Loading...
20141118 Late Correspondencew r tr ¢o � cw w c.rj } F LL) - L) {� x U ui W J Q I— W H0 - 'C Z p OC w n w U 2 In w2 LL J ? Q . Q U U w Z w z p it Q U r :/Y'�` �� �.. -� . 1' w' y � ��� �Y• 1 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2014 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 Emails from: Sharon Yarber; Madeline Ryan, Letter from Palos Verdes Peninsula Horsemen's Association L Updated Track Change Version of Parks Master Plan Update Survey 1 Email exchange between Greg Golombek and Gayle Plecha 2 Email from the Anderson Family Respectfully sub fitted, a& Carla Morreale ** PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted through Monday, November 17, 2014**. W:WGENDA\2014 Additions Revisions to agendas\20141118 additions revisions to agenda.doc Subject: FW: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report From: sharon yarber [mailto:momofyago@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 9:42 PM To: Madeline Ryan Cc: Lauren Ramezani; (Sunnyside HOA president) (ckmeisterheim@gmail.com); Anna McDougall; Bob Laman; Charlene O'Neil; Hal Winton; Jay Jones; Jean Longacre; John DeGirolamo; Lorraine Kirk; patpoddatoori@vahoo.com; Sherree Greenwood; Sunshine Subject: Re: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report I agree completely. The bridge was and is absolute overkill. This is not ever going to be an ADA compliant trail so no bridge is necessary. I have hiked it myself personally and can easily cross the ravine. Any horse could as well. On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Madeline Ryan <pvpasofmogyahoo.com> wrote: Hello Lauren, et al: It may be too late, but I do think the City of RPV should mirror the efforts of Rolling Hills and their improvements of the lower portion of Martingale Trail. This ravine has always been a challenging crossing, given the water that rushes through the area, washing out most of the good footing, making it quite difficult for equestrians to cross safely to traverse the other side and proceed to the Lower Willow Springs Trail. In dry weather, the stream is less of a threat but still an eroding force. With the acquisition of this lower portion of Martingale Trail, the City of Rolling Hills set out to improve this crossing, and I'm not sure what methods were used, but there is not a bridge in sight: What there is is a wide, elevated crossing covered in native soil, wide and dry, with the streambed flowing underneath, perhaps through a corrugated pipe. My point is, that to get across a ravine, it doesn't take a bridge costing tens of thousands of dollars now and in future maintenance costs. I know there is very little wiggle room when funds are granted based on applications and proposed improvements, but I do think we could do a simpler crossing for less money and keeping future maintenance costs at a minimum. Madeline Ryan Palos Verdes Drive East "May the Trails be with you..." Madeline z. From: Lauren Ramezani <LaurenRCc rpv.com> To: "(Sunnyside HOA president) (ckmeisterheim(agmail.com)" <ckmeisterheim()gmail.com>; Anna McDougall <Amcdou alc� Imo-yahoo.com>; Bob Laman <robert.laman@dslextreme.com>; Charlene O'Neil <CMOneil(a),aol.com>; Hal Winton <winton4jesus(cD-juno.com>; Jay Jones <01000(a)_cox.net>; Jean Longacre <jeanlongacre ,aol.com>; John DeGirolamo <idegirolamo(c-,)me.com>; Lorraine Kirk <Irne(a-)sbcglobal.net>; Madeline Ryan <PVpasofino-yahoo.com>; "patpoddatoori(a)-yahoo.com" <patpoddatoori(a),yahoo.com>; Sharon Yarber <momofyago(c-gmail. com>; Sherree Greenwood <russ(a-cheapvintage.com>; Sunshine <sunshinerPv(a-)-aol.com> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 8:05 AM Subject: FW: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report Good morning, Attached please find a link to the 11/18/14 City Council meeting staff report regarding the Sunnyside Ridge Trail grant project and request to award an engineering design and construction management contract for the project. The meeting starts at 7 p.m. at Hesse Park. http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/citycouncil/agendas/2014 Agendas/MeetingDate-2014-11- 18/RPVCCA CC SR 2014 11 18 1 Sunnyside Ridge Trail Improvement.pdf The staff report is 4 pages. However, before you press "print" be advised that there is a total of 50 pages which include the project site map, contract, and email correspondence. If you have any questions regarding the staff report please feel free to contact me. Thanks Lauren Ramezani .Sr. Administrative Analyst- Public Works LACity of Rancho Palos Verdes 310-544-5245 Laurenr@rpv.com www.paIosverdes.com/rpv Subject: FW: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report From: Madeline Ryan [mailto:pvpasofinoCa@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 7:14 PM To: Lauren Ramezani; (Sunnyside HOA president) (ckmeisterheim@gmail.com); Anna McDougall; Bob Laman; Charlene O'Neil; Hal Winton; Jay Jones; Jean Longacre; John DeGirolamo; Lorraine Kirk; patpoddatoori@yahoo.com; Sharon Yarber; Sherree Greenwood; Sunshine Subject: Re: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report Hello Lauren, et al: It may be too late, but I do think the City of RPV should mirror the efforts of Rolling Hills and their improvements of the lower portion of Martingale Trail. This ravine has always been a challenging crossing, given the water that rushes through the area, washing out most of the good footing, making it quite difficult for equestrians to cross safely to traverse the other side and proceed to the Lower Willow Springs Trail. In dry weather, the stream is less of a threat but still an eroding force. With the acquisition of this lower portion of Martingale Trail, the City of Rolling Hills set out to improve this crossing, and I'm not sure what methods were used, but there is not a bridge in sight. What there is is a wide, elevated crossing covered in native soil, wide and dry, with the streambed flowing underneath, perhaps through a corrugated pipe. My point is, that to get across a ravine, it doesn't take a bridge costing tens of thousands of dollars now and in future maintenance costs. I know there is very little wiggle room when funds are granted based on applications and proposed improvements, but I do think we could do a simpler crossing for less money and keeping future maintenance costs at a minimum. Madeline Ryan Palos Verdes Drive East "May the Trails be with you..." Madeline From: Lauren Ramezani <LaurenRCa.rpv.com> To: "(Sunnyside HOA president) (ckmeisterheim(o)gmai1.com)" <ckmeisterheimC&,gmail. com>; Anna McDougall <Amcdougalll aC�yahoo.com>; Bob Laman<robert.lamanadslextreme.com>; Charlene O'Neil <CMOneil(a),aol.com>; Hal Winton <winton4jesus �iuno.com>; Jay Jones <0000Qcox.net>; Jean Longacre <jeanlongacre(@7aol.com>; John DeGirolamo <idegirolamoCa.me.com>; Lorraine Kirk <lrne sbcglobal.net>; Madeline Ryan <PVpasofino .yahoo.com>; "patpoddatoori(a�yahoo.com" <patpoddatoori(c)yahoo.com>; Sharon Yarber <momofyagoC@__gmail.com>; Sherree Greenwood <russ _cheapvintage.com>; Sunshine 1 <su nsh i nerpvCa).aol. com > Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 8:05 AM Subject: FW: Sunnyside Ridge Trail Grant Staff Report Good morning, Attached please find a link to the 11/18/14 City Council meeting staff report regarding the Sunnyside Ridge Trail grant project and request to award an engineering design and construction management contract for the project. The meeting starts at 7 p.m. at Hesse Park. http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/citycouncil/agendas/2014 Agendas/MeetingDate-2014-11- 18/RPVCCA CC SR 2014 11 18 1 Sunnyside Ridge Trail Improvement.pd The staff report is 4 pages. However, before you press "print" be advised that there is a total of 50 pages which include the project site map, contract, and email correspondence. If you have any questions regarding the staff report please feel free to contact me, Thanks Lauren Ramezanj Sr. Administrative Analyst- Public Works LO""City of Rancho Palos Verdes 310-544-5245 Lau[enr@r v.com p www. alosverdes.com/rpv From: Melody Colbert <melcolbert@aol.com> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 6:08 PM To: CC Subject: Letter from Palos Verdes Peninsula Horsemen's Association Attachments: SunnysideRidge2014_11.pdf Please see attached correspondence regarding Sunnyside Ridge Trail Improvement. Text is also pasted below for convenience: PO Box 4153 Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA 90274 November 17, 2014 Dear Mayor Duhovic and Members of the City Council, On behalf of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Horsemen's Association, I am writing to express the organization's pleasure in seeing that the restoration of the Sunnyside Ridge/Sol Vista. Trail (the "Trail to Everywhere") is moving along; however, we are concerned about the pace at which this project is progressing and the ballooning costs. The budget of $465,000 was arrived at based on staff's estimates. Pursuant to the grant application, $77,500 in design and consultant fees was anticipated. This KOA proposal of $140,500 is nearly twice that amount, and the Willdan proposal of $321,643 is so exorbitant that it makes the excessive KOA proposal seem reasonable by comparison. We are concerned that this KOA contract will seriously deplete the total funds necessary to complete the restoration project resulting in an eventual decision not to complete it at all, and loss of the grant funds. According to the grant application, this completion date for the project was anticipated to be September 2015. Now staff is talking about December 2015. Why has there been a delay? This project includes one challenging element - engineering the first 40 feet or so of the trail and designing the appropriate retaining wall(s), and one element requiring professional engineering - the bridge. That's