The URL can be used to link to this page

20150120 Late CorrespondenceCITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: JANUARY 20, 2015 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 1 Letters from: Ellen Berkowitz; Michael N. Friedman Respectfu ly submitted, A�2' Carla Morreale ** PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted through Monday, January 19, 2015**. W:\AGENDA\2015 Additions Revisions to agendas\20150120 additions revisions to agenda.doc T - . . From: Ellen Berkowitz < Ellen. Berkowitz@GreshamSavage.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 3:37 PM To: 'Michael N. Friedman'; CC Cc: Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>; Carla Morreale; Carolynn Petru; 'Brian Carter'; 'Matt Martin'; 'Julie Keye' Subject: RE: Green Hills' Appeal - Case No. ZON2003-00086 - Hearing Date: January 20, 2015 Michael — The references to the September, 2006 application package relate to the map attached to my letter as Exhibit B, which show Pacific Terrace along the property line. It is the same depiction of Pacific Terrace as contained in your August 8, 2014. Hope that at least partially answers your question. Thank you. Ellen From: Michael N. Friedman [mailto:mnfesq@hfllp.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 3:12 PM To: cc@rpv.com Cc: clynch@rwglaw.com; 'Carla Morreale'; Carolynn@rpv.com; Ellen Berkowitz; 'Brian Carter'; 'Matt Martin'; 'Julie Keye' Subject: Green Hills' Appeal - Case No. ZON2003-00086 - Hearing Date: January 20, 2015 Dear Council Members: I apologize for sending you an email regarding the above -referenced appeal, set for hearing at this evening's meeting. Unfortunately, Green Hills' attorney has the habit of sending lengthy correspondence at the very last minute in an effort to avoid having anyone respond to her. The use of the "11th hour" tactic is, perhaps, one of the reasons we are in this situation in the first place. If the applicant would give others a reasonable opportunity to review and respond to the information they supply, it would not now be complaining about the City's mistakes in its erroneous approval of Green Hills' amended master plan. At this point, I do not know how much of what I write will be properly "digested" by the council members and am, more likely, contributing to the administrative record that is being compiled for the likely Superior Court review of this matter. Nonetheless, it is important that the record be complete. Ms. Berkowitz made several references to the application package submitted by Green Hills in September 2006. She did not attach a copy of that package to her letter although it contains several other exhibits. According to her, all of the information regarding the "true" nature of the project is contained in this application package. Vista Verde resident, Matthew Martin, however, made request of the City Manager to provide copies of Green Hills' application for its revised master plan and was provided with an initial application filed with the City in 2003 and a revised application filed with the City in 2005. The erroneous and misleading information regarding the Memorial Terrace Mausoleum is contained in these two applications. I have attached them hereto for inclusion in the record of this proceeding. The exact words which I complained about in my letter to you dated January 12, 2015, are found in these applications. It appears, however, that Green Hills' application was deemed complete on November 22, 2006. Despite Mr. Martin's request, he was not provided with any revised application filed in September 2006. It appears, then, that the investigation of this matter remains incomplete and, before a decision is reached, Vista Verde urges the City to make a complete investigation of the facts underlying its approval of Green Hills' revised master plan. Thank you for considering this so near in time to tonight's meeting. Michael Friedman Mirharl N. Friedman HIRSCHBERG & FRIEDMAN, l.l_P 5023 IV, Parkway Calabasas Calabasas, California 91.302-14.21 Tel/Fax (818) 225--9593 Cell (818) 612-0822 Email mnfesq@hfllp.com Website www.hfllp.com Ellen Berkowitz Shareholder Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden, PC 333 South Hope Street 35th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Office direct: (213) 873-8395 Office main: (213) 213-7249 Fax: (213) 213-7391 1 Cell: (310) 592-3479 ww-w.GreshamSavage.com 1. Privileged and Confidential Communication. The information contained in this email and any attachmr.nls may be confidential or subject to the attorney client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. If you are not the interacted recipient of this Corn rnunicalion, you may riot use, disclose, print, copy or' disseminate the same. if you have received this in error, please notify the sender and destroy all copies of this message 2, IRS Circular 230 Notice, In accordance with Circular 230 of 'tie Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this ernail, including any attachments, is riot intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other recipient for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties that pray otherwise be imposed by the IRS, or (b) supporting, promoting, marketing, or recommending any transaction or matter to any third party. 