Loading...
20130903 Late Correspondencea t •! 4 t ^ F, • MSI AWL !, ► I*tJf � � Y nit - c a "RS!edwWSnla•" • ' .'.�_"_. �lplf �1��. iii f It I+ x .*mod J�X I K "'fit Carla Morreale From: Andrea Vona <avona@pvplc.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 6:09 PM To: CC Cc: Ara Mihranian; Joel Rojas Subject: Long -Range Property Management Plan Dear Rancho Palos Verdes City Council and Successor Agency to the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency, I have a comments relating to the Long -Range Property Management Plan dated September 3, 2013. Section C does not list the parcels associated with the Archery Range as being part of the Rancho Palos Verdes Natural Communities Plan. Currently, these properties are included in the Rancho Palos Verdes Natural Communities Plan. Similarly, within the description of the Archery Range, there is no mention of the Rancho Palos Verdes Natural Communities Plan, which should be discussed in a similar fashion to the description provided to Abalone Cove. Sincerely, Andrea Vona Andrea Vona Executive Director Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy 310-541-7613 X204 310-930-0583 (cell) "Preserving land and restoring habitat for the education and enjoyment of all." 4 CITYOF O RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2013 SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented for tonight's meeting: Item No. Description of Material 3 Email from Eva Cicoria 4 Email exchanges between: Sunshine and Anna McDougall Chu; Anna McDougall Chu and Joslyn Chu, Sunshine, and Staff; Sunshine and Jay Jones; Emails from: Sunshine; Madeline Ryan; Sharon Yarber 5 Emails from: Bill and Phyllis Glantz; Bruce and Randy Ross; Randy Ross; Information submitted regarding 32039 Sea Ridge Circle A Respectfully submitted, Email from Eva Cicoria W:\AGENDA\2013 Additions Revisions to agendas\20130903 additions revisions to agenda.doc Carla Morreale From: cicoriae@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 4:42 PM To: cc Cc: Ara Mihranian Subject: Tonight's Agenda items 3 and 6 Mayor Brooks, Mayor ProTem Dujovic, and Council Members Campbell, Knight, and Misetich, I have comments on two items on tonight's agenda: Item 3: 1 want to express support for the proposed improvements in the Abalone Cove Project Plan. I'd also like to express gratitude for having the opportunity to provide input in the planning process. It has been a pleasure exchanging ideas with the group of community members involved in this process as well as Ara, other staff members, and the consultants. Item 6: 1 never found a staff report for this item. Clicking on the link for the item only brings up a 3 - page letter from Carol Lynch. With help, eventually I did find the Long Range Property Management Plan. Is there also a staff report? Regarding the LRPMP, I am concerned that property that is in the NCCP is not described as such. Section C lists just Abalone Cove as being in the NCCP. Based on the maps and my experience serving on the PUMP Committee and subsequent volunteer work with PVPLC, at least one other property described in the document is also in the NCCP—the property described as the Archer Range. The description of each of the 4 parcels within the Abalone Cove property has a paragraph that reads as follows (or close to it): This parcel is to be within the City's proposed NCCP Reserve, and uses inconsistent with the parcel's Reserve status would not be permitted under theNCCP. The Reserve conserves regionally important habitat areas and provides important habitat linkages between patches of conserved habitat (see additional discussion above, Section C). Even if the property was not located with theReserve, permits would need to be obtained from the State and Federal governments before CSS habitat could be removed from this property. The description of the Archery Range property does not contain any reference to it being in the NCCP, yet it is in there, was reviewed by the PUMP Committee for trail location and uses, and is monitored by PVPLC volunteer KEEPERs. Is this intentional or an error? If intentional, the question of whether CEQA is triggered should be addressed more closely. In addition, the public should have specific notice of that intention and the opportunity to address the matter. Thank yiou, Eva Cicoria Carla Morreale From: SunshineRPV@aol.com Sent: Monday, September 02, 2013 9:51 AM To: Amcdougalll@yahoo.com Cc: CC; Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmaii.com>; jduhovic@hotmail.com; mizie@cox.net; jim_knight@juno.com; Brian Campbell <b.camp@cox.net>; cprotem73@verizon.net, Carolyn Lehr; Carolynn Petru; momofyago@gmail.com; pvpasofino@yahoo.com; robert.laman@dslextreme.com; info@pvpwatch.com Subject: Again Re: Urgent Fwd: Sunnyside info to RPV City Council Hi Anna, In a message dated 8/30/2013 11:51:11 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Amcdouaall1(d)-yahoo.com writes: Should I write them again? YES. To the same "them". Before noon, Tuesday September 3, 2013. This time, cc my whole cc list. I no longer have a clue as to what Staff chooses to exclude from the public record. Since your daughter is the last person I have seen jump a horse from the 2477 Sunnyside Ridge Road driveway onto the City's trail (2010 PV Loop Trail Relay), we all should know your recommendation. ...S Anna Sent from my iPhone On Aug 30, 2013, at 9:39 AM, SunshineRPV(o)-aol.com wrote: Here is the RPVlistsery notice with a link to the Rancho Palos Verdes Agendas for Tuesday, September 3, 2013. From there you can click on REGULAR BUSINESS: Item 4, the Sunnyside Ridge Segment... and view the staffs MEMORANDUM. Drawings start on page 14. I have provided the City's Staff with lots of history as did those of you who attended the August 27, 2013 site meeting. Now is the time to send a short email to cc _rpv.com and LaurenR(cD-rpv.com with the subject line: RPV City Council, September 3, 