it. How much resident input is required for that? The improvement of the existing switchbacks with some railroad ties and decomposed granite, as called for in the grant application, is all that is left to restore this vital trail link. In order to keep the costs down, the public works staff can install the switchbacks and conduct yet another meeting with residents to obtain input (though this has already been done a few times) and provide that input to the consultant. We do not need a consultant to conduct any more meetings with residents. Please approve the contract with a reduced scope of work and lower cap on cost, so that we can stay within the original proposed budget and complete this by September 2015, and direct staff accordingly. r. Thank you for your consideration. Charlene O'Neil, President Palos Verdes Horsemen's Association PO BIUI ox 4153 III Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA 90274 November 17, 2014 Dear Mayor Duhovic and Members of the City Council, On behalf of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Horsemen's Association, I am writing to express the organization's pleasure in seeing that the restoration of the Sunnyside Ridge/ of Vista Trail (the "Trail to Everywhere") is moving along; however, we are concerned about the pace at which this project is progressing and the ballooning costs. The budget of $465,000 was arrived at based on staffs estimates. Pursuant to the grant application, $77,500 in design and consultant fees was anticipated. This K proposal of $140,500 is nearly twice that amount, and the Willdan proposal of $321,643 is so exorbitant that it makes the excessive K proposal seem reasonable by comparison. We are concerned that this KOA contract will seriously deplete the total funds necessary to complete the restoration project resulting in an eventual decision not to complete it at all, and loss of the grant funds. According to the grant application, this completion date for the project was anticipated to be September 2015, Now staff is talking about December 2015, Why has there been a delay? 'chis project includes one challenging element - engineering the first 40 feet or so of the trail and designing the appropriate retaining wall(s), and one element requiring professional engineering - the bridge, That's it. How much resident input is required for that? The improvement of the existing switchbacks with some railroad ties and decomposed granite, as called for in the grant application, is all that is left to restore this vital trail link. In order to keep the costs down, the public works staff can install the switchbacks and conduct yet another meeting with residents to obtain input (though this has already been done a few times} and provide that input to the consultant. We do not need a consultant to conduct any more meetings with residents. Please approve the contract with a reduced scope of work and lower cap on cost, so that we can stay within the original proposed budget and complete this by September 2015, and direct staff accordingly. Thank, you for your consideration, Charlene O'Neil, President Palos Verdes Horsemen's Association Late Correspondence: Updated Track Change Version of Parks Master Plan Update Surve 14LPar S e November 2014 - March 2015 itte 1 THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PARKS MASTER PLAN UPDATE SURVEY Draft Thank you in advance for helping to shape the future of the City's Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Resources! All responses are anonymous. 1. Do you live in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes? Yes No 2. If you are a resident, what are the cross streets of the main intersection near where you live? Street with Street Overall, how would your rate the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Recreation and Parks Department in its ability to provide physical parks and facilitiesre^rea4io ser-viees and ,,,.,,,., ams to the public? Circle the appropriate number. 1. Great 2. Good 3. Adequate 4. Fair 5. Not meeting expectations 4. Overall, how would you rate the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Recreation and Parks Department in its ability to provide recreation programs, activities and events to the public? Circle the appropriate number. 1. Great 2_ Good 3. Adequate 4. Fair 5. Not meeting expectations 4. City of Rancho Palos Verdes Parks Master Plan Update Survey PAGE 2 4:-5. Below is a list of some recreational activities or pastimes. Please check the box next to any activities you or your familLregu4a4y-participate in on a monthly basis. You may select as many as you like. [ ]a. Hiking, walking or jogging [ ]b. Swimming [ 1. Playing +o.,m s .,A j ]c. Playing lacrosse [ ]d. Surfing [ ] e. Horseback riding [ ]f. Going to the beach [ ]g. Skateboarding [ ]h. Using a dog park [ ]i. Working out at a gym [ �. Participating in senior proar spr-egr-ams at the Peninsula Senior- Cexier [ ]k. Playing golf [ ]1. Road -4bicycling [ ]m. Picnicking or relaxing in a local park [ ]n. Playing tennis [ ]o. Participating in a RPV recreation program [ ]p. Attending an RPV special event 11g Visiting a City PefWountain bicycling j In Playing baseball [ Is. Playin sg occer []t. Playing softball [ ]u. Playing football {#-.[ ]v.Playing volleyball Please list any other activities you participate in that are not listed above. -5-.6. Below are some actions the City of Rancho Palos Verdes could take that would affect parks and recreation programs and opportunities in Rano a Pales Ver-descitywide. Please check whether you support, don't support, or have no opinion on whether the City should pursue any of the followin&t-he options that ye„ support. You may oleet as many as , 1i 0 [ ]a. Approving the 13building of 4ef .4--- City of Rancho Palos Verdes Parks Master Plan Update Survey PAGE 3 [ ]b• Building a new Community GepAe o the grounds ^_at r ager, rind P-ar4 [ ]c. Building a new C;45,14ail a4 Pein4 Vieeffte P"'Civie Center- (site of euFfent City Hall) [ ]d. p,,,.,.h.,sing !a -n for Ddevelopment of additional playing fields and outdoor recreation elements such as basketball or tennis courtsand othe,..,etive ro e atie f4eilities [ ]e Approving fl,0 19B„;iaing of a teen ee 40„ Building of physical recreation facilities such as a community center, gymnasium, pool or childrens play r� ound [ ]£ Preserving n,,,.,,hasin g u undeveloped land and pr-ese.. ing i4 for wildlife and natural habitat 6-.7. A number of ideas have been brought up over the years regarding possible uses at Point Vicente Park/Civic Center property (site of current City Hall). Please check the ^,-,tions you sppei4whether ou support, don't support or have no opinion of the following_ options. You may selec4 as many as .,,.,,';ke t+a. Building a multiple sport gymnasium with basketball and volleyball courts f+b. Building an outdoor swimming pool f+c. Building an indoor swimming pool H -d. Adding more outdoor athle4;e ut4s for tennis, as v elleyb"", „'te1111is or paddle tennis courts f+e. Building a band shell or amphitheater with lawn seating 4f. Building a skate park f+g. Adding playing fields for soccer, baseball and other field sports f+h. Creating a village green with gardens and walkways f+i. Providing a permanent dog park j. Building walking paths with fitness stations k. Building outdoor basketball courts 1. Building a children's playground in. Building bocce ball courts n. Building a tricycle park for tots o. Building an arts/cultural center Is there anything not listed above that you would like to see at Point Vicente Park/Civic Center? •-- mss. Below are a number of possible ideas for Ladera Linda Park .Please check whether you pport, don't support or have no opinion on the following elementsla^e a eheek ,,.,ark by any of the following elements you would s of 4 at had( ra Linda Pa fkYoumay seleet as many as you like. f- f+a. New community center f+b. Walking paths with fitness stations H -c. Gymnasium +d. _Additional Paddle Tennis Courts (currently two) t f+e. Tennis court (currently none) f+f. Bocce Ball Court(s) _ f+g. Expanded Nature Center . f+h. Athletic Fields f +i. Indoor Pool f+j . Outdoor Pool f+k. Tricycle Park for tots City of Rancho Palos Verdes Parks Master Plan Update Survey PAGE 4 Is there anything not listed above that you would like to see at Ladera Linda Park? 8.9. In your opinion, what is the single most important thing the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Recreation and Parks Department can do to improve the quality of life for its residents? 9:10. Please add anything else you would like to share in the section below. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS AND FOR BEING A PART OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PARKS MASTER PLAN UPDATE If you have any questions about the update or this survey please contact Senior Administrative Analyst Matt Waters at 310-544-5218 or mattw@rpv.com From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Hello Teri and Carla, Leza Mikhail Monday, November 17, 2014 5:03 PM Carla Morreale Teresa Takaoka FW: SJF Late Correspondence site plan and picture.pdf Please include this email exchange and attachment (in color please) in the late correspondence to the City Council for St. John Fisher. Thank you, Leza Mikhail Associate Planner City of 12ancFio (Palos Verdes Planning Department 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 www.palosverdes.com/rpv/planning/­`planning-zoning/­­index.cfm (310) 544-5228 — (310) 544-5293 f lezam6a rpv.com From: Greg Golombek [mailto:greg@hyndman-hyndman.comj Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 4:41 PM To: Gayle Plecha (gplecha@sjf.org) Cc: Shelly Hyndman; Leza Mikhail; Msgr. David Sork (dasork@sjf.org) Subject: RE: SJF Late Correspondence Please see attached site plan from the stage 1 construction of the convent/rectory remodel. The was a note on the site plan which called for the fence to be removed in its entirety. (See attached). Also, please note that when the fence reached the sidewalk to the west, it just ended, and you could still just around the fence to walk back into the landscaping along the hillside. I have attached a photo that shows the fence was in disrepair, falling over, and rusty. (see attached). We now have a retaining wall along most of the distance where the fence was along this south side. I hope that this helps. Let us know if you need anything else. Greg Golombek Hyndman & Hyndman Architects 1967 North Coast Highway 101 Encinitas, CA 92024 PH: 760-634-2595 www.hyndman-hyndman.com From: Gayle Plecha [ffl, ilk :,.cpl c,ha_c sjf arg,] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 3:09 PM To: Leza Mikhail Cc: Msgr, David A. Sork; Shelly Hyndman Subject: RE: SJF Late Correspondence Importance: High Hi Leza, Thank you for forwarding this to us. I do not recall the location of the fence that was removed. Shelly, is it indicated on any of the plans? I also just read your staff report for tomorrow night's City Council review of our project. Hopefully the Council will accept all of your recommendations. Thanks again, Gayle From: Leza Mikhail [mailto:LezaMCr.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 9:21 AM To: Gayle Plecha Cc: Msgr. David A. Sork; Shelly Hyndman (Shell a)h ndman-h ndman.com) Subject: FW: SJF Late Correspondence Hello Gayle and Msgr. Sork, Attached is a letter from Douglas Butler which was submitted as late correspondence. He is referring to a fence that was removed along the south driveway during construction. Please be prepared to address this letter if the City Council brings it up. I do not see a reason that a fence would be required here by the CUP or Development Code. I also checked the Settlement Agreement and do not see a requirement through the settlement. Hopefully, it is not an issue with the City Council. I will see if they bring this up. Thank you, Leza Mikhail Associate Planner City of Rancho (Tacos Verdes Planning Department 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 www.palosverdes.com/rpv/planning/planning-zoning/index.cfm (310) 544-5228 — (310) 544-5293 f lezam r v.com From: Leza Mikhail Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 8:22 AM To: Carla Morreale (carlar�n�rpv cq ); Teri Takaoka (terit rpv carr) Cc: Joel Rojas Subject: SJF Late Correspondence Hello Carla, Please see the attached late correspondence for the SJF item on tomorrow's CC Agenda. Thank you, Leza Mikhail Associate Planner City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Department 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 www.palosverdes.com/rpv/planning/planning-zoning/index.cfm (310) 544-5228 — (310) 544-5293 f lezam[a).rpv.com ^ � yP. Y {syr. ,��4� f:.,;`'r i. � r� ,%����'`•.L,. rl �' 1� r ► � r ` .:, �j: .�„ ,,,;. � - � •,, % s �' ,, .� •r'•,",may.. � �, •�ti. fir•:%+ r' +'? � `r'' � .r^r 1�;:c+'-,�. Ns r rir r JY s ^7F, Y rP. - , +✓. Fes" ,.{+.��ji" ,lf^,irr ,+* s, y•�1+-Z , t 1 i fi 1 �• � `` et•: 4igi.T^�. - � r,I'• we kc,, . t, �r'tja• r !� tE .L'1H�,al-••fir'` ~ A �i �� J. r 4•i J, r Jj7�i1`1{�rr. � i � t..r. ,• (,' /' is d( 1� } �' ,;. A 4-::. y E H Ii J , r From: Joel Rojas Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 3:23 PM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka; Carolynn Petru; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>; Paul Christman Subject: FW: Council meeting November 18, 2014 Attachments: Dear Mayor 111314.docx; vacuflow documentation.pdf; vacuflow HVS-1005 IAQ Green health sheet 111714.pdf; whole house vacuum studies bacteria might 111714.pdf Late correspondence related to item No. 2 From: Fineart paintings[mailto:fineartpaintings@outlook.comj Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 3:14 PM To: Joel Rojas Subject: Council meeting November 18, 2014 Mr. Rojas, I've been attempting to send emails all day, and I realized that bulk email has not worked. Therefore, I will send the emails one at a time. I will send you the letter that I sent to the mayor. Please feel free to call me at 310-408-9006 Joseph Anderson November 18, 2014 Dear Mayor Duhovic, Council Members and Staff, Construction is going according to schedule and we are on time. The sump pump and the pool resurfacing have passed inspection. The French drain has been installed on the East side. The east and west sides of the house are very close to being back filled. The property is clean. Constant attention is being paid to minimize dust and noise. I have received a report from Palos Verdes engineering explaining why water continues to come from Glantz's property and filling my trench areas. Two engineers evaluated the problem; Rick Morales and Noel Aquino. The two civil engineers and Hamilton Associates had previously determined that the water that is impacting our property is subterranean and is also related to excessive watering. (the Glantz's also had a broken pipe ) The French drain installed by the Glantz's was improperly placed. It is too high and doesn't collect the subterranean water. The excessive water is related to the newly planted tall ficus trees and other irrigation. I've been previously warned that the expansive soil in both of our properties can lead to structural damage if there is water infiltration. Quality Concrete warned also warned me that I do not have caissons on the east side and I am in danger of subsidence movement of the building if I continue to have water infiltration. Ken Poole, an attorney and expert on this type of problem warned me that this is the biggest problem that I have and it does need to be addressed. I was told that the Glantz's engineer did not do a final inspection. He merely looked at photographs. The engineers had design two very large sump pump on both sides of my property to catch the Glantz's water. It had been proven that the water from the Glantz's property had migrated all way to the west side of my house. The engineers tell me that is likely that my new system should catch the water. I cannot take a chance. The problem is no different than the dewatering wells that the city uses to help catch water in the landslide areas. The water on Glantz's property has to be stopped before it comes onto my property. If my house or the Glantz's house moves because of excessive watering it will impact the entire neighborhood. I kindly had submitted the original engineering evaluation report (dated August 26, 2013,) to the city. With the information from the report, the Glantz's would have the opportunity to use the information in order to solve their water problem. Please review that recommendation. To be noted, in addition to the problem of sub -surface water, it was recommended that a license arborist be consulted regarding the trees and the root growth. I am asking the city to be involved. As I noted above, any shifting or sliding of either properties will have a major effect on all surrounding properties. The Glantz's drain system needs to be redone. A sump pump and a proper French drain was recommended in the initial report, and this should be done. The water has been excessive and is dangerous. At the October 7, 2014 council meeting, my entire statement was related to communication. For example, I did state that I wasn't receiving emails from the neighbors to the city, and when I finally received them after multiple request I was able to change things accordingly to make the neighbors 0 happier. I emailed Paul Christman (11/12/14) and requested that all emails be forwarded to me since the October Council meeting. To my surprise- there were emails. There is now another Council meeting of which we were not informed. In summary of what's below I would like to say that for many years, before the recent construction started, my family has been harassed by the Glantz's. A tree branch was removed from a tree in front of our kitchen. Billy Sims whom I had working at my house, identified the tree trimmer that had illegally came on to my property and deformed my tree. I had an opportunity to talk to the tree trimmer, and asked I him why he removed the limb of the tree. He informed me that he was working for Glantz's and they ordered him to cut the branches. He stated the branches were blocking her view. I asked him if he knew this was dishonest and he stated that he knew it and he apologized. At that time, I should have called the police. The police were called on multiple occasions. One time a vehicle was 3 inches into her driveway so she called the police. Kathy asked her kindly to let us know if there is an issue and we will take care of the problem instead of calling the Sheriff's Department for a car parked a little off of the curb. I would address any issues of how the kids park the cars immediately. We would rather see the police involved in keeping the neighborhood safe and catching criminals. Kathy and I wish to be good neighbors and did everything we could to develop a positive relationship. One day Kathy and I saw the Glantz's gardener cutting off the plants on my fence. The gardener told Kathy that he had been instructed by the lady and would Kathy please tell her to not have him cut my plants. Kathy I both asked her to stop cutting the plants since the fence is completely on my property. From that point on she has become much more fixated on my family. She is vindictive and harassing us and using the power of the city to punish us. This past summer, I was on the roof going over the positions of my solar panels. Mrs. Glantz came out and told me that she will not allow me to have solar panels on my roof. She emphatically stated that she will not allow me to have my solar panels. Several months ago, Paul Christman was summoned by Mrs. Glantz. He stopped by and talked to me about