3. Transmission of Viruses. Although this communication. and any attached documents or files, are believed to be free of any virus or other defect, it is the re:,sponsibilily of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free, and the sender does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage arising in anyway from its use. A. Security of Email, Electronic tronic mail is sent over the public internet and may not be secure_ Thus. we cannot guarantee the privacy or confidentiaIlly of such information, This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com From: Christie Bowman <Christie.Bowman@GreshamSavage.com> on behalf of Ellen Berkowitz <Ellen.Berkowitz@G reshamSavage.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:20 PM To: CC Cc: 'mnfesq@hfllp.com'; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com> Subject: Green Hills' Appeal - Case No. ZON2003-00086 Attachments: City Council -02 Letter re Staff Report Response with Exhibits.PDF Please see attached correspondence regarding Green Hills' Appeal (Annual Review of Case No. ZON2003- 00086). Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Ellen Berkowitz Shareholder Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden, PC 333 South Hope Street 35th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Office: (213) 213-7249 Ext.1802 Fax: (213) 213-7391 www.GreshamSavage.com 1. Privileged and Confidential communication. The information conlained in this email and any atlar;hrnents may be confidential or sub.ler..t loth(- attorney client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication you may not use, disclose: print, copy or disseminate ttae same if you have received this in error, please notify the sender and destroy all copies of this message. 2, IRS Circular 234 Notice, In accordance with Circular 2:30 of the Internal revenue Service, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this email, including any attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other recipient for, the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties that, may otherwise be imposed by the IRS, or (b) supporting, promoting, marketing, or recommending any transaction or matter to any thirst party. 3. Transmission of Viruses, Although this communication, and any attached documents or files, are believed to be free of any virus or other dofect, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free, and the sender does not ac(-,ept any responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. 4. Security of Email. Electronic mail is sent over [tie public internet and may not be secure. Thus, we cannot guarantee the privacy or confidentiality of such intormation This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com GRESHAM SAVAGE January 20, 2015 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL & U.S. MAIL Honorable City Council Members City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Blvd, Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Ellen.BerkowitzCu`GreshamSavage.com • Los Angeles (213) 213-7249 • fax (213) 213-7391 Re: Green Hills Memorial Park's ("Green Hills") Appeal of the Planning Commission's November 11, 2014 Decision, issued in connection with the Annual Review of Case No. ZON2003-00086 (Green Hills Master Plan) Dear Honorable City Councilmembers: According to the Staff Report prepared in connection with the upcoming January 20, 2015 City Council hearing (the "Staff Report"), the mountains of letters, documents, plans, testimony, minutes, notices, and everything else comprising the lengthy history of this appeal can be summed up into a single question: Did Green Hills mislead the City when it applied for amendments to its 2007 Master Plan Revision? Since Staff and certain current and former Planning Commissioners now seek to distance themselves from any involvement in the approval of the Pacific Terrace Mausoleum (the "Mausoleum"), approved as part of the 2007 Master Plan Revision, they have, quite obviously, a compelling interest in obtaining an affirmative answer to this question. For self-preservation purposes, it is in their interest to point the finger elsewhere and say "we must have been deceived," rather than to assume responsibility for a decision they now, in -hindsight, apparently regret. And, thus, they are today attempting to recast their own self-proclaimed judgment