2013, Item 4. Sunnyside Ridge Trail Segment Improvement Grant Application for L.A. County Fourth Supervisorial District. You are encouraged to write whatever you feel in response to the Staff Report. What we all need to mention is that this grant application should not jeopardize our chance of being awarded this grant by requesting funding for unnecessary improvements. The one nice thing about this grant opportunity is that it does not require the City to come up with "matching funds". Have a look at the Agenda Item 3. Having been awarded a grant to improve Abalone Cove Park, we the people of RPV get to chip in more than $300K for better benches and trash receptacles. It is our City Council Members who will make this decision. Show up and watch what the two members who are running for reelection have to say. There is so much more going on than what you can see on cable TV. Do note that Staff estimates that all this is only going to take 15 minutes. I just opened the email from Lauren Ramezani, Sr. Administrative Analyst-Public Works. No matter how you find it, read this Staff Recommendation and respond. Whatever happened to Bindu? ...S <mime-attachment> Carla Morreale From: Lauren Ramezani Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 7:43 AM To: Carla Morreale Subject: FW: SunnysideRidge RPV Carla, An item for late correspondence. Tx Lauren Ramezani Sr. Administrative Analyst- Public Works City of Rancho Palos Verdes 310-544-5245 Laurenr@rpv.com . www.palosverdes.com/rpv From: Anna McDougall [mailto:Amcdouga111(�byahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 02, 2013 9:14 PM To: SunshineRPWbaol.com; Bindu Vaish; simakm@rpv.com Cc: CC; Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com>; jduhovic@hotmail.com; mizie@cox.net; Jim knight - juno.com; Brian Campbell <b.camp@cox.net>; cprotem73(a verizon.net; Carolyn Lehr; Carolynn Petru; momofyago a gmail.com; pvpasofino(cbyahoo.com; robert.laman@)dslextreme.com; info@pvpwatch.com; Mark Zoeckler Subject:: SunnysideRidge RPV Aloha, I am resending my email as I heard there may have been technical issues in its distribution. I want to continue my support in the repair of the trail on Sunnysideridge Rd. The only way my 14yo dtr and I are able to use that connection. is a jump from one level to the next. It's possible but not ideal or safe, or have to challenge the traffic on PVDrEast where there is no separation of traffic from pedestrian or equine use. Please do not see this item as insignificant. It is crucial to keep our links open. Rolling Hills met us half way with their contribution for a trail on PVDrEast, now lets complete the circuit. Please? Anna & Joslyn Chu Sent from my iPhone On Aug 3, 2013, at 5:03 PM, Anna McDougall <Amcdou a111(a�yahoo.com> wrote: Bindu, I know this had been a long journey for everyone and I am eager to support this endeavor. I believe this a critical repair for the trail system for both hikers and equestrians. Considering the challenges many face on PVDr East I believe this will enhance our community and safety by minimizing traffic exposure to residents. How may I offer my support in this process? Anna Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Bindu Vaish <BinduVAKpv.com> wrote: Good morning. The City of RPV is pursuing another grant opportunity to construct Sunnyside Trail (between Sunnyside Ridge and Palos Verdes Drive East ) connecting the Sol Vista & Deadman's Curve segments. We need your input on this project (comments, suggestions, and concerns) before we submit the grant application to the City Council for approval. Unfortunately the grant deadline for submitting the application is very tight. However your input is very important to us; therefore, please submit your comments by Wednesday August 7, 2013 so that we can complete our application on time. Please provide your feedback to me via e-mail at binduvC«@rpv.com and copy Siamak Motahari (simakm@rpv.com) or call me at 310-544-5254. If I am not at my desk you can reach the front office at 310-544-5252 and ask for Siamak. apologize for the short notice. Thank you, Bindu Vaish Associate Engineer City of Rancho Palos Verdes CA 90275 P)310-544-5254 F)310-544-5292 Sent from my iPhone On Sep 2, 2013, at 9:50 AM, SunshineRPVnaol.com wrote: Hi Anna, In a message dated 8/30/2013 11:51:11 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, AmcdougalllAyahoo.com writes: Should I write them again? YES. To the same "them". Before noon, Tuesday September 3, 2013. This time, cc my whole cc list. I no longer have a clue as to what Staff chooses to exclude from the public record. Since your daughter is the last person I have seen jump a horse from the 2477 Sunnyside Ridge Road driveway onto the City's trail (2010 PV Loop Trail Relay), we all should know your recommendation. ...S Anna Carla Morreale From: SunshineRPV@aol.com Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2013 6:28 PM To: momofyago@gmail.com; beachjake@sbcgIoba1.net; jean longacre@aol.com; j1000 @cox.net; raymadelin@gmail.com; pvpasofino@yahoo.com; amcdougalll@yahoo.com; cmoneil@aol.com; primadonis@aol.com; vjotten@cox.net, robert.laman@dslextreme.com; Ienee910@intergate.com Cc: Bindu Vaish; Siamak Motahari; Carolyn Lehr; CC Subject: Sunnyside mystery of the day Why is this response to Bindu's call for comments not included in the Staff Report? It says what needs to be said so concisely. Did anyone else send a comment which has gone missing? If so, send it again and add cc rpv.com to your Cc: list. If you didn't send a comment, do it now. Staff has not offered a reduced scope of work as an alternative to their recommendation. So, what the reduced cost might be is unknown to Council and the public. ...S > Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 23:11:08 -0400 > From: <0000(cD-cox.net> > To: binduv(a)-rpv.com > Subject: Comments regarding the Sunnyside Trail between Sunnyside Ridge Road and Palos Verdes Drive