 13,2013,7:00pm all to be held at the Point Vicente Interpretive Center.The design is 60%complete and will be finalized to start construction in the Summer. o The plans for the safety improvement projects (upgrading guardrails, chevron signs and striping)are complete.Staff is waiting for Federal Authorization to proceed with construction. o Staff has received Federal Authorization (E-76)to proceed with construction.This project will upgrade the failed and damaged guardrails along PVDE.The project plans and specifications have been approved by the City Attorney's office and the project is ready for bidding. •Bicycle Safety:Cyclist safety and awareness,sharing of roadways with motor vehicles (Score =2) o Awaiting METRO approval of grant amendment to begin design for PVDS construction bike compatible lanes both sides,excluding the landslide. o Metro has acknowledged receipt of the amendment and has provided a verbal approval.The City is awaiting the final approval letter. 2)SAN RAMON CANYON PROJECT •San Ramon Canyon Stabilization:Solicit financial support from the City &County of Los Angeles and present financing alternatives (Score =12) Design plans 100%completed;addressed environmental questions from Army Corps of Engineers -awaiting review comments which are anticipated by late September,need ACOE permit before project can be advertised per State grant funding requirements: o Awarded $9.5 million grant funding; o Sewer re-Iocation complete; o Shelf-ready early action stabilization project plan designed and ready o Pursuing federal, state and LA funding,presented financing options to Council July 17,reimbursement resolution adopted August 21; o Received the Army Corp of Engineer's permit December 3,2012; o Prospective Bidder's pre-qualification applications were received December 5,2012; o The project is being advertised -the City has asked to received proposals from pre-qualified bidders;the proposals received will be opened at 11 :00 Thursday morning January 24,2013;and o The City Council has directed Staff to develop funding alternatives, including the possible use of Reserves and/or debt financing,to be presented to the FAC.Subject to approval by the City Council,Magis Advisors is expected to assist the City with the development of financing alternatives. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 3 of 15 3)CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT •Increase Citizen Involvement in Infrastructure Goal-Setting &Planning:Review "lessons learned"from past projects,need more direct Staff outreach to residents and businesses,identify instances and plans to deal with deferred maintenance of facilities (Score =12) o Public outreach in planning for Safe Routes to Schools with parent surveys and student tallies to design project;also PTA presentation and PW will participate in annual Walk to School Day; o Public Works use of community workshops for planning of San Ramon: RPV neighbors as well as LA mobile home park; o Public outreach in design of Whitley Collins crosswalk; o Preserve Trails Plan extensive public input from all user groups; o Planning staff worked with many interest groups in preparing policy reports on:Garage Sales,FAR,Hedges,Clean-Up Amendments,Open Space Hazard and GIS Zoning;and o Public Works use of City Council workshop to educate community specific to the geophysics of the Altimira landslide complex including potential mitigation projects to aid in slowing movement. •Evaluate City Recreation Programs:Review the current types of recreation programs offered to the public (Score =2) o Staff continues to evaluate and adjust recreational programs to meet the needs of the community.This summer and fall,the R&P Dept.added a Jr. Ranger Summer Camp;ran a successful Adult Softball League;held a Music Festival at the Ladera Linda Community Center;collaborated with the City of Torrance to offered a joint REACH events for adults with developmental disabilities;added a second Pet Vaccination Clinic;and, sponsored an Author Book Signing event at the Point Vicente Interpretive Center. •City Dog Park:Consider location for City dog park (Score =2) o Completed.The temporary "Rancho Caninos"dog park was constructed at Point Vicente Park/Civic Center and officially opened to the public on November 8th . •City Skate Park:Consider location for City skate park (Score =5) o Completed unless reconsider in the future •City Dog Beach:Consider location for City dog beach (Score =4) o Completed City Council Goals &Priorities Page 4 of 15 •Peninsula-Wide Park Support of City Parks:Conduct outreach to other Peninsula cities for support of park maintenance &improvement (Score =3) o Completed;Staff outreach was part of Skate Park and Dog Park issues. 4)PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE •Infrastructure Funding:Consider a full range of funding options (Score =12) o Staff and San Ramon Subcommittee currently pursuing funding resources for project with County and City of LA.Debt financing options have been reviewed with City Council and a reimbursement resolution was adopted August 21 to allow the city council the discretion in the future to determine the funding plan including debt financing. o Mayor and staff lobbied our representatives in Washington DC for funding for the San Ramon project. o As described above,the City Council has directed Staff to develop funding alternatives,including the possible use of Reserves and/or debt financing, to be presented to the FAC.Subject to approval by the City Council, Magis Advisors is expected to assist the City with the development of financing alternatives. •Portuguese Bend Landslide:Roadway maintenance,dewatering wells (Score =6) o Current budget provides funding for new dewatering well (Abalone Cove); o City Council,in conjunction with Staff,conducted a landslide workshop July 31 that reviewed the geology of the landslides,previous mitigation measures and summarized possible future mitigation measures;and o City Council directed Staff to bring back a report that further defines the possible future mitigation measures,summarizes the costs and prioritizes the projects -staff report to City Council is anticipated in October/November. •Citywide Sewer Maintenance:Review maintenance program,schedule and projects (Score =6) o Abalone Cove Sewer Lift Station repairs are complete; o Harris &Assoc.revised Citywide Sewer Report on needs and maintenance; o Currently reviewing sewer maintenance efforts with LADPW;and o Reviewed sewer maintenance efforts with LADPW,anticipate reporting finding with projects in Spring 2013. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 5 of 15 •Citywide Storm Drain Maintenance:Review maintenance program,schedule and projects (Score =5) o PW Storm Drain Master Plan Update underway; o Storm Drain Lining Project $1 million recently approved by Council - construction in progress completion anticipated in October; o Completed construction of Ronsard to Stokowski storm drain improvements; o Completed emergency project to restore drain facility in PB Landslide; o Awarded GPS mapping contract for storm drains on east s'ide of RPV; o Awarded construction contract for improvements to Miraleste Plaza storm drain system -const begins Sept 2012; o Awarded contract for catch basin cleaning for FY 2012-12 -begins Sept 2012; o Design contract awarded for improvements to San Pedro Canyon drainage system; o Design underway for Mossbank extension runoff improvements;and o Miraleste Plaza storm drain system,catch basin cleaning,design of San Pedro Canyon drainage projects,and the Mossbank extension improvements are substantially complete. •Energy Audit of City Facilities:Provide update of grants and completed projects (Score =3) o Met with Contractor re:audit of City facilities;determined PVIC and Hesse potential candidates for Auto Demand Response.Did agree to Enterprise Energy Mgmt.System with SCE (free).The City is currently designated a Valued Partner with SCE.Staff has applied for Silver Status which would increase the City's energy cost savings.Staff is waiting to hear from SCE on its Silver Status application. o In July,Staff met with Greg Stevens,a consultant who works on behalf of the South Bay Environmental Services Center (SBESC)to begin a full energy audit of the City's Municipal buildings.Mr.Stevens reviewed the City's energy and gas bills over the past 12 months and conducted site visits to each City facility.The audit will document the existing lighting, HVAC,building envelope and insulation inventory for each facility,Mr. Stevens is currently in the process of preparing the audit report for the City which will identify energy upgrade opportunities,associated costs for upgrades,potential rebates,future payback,HVAC and solar systems for the City Hall campus. o Staff is also working with SBESC to scope the merits of applying for grant funds to install wireless access devices to enable secured transfer of energy consumption data at City facilities. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 6 of 15 •County Sewer Pump Station at Western Avenue &Avenida Aprenda:Identify issues to be addressed,encourage LA County Sanitation Districts to complete work (Score =1) o PW staff is in communication with County to complete and restore the work site;and o The construction was scheduled for completion by December 31,2012, but a few of the final aspects of the project,including the final paving of the Palmeras Place cul-de-sac,have been delayed and so it is now expected to be complete in early 2013. •CalWater Facilities within Portuguese Bend Community:Meet with CalWater to ensure the safety of water lines and other infrastructure in active landslide area (Score =1) •Cell Sites in Public Right-of-Way:Explore options to provide better visual screening (Score =0) •Citywide Street Maintenance:Review street maintenance program (Score =?) o PW staff continually implementing Pavement Management Program, largely on schedule for residential and arterial street paving projects. Arterial rehab of PVDS is completed Will begin plan preparation for Palos Verdes Drive East.Design of the next residential rehabilitation project (Area 3 &5)is nearing completion.Construction is expected to commence in about 3 months. o Construction for PVDE roadway rehabilitation will commence Summer 2013.With the anticipated impacts,the summer months will be the ideal time to construct the improvements.Further,due to the heavy construction at Marymount College,it is best to delay the roadway rehabilitation until after Marymount College completes most of their improvements. o The Residential Roadway Rehabilitation Project (Areas 3 &5)will commence construction around January 2 (weather permitting).A construction contract has been awarded to Hardy &Harper and project details are being worked out. 5)GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY,FISCAL CONTROL AND TRANSPARENCY •Evaluate "Core"City Services:What services do citizens really want from the City?(Score =11) •Full Transparency of Financial Information:Improve public access to City financial information (Score =10) City Council Goals &Priorities Page 7 of 15 o The following information is now posted on the City website and easily identified for citizens: •Employee Salary Rates •Employee Salary Ranges •Adopted Pension Revision that was implemented in September 2011,including employee's assumption of remainder of 8%share of contribution immediately saving the City 1.5%of compensation and establishing a 2 nd tier for new employees (in process) •City Manager Employment Contract •Employee W-2 Wages. •Employee Salary Survey of Market Area •RPV Staffing Levels and Cost,Comparing to other South Bay Cities Full-Time Employee Benefits •Personnel Rules •CalPERS link to Facts vs.Myths re:Pensions •State Controller's Certificate of Compliance •All agendas,staff reports and minutes of the Oversight Board of the Successor Agency of the RDA are prepared by Staff and posted on the City's website •All monthly cash balance reports and payment warrant registers are available •All financial reports,including the budget,CIP,5 Year Model,CAFR (with audited financial statements)and midyear financial report • Establishing a Council policy for banking procurement,possibly leading to a competitive process for banking and merchant credit card services •Coordinated a review by the FAC of the alternative methods for obtaining and/or estimated the City's unfunded pension liability culminating in a report to the City Council on June 19 th •Improve Organizational Efficiency:Run a "tight ship,"conduct performance audit of City staffing &programs,analyze '.'needs"vs."wants,"consider increased use of volunteers (Score =10) o Identified opportunity to augment crime prevention neighborhood patrols by using Lomita Station "Volunteers on Patrol"hours. o Council to award a contract to conduct an organizational efficiency audit of City staffing vs.workload assignments July 17. o Staff and PVNET,its current IT provider,are proceeding with the 2012 upgrade of the IT system,leading to improved energy and IT network support efficiencies,cost savings,standardization of software and desktop computers,improved remote access for users and video-conferencing capabilities.Use of Office 2010 has been implemented,following instructor-led classroom training and weekly introductory workshops.Call handling design for the VOIP system is-ongoing.Installation of replacement desktop computers is expected in January 2013. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 8 of 15 o Completed replacement of the Main Page of the City's website,including new features like Spotlight,City News &Events,topical scroll bar and revisions of the drop-down menu that are now consistent with other California cities. o Recently Integrated texting and Twitter into the City's emergency notification Iistserver system. •Overview of Current Business Environment:Staff to brief City Council on the current regulatory framework affecting City businesses (permits,fees,zoning, etc.);tentatively agendized for 3/6/12 meeting (Score =6) o Completed;Joel Rojas presentation to Council on March 6,2012. •Review City Fees:Review all fees charged the public,especially to City property owners and businesses (Score =4) o Completed a review of fees related to business; Joel Rojas presentation to Council March 6,2012. •Conduct a Business Survey:Staff to prepare a survey,with the assistance of the Chamber of Commerce or other organizations with similar experience and expertise,to assess what the City can do for businesses and how can the City be a better partner with businesses.(Score =4) o While not intended to fulfill this goal,Planning did conduct a small survey of businesses in conjunction with proposed mixed zoning at Golden Cove. •Council Liaison to Advisory Boards:Consider whether each City advisory board should have a designated City Council liaison (Score =4) •Review of Existing Contracts/Consultants:Review all contracts and consider formal bid process,review City's use of consultants,ensure that consultant work product is actually used,review IT/PV on the Net (Score =3) o Staff Analyst has prepared a comprehensive list of contracts,value and term in order to aide in the process of determining new bids to be undertaken. •Evaluate Business Fees:Review fees charged for business licenses,sign permits,etc.