the issue, which was related to getting our east wall completed on her side. At that time, he asked us to put covering over the area of construction so that she is not annoyed by the construction. The covering was done before he left her house. When Mr. Christman went over to Mrs. Glantz's house and had discussion with her. She told him that she wanted the constructions stopped. He pleaded that it was better to let us complete the construction. The current situation relates to communication and political pressure, and a neighbor that is set on using the city to punish us. It was stated in the public meeting of the Council that Mr. Rojas that he was punishing us. He already knew that it was the contractor that I hired that had caused construction delays, but we were being punished. Two weeks ago, Mr. Rojas called me and stated that he wanted to hear the fans. He came up and listened to the fan and then spoke to Mrs. Glantz. He informed her that the fan was not visible through her ficus trees. He also wanted to hear the vacuum cleaners. The vacuum cleaners were installed in 1985. Mr. Rojas asked me several times in what year the vacuums were installed and I informed him again that they were installed in 1985. The vacuum cleaners have been in use since that time. Up until this time there has never been a complaint about the vacuums. When I listen to the vacuums with Mr. Rojas, both vacuums were loud. I called the vacuum company to have the service man 30 inspect the vacuums and explain why they appear to be louder than I remember. I was told that the mufflers had been removed. The contractor had removed the mufflers from the vacuums without replacing them. The mufflers were immediately installed. I asked the technician if this is what this vacuum is supposed to sound like. He stated that are vacuums are quieter because of the newer mufflers. On Mr. Rojas visit above, we discuss the fan facing the Glantz's ficus trees. I stated that could have a screen placed over the fan if necessary. Mr. Rojas stated that I didn't need to do this until he told me. We are still waiting as to if a shield will be necessary. Mr. Paul Christman arrived and stated Mr. Rojas said that I had combined the fans and the vacuum cleaners to work together- and this did not make any sense to Mr. Christman. This is a misunderstanding on Mr. Rojas's part. I showed Mr. Christman the fans and the vacuums. He saw that the new mufflers were installed. He also saw that the whole house fan and vacuum have nothing to do with each other. He didn't listen to the vacuum cleaners. They are typical vacuum cleaners for a large house. The brand is a Vacuflow and is one of the best companies. One of my children has a severe sinus problem for which surgery was recommended. The use of the central vacuum system has eliminated the need for the surgery. He has an allergy to dust mites. He is not affected by construction dust. Portable vacuums shed the dust mites. They are not effective in controlling my son medical problem. On November 6, 2014, Mr. Christman and Mr. Rojas arrived to listen to the vacuums. Unfortunately, they arrived as the cement truck was pouring the cement for the sump pit on the east side. They did have the cement truck stop working and listened for approximately a minute to each fan. They told me that the city manager and the attorney had already decided that the exhaust pipes on the vacuums are to be placed through the roof. In other words, the decisions were made before anyone listens to the sound of the muffled vacuums. They told me that it was a political decision. They stated that the whole situation has gotten totally out of control. It was a political mess. Mr. Rojas did not have a firm understanding about the way a central vacuum system works and that the vacuum had been installed in 1985. Why is this an issue now in 2014? 1 called the vacuum company again and they are going to relook at the system. There are many such vacuum systems here in Palos Verdes. The company that we use has installed thousands of these machines which also requires special licensing by this specific company to install. Mr. Christman had a suggestion for decreasing the sound. Mr. Rojas asked me again when were the vacuums install. He asked me three more times about the year of installation. Joey made it very clear that was 1985. There is a problem when both the city manager and the attorney make a decision of what to do with the vacuums without anyone even listening to the vacuums after the mufflers were in place. The decision to have the vacuums vent through the roof was made prior to Mr. Christman and Mr. Rojas listening to the vacuums with the mufflers in place. It appears that the city manager and attorney have made a decision not based on facts, but instead on political punishment. After years of personal harassment the Glantz's are using the city punish us. We have spoken to the local installer of our vacuums. It is strongly recommended to NOT vent the vacuums to the roof. He is one of only a few licensed installers of Vacuflow. He will come up and test the units to ensure that they are functioning up to the standards of Vacuflow. We will follow through with any suggestions that he may have if there is a problem. Steve Ambuter, the Western Regional Manager for vacuum flow, is now involved. Subject matter fan The reason why you use the whole house fan is to decrease the use of electricity. In Southern California, a whole house fan is used for 15 minutes before starting an air -conditioner or heat pump. The nights in California are cool and you can save electricity by opening your windows. During the day, especially during Santa Ana conditions, the heat comes in quickly. If you have the fan on longer than 15 minutes you'll actually end up warming up your house by pulling in hot air. The fans are for minimum use. The whole issue of the fans is a big deal about nothing. In other parts of the United States where the evenings are warm it may be worthwhile to have a fan on at nighttime. I don't expect to be using any of the fans for an extended period of time otherwise the defeat the purpose of the whole house fan by using electricity. All the fans have been adjusted and soundproof, so that they are below 60 dB. It is difficult to make a decision when there are inaccuracies in a report. I'm referring to Carolyn Petru's report of October 29, 2014. 1 realized that she can report only what she is told. Unfortunately, the facts are wrong. Item # 2 states that the fan in the garage exhausts the sound from the vacuum system. The two mechanical units are completely unrelated and independent. When the information is inaccurate it doesn't mean that you call a Council meeting to have the vacuums or the fans removed. When I spoke to Mr. Rojas on 11/6/2014, he informed me about the pending political disaster. I asked him to talk to me first before any decisions were made. That didn't occur. I asked the vacuum company to relook at the vacuums to see that they are running properly. The mufflers have made a great difference. I want them to look at other alternatives such as adding more mufflers if it's appropriate. Different devices could be made or developed if necessary. The first paragraph states "a total of three fans on the property that are bothersome to the neighbors". In regards to the west wall fan, facing the Zhang property, the crew has been working in the hot utility room. We have used the fan while they are working to circulate air. The fan is quiet and unobtrusive; Mrs. Zhang wasn't even aware that the fan had been working all through the summer. The fan does not blow out dirt or dust. The fan is used to circulate air. Clean air, the same air that we breathe. Not once did Mr. or Mrs. Zhang ever ask us about the appearance of the fan, or complain about noise. Glantz has started a hysterical panic. Glantz letter goes out on 10/14/14 6:36 pm and Zhang chimes in at 9:37pm. In Glantz' email of 10/14/14, paragraph two, there are a few obvious self-serving untruths. She states that "when both fans are in operation that they are very loud and obnoxious - disturbing her peace and quiet". Fact: The fans are quiet, and have never been on at the same time. The fan is not the same fan and duct system that was on the roof. Yes, the roof fan was removed. It was not permitted to have the mechanical on the roof without it be enclosed. The subcontractor that was involved with the fan was removed from the job and I am contemplating legal action against him. My whole east side of my house directly faces the adjacent property. For some reason Glantz think's that we are personally directing our fans at her. Physically, the east wall of the house was the only place to install the fan, and was approved on our plans. The fan in the garage will have minimal use. 4 Garage fan behind the ficus trees kitchen fan behind the ficus trees 2. This is the same model of the fan that we have in the kitchen for which we have a permit. During the ordinance period of 2013, 1 was ordered to complete the wall on the east side. Mr. Christman knew this included the fan in the wall of the garage, of which was noted on the approved plans. He was happy with the results of the construction of the wall. During the ordinance of 2013, my ability to pull permits was improperly stopped as a punishment. Now that the new ordinance is in effect, we are dutifully trying to have all paperwork and permits agree with the approved plans, during the very short time remaining, and we are now being incessantly harassed. The fan has no connection to the vacuum system. It is quiet fan. It will probably be used a few times a year and is located in the garage. The vacuum company has installed our type of central vacuum systems all over the peninsula. The mufflers on the vacuums that were inappropriately removed by the contractor. The day after Mr. Rojas heard the vacuums, (as noted in Carolyn Petru's letter of 10/29/14) the new mufflers that were on backorder were available and were installed. They had already been on back order, and the muffler installation had nothing to do with Mr. Rojas' visit. Mr. Christman was aware that mufflers had been installed and if this information was forwarded to Ms. Petru, another letter should have been forthcoming showing updated information about the vacuum being updated with the mufflers. The vacuum has always been in the garage on the east wall- since 1985. 