East > Cc: siamakm(a)-rpv.com, clehr(),rpv.com > Dear Ms. Vaish, > I recently visited the site of the trail in question and came away with two observations. > The only part that the City of Rancho Palos Verdes really needs to put money into is the short stretch of the easement on the east side of the house at 2477 Sunnyside Ridge Road. On the east side of the easement a Sutter Wall could be erected and the ground in between filled in to provide a steady footing for horse traffic. Past that point the equestrian traffic could eventually restore the trail down the slope to the streambed and up the other side to Palos Verdes Drive East. > Regarding a proposed bridge across the stream bed, I do not think that is necessary unless someone needs to be crossing it in a thunderstorm. > Best, > Jay Jones > 32646 Coastsite Drive, Unit H > Rancho Palos Verdes 90275-6812 > 310-377-8641 > (Adopter of PV Loop Trail Segment 49) I Carla Morreale From: SunshineRPV@aol.com Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:32 PM To: CC; Bindu Vaish; Ara Mihranian Subject: September 3, 2013 City Council meeting Attachments: 2013 repeat old map-0447.pdf August 29, 2013 MEMO from SUNSHINE TO: RPV City Council RE: Grant application for improvements to the Sunnyside Segment of the Palos Verdes Loop Trail. Following are my comments from the last time this issue came before City Council. This time, the site meeting was attended by four Staff Members. How cost effective is that? The only other thing to be noted as different since the 2007 grant application, is that the Sunnyside Ridge Storm Drain Project has been completed. What was once a two switchback trail route (improved as an Eagle Scout Project) from PV Drive East to the bottom of the canyon has been obliterated. The plan displayed at the meeting proposes four switchbacks. Overkill in this situation. Please approve a grant application for only the work that needs to be done and that we have a chance of winning. No more than $100K. See attachment. Look for the little cloud in the middle labeled AREA WHICH NEEDS WORK BY THE CITY OF RPV. All else will recover within the City's usual trail maintenance budget. ...S Sunshine 6 Limetree Lane Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275-5909 1-310-377-8761 SunshineRPVe-aol.com September 9, 2007 JOEL ROJAS, A.I.C.P., DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES 30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275 RE: Proposed trail rerouting at 2477 Sunnyside Ridge Road and corresponding proposed Negative Declaration. Dear Director Rojas: It was with great pleasure that I heard the news about the City finally getting back to addressing this "problem child". Given that this immediate area has been a "construction zone" for more than four years, the Sunnyside Ridge Storm Drain Project will start soon and people have been risking life and I limb on PV Drive East without this trail connection, it is way past time this work was looked into. My thanks to whomever it was for instigating this action. The Public Notice implies that this proposal is for a new trail. Just because the City's General Plan calls this trail "conceptual" on figure 22 doesn't mean that it didn't actually exist way back then. The fact that it was horseback riders who went running to City Hall when the bulldozers for the Podatoori residence showed up is proof that it was there when the construction plans were approved. It has been shown as an actual trail on the PVHA trail guide map since they started publishing it in 1985. Only 200 feet of trail needs to be in a new location. The fact that you are recommending approval of a Negative Declaration for such a huge amount of work is great. I will be at the City Council Meeting to urge Council to approve it. In the mean time, urge you to fix the places where the check -list and the comments in the Comments are not consistently either No Impact or Less Than Significant Impact. The description of the trail construction components is outrageous. Other than the need to correct the language that suggests a 60 foot long retaining wall can go across a 10 foot wide easement, I condone it only with the assumption that a future proposal for a lot less work will not require a new Negative Declaration. Sincerely, If Council is to be asked to approve Staff Time to search for funding for this Scope of Work, then, I object. All that is needed from a grant or some such is a 25 foot long, 4 foot 6 inch (max. visible above grade) retaining wall with a guardrail/fence on top. Other then that, Staff just needs to be able to coordinate volunteers (the way the PVP Land Conservancy manages the trails within the preserves) and coordinate with the work being done by Public Works. Paying a "City Approved" Engineer to establish how deep the I beams need to go is missing from this description. That is the only thing that was missing from the design that was submitted to the City Manager on August 12, 2005. If Staff had stepped up with that bit of information, this wall would have been built (with donated money) by now. also object to the notion of the City paying for landscaping. Just like on roadsides, if people want screen planting they should plant it and maintain it on their own property. Mr. Podatoori, to the west, should be reminded that he needs to keep his hedge from encroaching into the easement. Mr. DeGirolamo, to the east; has offered to provide and maintain ground cover plants on the slope. Cost to the City? Code Enforcement. There is an erosion control issue that will not have been created or solved by the proposed work. The runoff from all of Mr. Podatoori's hardscape discharges into the canyon at just two locations. (Public Works approved the plan.) Both of these outfalls are above the trail tread. An Eagle Scout candidate applied to install an erosion control device on the trail but Dean Allison turned him away. The design is still viable