(Score =3) o Completed March 6,see above. •Streamline Business Openings:Review and improve City processes for new business (Score =3) City Council Goals &Priorities Page 9 of 15 o Completed March 6,see above. •Evaluate Development Review Process:Review fees,expand lower-level decision making,streamlined review processes,etc.(Score =3) •Zero-Based Budgeting (ZBB):Consider "hybrid"ZBB and provide other detailed information (Score =1) o Completed,and staff would consider this to be one of our top accomplishments for the fact that the menu of discretionary items for Council to scrutinize was greatly expanded to 50 items at a total value of $9.6 million.Easy to use one-page summaries were provided for each program to facilitate identification of budgetary priorities.Staff conducted three budget workshops leading to the Public Hearing conducted on June 19th . •Support of Local Businesses:Streamline processes,be more "business friendly" (Score =1) o Completed March 6,see above. •Create a City Business Forum:Include City Council and Staff (Score =1) o Staff is an active participant in the PVP Chamber of Commerce's Economic Development Committee and the South Bay Cities Economic Development Roundtable.Staff is developing a page on the City's Website to act as a business forum for receiving feedback from City businesses and for disseminating information to City's businesses.In addition,Staff participated in the PVP Chamber's "Community Showcase and Job Fair"on Saturday,September 29 th . •Evaluate View Restoration Process:Re-evaluate ordinance and procedures (Score =1) •Evaluate Employee Compensation:Review salary,benefits &pension (Score =0) •RPV Chamber of Commerce:Focus on developing RPV businesses,possible "subset"of existing Peninsula Chamber of Commerce (Score =0) •Evaluate City Tree Review Process:Re-evaluate ordinance and procedures,try to preserve existing street trees (Score =0) •Prepare a Fiscal Health Statement:Facilitate the preparation of a short "fiscal health statement"of the City by the FAC. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 10 of 15 o The FAC has prepared the "statement"and expects to present it to the City Council in early 2013. •Analyze various methods of generating revenues for the City:Analyze various methods of generating revenues for the City,efficiency improvements and expenditure reductions; o The task is in process. •Update the Committee's Memorandum to the City Council dated April 25,2012 and titled "Calculation of the City's Unfunded Pension Liability":Receive the 2012 CalPERS Actuarial Valuation Report,update the Committee's Memorandum to the City Council dated April 25,2012 and titled "Calculation of the City's Unfunded Pension Liability",and consider any other pension related issues which City Council may direct; o The task is in process . •Conduct a competitive bid process for banking services. o This task is in process and is expected to be completed in early 2013. •Implementation of the recommendations made by NexLevel regarding IT (including formalizing a Strategic Plan,installation of a help-desk incident tracking &metric system and conducting quarterly internal IT meetings with departments). o The task is in process. •Conducting the competitive process for all IT services. o The task is in process;however,Staff needs to complete the 2012 IT Upgrade prior to proceed in early 2013. •Implementation of the replacement accounting system (replacement was high-priority recommendation by Management Partners in 2008. o The task is in process. 6)PALOS VERDES PENINSULA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT •Shared Use of PVPUSD &City Facilities:Coordinate with the school district to share active recreation facilities (Score =11) o Efforts still actively underway as School District nears fundraising goal for pool. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 11 of 15 •Eastview School District Issue:Consider whether to resume efforts to resolve disenfranchisement of Eastview residents regarding PVPUSD issues (Score =2) o [Identified as a separate item (No.11)on Councilman Duhovic's list,but may fit here]. 7)WESTERN AVENUE CORRIDOR ISSUES •Western Avenue Commercial Corridor:Evaluate &integrate existing Western Avenue specific plans,SCAG grant proposal,City Municipal Code and other programs for future discussion and goal-setting;SCAG grant status tentatively agendized for 1/17/12 meeting (Score =10) o A new Western Ave Corridor Vision Plan is being developed by a land use consultant as part of the $100,000 Compass Blueprint grant awarded to the City by SCAG.The plan is intended to improve the aesthetics, economic development opportunities and traffic within the commercial corridor.An advisory committee made up representatives of local residential neighborhoods,businesses,the City of Los Angeles and Caltrans will help guide the effort. •Western Avenue Improvement:City "gateway,"improve aesthetics (Score =7) o The Western Avenue Vision Plan Advisory Group had its kick-off meeting on August 22,2012.One of the primary goals identified by the Group was to make Western Avenue more of a City "Gateway"through streetscape beautification,increasing the walk ability,improving the pedestrian and bicycle experience and creating incentives for businesses to renovate their buildings.A Draft Concept Plan to improve aesthetics was presented to the Advisory Group on November 13 th and input was received.The Concept Plan will be presented to the general public at a public workshop in early 2013. •Ponte Vista Project in San Pedro:Monitor and evaluate development proposal for Ponte Vista site,focus on traffic impacts (Score =5) o Project updates monitored by staff and presented in Border Reports. 8)CITY RESERVE POLICY •Enhance General Fund &CIP Reserves:Increase reserves from cost savings and improved efficiencies to increase future infrastructure funding (Score =9) o Completed and presented on June 19th. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 12 of 15 9)SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ISSUES •SCE Infrastructure Safety &Reliability:Confer with SCE to ensure the safety of electrical lines (Score =9) o RPV staff participated in Peninsula-wide workshop held by SCE in February where we demanded and received a comprehensive planning document for improved electrical service reliability. o In-depth report and presentation on SCE issues and recommended actions to Council July 17 and follow up report by SCE given on Dec.4. 10)CITY TRAIL SYSTEM ENHANCEMENT •Trail System Enhancement:In coordination with the Land Conservancy (Score =9) o In May,the Council considered proposed amendments to the preserve trails system which is managed by the PVPLC.Council directed that further analysis of safety considerations be undertaken.Trail usage proposals were presented to the Council on October 2,at which time an updated Preserve Trails Plan was approved by the City Council. o In addition,staff is working on opportunities to enhance trails outside of the Preserve (Salvation Army,Bronco and Lower Hesse Park). o In May,the Council considered proposed amendments to the preserve trails system which is managed by the PVPLC.Council directed that further analysis of safety considerations be undertaken.Trail usage proposals will come back to the Council for consideration in October. o In addition,staff is working on opportunities to enhance trails outside of the Preserve (Salvation Army,Bronco and Lower Hesse Park)and will be presented at upcoming Council agendas in the next three months. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 13 of 15 The following goals were not included on the final adopted list because they are already under review or scheduled on theTentative Agenda: •Civic Center Master Plan:Staff to present all information about the Civic Center project prepared to date to the City Council and the public within 60 days;City Council may then refer to PC and/or FAC for recommendations. •Sheriff's Department Community Outreach:Consider Deputies'attendance at HOA meetings •Monitor Traffic Safety Commission Activity:Review &evaluate effectiveness of flashing lights at crosswalks •Animal Control:Review contract with County Animal Control,trapping of wild/nuisance animals and road-kill disposal •Review Fire Protection Services:Ensure weed abatement is sufficient on City's open space properties •Rancho LPG Butane Tanks in San Pedro:Reconsider position on the removal of tanks? •Terranea Resort:Evaluate fees and process for use of City Hall for off-site parking •Current Park Improvement Initiatives:Provide City Council overview of status of current projects (i.e.,Lower Hesse,Grandview,Abalone Cove grant,ADA upgrades,etc.) •Status of Redevelopment Agency:Staff to brief City Council on status of RDA in light of recent State Supreme Court decision •Beautification (Recyclinq)Grant Program:Reinstate the Beautification (Recycling)Grant Program,review City policy,consider disbursement on basis of best use/need,possibly focus on Hawthorne Boulevard or other major corridors. •Temporary Non-Commercial Banner Program:Re-evaluate aesthetics of current banner sign "backdrops" •Aircraft Noise Impacts:Monitor FAA airspace proposal for Long Beach airport, monitor helicopter flight paths from Torrance airport •Re-Evaluate "No Solicitation"Ordinance:Review solicitation regulations and alternatives;tentatively agendized for 4/3/12 meeting City Council Goals &Priorities Page 14 of 15 •Public Feedback via City Website:Revise City website to provide enhance opportunities for public feedback,opinion surveys,etc. •Town Hall Meetings:Consider establishing a regular schedule of "town hall"-style meetings •Regular City Council Meetings:Reduce duration of meetings,length of Staff reports City Council Goals &Priorities Page 15 of 15 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: FYI Siamak Siamak Motahari Direct 310-544-5339 siamakm@rpv.com Siamak Motahari Tuesday,December 18,2012 7:40 AM Jim Hendrickson;Joel Rojas;Ara Mihranian;Bindu Vaish Carolyn Lehr;Carolynn Petru;Carla Morreale FW:URGENT RE:Abalone Cove RPV Council Dec 18 Item H From:SunshineRPV@aol.com [mailto:SunshineRPV@aol.com] Sent:Monday,December 17,20126:28 PM To:pdownjac@hotmail.com Cc:Siamak Motahari Subject:tJRGENT RE:Abalone Cove RPV Council Dec 18 Item H I say NO to any more fancy schmancy improvements in the California Coastal Zone especially if they do not improve the California Coastal Trail all across the site.People who want groomed trails and manicured na~ive plants should visit Trump National and Terranea. When RPV can't afford $4,500.00 to do the paperwork to accept a trail easement from the PVP Library Dist11ct and $whatever to hire a soils engineer to verify an $8,000.00 bid to restore the Narbonne Right of Way,we have no business spending more than $600K on the chance that we will get $300K ish back,someday. It is fascinating since Mr.Motahari is an Engineer and an RPV employee,he has not mentioned in his Staff Report how the State of California has declared their OK with improvements in the old Abalone Cove (the NCCP dodges this bullet)Shoreline Preserve without accommodating the State legislated California Coastal Trail.$600K later,the California Coastal Commission could have a whole new position. The whole proposal makes no sense.It is our coast and our money. Call your favorite Council Members.Or,call City Hall.Leave a message ...Mayor Brooks does not approve of "late correspondence". No on Item H....s From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: William James <billandkathyjames@msn.com> Tuesday,December 18,2012 11 :07 AM CC Kathryn Downs Appointments to the FAC Dear City Council Members, Happy Holidays,and thank you each for your service to our community in 2012. I am writing you in connection with your appointments this evening to two positions on the Finance Advisory Committee (IIFAC II ).Our committee has had a productive year.In addition to our normal reviews of the City's budget and related accounting documents,we have produced reports on pension,banking,and reserve policy issues. We believe that we have assisted the Council and made a contribution to our City and are gratified that several well-qualified applicants are seeking to join the FAC.But,in my opinion, Willie Wang and John Stillo each deserve to be reappointed. Willie has served (and is still serving)as Chair of the FAC this year and John was appointed to fill the final portion (less than a year)of a prior member.Each of them participated in drafting and/or finalizing the above reports and each has been a valuable member of the FAC. When a citizen applies to one of the City's committees,he or she is asked to agree to serve for up to four years.In deciding to make such a commitment,the applicant is often required to choose between that option and other opportunities,such as working for a church,various youth groups and other organizations.I feel that we should welcome that commitment and reward it with our support and appreciation.Certainly,Willie and John deserve that support. -Bill James 1 3. From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Councilman Knight, Judy Huey Tuesday,December 18,20123:28 PM Jim Knight CLehr@rpv.com;Jim Hendrickson CDBG Funding of ACLAD Projects We contacted our CDBG consultant regarding your question of using CDBG funds for ACLAD projects.Apparently the City must first get approval from the Community Development Commission (CDC) that the project area meets the eligibility qualification process as a slum/blight project area.In the past,the City landslide mitigation projects that were paid for with CDBG funds were located in Redevelopment areas that were approved by the CDC. In 2006 HUD revised its CDBG Eligibility and National Objective Regulations,and cities must now develop a comprehensive Slum/Blight Report and define a methodology to assess the area.The City would have to use its own funds to pay for the costs associated with obtaining this designation from the CDC,since those costs are not reimbursable with CDBG funds. In summary,the City could pursue approval to use CDBG funds for ACLAD projects.However,there would be costs incurred by the City to designate the project area as slum/blight,which mayor may not be approved.Also,there is the element of the time it would take for the approval of a slum/blight area,which would preclude the City from funding a project until FY 14-15. Please let Jim or myself know if you have any further questions. Regards, Judy Huey Senior Administrative Analyst Public Works Department City of Rancho Palos Verdes 1 From: Sent: To: Subject: Teri, Ron Dragoo Tuesday,December 18,201210:54 AM Teresa Takaoka Late Correspondance Response Following is Public Works response to the late correspondence regarding item #5. Ron Dragoo,P .E. Senior Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (310)544-5253 Office (310)544-5292 FAX From:Ron Dragoo Sent:Monday,December 17,2012 5:32 PM To:SunshineRPV@aol.com Subject:FW:Heads up.RE:RPV City Council Meeting !2/18/2012 Item 5 Hi Sunshine, This effort,Landslide Mitigation Measures -Review of Prioritized List of Projects,is designed to determine where Council would like to focus efforts and when.Staff has included ideas that may be helpful to Council in making decisions,but we are not designing anything yet,which is when peripheral items like trails would be considered,during design.During the next phase I will send proposed design scope(s)and location(s)to the Planning Dept.who oversee the trails network and all the Plans you reference below,for their input.I don't manage those areas.I haven't forgotten the trails in the Landslide area -they are everywhere! Best regards, Ron Dragoo,P.E. Senior Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (310)544-5253 Office (310)544-5292 FAX From:SunshineRPV@aol.com [mailto:SunshineRPV@aol.com] Sent:Monday,December 17,20124:06 PM To:Ron Dragoo Cc:CC Subject:Heads up.RE:RPV City Council Meeting !2/18/2012 Item 5 Hi Ron, 1 5 Your Staff Report does not mention either of these things.I am hoping you will include them in your verbal report so that Council does not have to ask. Return my call if you would like more details. 