3. House cooling fan West: as noted above this is a quieter fan 45 dBs. It is sound proofed. It does not and never will exhaust the vacuum. It's a smaller fan as it only ventilates two rooms. The paragraph beginning with October 22, (Carolyn Petru's email 10/29/14) refers to the written notice to cease operation of the fans as they are currently in a status of unpermitted. To address the current concern about the unpermitted fans please note that last year, we were ordered by Mr. Christman under the urgency ordinance of 2013, to complete the vertical walls, both east and west. We were not allowed to work on the interior of the house until the vertical walls were complete (per Mr. Christman). We complied and completed the walls including the installation of the fans that had already been approved on the plans. We were all trying to complete the walls so the neighbors would stop complaining. To complete the walls I had to use the plans that were approved. We should have received a permit for the fans as per our plans, but due to the 2013 ordinance, Mr. Christman did not issue the required permit. The ordinance required that the walls be completed, so we completed the walls per plan which included fans. Mr. Christman was quite pleased with the completion and appearance of the walls. Also, as per the 2013 ordinance, we were not allowed to pull the permits to complete the paper work requirement of the city (just another example of catch 22). We only did what we're ordered to do. 01 We were ordered to complete the walls including fans, without a permit. Considering the above it is improper to say that we did work without a permit without the perspective of what happened. Post ordinance of October 2014, we submitted paperwork for the required permits for the fans, but instead of issuing the permits, we were asked to resubmit the previously approved plans for the fans before receiving a permit. Also noted was the slight relocation of the east side wall fan to a niche area even further distancing the fan from the property line. It is clear that the fans were approved by planning and should still be in a state of approval clearing the way for a proper permit to be issued. As mayor, please sit down with the personnel of the city. You should understand how the decisions are being made with inadequate information. Please talk to the councilman driving the situation for the Glantz's. My children asked me "do I have political power" I told them that I have definitely have political power and I use it on every voting occasion. I had consulted with two engineers that helped me pick the appropriate fans for our house. This whole situation has been completely inflated and blown out of proportion. Tonight on November 17, 2014 Kathy received a call back from Mr. Rojas regarding her request to receive the permits for the fans. Kathy told me that Mr. Rojas had requested that the fans be vented through the roof. The fans are under slanted copper roofs. Slanted copper roofs are the most prominent artistic part of this house. It would be inappropriate to pass vents through the copper roofs. The current copper roof have been completely soldered or braised. If we try to remove the copper panels, they would have to be destroyed and new panels would have to be made. The copper roofs are not the waterproofing of the roof, it is the membrane below the roof that provides the waterproofing. The cost to do it now after the sections have been completed is prohibitive. It is the wrong time of the year to open up the roof. If the copper panels were replaced our time schedule would be affected. The fans all meet code requirements. They are under 60 db. The 2013 ordinance that was passed cost us over $200,000 and extended the construction by 7-8 months. In my first meeting with the City Council, I expressed that my greatest desire was to have an energy efficient home. Mayor Duhovic did question why the pool was taken away from us during construction. The Glantz's focused on impeding what was important to us ( energy, conservation...) and made every effort to make sure I did not accomplish these environmental goals. East roof roof Response to the neighbor's emails of October 14, 2014. Mrs. Zhang was concerned that when we start using the fan it will start to annoy her. The men have been using the fan for several months C7 ) 6 now and we have had no complaints up until Mrs. Glantz got the Zhangs involved to further punish us. The fan is located in a utility room that is encased in wood and soundproofing. The fan is so quiet that Mrs. Zhang had no idea that the fan was even in use. The fan is necessary to be able to exhaust the accumulated hot air the collects in the high points of the gym. It is the only way to circulate the hot air out of the room, and the west wall is the only wall that is not a roof or a window or the entry to another room. The ducting is soundproofed and has multiple dampers. As far the vacuum is concerned, it is a dustless vacuum, there is no dust that escapes through the exhaust. The exhaust is only used for cooling the motor to avoid overheating. No dirt or dust goes through the exhaust. The vacuum has been in existence since 1985. 1 spoke to the vacuum company and they strongly do not recommend that the vacuum's exhaust be placed through the roof. That side of the house has been finished in terms of construction. There presently is a copper roof with the longest panels of the slanted roof directly over the vacuum. It would be necessary to remove two panels and violate the integrity of the waterproof membrane underneath. More importantly, all of the Lutron (electrical) wires are in the joist underneath the copper roof. I do not wish to create another leaking roof situation with an ill-advised vent puncture through a thoroughly waterproofed roof and the copper surface. We have spent an enormous amount of time and research as we have had to rebuild our home. The house is a work of art. Great care and thought was put into the exterior look of the house, including where the fans are located. This only serves to increase both the Zhangs' and the Glantzs' property values instead of diminish them as declared by Glantz. The Zhang children are in no danger from the fan, from noise or appearance. The objection to the fan being as loud as a jet engine takes me back to October 2013 when a councilman first suggested that a fan "could be" as loud as a jet engine. (Quite theoretical) That councilman has still to come and see firsthand what the issues are and could possibly come to a different conclusion than as reported by Glantz. She states emphatically that we have large noisy fans. We don't. And yes, RPV does have a noise ordinance that we respect. We don't need to be punished. We are in the best position to correct any problem. I want to emphasize that the vacuum has been in the same place on both sides since 1985 without a complaint until Mrs. Glantz more recent involvement and eagerness to complain. I am no longer allowing my family to be harassed any further. Please do your best to extricate the city of the Glantz's campaign of vengeance, punishment and abuse of process. We are so close to being done and cannot teardown (unnecessarily) already completed construction when we desperately need to focus all time and energy into completing the work still unfinished by the imminent due date. We are in the process of completing all of your suggestions from the meeting of October 2014. Thank you, The Anderson Family. 7 i-AYA., KUPOIG Y011f, k6M( `&V wliole-liouse cleaninq !j. CloaningAccessories & Kits for All Jobs 00V .I V,,tv. i,. Mhmml'IV' itSrclo 7.1)11%clz"f�t.,%Iol,,I,N^„V,,o, R9 the t Oth-<CM•I0,4 Cla—V. a VAZ I. fQt titl howu-MI't wfflraO ,hr %jp4.,Q dvnv 0430” rT--N A- 41nu,a,4 IN logo Eltnn-. O;S rho RrrEn OMCe as wv.l pvtnt*% w ,srZr: d.<:3•04 Qf- v;,j > fc, wtars.,jv,;-,VArU'LO Y..I P-4 V.:O —U, I - FO (M,C—M- US Ofe, Q1. M- !W 1v "JO—g 0! F,1, n -v 10 rci to laltr y mOm %Za Fl I! paCmw;% am acmmoos Po.,ca -m,( rq:M "vedw Wwrnwe on K,,v s:+dhce Awrl. rvge. wwltt, twil mi,tts, todite, 9 a 14 ."Q. Pi The Right Control Vacuum Sqatom for All Your Cleaning Needs Full -Service Warranty ... . . .... wliole-liouse cleaninq !j. CloaningAccessories & Kits for All Jobs v,pw Tvttc,- 4'1 howu-MI't wfflraO ,hr %jp4.,Q dvnv 0430” dftvvn, 1-4 tX� 41nu,a,4 IN logo Eltnn-. powohad cwdzo quick C"14c, OM fo, wandsard I 1.j (M,C—M- US Ofe, Q1. M- !W 1v "JO—g 0! F,1, n -v 10 rci to laltr y mOm %Za Fl I! paCmw;% am acmmoos Po.,ca -m,( rq:M "vedw Wwrnwe on K,,v s:+dhce Awrl. rvge. wwltt, twil mi,tts, todite, 9 a 14 ."Q. Hose Management Offers the Ultimate Cont, iPv. vjVm (- N% W, %I. pnarral m <, rt 1I r st— .1 1V41.1 11w 1. w1l, I'Ll IN al -t mv,pa —t, 3 IV w N- 'In, 0. q —s .,"I C;I, --, w—, It .1d Itpo., m. IN n m m -v twt, T.rlFinatrnlRl Or, 4.00, Spot it 1 I"ift " It— I — v,4.t i,N %I" q ,p I, Irl P I Mitt,. The Cyclonic Difference ulunto ftwm MR Mao mAkamum WAMW F#RmNwl.tt MR, Poo e.'A"t hl, P....'.4 1"Nu.., irk -o,14 Tv TRUE MLOW gill /I (.1u)iCes Ar• a lieei,111i.ier lionto 212-11,,LiLII-- V - TRUE MLOW gill . . . . . . . . . . . .... . ... .. Fl6i. RW QiCiiM.. ...... ..... Fr6w . .... .. ...... . . ... .... .... ..... . .. .. -- ..... ........ .. . .......... J Clean Starts Here' VACUFLO® CENTRAL VACUUM SYSTEMS: Ixe answer lor clean inaloor air Creating a healthy home environment for your family is important. According to the U.S. EPA, indoor air pollution is America's most serious environmental health problem. The American College of Allergists also reports that 50% of all illnesses are caused by, or aggravated by, polluted indoor air. No wonder indoor air quality is one of the top priorities for today's homeowners! VACUFLO Central Vacuum Systems can help improve indoor air quality by capturing 100% of all vacuumed dirt, dust and allergens with no recirculation of particles back into the living area. Leading organizations are talking about the health benefits of central vacuums like VACUFLO: um systems that are vented to the outdoors can significantly reduce dust mites, pollens, animal dander and other allergy causing agents." -US EPA `Allergy sufferers' symptoms can be improved up to 61 % when using a central vacuum system." -University of California Davis School of Medicine "Central vacuum systems are among the best indoor air quality investments for your home." -BUILDER Magazine "The healthiest type of vacuum to operate is a central vacuum that is vented outdoors." -The Healthy Home Institute ..clean air l choice 0/ Dirt makes a clean exit VACUFLO features Cyclonic Filtration Technology® (CFTT"), a unique filtration method that ensures maximum vacuum power every time. With CFT dirt, dust and allergens make a clean exit from your home. C/ACUFLO _)) V BUILT-IN CENTRAL VACUUM SYSTEMS VRCUFLO@ ix(? • green choice clean air green choice ��— Today's environmentally conscious homeowners are demanding and getting improved energy efficiency, better indoor air quality and smarter use of building materials. These "green" building initiatives not only protect the environment, but also improve comfort and boost home value. Organizations like Earth Advantage°, Environments for Living°, and the US Green Building Council with its LEED°, (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Rating System are providing standards and certification to ensure that best practices are followed across the country. Central Vacuum Systems have a unique role to play in "green" homes. By removing 100% of vacuumed dirt and dust, they ensure healthy indoor air and reduce the discomfort of allergy sufferers by more than 60%. VACUFLO Systems also offer these benefits: All you discard is the dust Unlike uprights, which are often discarded after only a few years, VACUFLO Central Vacuum Systems keep up worry -free cleaning for decades. A Limited Lifetime Warranty ensures it. No additional electricity VACUFLO offers turbine -powered powerheads. Turbines run off the airflow of your central vacuum system so they require no additional electricity to operate. Say NO to noise pollution VACUFLO features sound -dampening designs that keep homes peacefully quiet.There's never been a quieter, more powerful combination than VACUFLO Central Vacuum Systems and Turbine Powerheads. FACU FLO BUILT-IN CENTRAL VACUUM SYSTEMS' 512 W. Gorgas St., Louisville, Ohio 44641 1-800-822-8356 330-875-5556 fax 330-875-7584 www.vacuflo.com HVS-1005 5/07 OH -P Products, Inc. 2007 Litho U.S.A. BEAM CENTRAL VACUUM SYSTEMS Clinical research proves only a Beam Central Vacuum System relieves allergy symptoms. Research has revealed a new source of relief for allergy sufferers that is not a drug: a Beam Central Vacuum System. Clinical research at the University of California at Davis* has shown a Beam system provides measurable relief for allergy sufferers. The research Indoor air pollution is one of the most common problems addressed by allergists and is troublesome for their patients. Central vacuum systems often are recommended for removing pollutants. Researchers set out to determine whether a central vacuum system can relieve allergy symptoms. The findings Unlike conventional vacuums that can recirculate dust, a Beam system removes dust, mites, pollen, animal dander and other allergens, and is superior to a conventional vacuum in providing relief from allergy symptoms. See clinical summary on backside for further detail. UC -Davis clinical study proves a Beam° system reduces allergy symptoms. Nasal I Non -Nasal I Eye I Sleep For a copy of the study, see a Beam dealer or visit beam.com. *Study results were published in an article entitled "The Influence of a Central Vacuum System on Quality of Life in Patients with House Dust -Associated Allergic Rhinitis;' which appeared in The Journal of Investigational Allergology & Clinical Immunology. The study was conducted under the auspices of Stanley M. Naguwa, M.D., and M. Eric Gershwin, M.D., both of the Division of Rheumatology, Allergy and Clinical Immunology, University of California at Davis School of Medicine, Davis, CA, USA. 0 i M #lust, dander, mold, dust mites, pollen and • make millionsof in their own homes. Homes with p,. require extra -thorough, deep cleaning. Research shows that Beam° Central Vacuum Systems provide relief from major allergy symptoms. A clinical study was conducted at the University of California at Davis by Stanley M. Naguwa and M. Eric Gershwin titled The Influence of a Central Vacuum System on Quality of Life in Patients with House Dust -Associated Allergic Rhinitis. Data from self-evaluation scores entered by participants during a six month data accumulation period was the basis of the study. Measurement device used in this study is Juniper Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire, which is used and accepted worldwide. Differences in scores from baseline to central vacuum results are statistically significant in all RQLQ domains (ie. groups of symptoms). 2.5 2.37 2.0 w47% m 1.5 improvement i 1.0 1.21 0.5 0.0 --- Baseline Conventional Central Vacuum Vacuum Nasal Symptoms: Patients who used central vacuum systems rated the severity of stuffy/blocked nose, runny nose, sneezing and postnasal drip 47 percent less than the baseline and 49 percent less than when they used a conventional vacuum. 2.0 I' I 1.561% w improvement to 0.78 0.5 0.0 _...._ Baseline Conventional Central Vacuum vacuum 2.5 .. 2.0 2.09 48% 11.5 improvement a 1.0 1.11 - Central Vacuum Non -Nasal Symptoms: Patients who used central vacuum systems rated the severity of fatigue, thirst, reduced productivity, tiredness, poor concentration, headache or feelings of being worn out 46 percent less than the baseline and 46 percent less than when they used a conventional vacuum. Steep SyMptprms 2.0 1,87 w ,.s 44°i 0 improvement 1.0 0.92 os 0.0 Baseline Conventional _ Central .., _ _- Vacuum Vacuum -_re_, Eye Symptoms: Sleep Symptoms: Patients who used central vacuum systems Patients who used central vacuum systems rated the severity of itchy, watery, sore and rated the severity of sleep symptoms including swollen eyes 61 percent less than the baseline difficulty getting to sleep, waking up at night and and 60 percent less than when they used a lack of a good night's sleep 44 percent less than conventional vacuum. the baseline and 49 percent less than when they used a conventional vacuum. © 2007 Electrolux Home Care Products Ltd., #071010.3.07 Powerful deep cleaning. Up to five times more powerful than an upright vacuum, a Beam Central Vacuum System deep cleans carpets, upholstery, draperies, wood and tile. You'll even dust less often! Easy whole -house cleaning. Why lug a heavy vacuum? Beam's powerful electric powerhead, lightweight 30' crushproof flexible hose and versatile cleaning attachments let you clean everywhere you want to clean with ease. Accessories available for cleaning blinds, ceiling fan blades — even for grooming pets! Affordable relief. A Beam system can be installed in your new or existing home in just hours — with no mess, no disturbance to your walls. There's no outside venting required. TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: NOVEMBER 17, 2014 SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, November 18, 2014 City Council meeting: Item No. Description of Materials Emails from Sunshine L Email from Eva Cicoria 1 Letter from Douglas Butler 2 Email exchange between Bruce Ross and Building Official Christman 4 Emails from: Dottie Lancaster Hashizumi; Jarel & Betty Wheaton; Sheri Hastings Respectfully ubmitted, Carla Morreale WAAGENDA\2014 Additions Revisions to agendas\20141118 additions revisions to agenda through Monday afternoon.doc Subject: FW: Business as usual Re: RPV CC Meeting on 11-18 From: SunshineRPV aol.com [rnailto:SunshhineRPV a aol.com] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2014 8:59 PM To: pv_pasofino@ ahoo.com; amcdou�all yahoo.com; jeanlorl acre c aol.com; r� delin@Rmail.com; radlsmith cox.net; leneebilsl<i @hotmail.com Cc: Carolynn Petru Subject: Business as usual Re: RPV CC Meeting on 11-18 Hi Madeline, KOA is a "preapproved" standby Engineering Consultant. The "plans and specs" they produce will go out to bid for the actual construction. That is why I am so worried about what Staff tells them to design. The California Coastal Trail, Salvation Army Trail, Abalone Cove and San Ramon Canyon projects, even the PV Nature Preserve, have all been, shall we say "not compliant" with the spirit of the not updated RPV Trails Network Plan. The item before the City Council is simply a shuffle of moving approved funding from one category to another. The Council has no say in what work gets done, when. UNLESS... at least three of them speak up. ...S In a message dated 11/14/2014 6:23:53 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,pvpas)fino@,yahoo.com writes: Okay, I guess Staff wants this to go to KOA and when did the bids for this take place? Must of missed this one. "Award Engineering Design and Construction Management Contract for Sunnyside Ridge Trail Improvement Project (Supports 2014 City Council Goal, City