and there are future Eagle Scouts out there. A better solution would be for the City to admit its error and install drain pipes to the bottom of the canyon as a part of the Sunnyside Ridge Storm Drain Project's Streambed (something) Agreement. Except, Ron Dragoo says it would be onerous to get this Agreement modified. Speaking of the Sunnyside Ridge Storm Drain Project. That work at this site should improve the existing switchback trail on the north side of Greenwood Canyon simply by bringing in their equipment along the least steep route. How costly can that be? This is just the tip of the iceberg about how this trail connection can be restored at much less than the quoted estimate. Only the part of this missive which is above the "Sincerely" is being submitted as a comment on the draft Negative Dec. I am counting on you, the Council, to squash the huge Scope of Work should it show up as a Recommendation in the Staff Report. ...S Carla Morreale From: Lauren Ramezani Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 7:47 AM To: Carla Morreale Subject: FW: RPV City Council meeting, September 3, 2012, Sunnyside segment grant application Another late correspondence. Lauren Ramezani Sr. Administrative Analyst- Public Works City of Rancho Palos Verdes 310-544-5245 Laurenr@rpv.com www.palosverdes.com/rpv From: SunshineRPVCa)aol.com [mailto:SunshineRPVOaol.com] Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:01 AM To: Lauren Ramezani Subject: RPV City Council meeting, September 3, 2012, Sunnyside segment grant application Hi Lauren, This is what you might call a "courtesy notice". Please track down how much money the City of RPV received by selling the portion of the Narbonne Right of Way between Palos Verdes Drive East and Sunnyside Ridge Road. The proceeds were split with LA County. I will ask the City Council to listen for this information in your verbal presentation on Tuesday evening, September 2, 2013. Following is an illustration of where the trail was. It is more clear on the City's aerial photo of 1976. Where did the money go? Why has the trail connection not been restored for ten years? The answers to these questions are relevant only in so far as putting Council and Staff into a position of awareness so that the same errors are not repeated. The existing RPV Trails. Network Plan update (1993) does not contain a trail development criteria matrix. (The 1990 version did.) The City Council has accepted the TRAILS DEVELOPMENT / MAINTENANCE CRITERIA of July 4, 2012. Which trail TYPE describes the basis for your cost estimate? ... S _flax ��i�y Carla Morreale From: Lauren Ramezani Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 11:35 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Siamak Motahari; Les Jones; Bindu Vaish Subject: FW: Sunnyside Trail Segment - Grant Opportunities For Improvement Late correspondence for this item. tx Lauren Ramezani Sr. Administrative Analyst- Public Works City of Rancho Palos Verdes 3.10-544-5245 Laurenr@rpv.com www.palosverdes.com/rpv From: Madeline Ryan [mailto pvpasofino(5yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 11:25 AM To: Lauren Ramezani Cc: Ara Mihranian; Bindu Vaish Subject: Sunnyside Trail Segment Grant Opportunities For Improvement Hello Lauren, Ara and Bindu Thank you all for taking so much time with us, proponents and opponents, of this project. I really believe that the dollar amount applied for should be based on the more critical needs. The critical needs, in my opinion, is to make safe the trailhead access. That being the area between the two developed parcels. It is obvious that the slope needs to be stabilized to protect Mr. DeGeralamo's property and provide safe access for pedestrians/equestrians and the suggestion of retaining walls is certainly the way to go. From there the northside of 2477 and its dubious drain should be another critical need. The switchbacks would make sense and keep trail users within the City -owned easement. However, I question the need for a bridge and the exorbitant amount of money needed to purchase and place a bridge. In addition, where are the maintenance funds for future repairs coming from? Changing the scope of work now, exclude the bridge, and apply only for the amount of funds that would enhance, embellish and make safe this very critical link to the trail networks bordering our City might 'bring home the bacon' we need to realize this much desired access. Thank you again for your hard work and diligence in pursuing avenues to fund trail opportunities within our City. Madeline Ryan 28328 Palos Verdes Drive East RPV "May the Trails be with you" ... Madeline Carla Morreale From: sharon yarber <momofyago@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 7:46 AM To: CC; Carla Morreale; Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com>; jim_knight@juno.com; Jerry Duhovic; Brian Campbell; Anthony M. Misetich Subject: Sunnyside Ridge Road Dear Members of the RPV Council, I support the notion of seeking a grant for the improvement of the Sol Vista Trail between Sunnyside Ridge Road and Palos Verdes Drive East, as this is an important link to the trail network, especially for residents on the east side of the Hill. That said, I encourage the Council to modify the proposal sought by staff so as to reduce the scope of the proposed project to that which is reasonable and necessary and to reject those portions of the proposed project that will likely be seen by the grantors of the grant as excessive and, frankly, grandiose. To seek that which is unnecessary runs the risk of getting nothing rather than something to fix this relatively minor problem. This issue has languished in the City since at least 2004, and a simple and relatively cost effetive alternative is availble and should be pursued. There is no question that the first several feet of the trail from the trailhead at Sunnyside Ridge Road need improvement. A horse clearly