1.The existing storm runoff improvements in Paintbrush Canyon have not been maintained so they lost their effectiveness many years ago.(And a portion of dirt Crenshaw in the Preserve Trails Plan washed away.)I'm thinking that both the pipes and the trails should be visited on the same contracted schedule.What is in your recommended "do over"which provides for ongoing adjustments and repairs given that the landslide movement is still going to require them or all is for naught,again? 2.It has been suggested that both the culverts under PV Drive South (Gateway Park and the western ski jump) be replaced with corrugated pipes as large as the trail tunnel under Crenshaw to eliminate the need for pedestrian/equestrian crossing at street level.Since the Preserve Trails Plan,Coastal Vision Plan and RPV Trails Network Plan have become so fragmented,it really falls to the Public Works Engineers to accommodate non-motorized traffic circulation.Have you given this some thought? ...S 310-377-8761 2 Andy Winje From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Thanks Jim. CL Carolyn Lehr Tuesday,December 18,2012 1:47 PM Andy Winje FW:WQFI Presentation to RPV this evening Revenue Summary for Cities.pdf;WQFI CityFactSht.pdf;South Bay Cities WAG.pdf From:Jim Knight [mailto:knightjim33@gmail.com] Sent:Tuesday, December 18,2012 10:06 AM To:Carolyn Lehr Subject:Fwd:WQFI Presentation to RPV this evening Carolyn, I just received this.It might be of interest to Council and the public in relationship to agenda item #7.I have also attached a South Bay summary of the two watersheds assigned to us by the County that was sent to me by SBCCOG. Jim ----------Forwarded message ---------- From:Scott Valor <svalor@santamonicabay.org> Date:Tue,Dec 18,2012 at 8:14 AM Subject:WQFI Presentation to RPV this evening To:"knightjim33@gmail.com"<knightjim33@gmail.com> Cc:"brian.campbell@rpv.com"<brian.campbell@rpv.com> Hi Jim and Brian-- It is my understanding that Russ Bryden of County Public Works is being given a few minutes to present on the County's Water Quality Funding Initiative at your council meeting tonight. While the 5MBRC has not adopted a formal position on the WQFI,the county is one of our long-time partners and our staff has been working with various local stakeholders to provide information about the initiative and to gauge the level of interest in it. Politics aside,should the WQFI go through,we believe it has the potential to address myriad water quality issues in the watershed that are one of the primary focuses of the 5MBRC.I have attached some background information for you including a breakdown of potential city receipts from the intiative. Let me know if you have any questions. /s Scott Valor Director of Government Affairs Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission 310-922-2376 visit us at www.smbrc.ca.gov 7 Jim Knight RPV City Council 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. RPV,CA 90275 310/544-5207 Andy Winje From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Carolyn Lehr Tuesday,December 18,2012 10:18 AM Andy Winje FW:Information on the Clean Water,Clean Beaches Measure Webinar Invite.pdf;South Bay Cities.pdf Andy,this "new"information chart may not be different enough from what you already prepared on the Power Pt.for tonight.Use the attachments and webinar invite as you deem best. Carolyn From:Jacki Bacharach [mailto:jackibach@cox.net] Sent:Monday,December 17,2012 8:27 PM To:'Jacki Bacharach' Subject:FW:Information on the Clean Water,Clean Beaches Measure FYI From:Bryden,Russ [mailto:RBRYDEN@dpw.lacounty.gov] Sent:Monday,December 17,20124:31 PM To:jacki@southbaycities.org Subject:Information on the Clean Water,Clean Beaches Measure Dear Jacki, The team for Flood Control District's Clean Water Clean Beaches Measure would like to share some important information about the Measure with your COG's members.Please find attached the following: (1)Data on individual cities'projected revenue (40%local return),estimated number of city owned parcels and the Fee amount owed for them,and the projected WAG revenue cities will collectively program and implement (50%WAG return).Note that over 90%of the revenues from the Measure will be returned to the communities from which they were generated and be under the control of the cities. (2)Invitation to a webinar this Thursday (12/20)providing information on the status of the Measure,insight into how the Fee is calculated,an explanation of how the program will be governed and how cities can access their funds,and an interactive segment to address cities'specific questions. Additionally,we'd like to share with you that the Fee was calculated for city owned parcels using the most up-to-date land use information available.However,there may be cases where this data does not reflect the actual current land use for an individual parcel.If in the coming weeks your city identifies a parcel where the Fee amount does not seem to be consistent with the current land use,please contact the Clean Water,Clean Beaches team and we'll arrange for the parcel to be immediately reviewed and if necessary,the Fee amount to be revised. For more information on the Measure please visit our website at www.LACountyCleanWater.org. Sincerely, The Clean Water,Clean Beaches Team 7 LA County Flood Control District, Clean Water,Clean Beaches Measure Revenues vs Fee Obligations _'~L':0,":'::-.''.r;..-:'---'~.-'--_.--~ ,;Count'of i;-Fees on '31·'tf·.i'":':..t"."_!~.... City;Owned '"City Owned ~r,~rc~:!s'<,r _~.Parcels r ----..-.~•...--, ,(~~~::~j~~l ..'····.1...,':.,' ./~~~/:-:"~>it.t ~::;~.?~.·~.:{~::·\?l~.~ -,;,'iWAG Revenij~:i'';~-(DOminiflJe£WAG~)i:tt.~c,c:~,~~~...;",;~.~~~~;;,:.~'~~:'\:·:iitti:.~~:~j Municipality Carson EISeaundo Gardena Hawthorne Hermosa Beach Inalewood Lawndale Lomita Manhattan Beach Palos Verdes Estates Rancho Palos Verdes Redondo Beach Rollina Hills Rollina Hills Estates Torrance Grand Total ® 162 I $ 42 I $ 54 I $ 71 I $ 70 I $ 206 I $ 35 I $ 16 I $ 71 I $ 192 I $ 99 I $ 97 I $ 51$ 22 I $ 210 I $ 1,352 I $ 105,000 52,000 37,000 84,000 29,000 69,000 4,000 6,000 54,000 157,000 171,000 68,000 4,000 36,000 142,000 1,018,000 ~----- Direct Return to: City (40%) $2,288,000 $618,000 $798,000 $804,000 $148,000 $996,000 $219,000 $234,000 $408,000 $246,000 $594,000 $740,000 $42,000 $194,000 $2,255,000 $10,584,000 --->1$8,700,000 $17,000,000 can a er,clea be ch@s me~S.lHe The County of Los .A.ngleles Flo·od Gontrol District is proposingl to establish an annual clean \I'liater fee to fund the Clean VVater,Clean Beaches Program.A.dean lJ~iater fee 1lliill glenerate about $210 million a year,1Jlith a 90 percent local return to cities and local l~\{atershed Qiroups.Notices about a Janual)"15 Public HearinQi (required by Proposition 218)on this proposed measure have been mailed to all Gounty property o'Jvners - inciudinQi your city. To inform city staff and ele·cte·d officials about the process and specifics of this proposal,the Los Ange·les 'County Flood Control District will be holding a webil~ar on Thursday,Decembe·r 20 at 11 :3.0 a.m.This 'J~lill be ]ust one opportunity to learn a.bout this proposed measure and anS 1Ner your questions-you and y'our colleaQiues are encoura.ged to ·oin. The clean lj',I'ater fee 1lllouid provide dedicated fundingl to municipalities for local pollution prevent.ion projects and programs,deaningl up 1ll,i'atef1AI'ays,and 1l1,\'ork related to fl,llS4 permit. What: A ~\I'eb[nar diSCUSSing the proposed Clea .'tI'later,Clean Beaches r\'leasure. Who,Sho,uld Attend: Ci1t~l OffIciafs,CitY'Managers,PublHc 'til/Dirks,EngIneers and other staff interested in the purpose and mecha ies of the proposed Clean \I'la er,Clean Beaches [\'leasure. When and Where: Thursday,December 20 at 11 =30 a.m. Plea.se RSVP'for access details.You are encouragecl to submit q estions a ead of time to ensure all are addressed during the 60 ml ute '..veblnalf. Water and Beaches Today Water quality in rivers and creeks,lakes,the bay and coastal waters continue to be a challenge for counties throughout California: •Water pollution is at levels well above accepted health standards and Clean Water Act regulations. •Sources of clean drinking water are threatened by contamination. •Independent Water quality tests have recently determined that 7 out of 10 most polluted beaches in California are on the Los Angeles coast. The Clean Water,Clean Beaches Measure would fund projects to reduce trash and pollution in our waterways and protect local sources of drinking water from contamination. The Problem Water runoff is a major source of pollution in rivers,creeks, lakes and along our coastline.When it rains or we water lawns,wash cars or hose down sidewalks,water rushes down the street,picking up trash and toxic pollutants. On a typical rainy day,billions of gallons of contaminated stormwater flows directly-untreated-into rivers,creeks, lakes,bays and coastal waters.These polluted waters include toxic substances that can affect our health,and the health of fish and marine life.These pollutants include: •Industrial solvents,paints and chemicals •Toxic metals like lead,mercury,chromium and arsenic •Infection-causing bacteria •Pesticides and fertilizers •Trash like plastics,cigarette butts,candy wrappers and syringes Top:During storms,rushing water jJicks up trash from the streets and sends it into storm drains.The trash flows to the ocean and washes back onto beaches. Bottom:The fee could fund new screen inserts in storm drains to trap trash before it enters waterways,and fund ongoing maintenance to keep them clean. A Solution The County of Los Angeles Flood Control District is proposing to establish an annual clean water fee to fund the Clean Water,Clean Beaches Program. The clean water fee would provide dedicated funding to municipalities for pollution prevention,cleaning up waterways,protecting local drinking water sources from contamination,and for capturing stormwater before it enters waterways. Captured water can then be held,filtered and cleansed naturally in groundwater basins-increasing local drinking water supplies and reducing the need for imported water from Northern California and the Colorado River.This can Municipalities now face stormwater pollution regulations and fines-with no dedicated funding source to address the (;;'\ problem.W (Continued on back) www.LACountyCleanWater.org C October 2012 help ensure that we are able to fulfill our current and future water demands and protect our environment. Allocating the Fee The fee will be allocated with 90%local return-invested back where it was raised: •40%returned to cities and County unincorporated communities for new or existing local water quality projects •50%to watershed area groups for regional collaborative projects •10%to the District for countywide water quality monitoring,projects for improving water quality, technical assistance to cities and watershed groups and performance oversight Multi-B~nefit Projects A clean water fee will generate about $270 million a year.The value of clean beaches and coastal waters to commercial and tourist industries is invaluable-a major driver of our economy. There are tangible financial benefits from investing in infrastructure.A recent study by the independent Economic Roundtable in Los Angeles analyzed spending on storm water and water conservation projects: •100%of all funds will be spent locally. •Projects will generate thousands of local jobs in engineering,construction,landscaping,environmental clean-up and related tasks. •Every $1 in direct stormwater investment stimulates $2 in economic activity. Cleaning up waterways now can also help avoid stricter and more costly water quality regulations by the state.That's a potential burden that could impact everyone. The Proposed Fee All properties generate water runoff.The more hard surfaces that a parcel has (such as buildings and pavement),the more water runoff it will generate.If passed by voters,the fee will be determined by the amount of runoff properties generate, based on the size of each parcel (but not its value)and its land use (residential,commercial/industrial or undeveloped). The typical single-family residential fee will be $54 annually. About 75%of commercial properties would pay less than $420 a year.For example: •Typical convenience store or fast food restaurant property (10,000 square feet):$250 a year •Typical city park (5 acres):$600 a year •Typical "big box"store (10 acres):$11,000 a year This is an example of a multi-benefit project that could be funded and result in benefits that include improved water quality and increased drinking water supplies.The Tujunga Wash Greenway,in the urban San Fernando Valley,creates a restored stream and ecosystem that naturally cleanse millions of gallons of water,neutralizing pollutants and replenishing groundwater supplies. Strict Fiscal Safeguards The proposed measure includes strict fiscal safeguards: •All funds are required by law to be completely dedicated to local water quality improvement projects and cannot be diverted or used for anything else. •An Oversight Committee reviews expenditures;subject to independent annual audits. •By law,the fee could not be increased without another vote. www.LACountyCleanWater.org TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: HONORABLE MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY CLERK DECEMBER 17,2012 ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday,December 18,2012 City Council meeting: Item No. SS1 1 5 7 City Council Oral Reports Respectfully submitted, Description of Material Updated Annotated Version of the City Council 2012 Goals & Priorities Emails from:Mark R.Wells;Jim Gordon;Donald M.Davis Email from Sunshine Emails from:Lowell Wedemeyer;Don Reeves City Council Rules of Procedure -Section 5.8 &/c6-~ Carla Morreale W:\AGENDA\2012 Additions Revisions to agenda920121218 additions revisions to agenda through Monday afternoon.doc RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL 2012 GOALS &PRIORITIES Adopted March 20,2012 (Updated December 18,2012) 1)PUBLIC SAFETY AND TRAFFIC ISSUES •Focus on Crime Prevention:Prioritization of "Crime Watch,"notification of the public,Neighborhood Watch (Score =14) •At the February 21 st City Council meeting,Deputy Will Bartlett made a presentation on residential crime prevention tips and offered to make similar presentations to interested homeowners groups.; •RPV staff immediately posts Breaking News notices on the City website regarding significant traffic accidents,road closures,emergencies etc.on a 24/7 basis as we are notified (a level of service not found in most other cities); •The Summer 2012 City Newsletter focused on Crime Prevention; • A New Law Enforcement web page was added to City's web site to provide the public with more information and resources on crime trends and prevention;and o At the November 20 th City Council meeting,Sgt.Rozas of the Lomita Sheriffs Station provided a status report and PowerPoint presentation