Trail System Enhancement) (Motahari) Recommendation: Award a Professional Services Agreement for the Sunnyside Ridge Trail Improvement project to KOA Corporation to provide design development services, public outreach; geotechnical, structural, and civil engineering; landscape architecture and design; and construction management and oversight for an amount not to exceed $140,450." "May the Trails be with you..." Madeline From: SunshineRPV@aol.com Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2014 10:49 AM To: CC; Carolynn Petru; Michael Throne; Cory Linder Subject: November 18, 2014 RPV City Council Agenda Item I. Sunnyside trail "improvement" MEMO from SUNSHINE TO: RPV City Council, Staff and interested parties RE: November 18, 2014 RPV City Council Agenda Item I. Sunnyside segment trail improvement grant. I support approval of this Agenda Item with one modification. RPV tax payers should not have to pay for work which has already been done. But, that is what Staff is recommending. Authorize the funds. Just don't authorize the delay in the timing. This work should be completed before the May 2, 2015 Palos Verdes Loop Trail Relay. We, the people, have been asking for a geotechnical survey of this easement for going on ten years. The "community outreach" has been ongoing for said ten years. Go ahead and agree to pay KOA Corporation to provide design development ; geotechnical, structural, and civil engineering; landscape architecture and design; and construction management and oversight for an amount not to exceed $140,450. The one modification I am hoping for is that the existing RPV General Plan will over -ride Staff's compulsion to eliminate the Peninsula's emergency circulation trails network. Do not waste more time on "workshops". This trail connection needs to be restored as soon as possible. The RPV City Council has not been given the opportunity to amend the RPV Conceptual Trails Plan according to the action taken which reduced the easement width at the south end of 2477 Sunnyside Ridge Road. The RPV City Council has not been given the opportunity to amend the RPV Conceptual Trails Plan according to the action taken which scraped away the existing trail on the north end as a part of the Sunny Side Storm Drain Project. Do it now. The design consultant needs to be given the following criteria and get on with their work. Design, construction and maintenance should be done so that the updated (per the latest Council policies) Trails Network Plan can read: November 18, 2014 DRAFT, page?. Rancho Palos Verdes Trails Network Plan Specific unpaved trail status and concepts SECTION FIVE A. Palos Verdes Loop Trail - RPV portions described counterclockwise. (See Appendix B. Top -o' -the -Hill Loop Trail - No trail segments in this Section. (See Appendix ???) C. Palos Verdes Drive Trail System - RPV portions described counterclockwise. (See Appendix ???) D. Coastal Bluff Top Trail System - No trail segments in this Section. (See Appendix ???) S5A28 The Sunnyside Segment Route: This specific -course trail begins on Sunnyside Ridge Road at the Narbonne right of way. (GPS S5A28- 1). This trail extends northward across Greenwood Canyon to Palos Verdes Drive East. (GPS S5A28-9). Status: Category I. In this case, the Public Works Department is expected to take the lead on maintaining this City owned infrastructure. Development/Maintenance Criteria: TYPE 5. Curb cuts should have anti -slip surfaces. Access: This trail is a portion of the Palos Verdes Loop Trail (18) connecting the Sol Vista (A27) and Deadman's Curve (A29) Segments. This trail is a portion of the Alta Vista Trail which connects Dapplegray Park (RHE) with Sol Vista Park (RPV) through horsekeeping zoned communities. It can be reached from both parks where there is some residential street parking. "Respect the neighborhood" signage should be provided. No trailhead amenities need to be provided. Objectives: This trail should be preserved and improved to provide a public, non -motorized, off-road connection of the Palos Verdes Loop Trail as user demand increases. 0 From: cicoriae@aol.com Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 11:32 AM To: CC; Cory Linder; Matt Waters Subject: Parks Master Plan Community Survey Mayor Duhovic, Mayor Pro Tem Knight, Council Members Brooks, Campbell, and Misetich, Cory and Matt, I realize that this item is on the consent calendar, but I have a few comments, questions and suggestions regarding the Parks Master Plan Online Community Survey for your consideration. Survey question 3 asks: "Overall, how would you rate the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Recreation and Parks Department in its ability to provide recreation services and programs to the public?" I suggest that the question be divided into two --one inquiring regarding satisfaction with programming at City parks and a second inquiring regarding the parks' status, in general, so we can get a sense of how important it is to folks to make changes (or not). Survey question 4 says: "Below is a list of some recreational activities or pastimes. Please check the box next to any activities you regularly participate in. You may select as many as you like." I should think it would be helpful to give some indication of what constitutes "regularly" if the goal is to project/anticipate levels of use of particular facilities. I also think there should be a separate question inquiring about kids' activities, so it is clear whether the respondent should be answering on behalf of a family or identifying adults' or kids' activities separately. You might consider having an item for Road Bicycling and a separate one for Mountain Bicycling. Team sports is a very broad category --volleyball (indoor and out), basketball, baseball, football, soccer, etc. It is likely to generate an unduly large number of responses without giving a lot of useful information, versus individual sports that are broken down, particularly if parents respond regarding their kids' activities. Survey question 5 states: "Below are some actions the City of Rancho Palos Verdes could take that would affect parks and recreation programs and opportunities in Rancho Palos Verdes. Please check the options that you support." I notice that the references to building a senior center and teen center are listed as "approving" them, while the other items are actually building the facilities, e.g., community center and city hall. Is this distinction intentional? Is the thought to identify support (or lack thereof) to participate in the ongoing private fundraising of the senior center in RHE or to identify support for actually building one in RPV? Survey question 6 states: "A number of ideas have been brought up over the years regarding possible uses at Point Vicente Park/Civic Center property. Please check the options you support." There is always confusion with the reference to Point Vicente Park. Is it the intention to survey opinions regarding Lower Point Vicente Park, Upper Point Vicente Park, or both? This should be made clear. There are strong opinions in the community regarding what would be wholly inappropriate to build at Lower Point Vicente Park and what would be completely appropriate at Upper Point Vicente and I expect that respondents will balk at expressing support for most items on the list if they think there is a chance the survey will be interpreted to mean that these items are desirable at either location. Survey questions 5, 6 and 7 each ask for respondents to check options they support. These questions would solicit better data, I believe, if they each were phrased as 2 separate questions --inquiring of those activities or improvements that respondents would support and, separately, those activities or improvements respondents would be likely to use/engage in. One question gets to level of community interest; the other gets to level of community tolerance --for spending the money, for having a particular facility at a particular location, etc. For example, I support the idea of a skate park and dog park at suitable locations if the community wants them, yet I wouldn't be likely to use either. If the interest in use is not there, then I wouldn't support them. Thank you for your time and consideration. Eva DOTJGLAs BTJTLIEP. A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTO RN EY AT LAW 28441 HIGHRIOGE ROAD, SUITE 303 R(ILLING I-IILL.13 HSTATES, CAL11,ORNIA 9027,1r-4872 1310) 265-9999 FAX (3101 26S-4995 November 10, 2014 Via U.S. Mail and Fax, (310) 544-5293 Leza Mikhail Community Development Department 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275-53391 Re: CUP Review St. John Fisher ZON 2007-00492 5448 Crest Road Rancho Palos Verdes, CA Dear Ms. Mikhail: REcEz1vLzo I am a property owner on Valley View Road, Rancho Palos Verdes, California. The fence separating St. John Fisher Church and the Rancho Crest Homeowners' Association was removed by St. John Fisher Church during the construction of the church. There is no longer a fence along the south property line of the St. John Fisher property, along the access road from Crenshaw Boulevard to the beginning of parking spaces on the south prop- erty line. This has created a potential nuisance on the Rancho Crest Home- owners' Association open space property which adjoins the church. Without a fence separating the property, persons may enter the Rancho Crest Homeowners' Association open space property and hurt themselves. (D 2 Leza Mikhail Community Development Department November 10, 2014 Page 2 The lack of a fence leaves the homes in the Rancho Crest Homeown- ers' Association vulnerable to break-in from the rear of the property, where persons may be hidden by the trees and bushes. Very truly yours, V DOUGLAS BUTLER DB: j cm Butler\RentalProperties\ValleyView\ ChurchRemodel\CommDevDpt-Fence3,Ltr-111014 Ok From: Paul Christman Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 3:29 PM To: Fineart paintings Cc: Dora Ngan; Ross, Randy Ellen; phyllisglantz@verizon.net; dora; Randy; Joel Rojas; Greg Pfost; Ara Mihranian; CC; wanpingyuyu; Rob Kautz; Danise Holloway; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>; Carolynn Petru; Ara Mihranian; Paul Christman Subject: RE: Continuing Construction by the Andersons on Sea Ridge Circle in Rancho Palos Verdes This message is to inform you that this matter will be considered again by the City Council at their next regular meeting to be held on Tuesday November 181" From: Paul Christman Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 10:50 AM To: Ross, Bruce; Susan Brooks; Jerry Duhovic; Anthony Misetich; Jim Knight; Brian Campbell Cc: Dora Ngan; Ross, Randy Ellen; phyllisglantz@verizon.net; dora; Randy; Joel Rojas; Greg Pfost; Ara Mihranian; CC; wanpingyuyu; Rob Kautz; Danise Holloway; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>; Carolynn Petru; Ara Mihranian; Sandra Ishman; Tom DeFazio; Andrew Jensen; Paul Christman Subject: RE: Continuing Construction by the Andersons on Sea Ridge Circle in Rancho Palos Verdes I wanted to let you know that Staff has been researching other cities Ordinances, along with some additional information that we received related to the length of time allowed and penalties for certain ongoing construction projects. Staff has met with the City Manager and the City Attorney, and intends to present recommendations to the City Council at the Tuesday October 7th City Council Meeting. You requested to be informed of what additional action is proposed. The Staff report and proposals for consideration by the Council will be made available for all to review by the Thursday (10/2/14) before the meeting. Thanks, Paul From: Ross, Bruce [maiito:bruce.ross@blross.corn] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2014 3:36 PM To: Susan Brooks; Jerry Duhovic; Anthony Misetich; Jim Knight; Brian Campbell Cc: Paul Christman; Dora Ngan; Ross, Randy Ellen; phyllisglantz a_verizon n i; dora; Randy; Joel Rojas; Greg Pfost; Ara Mihranian; CC; wanpingyuyu; Rob Kautz; Danise Holloway; Carol Lynch qch rwlaw.com_> Subject: Continuing Construction by the Andersons on Sea Ridge Circle in Rancho Palos Verdes Dear Council Members of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, On September 1, 2013, Dr. Joseph Anderson stood before you and said that he would be finished with construction on his house on Sea Ridge Circle in Rancho Palos Verdes "within a month or two" It is now a year later and construction continues at full force despite a Resolution passed by the City Council stating that no new permits would be issued if the construction on existing permits was not completed on projects that have gone on for more than four years. We are aware that the City gave a 90 day extension in January of 2014, but that is long passed as well. Those of us who have lived through the more than five years of construction on the Anderson house have been told often that Dr. Anderson was going to be done in a month or two. As has been proven through the Council's own experience, these statements cannot be relied upon. We believe that now is the time the Council must take additional action. We suggest the following possibilities: First, the Council could pass an ordinance imposing a penalty for every day until the Andersons complete construction of the projects they have undertaken. Second, the Council can seek to put into place a receiver or other professional to manage the construction to its completion. Leaving the matters in the discretion of the Andersons and on their timeline has proven to be unacceptable. Please let us know what additional action you propose taking. Since it has been a full year since the matter was taken up before you, it is clear that action at this time is required. Bruce L. Ross 32026 Sea Ridge Circle Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 310- Subject: FW: Peafowl From: Dottie Hashizumi [mailto:dottiehash@cox.net] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 3:34 PM To: Daniel Pitts Subject: FW: Peafowl Forgot to tell you, I have not heard or seen a peacock in over 13 years. Very sad. From: Dottie Hashizumi [mailto:dottiehash@cox.net] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 3:27 PM To: 'danielp@rpv.com' Subject: Peafowl Mr. Daniel Pitts, Just to put my 2 cents into the conversation: I have lived at my address of 22 Coveview Drive, RPV since before it was a city. I love the peacocks. In my younger years, I attended the council meetings and listened to all these "new comers" to the Peninsula talk about the fact peacocks are not indigenous to the area. However, my feeling is they have been around way before 99% of us have been here. I even informed the City about Dennis Fett, a peacock specialist, but they didn't wish to pay his airfare way back when this all started. Anyhow, there are MANY OF US that LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the peafowl. Maybe some of our people should find out how Arcadia citizens have handled and love their peafowl ! And are proud of them ! Yes, they need to be controlled and there are several ways to do this with birth control methods. Plus, part of the City surveys of peafowl should include to/king to the homeowners where they are counting the peacocks and also doing a survey of residents. Not all us "older" folks are able to drive at night or go to council meeting like in our younger days. Right now, to me it is far more important to take care of these impossible trail people. Why the heck are they still out walking back from the trail at 8:20 at night? Still parking on Crenshaw at 8:30 at night ? We've had far too many burglaries, too much trash and too many "near accidents" on Crenshaw between Del Cerro entrance and St. John Fisher plus at our only entrance/exit from Del Cerro. Please forward this on to the other council members. Dottie Lancaster Hashizumi �f From: Ara Mihranian Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 10:41 AM To: Carla Morreale; Teresa Takaoka Cc: Carolynn Petru; Joel Rojas; Daniel Pitts Subject: FW: Peafowl Census / Trapping Plan 2015 Late correspondence for tomorrow night's CC meeting on peafowl. Ara Michael Mihranian Deputy Director of Community Development L)'RANGHC) � ,I��..`t'`�.:i LOSS ` ERE 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 310-544-5228 (telephone) 310-544-5293 (fax) aram@rpv.com www.palosverdes.com/rpv Do you really need to print this e-mail? his e_nia I .es> f,:.. c. ,n,a ns rr,f,1xrn.,u a.n t?zx(<>rq;rrg to the, t"Ity of rtarl=.a10 Palos Vr €.1u:>f wEric°) may b+> pr€vis,rccl, conr;dE:ntra, and or sre>t.oaeel frann scA sure, I. le, latir,r1 is .nter lk,-,d t)�iiy for Use of the individual or e'nUty darned, Una.,A ovize. dkv;r,. €nn,"Ition, dia%r t41florr, ig is s«€ctiy Pr; hib tell, `, � I ,,z!3 .r b E��_t �,�:!; ���s cn��li in r.r.;r�, ear �� e i�E: ter€ :r��,:,r+,:ir�r1 r, i Car{3;� �, €��ssr� notify '. �r �tir. �reer err a,r;? �;r ip�. E hank yCry 'f'r /est" r�y�t �-z�r.,e int. � � iuo.�. vn. From: Jarel Wheaton [mailto:jwheat2007@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2014 2:13 PM To: Ara Mihranian Cc: Carolynn Petru Subject: Peafowl Census /Trapping Plan 2015 Ara / Carolynn: The peafowl problem has now spread to our neighborhood. How do we make sure this area is considered and included in the census and trapping plans at the appropriate time? It seems to us that it would be easier to address the problem while the numbers are smaller. We counted 1 I peafowl at the intersection of LaGarita and Lomo last week. Normally, we see five or six at a time on houses/flowerbeds on a regular basis, but other neighbors who have large trees often see twice that many. Jarel & Betty Wheaton u From: Sheri Hastings <sherihastings@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 2:11 PM To: CC Cc: jim_knight@juno.com; robert.cumby@cox.net Subject: Re: Oct. peafowl study Attachments: Re: Oct. peafowl study Dear City Council Thank you for considering culling the local peafowl population. As I write this there almost 2 dozen visible from the window. We have had as many as 4 dozen+ here at a time. While I appreciate how they are a unique feature in our community and enjoy them in small numbers, such a great many can be unpleasantly noisy. This is especially true between January and April when they are even more noisy than usual. Please let me know if I can be of any assistance with this effort. I would think the local coyote population (5 here last night - and also needs to be culled I think) would assist with this as well but for some reason they do not seem to do so. Most Gratefully, Sheri Hastings 10 Vanderlip Drive RPV, CA 90275 310-544-1064 From: Sheri Hastings <sherihastings@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 12:22 PM To: Robert Cumby;jim-knight@juno.com Subject: Re: Oct. peafowl study Can we mail our input directly to you? I am looking at 26 in my backyard as I type this. I would love to see some of them rehomed.:) From: Robert Cumby <robert.cumby@cox.net> To: Robert Cumby <robert. cumby@cox. net> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 8:56 AM Subject: FW: Oct. peafowl study -----Original Message ----- From: jim knight(d�juno.com [mailto:jim knight(a)Ouno.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 4:01 PM To: robert.cumby(a-)cox.net Subject: Oct. peafowl study Bob, Attached is an Oct. follow-up peafowl study to the one the city conducted in June of this year. The staff will be recommending the city consider a peafowl removal program at the upcoming Nov. 18 City Council meeting next Tuesday. Anyone can give the city their input on the matter before or at the meeting. Please pass it around so the community is informed. Thanks, Jim