cannot navigate a tread that is about 4-5" wide adjacent to a steep slope. If the initial portion of the trail were to be improved by flattening and wideing it, it would be safe and perfectly fine. Beyond that, brush clearance and constuction of simple switchbacks (no railroad ties are needed) coud be easily and inexpensiely installed. The idea of a bridge to traverse a tiny culvert is ludicrous and absolute overkill. Indeed, equestrians (of which we have none on our staff or Council) will attest to the fact the a horse would far rather traverse terra firma through a ditch than cross a man made, above ground bridge. If the grant decision makers were to investigate the sight and see the area over which a bridge is sought they will surely laugh at us and reject our ludicrous request out of hand. The bottom line is this - please scale back the scope of the project to something that is reasonable and cost effective. What staff has proposed is beyond over the top and beyond what any equestrian has sought. There is an old saying - "the pigs get fat and the hogs get slaughtered". Please do not be pigs and ask for more than we want or need and therefore get nothing. This is not a $465,000 project, and therefore we do not need to list this as an unfunded CIP. Designate $100,000 for it, seek a grant of $100,000, and if we get it, great, and if not, complete the project with City funds promptly. We can afford to do a scaled back project and this is long, long overdue. And please also place a trail marker at the trailhead. Thank you for your consideration. Sharon Yarber Carla Morreale From: Phyllis Glantz <phyllisglantz@verizon.net> Sent: Monday, September 02, 2013 10:56 PM To: CC Cc: Joel Rojas; bruce.ross@blross.com; Ross, Randy, dora@apolloemb.com; Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com> Subject: RPV Urgency Ordinance Dear City Council Members & Mr. Rojas, We have read the Anderson letter which is attached to the Urgency Ordinance text and other documentation and we believe that is an attempt by them to divert attention from the real issue before the Council — namely the Urgency Ordinance regarding the four plus years of ongoing construction at the Anderson residence and its effect on our neighborhood. We have only recently become aware of the Andersons' allegations when we began our landscaping project. We are now working with our landscaping project manager, our engineer and the City to address any issues. However, the real question is can the citizens of Rancho Palos Verdes have the expectancy of enjoying their homes in their own neighborhoods after what should be a reasonable period of home construction and renovation by their neighbors — not one that continues for years and years? Bill & Phyllis Glantz 32034 Sea Ridge Circle 5 Carla Morreale From: Ross, Randy <randy.ross@blross.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 7:19 AM To: Phyllis Glantz Cc: CC; Joel Rojas; Ross, Bruce L.; Dora Ngan; Susan Brooks <Subrooks08@gmail.com> Subject: Re: RPV Urgency Ordinance Dear City Council Members and Mr. Rojas, We agree. We look forward to seeing you this evening. Bruce and Randy Ross Randy Ellen Ross Attorney at Law CEO Bruce L. Ross & Company 609 Deep Valley Drive, Suite 390 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274-3629 Office Voice: 310-544-8881 Office Fax: 310-544-8841 Fax to Email: 310-802-7508 Cell: 310-850-2239 On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Phyllis Glantz <phyllis lg antznu,verizon.net> wrote: Dear City Council Members & Mr. Rojas, We have read the Anderson letter which is attached to the Urgency Ordinance text and other documentation and we believe that is an attempt by them to divert attention from the real issue before the Council — namely the Urgency Ordinance regarding the four plus years of ongoing construction at the Anderson residence and its effect on our neighborhood. We have only recently become aware of the Andersons' allegations when we began our landscaping project. We are now working with our landscaping project manager, our engineer and the City to address any issues. However, the real question is can the citizens of Rancho Palos Verdes have the expectancy of enjoying their homes in their own neighborhoods after what should be a reasonable period of home construction and renovation by their neighbors — not one that continues for years and years? Bill & Phyllis Glantz 32034 Sea Ridge Circle Carla Morreale From: Joel Rojas Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 11:31 AM To: Teresa Takaoka Cc: Carla Morreale Subject: FW: Urgency ordinance From: Ross, Randy[mailto:randy.ross(a)blross.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 11:28 AM To: Joel Rojas; Susan Brooks <Subrooks08(5)gmail.com>; Paul Christman; Glantz, William; Dora Ngan; Ross, Bruce L. Subject: Urgency ordinance Dear All, As I was reading the documents on the website, I noticed several references to "32303 Sea Ridge Circle" as the property owned by the Andersons. Please note that the property is actually located at 32039 Sea Ridge Circle. These references begin on page 5-1 and continue throughout. Thank you. Randy Randy Ellen Ross Attorney at Law CEO Bruce L. Ross & Company 609 Deep Valley Drive, Suite 390 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274-3629 Office Voice: 310-544-8881 Office Fax: 310-544-8841 Fax to Email: 310-802-7508 Cell: 310-850-2239 5 paeaQ Veordea IEcuyisseenuuy Corporation W N W Site Reconnaissance & CO Documentation at East Sideyard C/) Masonry Fence Wall CD Taken on 8/26/13 By Rick Morales, P.E. CL Ca CD Prepared For Dr. & Mrs Joe Anderson Project Address 0 32039 Sea Ridge Circle Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 0 Palos Verdes Engineering Corporation 27520 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 250, Rolling Hills Estates, California 90274 PVEC F.N.: 1-13-0241 e Dr. & Mrs. Joe Anderson 32039 Sea Ridge