regarding FY 12-13 Crime Prevention Enhancements,which included neighborhood patrols by Volunteers on Patrol (240 hours)and the Sheriffs Reserve Deputies (243 hours);a directed patrol along Palos Verdes Drive South (92 hours)that resulted in a significant drop in property crimes along with arterial corridor;increased Community Outreach in the form of attending HOA meetings,Neighborhood Watch meeting and block parties; producing public service .announcements (PSAs),conducting tours of the Lomita Station;staffing an information booth at the City's July 4th Celebration event;participating in Read Across America and Yellow Ribbon Week at local elementary schools;and conducting teen safety/driving classes at Marymount College. •Forge Closer City Relationship with Sheriffs Department: Improve communication with leadership at the Lomita Sheriff's station (Score =9) o Staff engaged in greater communication with new Captain re:goals of the Council,unacceptable incidents of non-communication or lack of follow- thru such as correcting speed traps. •Increase Sheriff's Presence on South and West Sides of the City:Consider creation of Sheriffs Department substation on City property (Score =6) City Council Goals &Priorities Page 1 of 20SS I o Preliminary discussions held with ambulance,Park Rangers and Sheriff re:potential locations at Point Vicente Park or Ladera Linda Community Center.Will follow as master plans develop or new opportunities arise. •Review Sheriff's Department's Allocation of Assets:Promote better focus the Department's efforts in the City (Score =5) o Staff worked with Regional Law subcommittee and Peninsula cities to re- design allocation of CORE,traffic and patrol units to best meet safety needs as well as budgetary conditions. •Notification of Public Safety Issues:Formalize system to notify City Staff of public safety issues,review communications policy and guidelines (Score =5) o See above. •Create Joint Powers Agency for Emergency Management for the Peninsula:Pre- arrangements to share resources during natural disasters (i.e.,wildfire, earthquake,tsunami,flooding,etc.)and for other hazards (Score =4) o Staff met with Mayor Misetich and the Area G Disaster Services Coordinator on October 15,2012.It was discussed that the initial effort would begin "Mayor to Mayor"by introducing the concept of the four Peninsula cities sharing resource inventory lists with each other. •Focus on Traffic Enforcement:Eliminate "speed traps"&replace with speed warning signs/units,target perceived erratic driving related to Marymount College (Score =3) o Allocated additional 30%to traffic enforcement in FY12-13 Budget o City Traffic Engineer will update all remaining speed zone surveys to be compliant and defensible by the courts o The City's consulting traffic engineer has completed the remaining speed zone surveys which are currently being reviewed by staff.After review the surveys will be presented to the Traffic Safety Commission for a recommendation to City Council for approval and adoption. •Palos Verdes Drive East Safety:Improve roadway safety (Score =2) o Public Works preparing to hold public workshops on PVDE safety improvements of public rights-of-way.The TSC has tentatively scheduled three workshops for Thursday,November 15th at 7pm,Monday,December 10th at 7pm,and Saturday,February 2nd at 10am.;Staff will recommend awarding design of PVDE at the September 18,2012 Council meeting. o The Palos Verdes Drive East public workshops have been rescheduled to Monday,December 10,2012 at 7pm,Saturday,February 2nd ,2013 City Council Goals &Priorities Page 2 of 20 10:00am and Wednesday March 13,2013,7:00pm all to be held at the Point Vicente Interpretive Center.The design is 60%complete and will be finalized to start construction in the Summer. a The plans for the safety improvement projects (upgrading guardrails, chevron signs and striping)are complete.Staff is waiting for Federal Authorization to proceed with construction. a Staff has received Federal Authorization (E-76)to proceed with construction.This project will upgrade the failed and damaged guardrails along PVDE.The project plans and specifications have been approved by the City Attorney's office and the project is ready for bidding. •Bicycle Safety:Cyclist safety and awareness,sharing of roadways with motor vehicles (Score =2) a Awaiting METRO approval of grant amendment to begin design for PVDS construction bike compatible lanes both sides,excluding the landslide. a Metro has acknowledged receipt of the amendment and has provided a verbal approval.The City is awaiting the final approval letter. 2)SAN RAMON CANYON PROJECT •San Ramon Canyon Stabilization:Solicit financial support from the City &County of Los Angeles and present financing alternatives (Score =12) Design plans 100%completed;addressed environmental questions from Army Corps of Engineers -awaiting review comments which are anticipated by late September,need ACOE permit before project can be advertised per State grant funding requirements: a Awarded $9.5 million grant funding; a Sewer re-Iocation complete; a Shelf-ready early action stabilization project plan designed and ready a Pursuing federal,state and LA funding,presented financing options to Council July 17,reimbursement resolution adopted August 21; a Received the Army Corp of Engineer's permit December 3,2012; a Prospective Bidder's pre-qualification applications were received December 5,2012; a The project is being advertised -the City has asked to received proposals from pre-qualified bidders;the proposals received will be opened at 11 :00 Thursday morning January 24,2013;and a The City Council has directed Staff to develop funding alternatives, including the possible use of Reserves and/or debt financing,to be presented to the FAC.Subject to approval by the City Council,Magis Advisors is expected to assist the City with the development of financing alternatives. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 3 of 20 3)CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT •Increase Citizen Involvement in Infrastructure Goal-Setting &Planning:Review "lessons learned"from past projects,need more direct Staff outreach to residents and businesses,identify instances and plans to deal with deferred maintenance of facilities (Score =12) o Public outreach in planning for Safe Routes to Schools with parent surveys and student tallies to design project;also PTA presentation and PW will participate in annual Walk to School Day; o Public Works use of community workshops for planning of San Ramon: RPV neighbors as well as LA mobile home park; o Public outreach in design of Whitley Collins crosswalk; o Preserve Trails Plan extensive public input from all user groups; o Planning staff worked with many interest groups in preparing policy reports on:Garage Sales,FAR,Hedges,Clean-Up Amendments,Open Space Hazard and GIS Zoning;and o Public Works use of City Council workshop to educate community specific to the geophysics of the Altimira landslide complex including potential mitigation projects to aid in slowing movement. •Evaluate City Recreation Programs:Review the current types of recreation programs offered to the public (Score =2) o Staff continues to evaluate and adjust recreational programs to meet the needs of the community.This summer and fall,the R&P Dept.added a Jr. Ranger Summer Camp;ran a successful Adult Softball League;held a Music Festival at the Ladera Linda Community Center;collaborated with the City of Torrance to offered a joint REACH events for adults with developmental disabiliti~s;added a second Pet Vaccination Clinic;and, sponsored an Author Book Signing event at the Point Vicente Interpretive Center. •City Dog Park:Consider location for City dog park (Score =2) o Completed.The temporary "Rancho Caninos"dog park was constructed at Point Vicente Park/Civic Center and officially opened to the public on November 8th . •City Skate Park:Consider location for City skate park (Score =5) o Completed unless reconsider in the future •City Dog Beach:Consider location for City dog beach (Score =4) o Completed City Council Goals &Priorities Page 4 of 20 •Peninsula-Wide Park Support of City Parks:Conduct outreach to other Peninsula cities for support of park maintenance &improvement (Score =3) o Completed;Staff outreach was part of Skate Park and Dog Park issues. •Evaluate City Recreation Programs:Review the current types of recreation programs offered to the public (Score =2) o Staff continues to evaluate and adjust recreational programs to meet the needs of the community.This summer,the R&P Dept.has added Jr. Ranger Summer Camps,Adult Softball League and new music and dance programs at Ladera Linda. •City Dog Park:Consider location for City dog park (Score =2) o Per Council directive,staff is pursuing temporary dog park at Civic Center; expect to implement this summer. 4)PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE •Infrastructure Funding:Consider a full range of funding options (Score =12) o Staff and San Ramon Subcommittee currently pursuing funding resources for project with County and City of LA.Debt financing options have been reviewed with City Council and a reimbursement resolution was adopted August 21 to allow the city council the discretion in the future to determine the funding plan including debt financing. o Mayor and staff lobbied our representatives in Washington DC for funding for the San Ramon projeGt. o As described above,the City Council has directed Staff to develop funding alternatives,including the possible use of ReseNes and/or debt financing, to be presented to the FAC.Subject to approval by the City Council, Magis Advisors is expected to assist the City with the development of financing alternatives. •Portuguese Bend Landslide:Roadway maintenance,dewatering wells (Score =6) o Current budget provides funding for new dewatering well (Abalone Cove); o City Council,in conjunction with Staff,conducted a landslide workshop July 31 that reviewed the geology of the landslides,previous mitigation measures and summarized possible future mitigation measures;and o City Council directed Staff to bring back a report that further defines the possible future mitigation measures,summarizes the costs and prioritizes \ City Council Goals &Priorities Page 5 of 20 the projects -staff report to City Council is anticipated in October/November. •Citywide Sewer Maintenance:Review maintenance program,schedule and projects (Score =6) o Abalone Cove Sewer Lift Station repairs are complete; o Harris &Assoc.revised Citywide Sewer Report on needs and maintenance; o Currently reviewing sewer maintenance efforts with LADPW;and o Reviewed sewer maintenance efforts with LADPW,anticipate reporting finding with projects in Spring 2013. •Citywide Storm Drain Maintenance:Review maintenance program,schedule and projects (Score =5) o PW Storm Drain Master Plan Update underway; o Storm Drain Lining Project $1 million recently approved by Council - construction in progress completion anticipated in October; o Completed construction of Ronsard to Stokowski storm drain improvements; o Completed emergency project to restore drain facility in PB Landslide; o Awarded GPS mapping contract for storm drains on east side of RPV; o Awarded construction contract for improvements to Miraleste Plaza storm drain system -const begins Sept 2012; o Awarded contract for catch basin cleaning for FY 2012-12 -begins Sept 2012; o Design contract awarded for improvements to San Pedro Canyon drainage system; o Design underway for Mossbank extension runoff improvements;and o Miraleste Plaza storm drain system,catch basin cleaning,design of San Pedro Canyon drainage projects,and the Mossbank extension improvements are substantially complete. •Energy Audit of City Facilities:Provide update of grants and completed projects (Score =3) o Met with Contractor re:audit of City facilities;determined PVIC and Hesse potential candidates for Auto Demand Response.Did agree to Enterprise Energy Mgmt.System with SCE (free).The City is currently designated a Valued Partner with SCE.Staff has applied for Silver Status which would increase the City's energy cost savings.Staff is waiting to hear from SCE on its Silver Status application. o In July,Staff met with Greg Stevens,a consultant who works on behalf of the South Bay Environmental Services Center (SBESC)to begin a full I City Council Goals &Priorities Page 6 of 20 energy audit of the City's Municipal buildings.Mr.Stevens reviewed the City's energy and gas bills over the past 12 months and conducted site visits to each City facility.The audit will document the existing lighting, HVAC,building envelope and insulation inventory for each facility.Mr. Stevens is currently in the process of preparing the audit report for the City which will identify energy upgrade opportunities,associated costs for upgrades,potential rebates,future payback,HVAC and solar systems for the City Hall campus. o Staff is also working with SBESC to scope the merits of applying for grant funds to install wireless access devices to enable secured transfer of energy consumption data at City facilities. •Energy Audit of City Facilities:Provide update of grants and completed projects (Score =3) o Met with Contractor re:audit of City facilities;determined PVIC and Hesse potential candidates for Auto Demand Response.Did agree to Enterprise Energy Mgmt.System with SCE (free).The City is currently designated a Valued Partner and working toward Silver status to achieve 5%kwh savings. o In July,Staff met with Greg Stevens,a consultant who works on behalf of the South Bay Environmental Services Center (SBESC)to begin a full energy audit of the City's Municipal buildings.Mr.Stevens reviewed the City's energy and gas bills over the past 12 months and conducted site visits to each City facility.The audit will document the existing lighting, HVAC,building envelope and insulation inventory for each facility.Mr. Stevens is currently in the process of preparing the audit report for the City which will identify energy upgrade opportunities,associated costs for upgrades,potential rebates and future payback. •County Sewer Pump Station at Western Avenue &Avenida Aprenda:Identify issues to be addressed,encourage LA County Sanitation Districts to complete work (Score =1) o PW staff is in communication with County to complete and restore the work site;and o The construction was scheduled for completion by December 31,2012, but a few of the final aspects of the project,including the final paving of the Palmeras Place cul-de-sac,have been delayed and so it is now expected to be complete in early 2013. •CalWater Facilities within Portuguese Bend Community:Meet with CalWater to ensure the safety of water lines and other infrastructure in active landslide area (Score =1) City Council Goals &Priorities Page 7 of 20 •Cell Sites in Public Right-of-Way:Explore options to provide better visual screening (Score =0) •Citywide Street Maintenance:Review street maintenance program (Score =?) o PW staff continually implementing Pavement Management Program, largely on schedule for residential and arterial street paving projects. Arterial rehab of PVDS is completed Will begin plan preparation for Palos Verdes Drive East.Design of the next residential rehabilitation project (Area 3 &5)is nearing completion.Construction "is expected to commence in about 3 months. o Construction for PVDE roadway rehabilitation will commence Summer 2013.With the anticipated impacts,the summer months will be