errors as the product of some fictitious grand scheme foisted upon them by Green Hills. But the City was not deceived. Green Hills advised the City of the location of the Mausoleum in the application packages submitted to the City long before the proposed Master Plan Revision came before the Planning Commission for approval. Perhaps no one at the City reviewed those application packages. Perhaps they didn't care where the Mausoleum would be located. Perhaps they were too busy paying attention to other issues, or too distracted to focus on this topic. We don't and can't know the answer at this point, because too many individuals involved with the 2007 "AN. Bill; 550 East Hospiutlity Lane. Suite 300 • S.ui Bernardino, California 92405 6�4x'r RIVFR.SII)C 3750 University Avenue, Suite 250 • Riverside. California 92501 / ,S \N 1)ILUU 550 West C Sweet. Suite 1810 • San Diem California 92101 LOS .-1'NGIU Lli5 333 South Hope Street, 35"' Moor • Los Angeles, California 90071 G583-000 -- 1523524 1 Honorable City Councilmembers January 20, 2015 Page 2 Master Plan Revision approval are now endeavoring to skew the facts and re -write history to protect their own interests. Given Staff's participation in the preparation of this Staff Report (and for that matter, their participation in the allegedly "independent investigations" of the Lilley Planning Group and the mysterious "internal" review), it is impossible to overcome the multiple conflicts of interest to obtain a clear view of the facts from the Staff Report and related materials. Nevertheless, we will attempt to respond to the allegations raised in the Staff Report. Unfortunately, most of the alleged "misleading" activities turn out to be the product of Staff oversights and are not the result of anyone's misdeeds or wrongdoing. As a preliminary matter, we should point out that we take no joy in highlighting these oversights. Green Hills and City Staff have maintained a pleasant working relationship over the years, and we recognize that mistakes can be made by both private parties and public entities when dealing with complex planning matters. Engaging in this type of adversarial combat with the City is at odds with Green Hills' mission and approach, and we have tried to avoid laying blame for any oversights committed during the Master Plan Revision approval process on any group or individual. Nevertheless, now that the Staff Report has chosen to portray Green Hills as deliberate liars, it appears that social niceties have gone out the window in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, traded for accusations, vilification and character assassination. Accordingly, we have no choice but to counter these unconscionable attacks as necessary. In addition to our response to the Staff Report, this letter also briefly discusses: (1) the City's inability to require Green Hills to apply for a variance at this point in the process; (2) the impropriety of the City's attempt to impose a moratorium on lawful burials; (3) the inaccurate conclusions contained in the Lilley Planning Group's latest report; and (4) a few overall thoughts on this annual review process. A. The Staff Report Does Not Identify a Single Misrepresentation. Based on the obvious conflicts of interests among individuals within the City, it is no surprise that the entire Staff Report is "spun" to paint Green Hills in a negative light. Nevertheless, after wading through the muckraking, it becomes clear that every alleged claim of "misleading" action on the part of Green Hills is, in reality, the result of an oversight on Staff's part or a misrepresentation of the underlying facts. A few examples: ➢ The Staff Report suggests that Green Hills originally proposed an 80 foot setback for the Mausoleum, but changed the setback to 8 feet just before the final Planning Commission hearing on the 2007 Master Plan Revision. This is blatantly false. Green Hills never proposed that the Mausoleum be set back 80 feet. As is evident from a review of Green Hills draft application package, G583 -OW -- 1523524.1 Honorable City Councilmembers January 20, 2015 Page 3 submitted in September, 2006 (five months before the February, 2007 Planning Commission hearing), the Mausoleum was always proposed to be immediately adjacent to the property line.' Green Hills never "changed" the setback, other than to correct the erroneous notation in the staff report prepared for the February, 2007 Planning Commission hearing. ➢ The Staff Report claims it lacked sufficient time to adequately review Green Hills' application for the 2007 :Master Plan Revision, suggesting that Green Hills deliberately waited to submit its application until one month before the February, 2007 Planning Commission hearing. In truth, as noted above, the application was submitted in September, 2006, five months prior to the