Circle Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 - Opinions - Geotechnical Report - Site Plan Test Location 1 Test Location 2 Site Reconnaissance & Documentation at East Sideyard Masonry Fence Wall Test Location 3 Taken on 8/26/13 by Ri No. C40289 P.E. PVEC F.N.: 1-13-0241 Test Location 4 Test Location 5 Test Location 6 0 Test Location 7 ANDERSON 32029 Sea Ridge Circle Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 PRIMARY ISSUES: A. The subject property @ 32029 Sea Ridge Circle receives subsurface runoff from the neighboring property to the east at 32034 Sea Ridge Circle. B. The existing masonry fence wall along the east property line of the subject property is surcharged by the higher elevated soil and root influences by several mature trees from the adjacent neighboring property to the east forcing it to behave as a retaining wall causing tilted conditions. C. The existing masonry wall on the adjacent property may be encroaching over the east property line and onto the subject property. D. The vertical height of the existing masonry wall on the adjacent neighboring property extends 2 feet above than the 6 foot tall masonry fence wall on the subject property which exposes an approximate 8 foot tall total height tall wall from viewing on the subject property. Rpl ANDERSON 32029 Sea Ridge Circle Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 PRIMARY ISSUE A: A.1 The February 25, 2013 Hamilton & Associates geotechnical report indicate on page 3, "Based upon our observations of the site conditions, in our opinion, the moisture intrusion affecting the eastern portion of the subject lot is likely caused by one or a combination of the following: 1. Migration of subsurface water derived from irrigation and rainfall on elevated yard and planter areas on the adjoining lot to the east. 2. Inadequate provision of surface and subsurface drainage systems to collect and dispose of water accumulating within planters and retaining wall backfill on the adjoining lot to the east. 3. Moisture infiltration through the block retaining wall on 32034 Sea Ridge Circle. 4. Unidentified subsurface contributions such as broken or leaking subgrade lines. It is our recommendation that the neighboring retaining wall subdrain system be researched and equipped with appropriate drainage improvements, as neccessary." 0 A.2 We (PVEQ recommend that a proper waterproofing barrier on the neighbor's retaining wall and a proper drain device at the base of the wall be designed by a licensed Civil Engineer. The runoff collected by the drain system will likely require a sump pump system to direct water to the street. PRIMARY ISSUE B : B.1 All Test Locations 1 - 7 provide vertical readings indicate that the masonry fence wall at the subject property is tilted away from the neighboring property with readings between 89.0 degrees - 89.9 degrees where 90 degrees is true vertical. B.2 The rear section of the subject masonry fence wall at Test locations 1 & 2 improperly retains the neighbor's rearyard soil. We noted that there is no retaining wall along the neighbor's property to support their rearyard. B.3 There are several very tall trees that occur in the planter adjacent to the neighbor's retaining wall. It is possible that the neighbor's retaining wall is also tilted due to the absence of any base drain device as well as from tree root influences. B.4 We recommend that a new retaining wall be designed at the neighbor's rearyard to support the lateral pressures introduced by the soil grade. B.5 We recommend that a licensed Arborist be consulted to examine the neighbor's trees to determine the affect of the existing root growth to the existing retaining wall. 0 PRIMARY ISSUE C: C. l The nail point in the street curb may indicate the location of the east property line. If this is the case, we noted that the east edge of the masonry fence wall on the subject property may be constructed away from the property line by 3 5/8 inches. C.2 The horizontal distances between the masonry fence wall and the neighbor's retaining wall at Test location 4 is 1 7/8 inches and at Test location 6 is 1 1/2 inches. This may indicate that the neighbor's retaining wall may be encroaching onto the subject property. C.3 We recommend that a licensed Surveyor be hired to determine the location of the east property line for the subject property and the location of the masonry fence wall in relationship to the masonry retaining wall. PRIMARY ISSUE D: D.1 The vertical height of the masonry fence wall on the subject property does exceed 6 feet above the concrete walkway. With the construction of the neighbor's retaining wall, we noted that it extends another 2 feet above the masonry fence wall. D.2 We recommend that this issue of a wall condition exceeding 6 feet visibly from the subject property be brought to the attention of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Building Department. IN 0 I to _ O I in O I Lr) _ O l\v� iI n _ O I in TEST LOCATIONS AT SOUTH PROPERTY LINE CMU FENCE WALL _71i ti� � I� �� 1�, 7 —t . � •. •i _ .. � r'� ., �' .5 V �'. . tea/' '�3', •� P •+++ss� ' � •. '''� � i � � ,�4 f . r �1 f �A♦ ' \ �: �` � � � • !, �,.