the ideal time to construct the improvements.Further,due to the heavy construction at Marymount College,it is best to delay the roadway rehabilitation until after Marymount College completes most of their improvements. o The Residential Roadway Rehabilitation Project (Areas 3 &5)will commence construction around January 2 (weather permitting).A construction contract has been awarded to Hardy &Harper and project details are being worked out. •Focus on Traffic Enforcement:Eliminate "speed traps"&replace with speed warning signs/units,target perceived erratic driving related to Marymount College (Score =3) o Allocated additional 30%to traffic enforcement in FY12-13 Budget;and o City Traffic Engineer will update all remaining speed zone surveys to be compliant and defensible by the courts. •Palos Verdes Drive East Safety:Improve roadway safety (Score =2) o Public Works preparing to hold public workshops on PVDE safety improvements of public rights-of-way.The TSC has tentatively scheduled three workshops for Thursday,November 15th at 7pm,Monday,December 10th at 7pm,and Saturday,February 2nd at 10am.;Staff will recommend awarding design of PVDE at the September 18,2012 Council meeting. o The plans for the safety improvement projects (upgrading guardrails, chevron signs and striping)are complete.Staff is waiting for Federal Authorization to proceed with construction. •Bicycle Safety:Cyclist safety and awareness,sharing of roadways with motor vehicles (Score =2) o Awaiting METRO approval of grant amendment to begin design for PVDS construction bike compatible lanes both sides,excluding the landslide ..... City Council Goals &Priorities Page 8 of 20 2)SAN RAMON CANYON PROJECT •San Ramon Canyon Stabilization:Solicit financial support from the City &County of Los Angeles and present financing alternatives (Score =12) Design plans 100%completed;addressed environmental questions from Army Corps of Engineers -awaiting review comments which are anticipated by late September,need ACOE permit before project can be advertised per State grant funding requirements: o Awarded $9.5 million grant funding; o Sewer re-Iocation complete; o Shelf-ready early action stabilization project plan designed and ready;and o Pursuing federal,state and LA funding,presented financing options to Council July 17,reimbursement resolution adopted August 21. 3)CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT •Increase Citizen Involvement in Infrastructure Goal-Setting &Planning:Review "lessons learned"from past projects,need more direct Staff outreach to residents and businesses,identify instances and plans to deal with deferred maintenance of facilities (Score =12) o Public outreach in planning for Safe Routes to Schools with parent surveys and student tallies to design project;also PTA presentation and PW will participate in annual Walk to School Day; o Public Works use of community workshops for planning of San Ramon: RPV neighbors as well as LA mobile home park; o Public outreach in design of Whitley Collins crosswalk; o Preserve Trails Plan extensive public input from all user groups;and o Planning staff worked with many interest groups in preparing policy reports on:Garage Sales,FAR,Hedges,Clean-Up Amendments,Open Space Hazard and GIS Zoning. •City Skate Park:Consider location for City skate park (Score =5) o Completed unless reconsider in the future •City Dog Beach:Consider location for City dog beach (Score =4) o Completed •Peninsula-Wide Park Support of City Parks:Conduct outreach to other Peninsula cities for support of park maintenance &improvement (Score =3) o Completed;Staff outreach was part of Skate Park and Dog Park issues ..,.. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 9 of 20 •Evaluate City Recreation Programs:Review the current types of recreation programs offered to the public (Score =2) o Staff continues to evaluate and adjust recreational programs to meet the needs of the community.This summer,the R&P Dept.has added Jr. Ranger Summer Camps,Adult Softball League and new music and dance programs at Ladera Linda. •City Dog Park:Consider location for City dog park (Score =2) o Per Council directive,staff is pursuing temporary dog park at Civic Center; expect to implement this summer. 4)PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE •Infrastructure Funding:Consider a full range of funding options (Score =12) o Staff and San Ramon Subcommittee currently pursuing funding resources for project with County and City of LA.Debt financing options have been reviewed with City Council and a reimbursement resolution was adopted August 21 to allow the city council the discretion in the future to determine the funding plan including debt financing;and o Mayor and staff lobbied our representatives in Washington DC for funding for the San Ramon project. •Portuguese Bend Landslide:Roadway maintenance,dewatering wells (Score =6) o Current budget provides funding for new dewatering well (Abalone Cove); o City Council,in conjunction with Staff,conducted a landslide workshop July 31 that reviewed the geology of the landslides,previous mitigation measures and summarized possible future mitigation measures;and o City Council directed Staff to bring back a report that further defines the possible future mitigation measures,summarizes the costs and prioritizes the projects -staff report to City Council is anticipated in October/November. •Citywide Sewer Maintenance:Review maintenance program,schedule and projects (Score =6) o Abalone Cove Sewer Lift Station repairs are complete o Harris &Assoc.revised Citywide Sewer Report on needs and maintenance o Currently reviewing sewer maintenance efforts with LADPW ;...... City Council Goals &Priorities Page 10 of 20 •Citywide Storm Drain Maintenance:Review maintenance program,schedule and projects (Score =5) o PW Storm Drain Master Plan Update underway o Storm Drain Lining Project $1 million recently approved by Council - construction in progress completion anticipated in October o Completed construction of Ronsard to Stokowski storm drain improvements o Completed emergency project to restore drain facility in PB Landslide o Awarded GPS mapping contract for storm drains on east side of RPV o Awarded construction contract for improvements to Miraleste Plaza storm drain system -const begins Sept 2012 o Awarded contract for catch basin cleaning for FY 2012-12 -begins Sept 2012 o Design contract awarded for improvements to San Pedro Canyon drainage system o Design underway for Mossbank extension runoff improvements •Energy Audit of City Facilities:Provide update of grants and completed projects (Score =3) o Met with Contractor re:audit of City facilities;determined PVIC and Hesse potential candidates for Auto Demand Response.Did agree to Enterprise Energy Mgmt.System with SCE (free).The City is currently designated a Valued Partner and working toward Silver status to achieve 5%kwh savings. o In July,Staff met with Greg Stevens,a consultant who works on behalf of the South Bay Environmental Services Center (SBESC)to begin a full energy audit of the City's Municipal buildings.Mr.Stevens reviewed the City's energy and gas bills over the past 12 months and conducted site visits to each City facility.The audit will document the existing lighting, HVAC,building envelope and insulation inventory for each facility.Mr. Stevens is currently in the process of preparing the audit report for the City which will identify energy upgrade opportunities,associated costs for upgrades,potential rebates and future payback. •County Sewer Pump Station at Western Avenue &Avenida Aprenda:Identify issues to be addressed,encourage LA County Sanitation Districts to complete work (Score =1) o PW staff is in communication with County to complete and restore the work site. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 11 of 20 •CalWater Facilities within Portuguese Bend Community:Meet with CalWater to ensure the safety of water lines and other infrastructure in active landslide area (Score =1) •Cell Sites in Public Right-of-Way:Explore options to provide better visual screening (Score =0) •Citywide Street Maintenance:Review street maintenance program (Score =?) o PW staff continually implementing Pavement Management Program, largely on schedule for residential and arterial street paving projects. Arterial rehab of PVDS is completed Will begin plan preparation for Palos Verdes Drive East.Design of the next residential rehabilitation project (Area 3 &5)is nearing completion.Construction is expected to commence in about 3 months. 5)'GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY,FISCAL CONTROL AND TRANSPARENCY •Evaluate "Core"City Services:What services do citizens really want from the City?(Score =11) •Full Transparency of Financial Information:Improve public access to City financial information (Score =10) o The following information is now posted on the City website and easily identified for citizens: •Employee Salary Rates •Employee Salary Ranges •Adopted Pension Revision that was implemented in September 2011,including employee's assumption of remainder of 8%share of contribution immediately saving the City 1.5%of compensation and establishing a 2 nd tier for new employees (in process) •City Manager Employment Contract •Employee W-2 Wages. •Employee Salary Survey of Market Area •RPV Staffing Levels and Cost,Comparing to other South Bay Cities •Full-Time Employee Benefits •Personnel Rules •CalPERS link to Facts vs.Myths re:Pensions •State Controller's Certificate of Compliance •All agendas,staff reports and minutes of the Oversight Board of the Successor Agency of the RDA are prepared by Staff and posted on the City's website •All monthly cash balance reports and payment warrant registers are available City Council Goals &Priorities Page 12 of 20 •All financial reports,including the budget,CIP,5 Year Model,CAFR (with audited financial statements)and midyear financial report •Establishing a Council policy for banking procurement,possibly leading to a competitive process for banking and merchant credit card services •Coordinated a review by the FAC of the alternative methods for obtaining and/or estimated the City's unfunded pension liability culminating in a report to the City Council on June 19th •Improve Organizational Efficiency:Run a "tight ship,"conduct performance audit of City staffing &programs,analyze "needs"vs."wants,"consider increased use of volunteers (Score =10) o Identified opportunity to augment crime prevention neighborhood patrols by using Lomita Station "Volunteers on Patrol"hours. o Council to award a contract to conduct an organizational efficiency audit of City staffing vs.workload assignments July 17. o Staff and PVNET,its current IT provider,are proceeding with the 2012 upgrade of the IT system,leading to improved energy and IT network support efficiencies,cost savings,standardization of software and desktop computers,improved remote access for users and video-conferencing capabilities. Use of Office 2010 has been implemented,following instructor-led classroom training and weekly introductory workshops.Call handling design for the VOIP system is-ongoing.Installation of replacement desktop computers is expected in January 2013. o Completed replacement of the Main Page of the City's website,including new features like Spotlight,City News &Events,topical scroll bar and revisions of the drop-down menu that are now consistent with other California cities. o Recently Integrated texting and Twitter into the City's emergency notification listserver system. •Overview of Current Business Environment:Staff to brief City Council on the current regulatory framework affecting City businesses (permits,fees,zoning, etc.);tentatively agendized for 3/6/12 meeting (Score =6) o Completed;Joel Rojas presentation to Council on March 6,2012. •Review City Fees:Review all fees charged the public,especially to City property owners and businesses (Score =4) o Completed a review of fees related to business;Joel Rojas presentation to Council March 6,2012. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 13 of 20 •Conduct a Business Survey:Staff to prepare a survey,with the assistance of the Chamber of Commerce or other organizations with similar experience and expertise,to assess what the City can do for businesses and how can the City be a better partner with businesses.(Score =4) o While not intended to fulfill this goal,Planning did conduct a small survey of businesses in conjunction with proposed mixed zoning at Golden Cove. •Council Liaison to Advisory Boards:Consider whether each City advisory board should have a designated City Council liaison (Score =4) •Review of Existing Contracts/Consultants:Review all contracts and consider formal bid process,review City's use of consultants,ensure that consultant work product is actually used,review IT/PV on the Net (Score =3) o Staff Analyst has prepared a comprehensive list of contracts,value and term in order to aide in the process of determining new bids to be undertaken. •Evaluate Business Fees:Review fees charged for business licenses,sign permits,etc.(Score =3) o Completed March 6,see above. •Streamline Business Openings:Review and improve City processes for new business (Score =3) o Completed March 6,see above. •Evaluate Development Review Process:Review fees,expand lower-level decision making,streamlined review processes,etc.(Score =3) •Zero-Based Budgeting (ZBB):Consider "hybrid"ZBB and provide other detailed information (Score =1) o Completed,and staff would consider this to be one of our top accomplishments for the fact that the menu of discretionary items for Council to scrutinize was greatly expanded to 50 items at a total value of $9.6 million.Easy to use one-page summaries were provided for each program to facilitate identification of budgetary priorities.Staff conducted three budget workshops leading to the Public Hearing conducted on June 19th . •Support of Local Businesses:Streamline processes,be more "business friendly" (Score =1) City Council Goals &Priorities Page 14 of 20 o Completed March 6,see above. •Create a City Business Forum:Include City Council and Staff (Score =1) o Staff is an active participant in the PVP Chamber of Commerce's Economic Development Committee and the South Bay Cities Economic Development Roundtable.Staff is developing a page on the City's Website to act as a business forum for receiving feedback from City businesses and for disseminating information to City's businesses.In addition,Staff participated in the PVP Chamber's "Community Showcase and Job Fair"on Saturday,September 29th . •Create a City Business Forum:Include City Council and Staff (Score =1) o Staff is an active participant in the PVP Chamber of Commerce's Economic Development Committee and the South Bay Cities Economic Development Roundtable.As a result,Staff is developing a page on the City's Website to act as a business forum for receiving feedback from City businesses and for disseminating information to City's businesses.In addition,Staff intends to participate in the upcoming "Community Showcase and Job Fair"that is scheduled for Saturday,September 29th . •Evaluate View Restoration Process:Re-evaluate ordinance and procedures (Score =1) •Evaluate Employee Compensation:Review salary,benefits &pension (Score =0) •RPV Chamber of Commerce:Focus on developing RPV businesses,possible "subset"of existing Peninsula Chamber of Commerce (Score =0) •Evaluate City Tree Review Process:Re-evaluate ordinance and procedures,try to preserve existing street trees (Score =0) •Prepare a Fiscal Health Statement:Facilitate the preparation of a short "fiscal health statement"of the City by the FAC. o The FAC has prepared the "statement"and expects to present it to the City Council in early 2013. •Analyze various methods of generating revenues for the City:Analyze various methods of generating revenues for the City,efficiency improvements and expenditure reductions; o The task is in process. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 15 of 20 •Update the Committee's Memorandum to the City Council dated April 25,2012 and titled "Calculation of the City's Unfunded Pension Liability":Receive the 2012 CalPERS Actuarial Valuation Report,update the Committee's Memorandum to the City Council dated April 25,2012 and titled "Calculation of the City's Unfunded Pension Liability",and consider any other pension related issues which City Council may direct; o The task is in process. •Conduct a competitive bid process for banking services. o This task is in process and is expected to be completed in early 2013. •Implementation of the recommendations made by NexLevel regarding IT (including formalizing a Strategic Plan,installation of a help-desk incident tracking &metric system and conducting quarterly internal IT meetings with departments). o The task is in process. •Conducting the competitive process for all IT services. o The task is in process;however,Staff needs to complete the 2012 IT Upgrade prior to proceed in early 2013. •Implementation of the replacement accounting system (replacement was high-priority recommendation by Management Partners in 2008. o The task is in process. 6)PALOS VERDES PENINSULA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT •Shared Use of PVPUSD &City Facilities:Coordinate with the school district to share active recreation facilities (Score =11) o Efforts still actively underway as School District nears fundraising goal for pool. •Eastview School District Issue:Consider whether to resume efforts to resolve disenfranchisement of Eastview residents regarding PVPUSD issues (Score =2) o [Identified as a separate item (No.11)on Councilman Duhovic's list,but may fit here]. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 16 of 20 7)WESTERN AVENUE CORRIDOR ISSUES •Western Avenue Commercial Corridor:Evaluate &integrate existing Western Avenue specific plans,SCAG grant proposal,City Municipal Code and other programs for future discussion and goal-setting;SCAG grant status tentatively agendized for 1/17/12 meeting (Score =10) o A new Western Ave Corridor Vision Plan is being developed by a land use consultant as part of the $100,000 Compass Blueprint grant awarded to the City by SCAG.The plan is intended to improve the aesthetics, economic development opportunities and traffic within the commercial corridor.An advisory committee made up representatives of local residential neighborhoods,businesses,the City of Los Angeles and Caltrans will help guide the effort. •Western Avenue Improvement:City "gateway,"improve aesthetics (Score =7) o The Western Avenue Vision Plan Advisory Group had its kick-off meeting on August 22,2012.One of the primary goals identified by the Group was to make Western Avenue more of a City "Gateway"through streetscape beautification,increasing the walk ability,improving the pedestrian and bicycle experience and creating incentives for businesses to renovate their buildings.A Draft Concept Plan to improve aesthetics was presented to the Advisory Group on November 13th and input was received.The Concept Plan will be presented to the general public at a public workshop in early 2013. •Western Avenue Improvement:City "gateway,"improve aesthetics (Score =7) o The Western Avenue Vision Plan Advisory Group had its kick-off meeting on August 22,2012.One of the primary goals identified by the Group was to make Western Avenue more of a City "Gateway"through streetscape beautification,increasing the walk ability,improving the pedestrian and bicycle experience and creating incentives for businesses to renovate their buildings.See also above. •Ponte Vista Project in San Pedro:Monitor and evaluate development proposal for Ponte Vista site,focus on traffic impacts (Score =5) o Project updates monitored by staff and presented in Border Reports. 8)CITY RESERVE POLICY •Enhance General Fund &CIP Reserves:Increase reserves from cost savings and improved efficiencies to increase future infrastructure funding (Score =9) City Council Goals &Priorities Page 17 of 20 o Completed and presented on June 19th. 9)SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ISSUES •SCE Infrastructure Safety &Reliability:Confer with SCE to ensure the safety of electrical lines (Score =9) o RPV staff participated in Peninsula-wide workshop held by SCE in February where we demanded and received a comprehensive planning document for improved electrical service reliability. o In-depth report and presentation on SCE issues and recommended actions to Council July 17. 10)CITY TRAIL SYSTEM ENHANCEMENT •Trail System Enhancement:In coordination with the Land Conservancy (Score =9) •Trail System Enhancement:In coordination with the Land Conservancy (Score =9) o In May,the Council considered proposed amendments to the preserve trails system which is managed by the PVPLC.Council directed that further analysis of safety considerations be undertaken.Trail usage proposals were presented to the Council on October 2,at which time an updated Preserve Trails Plan was approved by the City Council. o In addition,staff is working on opportunities to enhance trails outside of the Preserve (Salvation Army,Bronco and Lower Hesse Park). o In May,the Council considered proposed amendments to the preserve trails system which is managed by the PVPLC.Council directed that further analysis of safety considerations be undertaken.Trail usage proposals will come back to the Council for consideration in October. o In addition,staff is working on opportunities to enhance trails outside of the Preserve (Salvation Army,Bronco and Lower Hesse Park)and will be presented at upcoming Council agendas in the next three months. City Council Goals &Priorities Page 18 of 20 The following goals were not included on the final adopted list because they are already under review or scheduled on theTentative Agenda: •Civic Center Master Plan:Staff to present all information about the Civic Center project prepared to date to the City Council and the public within 60 days;City Council may then refer to PC and/or FAC for recommendations;tentatively agendized for 2/21/12 meeting •Sheriff's Department Community Outreach:Consider Deputies'attendance at HOA meetings •Monitor Traffic Safety Commission Activity:Review &evaluate effectiveness of flashing lights at crosswalks •Animal Control:Review contract with County Animal Control,trapping of wild/nuisance animals and road-kill disposal •Review Fire Protection Services:Ensure weed abatement is sufficient on City's open space properties •Rancho LPG Butane Tanks in San Pedro:Reconsider position on the removal of tanks? •Terranea Resort:Evaluate fees and process for use of City Hall for off-site parking •Current Park Improvement Initiatives: Provide City Council overview of status of current projects (i.e.,Lower Hesse,Grandview,Abalone Cove grant,ADA upgrades,etc.) •Status of Redevelopment Agency:Staff to brief City Council on status of RDA in light of recent State Supreme Court decision •Beautification (Recycling)Grant Program:Reinstate the Beautification (Recycling)Grant Program,review City policy,consider disbursement on basis of best use/need,possibly focus on Hawthorne Boulevard or other major corridors; tentatively agendized for 4/17/12 meeting •Temporary Non-Commercial Banner Program:Re-evaluate aesthetics of current banner sign "backdrops" •Aircraft Noise Impacts:Monitor FAA airspace proposal for Long Beach airport, monitor helicopter flight paths from Torrance airport •Re-Evaluate "No Solicitation"Ordinance:Review solicitation regulations and alternatives;tentatively agendized for 4/3/12 meeting City Council Goals &Priorities Page 19 of 20 •Public Feedback via City Website:Revise City website to provide enhance opportunities for public feedback,opinion surveys,etc. •Town Hall Meetings:Consider establishing a regular schedule of "town hall"-style meetings •Regular City Council Meetings:Reduce duration of meetings,length of Staff reports City Council Goals &Priorities Page 20 of 20 From: Sent: To: Cc: SUbject: December 14,2012 Mark R Wells <mtwells@pacbell.net> Friday,December 14,201210:22 AM CC PublicWorks;Planning;PlanningCommission;CityManager Extension of the Time Period for Completion of Phase 1 (Case No.ZON2003 ...00317) Mayor Brooks, Mayor Pro Tern Duhovic, Councilman Campbell, Councilman Knight, Councilman Misetich Re:Comments regarding Phase One Time Extension at Marymount College,Palos Verdes.(Case No. ZON2003-00317) Greetings. My name is Mark Wells and all of you are or can be very familiar with my writings and public comments regarding The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project. Should Mayor Brooks call for any motion extending the Phase One time period to any date in the future, for any reason,I urge you to remain silent and not offer any motion,whatsoever. I am including a portion of a news release dated September 15,2011 Ms.Curtis offered in which I will then offer some of my reasoning for simply allowing The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project to simply end,so that Marymount College officials and supporters can then bring forth expansion options based more on their wishes and requirements,rather than what has been approved: 1 f. ..For Immediate Release Sept.15,2011 Kelly Curtis,Public Relations kcurtis@marvmountpv.edu 310-303-7223 Marymount College announces 20-year plans for Rancho Palos Verdes and San Pedro campuses In Rancho Palos Verdes,Marymount is not proposing to construct any additional facilities beyond what the City of Rancho Palos Verdes has already approved,but Marymount is asking that the original eight-year plan be extended to 20 years to allow sufficient time to raise funds and construct the facilities. Approved in 2010,a new library and improved classroom and recreational facilities are slatedfor the campus's future,to enhance the educational experience of Marymount's students and provide the community with additional resources.Marymount will also be seeking approval to increase its overall enrollment from 943 to 1,200,due to the strong demand for four-year degrees." Paragraph one of the portion ofthe news release I have pasted to this correspondence now contains what I feel is a misrepresentation of what Marymount College officials are now seeking. Marymount Officials have approached the city with new plans for an athletic field that is larger than originally approved and which will require more study by City Staff as well as further approvals by (possibly)the Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission and certainly the Rancho Palos Verdes City CounciL Marymount officials have already indicated that they are not going forward with other approved plans for facility improvement during the time frame approved AND now sought for Phase One of the Project. Paragraph two of the portion of the news release contains a documented 'seeking'that indicates that Marymount College officials will seek an increase in student enrollment and probably increases in faculty, staff and service employees at the Rancho Palos Verdes campus,to accommodate the increased student enrollment. 2 The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project,in its Phase One approvals,contains language, Conditional Use Permits,plans,illustrations,guidelines for a permanent parking area for fewer than t/1,200"students. The news release can be assumed to contain goals and facilities of what Marymount officials will seek as opposed to what they might seek. The history of The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project contains what is becoming a growing number of revisions,eliminations,changes and other issues that strongly suggest to me that Marymount officials have/had little interest in using the approvals contained to further their Project along,without major revisions. Today,some local residents and some city staff members have acknowledged that the temporary parking spaces built to allow for fewer cars parked on public roads has not been utilized,as some Marymount College officials have asserted it would be.to just about everyone.This is mentioned in the current staff report regarding a time extension. Today,there can be no assertion that a 463-space permanent parking lot would be completed by March 19,2013 and that ANOTHER extension of the time period would not be sought. Today,there is no indication from Marymountofficials to what they might seek,as far as permanent parking spaces go,on a campus containing t/1,200"students. Today,I do not know if Marymount officials have enough funds available to fully complete construction of the permanent parking spaces by March 19,2013 and whether they have the funds to remove the temporary spaces as required by municipal code. Today,we can review news releases from Marymount College representatives that indicate how much money was spent on facilities in northwest San Pedro,central San Pedro and in Northern California. What we cannot see today is a permanent parking lot on Marymount's main campus that was originally approved for construction 3-1/2 years ago. The electrical upgrades now found on the main campus of Marymount Co'llege contain items that are in 3 direct conflict with the plans and illustrations approved for the Athletic Building approved via The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project's original contents. Marymount College officials through verbal admissions,news releases and other correspondence have indicated they have basically abandoned the time periods established in The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project in lieu of a "20-Year"plan for Marymount's main campus. With further and more complete review processes being necessary for new plans coming forth from Marymount College representatives,here is my opinion.I feel strongly that it is in the best interest of Marymount College students,faculty,staff and others associated with the college,as well as our city's governors,our city's staff and the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes and others,to move forward.It is time to allow Marymount officials presenting their plans and goals on individually and end The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project on December 18,2012. Regards, Mark Wells Rancho Palos Verdes. 4 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: bubba32@cox.net Monday,December 17,2012 8:25 AM CC Joel Rojas;Ara Mihranian Fwd:Re:MM extension Detail of Entitlement Phasing Uncompleted vs.Marymounts Proposed Extensions from October 292012 Application.xls;Comparison of Approved Entitlement Phasing Months with Marymount Proposal Oct 30 2012 R2.xls;Chapter_17.60_CONDITIONAL_USE_PERMITS ONE TIME.doc Honorable Mayor Brooks and City Council Members Based upon representations by Marymount College President Dr.Michael Brophy to the City Council of September 4,2012,and further confirmations given by him during the September 27,2012 Neighborhood Advisory Committee (NAC)meeting,the College has stated that it has no intention at this time to proceed with any additional construction of approved Phase I entitlements beyond completion of the Permanent Parking Lot facility (and removal/restoration)of the Temporary Parking lot now in place. As summarized in the accompanying chart (Detail of Entitlement Phasing ...),the College has presently not completed any of their promised Phase I construction components and have submitted a recent Application (October 29,2012)to further delay any Phase I construction elements well beyond one year,primarily not until 2020. As such,there is no planned activity within the Approved Phase I entitlements that would justify a time extension beyond completion (and restoration)of the Permanent parking lot construction and removal/restoration of the Temporary Parking lot site.Or even if it is completed. As shown in the second attachment chart (Comparison of Approved Entitlement Phasing ...),the college has documented that their current plan is to defer construction of all other approved Phase I entitlement components for up to eight years.This is evidence in the record that reveals there is no justification rationale (hardship or otherwise)for such a hollow extension.No hardship!Just convenience.Unworkable.Not justifiable by city code.(attachment three) As you are quite well aware,and contrary to the College President's contention,the revised field is not an approved part of Phase I.It is a new project.The College has been informed about that fact several times by RPV City Community Development Director Rojas.It does not qualify for inclusion as a Phase I entitlement suitable for any extension. Although not on tonight's Agenda,it is still relevant to note the specific circumstances of those approved entitlements which seriously conflict with the College's assumption that their "reduced"Athletic Field should be considered as a part of Phase I approved / G entitlements subject to possible time extension consideration by the City Council.On June 1,2010,the RPV City Council unanimously (5-0)approved the EIR and CUP resolutions 2010-41 &42,specifically citing a significant number of key Findings that adoption now by this city council in 2012 or 2013 would be forced to invalidate in order to approve/allow the approval of the new field application. These findings include,but are not limited to,the described concerns regarding balanced on site grading,safety and aesthetic issues related to the selection of the field protected by the added tennis courts,very significant noise impacts that were to be concentrated within a single 3 month Phase I grading process that now would be re-distributed to indefinite and non-overlapping additional time periods contrary to the adopted EIR conclusions and provisions .. There is now a very troubling history regarding the credibility of any assurances of constructing the permanent parking lot that has consistently been delayed,and that does not warrant further continuances "without prejudice".Such examples include the recent construction on PV Drive East of additional storm drainage facilities that,in fact,were a required part of existing Conditions of Approval not previously revealed to the City Council. The recent documentation received from the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE)is not signed and will most probably require additional further processing for compliance with the accompanying terms of approval therein.So,it is reasonable to expect further delays while these mandated actions are completed by the College. It would seem that an appropriate conclusion for the Council to make would be to simply extend,to a date certain,an approval to complete the approved Permanent Parking lot, inclusive of the removal and restoration of the Temporary Parking lot and site,without further time extensions for non-existent approved entitlements that would not be constructed anyway within such extended time. Start over.Stop the nonsense.Much of the groundwork for whatever facilities might someday actually be built is available when the College gets around to making up their mind(s)to actually do something.The approval for project entitlements should not be an open-ended proposition that allows the College to unilaterally and continuously re-write its' approved and agreed terms on an ever-changing basis. In this regard,the City of LA planning Department just recently (Wednesday,December 12,2012)deferred further consideration of Marymount's PVDN plans to a date "uncertain".This unprecedented action was prompted "because of issues raised by the City's Department of Engineering regarding the parcel map."More than likely,LA City Planning had obtained Marymount College's own submitted comments and Presentation stating that the PVDN site was "inadequate in size","infeasible",etc.being subject to serious geological constraints that were revealed to RPV in 2007 and 2010 by former President McFadden and by Attorney Donald Davis..';',.'.-~-:;.'.~- Moreover,those submitted Marymount PVDN plans have incredibly low and nonsensical projections for traffic generation that are less than half the trips (for Phase I -800 students)generated in RPV's traffic own EIR trip rates for 793 students,which itself was understated by a factor of at least 50 percent from the actual observed trips generated by only 658 students studied by RBF in late 2005. In conclusion,there remains the distinct possibility that Marymount will postpone starting their parking lot construction to a later date certain pending a new agreement with the City of RPV to approve their revised field,warts and all.Although the College may have the "right"to ask for such an arrangement,they do not have the "right"to force that approval on the City given their lack of performance of the agreed entitlements to date.Thus,it is not the City of RPV that would deny further extension of such non-performing entitlements,because the College is admittedly the party in default of their own contract. Jim Gordon .-.. Current Phase I Components (in)completion Status (per Condition #60 (a)and Exhibit 3-8)December 18,2012 I Approved Plan per EIR and CUP Resolutions:June 1,2010 through September 30,2012:Proposed Future Time completion dates from Application October 29,2012 I Construction 12/18/2012 Proposed Phase I Ext Construction Future **Future **Years I Days per Plan Complete?to December 18,2012 Time Needed Phase?Completion Date Shifted Demolition of Existinq Buildinqs:+ 1 Nursery School 14 No Not Demolished 14 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 2 Arts 14 No Not Demolished 14 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 3 Bookstore/Health Center 14 No Not Demolished 14 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 4 Maint/Photo Lab 14 No Not Demolished 14 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 5 Pool 14 No Not Demolished 14 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 6 Library 14 No Not Demolished 14 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 7 View Room/Hall 14 No Not Demolished 14 davs Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 Remove:I 1 Tennis and Handball Courts 14 No Not Removed 14 davs Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 2 West and South Parkina Lots 14 No Not Removed 14 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 Rouah Grade/Establish Buildina Pads for; 1 Athletic Facility 90 No No Grading 90 days Phase Three Sept 30 2030 18 2 New Library 90 No No Grading 90 days Phase Two Sept 30 2025 13 3 Faculty Addition 90 No No Grading 90 days Phase Two Sept 30 2025 13 4 Administration Addition 90 No No Grading 90 days Phase Three Sept 30 2030 18 5 Revegitate/Landscape new buildinq pads 14 No No reveqitation 14 days undefined various n/a Con struct/Reconfigure;I 1 North Parking Lot 60 No Nothing Done 60 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 2 Retaining Walls 14 No Nothing Done 14 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 3 New Campus Entry Drive 60 No Nothing Done 60 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 4 New East (Modified)Parking Lot Extension 45 No Partial,East only 80 days Phase One A Sept 30 2013 1 4a New West Parking Lot Extension 45 No Nothing Done 45 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 5'iAthletic Field (Tennis Courts removed**)90 No Rejected by College 90 days Phase One B Sept 30 2020 8 Sa Tennis Courts (4)90 No Removed**n/a Removed**n/a nja 6 Installation of Utilities*not specified No Nothina Done not specified NothinQ Done not specified not specified Installation of;I:r,Modular BUildings to replace demo'd facilities not specified No Removed**n/a nja Drainage and Water Quality Facilities not specified No Not performed not specified not specified I I I ITotalConstructionTimePlannedinPhaseIin28months90 I ITotal Construction time in 31 months with extension to December 18,2012 80 IRemaining Construction Time to Construct all other unfinished Phase I components 10 days ,il I IProposed Post December 18.2012 Phase I Component Construction time I ?Davs *Separate Permit issued for Utilities Upqrades.not a part of the Phase I Approved Plan:No construction Davs aDPlicable to these Utilities Uparades I I @) EIR/CUP Approved Entitlement Phasinq -Months (Resolution 2010-42)I I Duration High Noise Total Construction Calendar Phase Months Construction Months Months Dates I 28 3 3 6/1/2010 to Sept 30.2012 II 32 0 19 10/1/2012 to May 31,2015 III 36 0 14 6/1/2015 to May 31,2018 Total 96 3 36 6/1/2010 to May 31,2018 Marymount Colleqe October 30,2012 Application -Revised Entitlements -Re :wested "Revisions"to CUP Duration High Noise Total Construction Calendar Phase Months Construction Months Months*Dates la 40 3 3 6/1/2010 to Sept 30.2013 Ib 98 3 6 10/1/2012 to Sept 30,2020 II 60 3 19 10/1/2020 to Sept 30,2025 ~III 60 3 14 10/1/2025 to Sept 30,2030 Total 258 12 42 6/1/2010 to May 31,2030 *See Exhibit 3-8 for Construction Duration by Component:And Table 5.5-9 for Summary of Estimated Construction Noise d~ ') r 17.60.070 -Time limit. Before approving any conditional use permit,the planning commission shall establish a time limit within which the applicant shall commence upon the permitted use,as that phrase is defined in Section 17.86.070 (Enforcement)of this title.The time limit shall be a reasonable time based on the size and nature of the proposed development.If no date is specified by the planning commission or city council, a conditional use permit shall be valid for one year from the date of final action on the permit or approval.All such permits shall be null and void after that time unless the applicant has commenced upon the permitted use,as that phrase is defined in Section 17.86.070 (Enforcement)of this title.Upon a showing of substantial hardship,delays beyond the control of the applicant,or other good cause,the planning commission or city council may extend this period 0 ne ti me for up to one additional year. (Ord.320 §7 (part),1997:Ord.78 (part),1975) 17.60.080 -Failure to comply. If the time limit expires and no extension has been granted,or if any of the conditions to the use or development are not maintained,then the conditional use permit shall be null and void.Continued operation of a use requiring a conditional use permit after such conditional use permit expires or is found in noncompliance with any condition of a conditional use permit shall constitute a violation of this title. (Ord.320 §7 (part),1997:Ord.78 (part),1975) 17.60.090 -Amendments. An amendment to an approved conditional use permit may be initiated by the city or by the property owner pursuant to Section 17.78.040 (Miscellaneous)of this title. (Ord.320 §7 (part),1997) ~..- From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Carol W.Lynch <CLynch@rwglaw.com> Friday,December 14,201212:46 PM Carla Morreale Fwd:Marymount College -December 18,2012 City Council Meeting logo_signature_dark.jpg --------Original Message -------- Subject:Marymount College -December 18,2012 City Council Meeting From:"Davis,Donald M."<DDavis@bwslaw.com> To:Joel Rojas <JoeIR@rpv.com>,Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpv.com>,"Carol W.Lynch"<CLynch@rwglaw.com>,Carolyn Lehr <clehr@rpv.com> CC:Michael Brophy <MBrophy@marymountpv.edu>,Jim Reeves <JReeves@marymountpv.edu> Dear Joel and Ara, Marymount College has reviewed the staff report for the 18th.While we appreciate the staff recommendation for a time extension,the limited duration of such an extension is,in our view,unnecessary and undermines the purpose of an extension,which is to provide an applicant with a level of certainty as to its ability to seek funding and complete the approved work. I would like to request under the California Public Records Act (CPRA)that the City either make available any public' records (or indicate where they may already be available on the City's website)any "writings"as defined in the CPRA that evidence where the City Councilor Planning Commission granted only a partial time extension on a CUP to an applicant and the reasons for such limited extension within the past 10 years.I recognize that the City has up to 10 days to respond to this request,but would ask that you expedite the process so that the College has an opportunity to review such records prior to the hearing on the 18th. Regards, Don Donald M.Davis I Partner 444 South Flower Street,Suite 2400 I Los Angeles,CA 90071-2953 d -213.236.27021 t -213.236.0600 If- 213.236.2700 ddavis@bwslaw.com<mailto:ddavis@bwslaw.com>I vCard<http://www.bwslaw.com/tasks/sites/bwslaw/assets/fiIe/vCard.cfm?pkid=12>I bwslaw.com <http://www.bwslaw.com/> [cid:e242c1da-2914-49f4-b237-efffOcdOdcf4]<http://www.bwslaw.com/> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the CONFIDENTIAL use of the designated addressee named above.The information transmitted is sUbject to the attorney-client privilege and/or represents confidential attorney work product.Recipients should not file copies of this email with publicly accessible records.If you are not the designated addressee named above or the authorized agent responsible for delivering it to the designated addressee,you received this document through inadvertent error and any further review,dissemination,distribution or copying of this communication by you or anyone else is strictly prohibited.IF YOU RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONING THE SENDER NAMED ABOVE AT 800.333.4297. Thank you. From:rpvlistserver@rpv.com [mailto:rpvlistserver@rpv.com] Sent:Friday,December 14,2012 7:04 AM To:Davis,Donald M. Subject:Marymount College -December 18,2012 City Council Meeting ~-"- / PHASE 1 TIME EXTENSION REQUEST -DECEMBER 18,2012 CITY COUNCIL MEETING At its September 4,2012 meeting,the City Council extended the College's one-year time extension request for Phase 1 of the Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project from September 30,2012 to December 18,2012 in order to monitor the progress of the construction of the permanent parking lot before considering extending Phase 1 a full year (September 30,2013)as originally requested by the College.As such,on December 18,2012,the City Council will only consider extending the time limit for Phase 1 beyond the current December 18,2012 deadline.The City Council will not be considering the College's recent application submittal of Conditional Use Permit No.9 Revision "F"to amend the configuration of the Council approved athletic field and current conditions of approval or any other aspects of the project. This request will be considered at a later time as part of a dUly noticed public hearing. Click here<http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/citycouncillagendas/2012_Agendas/MeetingDate-2012-12- 18/RPVCCA_CC_SR_2012_12_18_01_Marymount_College_Facilities_Expansion_Project.pdf>to view the December 18,2012 City Council Staff Report. Inquiries regarding the upcoming December 18,2012 City Council meeting on the time extension request for Phase 1 should be directed to Ara Mihranian,Project Planner,at 310-544-5228 or via email ataram@rpv.com. BREAKING NEWS City staff o.ccasionally posts other important non-emergency information on the Breaking News page of the City's website located at:http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/breakingnews Be sure to go to the List Server page and subscribe to receive email messages whenever a Breaking News article is posted to the City's website.You can join at:http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/listserver Please do not reply directly to this message.The correct contact for each Listserv message topic is included in the message.We welcome your comments and suggestions,please send them to:comments@palosverdes.com <mailto:comments@palosverdes.com> This Listserv program is one of many services created,hosted,and provided by Palos Verdes on the NET,a non profit 501c3 community service organization serving<http://www.palosverdes.com/pvnetl>our communities by providing computer technology support to the City.