� / / I��fY 1 +� I 1 �`. � , � , , n ` e 1� R` �•' � � , ' � � N� � �� , �� "� �► .j �� � , r F A:� ., ` ,� M1 HAMILTON & Associates 1641 Border Avenue • Torrance, CA 90501 T 310.618.2190 888.618.2190 F 310.618.2191 W hamilton-0ssociates.net February 25, 2013 Project No. 08-1279 Dr. Joseph and Kathy Anderson 32039 Sea Ridge Circle Rancho Palos Verdes, California 90275 Subject: Memorandum of Geotechnical Engineering Observations of Moisture Intrusion Along Eastern Edge of Property, 32039 Sea Ridge Circle, Rancho Palos Verdes, California. Dear Dr. & Mrs. Anderson: We are providing this memorandum summarizing observations of moisture seepage conditions along the eastern property boundary recently encountered in the course of site remodeling activities. Site visits were made to the subject property between December 3, 2012 and January 15, 2013 to observe the moisture intrusion conditions along the eastern property boundary and provide, from a geotechnical/geological viewpoint, the likely contributing causes of the moisture intrusion and recommendations for remediation. The moisture -affected area, in relation to the residence and neighboring properties, is shown on Plate A, Geotechnical Site Schematic. SITE CONDITIONS The subject site (32039 Sea Ridge Circle) is located at the southernmost end of the Sea Ridge Circle cul-de-sac in Rancho Palos Verdes. According to available data, the subject lot was originally developed in 1985, and included a concrete block privacy wall along the eastern property boundary. We understand that the neighboring residence to the east (32034 Sea Ridge Circle) was built in 1987 at approximately the same elevation grade as the subject residence. tti Hamilton A Associates, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Construction Testing & Inspection Materials Laboratory Subsequent improvements to the rear yard of the neighboring lot include a swimming pool and surrounding deck area, elevated approximately 8 feet with respect to the adjoining Anderson property. The elevation difference is accommodated by a retaining wall constructed adjacent to, and approximately 2 feet taller than the original 6 -foot privacy wall on the Anderson property. An irrigated planter area extends along the outer edge of the neighbor's pool area, along the top of the retaining wall. Recent remodeling work on the subject property has involved shallow excavations to reconfigure utility trenches beneath the existing pavement along the eastern edge of the lot. Persistent moisture seepage and standing water have been encountered within recent trenching work along the east side of the subject lot. OBSERVATIONS It is reported that the eastern portion of the subject lot along the property boundary has exhibited unwanted moisture intrusion for many years in the form of wetness on and surrounding the block wall separating the subject property from the easterly neighboring property. A utility trench recently excavated along the eastern side of the property revealed the presence of open `head joints' acting as weep holes in between the bottom -most concrete blocks of the privacy wall. During and shortly after excavating, several inches of water was observed collecting in the trench. A portion of the `privacy wall' and footing were subsequently removed to observe the condition and proximity of both walls. Water was noted to immediately collect in the excavation by the owner and on-site crew. On December 3, 2012, observations were made of the utility trench and exposed privacy wall footing by a geologist from this facility in the company of Dr. Joseph Anderson, owner, and Mr. Stuart Cuellar, contractor. On this and subsequent site visits, persistent standing water was observed along the base of the privacy wall and in the adjacent trench excavation. It is our understanding that a portable sump pump has been repeatedly utilized to remove unwanted water from the work area, however water has collected immediately upon removal of the sump. According to the owner and site crew, the easterly neighboring property discontinued use of their sprinkler irrigation system during the last week of December 2012. On January 15, 2013, this office was requested to perform a site visit to observe the condition of the eastern block wall and trench excavation. No seepage or collected water was observed, and the work area along the southeast property boundary was generally dry to the touch. Anderson - Residence Addition M6'� February 25, 2013 08-1279 HAMILTON Page 2 & Associates FINDINGS Judging by the wail foundation and review of original grades, it is considered likely the block wall on the eastern boundary of the subject property was constructed as a free- standing privacy wall. The retaining wall on the neighboring property at 32034 Sea Ridge Circle was likely constructed to create the rear elevated pad area presently occupied by the swimming pool, deck and planter areas. Foundation and drainage system details for the neighboring retaining wall are not known at this time. Based upon our observations of the site conditions, in our opinion, the moisture intrusion affecting the eastern portion of the subject lot is likely caused by one or a combination of the following: 1. Migration of subsurface water derived from irrigation and rainfall on elevated yard and planter areas on the adjoining lot to the east. 2. Inadequate provision of surface and subsurface drainage systems to collect and dispose of water accumulating within planters and retaining wall backfill on the adjoining lot to the east. 3. Moisture infiltration through the block retaining wall on 32034 Sea Ridge Circle. 4. Unidentified subsurface contributions such as broken or leaking subgrade pipes. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that on-site and neighboring sources of water be checked and monitored to ensure that no leaks or broken pipes contribute unwanted moisture at the subject site. It is recommended that neighboring yard- and planter -irrigation areas behind and along the top of the neighboring retaining wail backfill be maintained and regulated as to not over water. It is recommended that the neighboring retaining wall subdrain system be researched and equipped with appropriate drainage improvements, as necessary. The drainage system should be designed in such a way as to not allow water to be released and build up between the neighboring retaining wall face and the Anderson screen wall and subsurface soils. At a minimum, the retaining wall would require a continuous backdrain to collect and alleviate buildup of hydrostatic pressure. All surface and subsurface Anderson - Residence Addition W1 �� February 25, 2013 08-1279 Page 3 HAMILTON & Associates drainage systems should conduct collected water to the street, or other approved outlet, via engineered, non-erosive devices. Other subdrainage alternatives may be considered but should first be reviewed and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to implementation. If unwanted seepage persists, a French Drain may be constructed on the Anderson property as a secondary measure to collect and dispose of subsurface water. We thank you for the opportunity of working with you. We look forward to assisting you during construction -related activities. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, HAMILTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Vero ica T Inay Staff Engineer ic'� - �7 avid T. Hamilton, M.S., P.E., G.E Principal Engineer VT/DTH/: rsm Distribution: (4) Addressee f NAL O (�5 F MAENS O0 No. 1597 C�(� a. CERTIFIED ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST Eirik Haenschke, P.G., C Project Geologist FESSIp AS W -cc CE 272 m flc o ! * F�(P. NJ orevN�c �FOF CA0- Attachments: Plate A - Geotechnical Site Schematic Anderson - Residence Addition M © February 25, 2013 08-1279 HAMILTON Page 4 & Associates 4t to � R iJl'~ ii L1.iH ' wj „71k • I I':: Of Palos Verdes Engineering Corporation Consulting Structural Engineers �T 27520 Hawthorne Bl. • Suite #250 • Rolling Hills Estate, CA 90274 - Tel (310) 541-5055 • Fax (310) 541-0321 • email: infoic;pvec com 90" PROPERTY LINE (ASSUMED) JOB Anderson 01-13-0241 SHEET# 1 OF 3 CALCULATED BY RM DATE 8-29-13 CHECKED BY RM DATE B-29-13 SCALE: N,T.S. CURRENT ANGLE OF CMU WALL WALKWAY SLAB 90" DR. AND MRS. JOE ANDERSON O32039 SEA RIDGE CIRCLE � RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275 TEST LOCATION 2 1 S1 • • T 0 t'hFW r- ,yam r. anti` �"� ' ~'' ' �` ' •a ..� .- - - - . � �T ',her 1' \ yam♦ fl+-' "�� AV ,tom w � ' • - 1 ,. X14 V,M�_Y�•1,,�;J� N id me A • • rt' r i mo -- No 17 41. 4F I 'T .. so o4t ' i T --a �1 tom• - _ - .1 •�I Y` ., a ��,. !' � _ 'i .tel W � r _ ry� acv ' i T T 9 tom• - _ - .1 •�I Y` ., a ��,. !' � _ 'i .tel W � r _ ry� acv T 9 . I 0 4 4-� (pq) 0 am Palos Verdes Engineering Corporation Consulting Structural Engineers 27520 Hawthorne BI. • Suite #250 • Rolling Hills Estate, CA 90274 - Tel (310) 541- 5055 • Fax (310) 541 0321 • email: infb@vpvec.com ORIC m PROPERTY LINE (ASSUMED) JOB Anderson 01-13-0241 SHEET# 2 OF- 3 CALCULATED BY RM DATE 8-29-13 CHECKED BY RM DATE 8-29-13 SCALE: N.T.S. N OF CMU WALL )F CMU WALL WALKWAY SLAB 90" DR. AND MRS. JOE ANDERSON 32039 SEA RIDGE CIRCLE 3l0 RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275 I TEST LOCATION 4 1 S2 I n • �-�`''- -.r.,r,- .. '.�._... ti - 1 _' i{y.� 1� .��.',. t._ • - t..' �. u ,- .. ��. , ,l' ,Ji. .- t fit..+, �. •�1s Sr ill., t.1 ,r�i�x�f', �!- . .. 1 r •• 'Y w • '7 r af� . .�.�_ �* r �' f - � s �: i' • . '.i' .., ` : .• � � .. • � � �! •. t, 0 0 i u 0 i ,:;...;7:. i � � a �. _;.�..p... r, 42 I lw . q - :..� t? a Palos Verdes Engineering Corporation Consulting Structural Engineers 27520 Hawlhome BI, • Suite #250 • Rolling Hills Estate, CA 90274 - Tel (310) 541-5055 *Fax (3 10) 541-0321 •email inf rvpvec.com PROPERTY LINE (ASSUMED) JOB Anderson 01-13-0241 SHEET # 3 OF 3 CALCULATED BY RM DATE 8-29-13 CHECKED BY RM DATE 8-29-13 SCALE: N.T.S. - LOCATION OF CMU WALL 19-3/8" IGLE OF CMU WALL ;9.2° 77" WALKWAY SLAB DR. AND MRS. JOE ANDERSON �NO32039 SEA RIDGE CIRCLE RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275 TEST LOCATION 6 1 S3 n i I f F_> i t 1 i ; i i i I f F_> i Ll r �°a 'r �: r WAIM 01, Carla Morreale From: cicoriae@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 4:42 PM To: cc Cc: Ara Mihranian Subject: Tonight's Agenda items 3 and 6 Mayor Brooks, Mayor ProTem Dujovic, and Council Members Campbell, Knight, and Misetich, have comments on two items on tonight's agenda: Item 3: 1 want to express support for the proposed improvements in the Abalone Cove Project Plan. I'd also like to express gratitude for having the opportunity to provide input in the planning process. It has been a pleasure exchanging ideas with the group of community members involved in this process as well as Ara, other staff members, and the consultants. Item 6: 1 never found a staff report for this item. Clicking on the link for the item only brings up a 3 - page letter from Carol Lynch. With help, eventually I did find the Long Range Property Management Plan. Is there also a staff report? Regarding the LRPMP, I am concerned that property that is in the NCCP is not described as such. Section C lists just Abalone Cove as being in the NCCP. Based on the maps and my experience serving on the PUMP Committee and subsequent volunteer work with PVPLC, at least one other property described in the document is also in the NCCP—the property described as the Archer Range. The description of each of the 4 parcels within the Abalone Cove property has a paragraph that reads as follows (or close to it): This parcel is to be within the City's proposed NCCP Reserve, and uses inconsistent with the parcel's Reserve status would not be permitted under theNCCP. The Reserve conserves regionally important habitat areas and provides important habitat linkages between patches of conserved habitat (see additional discussion above, Section C). Even if the property was not located with theReserve, permits would need to be obtained from the State and Federal governments before CSS habitat could be removed from this property. The description of the Archery Range property does not contain any reference to it being in the NCCP, yet it is in there, was reviewed by the PUMP Committee for trail location and uses, and is monitored by PVPLC volunteer KEEPERs. Is this intentional or an error? If intentional, the question of whether CEQA is triggered should be addressed more closely. In addition, the public should have specific notice of that intention and the opportunity to address the matter. Thank yiou, Eva Cicoria