<http://www.palosverdes.com/pvnetlaccomplishments.htm>educational internships and<http://www.palosverdes.com/pvnetlservices.htm>animation training to kids,<http://www.palosverdes.com/animation/team/>workforce training to adults,<http://www.giscentral.org/>free classes for seniors.<http://www.palosverdes.com/pvnetlservices.htm>and free web pages to non-profit organizations<http://palosverdes.com/pvnetlservices.htm>since 1995.Click here for information about free classes to residents.<http://www.palosverdes.com/pvnetlservices.htm>Contact us by email at information@palosverdes.com<mailto:information@palosverdes.com> NOTICE:This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information.If you are not the intended recipient of this communication,or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this communication to the intended recipient, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents.Thank you. ..."'=""'..•. From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hi Ron, SunshineRPV@aol.com Monday,December 17,2012 4:06 PM Ron Dragoo CC Heads up.RE:RPV City Council Meeting !2/18/2012 Item 5 Your Staff Report does not mention either of these things.I am hoping you will include them in your verbal report so that Council does not have to ask. Retum my call if you would like more details. 1.The existing storm runoff improvements in Paintbrush Canyon have not been maintained so they lost their effectiveness many years ago.(And a portion of dirt Crenshaw in the Preserve Trails Plan washed away.)I'm thinking that both the pipes and the trails should be visited on the same contracted schedule.What is in your recommended "do over"which provides for ongoing adjustments and repairs given that the landslide movement is still going to require them or all is for naught,again? 2.It has been suggested that both the culverts under PV Drive South (Gateway Park and the westem ski jump) be replaced with corrugated pipes as large as the trail tunnel under Crenshaw to eliminate the need for pedestrian/equestrian crossing at street level.Since the Preserve Trails Plan,Coastal Vision Plan and RPV· Trails Network Plan have become so fragmented,it really falls to the Public Works Engineers to accommodate non-motorized traffic circulation.Have you given this some thought? ...S 310-377-8761 1 5 From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Council Members: Lowell R Wedemeyer <Iowell@transtalk.com> Thursday,December 13,2012 9:50 PM CC;PublicWorks;City Manager City Council Agenda,December 18,Item 7. COMMENT ON LOS ANGELES COUNTY PROPOSED PARCEL FEE FOR CLEAN WATER.docx A comment is appended concerning item 7 on the December 18,2012 City Cou.ncil Agenda,the proposed Los Angeles County parcel fee for clean water,clean beaches. Lowell R.Wedemeyer 13 Clipper Road,Rancho Palos Verdes ....,.:--... 1 7 COMMENT ON LOS ANGELES COUNTY PROPOSED PARCEL FEE FOR CLEAN WATER,CLEAN BEACHES Los Angeles County proposes a parcel fee for its clean water,clean beaches ordinance. Critically,this is a "fee"as distinguished from a "tax".A parcel "fee"is supposed to broadly correspond to the value of some service or other benefit provided to the parcel. This comment raises several issues: 1.Does the County's proposed method of calculating the "parcel fee"actually and reasonably relate the amount of the fee on a particular parcel to the true benefit to that particular parcel?This comment asserts that the answer largely is "no." 2.What is the real benefit of the proposed parcel fee to a parcel of land?Is the benefit the treatment or management of rain-water run-off from that parcel?Or, more precisely,is the true benefit the treatment of pollution that rain water carries off the parcel?This comment asserts that the real benefit is the treatment of pollution,not management of pure rain water.Pure rain water is not a hazard, contaminated water is.There is no particular need to treat or manage pure rain water.Instead pure water is a potentially valuable commodity. 3.Should the County's proposed method of calculating the parcel "fee"be related (A)to the gross volume of run-off from a parcel,or (B)to the concentration of pollution that the parcel delivers with the run-off, which creates the need for water treatment? This comment asserts that the method of fee calculation should relate the amount of the fee to the pollution concentration,not just to the gross volume of run-off from the parcel. 4.Does the County's method of calculating the fee for a particular parcel properly relate the amount of that parcel's fee to the true,real-life volume of run-off from that particular parcel?This comment asserts that the answer is "no."This is because the "impervious percentage"which is the basis of the County's fee calculation is not related to the real-life imperviousness of any individual parcel. Rather,the "impervious percentage"of an individual parcel is presumed to be ~~..- Comment on L.A.County Proposed Parcel Fee 2012-12-13,Wedemeyer Page 1 of 5 identical for all parcels within a particular zoning classification.The County has not disclosed what is the range of error in the presumed "imperviousness percentages"in particular zones. 5.Is it feasible for the County to calculate the fee for a particular parcel by reference to the concentration of pollution produced by that particular parcel,either now or in the future?The answer is unknown to the author of this comment.This comment urges that this issue is critical to both public acceptance and to success of the program objectives. 6.If the County does not currently possess the data to make feasible such an individual fee calculation,then does the County's proposed ordinance include provisions reasonably designed to develop such information on the amount of pollution contributed by individual parcels and then to make that data available for future fee calculations?Keep in mind that this parcel fee is proposed to be permanent,with no sunset date.It does not appear that any such data-collection provision exists in the proposed County ordinance.By way of reference,the various air pollution control agencies eventually had to develop programs to identify and control point sources of air pollution.It is likely that successful water pollution control also will depend upon mechanisms to identify and control point sources.Focusing the fee calculation more precisely on the sources of pollution should help achieve the purposes for which the fee is to be collected. THE PROPOSED METHOD FOR CALCULATING THE FEE FOR AN INDIVIDUAL PARCEL. The County proposes to allocate the fee based upon the "impervious percentage"of the area of each parcel.Conceptually,the impervious percentage is the amount of hardscape on the parcel that prevents percolation of rain water into the soil of the parcel.However,the impervious percentage is not actually measured for each individual parcel.Instead,the County Engineer has assigned an impermeability percentage to various land-use zoning classifications.Then every parcel within a particular zone is presumed to have the same, -'L.~-••_ Comment on L.A.County Proposed Parcel Fee 2012-12-13,Wedemeyer '-:..--' Page 2 of 5 assigned impermeability percentage,without regard to the actual amount of hardscape on any particular parcel. For example,the impervious percentage for various zones range from 1%(for vacant land and Government Properties-Group A),to 91 %(for Residential-Manufactured Home Park,Government Properties -Group H,Institutional Group D)to 96%(for Commercial (Developed)-Group E,strip developments,hotels and motels.) Thus,the County's method of fee calculation (A)is poorly related to the real-life volume of run-off from any particular parcel,and (8)is only faintly related to the real-life pollution from a particular parcel. Except for the largest parcels,or property owners,there is no economically feasible mechanism in the proposed County ordinance for individual parcel owners to seek a fair adjustment of the parcel fee to correspond to the volume or run-off or the concentration of pollution from a particular parcel. As a consequence,the County's proposed ordinance inevitably will force the good guys (producers of minimized amounts of polluted run-off)to subsidize the bad guys (producers of large volumes of heavily polluted run-off)--with a permanent parcel fee. SUGGESTION 1.The Program Elements for the Water Quality Improvement Program should be amended in Section H(3)(a)(page 29 of 34)to add new grounds (5)and (6)for contesting the water quality fee as follows: "(5)The imperviousness percentage assigned to the parcel is excessive by 15%or more. (6)Permanent structural measures have been implemented on the parcel to reduce the actual surface flow of storm water off the parcel to the storm drain system by 15% or more below the flow assumed in the Engineer's imperviousness analysis." REASON:New grounds (5)and (6)will conform the fee charged to a particular parcel to the constitutional requirement that the fee charged shall be proportionate to the benefit or service actually being rendered to the parcel.New ground (6)also will give incentive to -",-~-..- Comment on L.A.County Proposed Parcel Fee 2012-12-13,Wedemeyer ---...-' Page 3 of 5 parcel owners to reduce their parcels'contributions to the storm water run-off.The municipal incentive provision in Section H(4)will not achieve this constitutional objective because it authorizes rebate to the parcel owner of no more than 60%of the 40%that the municipality receives back,that is,Section H(4)limits a local rebate to no more than 24%of the fee paid by the parcel owner. SUGGESTION 2.In the Program Elements for the Water Quality Improvement Program, section H(1),the method for calculation of the parcel fee should be amended to add: "The District,upon recommendation of the Engineer,shall impose a surcharge upon a particular parcel,or a class of similar parcels,based upon a preponderance of evidence of one·or more of the following: (A)The actual,continuing use of the parcel causes the storm water run-off to have a substantially higher quantity or concentration of matter requiring water treatment than the mean quantity or concentration for parcels in the class to which the parcel has been assigned; (8)The parcel owner has failed to implement officially-recommended practices, applicable to the class to which the parcel has been assigned,to minimize storm water run- off or to reduce the quantity or concentration of matter requiring water treatment." REASON.The amount of a parcel fee is required to correspond to the benefit or service rendered to the parcel upon which the fee is assessed.That is the difference between a parcel fee and a parcel tax.Where a particular parcel is used or managed to excessively burden the storm water system,then that particular parcel is not fully paying for the service or benefit the particular parcel receives,while other parcel owners are improperly being charged to subsidize the more burdensome particular parcel.This power should not be used to punish one-time,or short term,excesses. SUGGESTION 3.The Program Elements for the Water Quality Improvement Program should be amended to add express requirements (A)that the County Engineer >o-~-••_ Comment on LA County Proposed Parcel Fee 2012-12-13,Wedemeyer Page 4 of 5 systematically develop data and a budget to identify the concentration of pollution contributed by individual parcels,and (B)develop a methodology to adjust the fee for individual parcels to surcharge the higher polluter and reward minimization of pollution. REASONS.This will align the parcel fee more closely to the benefit conferred on the individual parcel.It will also foster the good-government objective of rewarding good behavior and penalizing bad behavior.This should strongly contribute to the ultimate goal of clean water and clean beaches. Lowell R.Wedemeyer 13 Clipper Road,Rancho Palos Verdes. December 13,2012 This comment is made as an individual tax payer and owner of a residential parcel,not on behalf of any group or City committee.The author thanks Andy Winje,City of Rancho Palos Verdes assistant engineer,for his excellent help in identifying the County's proposed methodology.Any errors and opinions in this comment are those of the author,not attributable to Mr.Winje. ,,0::-.-. Comment on L.A.County Proposed Parcel Fee 2012-12-13,Wedemeyer Page 5 of 5 Don Reeves li,1·2-l.Via Canada-Hanchn PaIns Verdes,CA ~)()275-Phone:~ll O-S:l3-6.'ifil -c1reevcsH95@aol.coll1 Date:12/14/2012 Executive Officer Board of Supervisors P.O.Box 866006 Los Angeles,CA 90086 Enclosed is my protest form against your ludicrous Clean Water,Clean Beaches Measure scam. • This is just another bureaucratic extortion using a noble idea as a cover.My tax bill already includes Metro Water District,Flood Control,Consolidated Sewer,WB MWD stdby charge,and LA West Mosq.AB assessments. Additionally,the city of Rancho Palos Verdes has a Water Quality/Flood Protection User Fee at $1.3M per year and a $181,000 Water Quality budget using our tax dollars.I will copy our CC on this letter but doubt if they will standup to this tax and spend proposal.In addition to this nonsensical plan is the amount you are trying to extort.Unfortunately,most folks are not cognizant of what you are proposing and will remain quiet unless they happen to look at their tax bill. Sincerely, 6424 Via Canada Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 7 City Council Rules of Procedure City Council Oral Reports -Section 5.8 City Council Oral Reports are short summaries of matters a Councilmember has attended as an elected official of the City.The Mayor may,with the consent of the City Council,limit the time for such reports or defer them to a future meeting,provided that the Councilmember's legal reporting obligations are met.Council members are required to provide a brief oral report on their attendance at any meetings where City funds have been expended.Detailed reports should be made in writing.Written reports will be posted on the City's website.Reports should omit functions that are purely of a social or personal nature. -"<~•••