February, 2007 Planning Commission hearing. Between the time the application was submitted and the Planning Commission hearing, Staff worked with Green Hills to refine and finalize the application; Staff also actively participated with Green Hills in community meetings to familiarize interested individuals with the contents of Green Hills' plans.z Thus, Staff was fully aware of the contents of the Master Plan Revision, including the proposed size and location of the Mausoleum, long before the February, 2007 Planning Commission hearing. ➢ The Staff Report claims that the notice describing the location of the proposed Mausoleum was inadequate, and blames this on Green Hills. Green Hills, however, does not write, prepare, or issue City public hearing notices. They are City notices. Green Hills provided all requested information to the City to enable Staff to prepare whatever notice it deemed appropriate. Staff now appears to believe the notice contained a description of the proposed. Mausoleum that was too cryptic. If that was so, then Staff could have, and should have, prepared a more detailed description. Staff's decision in this regard can hardly be blamed on Green Hills. Rather than address every allegation in the body of this letter, we have prepared a detailed and comprehensive response to each purported claim of "misleading" actions or statements referenced in the Staff Report. (See Exhibit "A.") As the responses make clear, Green Hills made no misrepresentations during the course of obtaining approval for the Mausoleum. Rather, Green Hills: ' A copy of the first page of the September, 2006 Master Plan Revision submittal package, clearly depicting the proposed Mausoleum located along the property line, is attached as Exhibit "B." 2 A copy of the notice distributed by Green Hills to its neighbors inviting them to attend meetings to learn more about the proposed Master Plan Revision, together with the mailing list indicating to whom those notices were sent, is attached as Exhibit "C." G583-000 -- 1523524.1 Honorable City Councilmembers January 20, 2015 Page 4 ➢ prepared an application for the 2007 Master Plan Revision; ➢ submitted the application package to the City sufficiently in advance of the Planning Commission hearing; ➢ clearly depicted the size and location of the Mausoleum in the application package; ➢ invited the community to learn more about its plans; ➢ met with interested community members to answer questions; ➢ appeared at two hearings of the Planning Commission at which the 2007 Master Plan Revision was approved; ➢ secured building permits from the Building Department; and ➢ constructed the Mausoleum in accordance with all requisite approvals issues by the City. Despite the cries of illicit conduct and wrong -doing, the Staff Report points to nothing that Green Hills did or didn't do that would evidence bad faith or an attempt to mislead the City in any way. Accordingly, Green Hills has a vested right to use the Mausoleum as approved and constructed. B. Because Green Hills Relied in Good Faith on the Permits Issued by the City, the City Cannot Now Require Green Hills to Seek a Variance nor can it Impose a Moratorium on Green Hills' Lawful Activities. 1. The City Has No Authority to Require a Variance where a Vested Right Exists. The Staff Report erroneously recommends that, if the City finds Green Hills has a vested right to use the Mausoleum as permitted, then the City should nevertheless require Green Hills to apply for a variance to permit the Mausoleum's 8 foot setback. This setback was already approved by the Planning Commission as part of the Conditional Use Permit granted pursuant to the 2007 Master Plan Revision. Thus, not only is a variance unnecessary at this point, but the Staff Report's recommendation to seek a variance evidences a complete misunderstanding of the law regarding vested rights .3 Because Green Hills' rights have vested, the City may not revoke those rights; this in turn means that if Green Hills applied for a variance, the City would have no authority to deny the request. Accordingly, it would serve no purpose to apply for a discretionary approval such as a variance, when the City lacks the discretion to deny it. That would be a pointless and futile exercise. 3 The legal standard(s) relating to vested rights protections were discussed in greater detail in Green Hills' October 24, 2014 letter correspondence to City Attorney Carol Lynch, and its August 6, 2014 letter correspondence to the Planning Commission. G583-000 -- 1523524.1 Honorable City Councilmembers January 20, 2015 Page 5 If for some reason the City feels it must have a variance on file to accompany the approval of the Mausoleum, the City has the authority to issue an after -the -fact variance pursuant to City Municipal Code (the "Code") Section 17.64.050(B). The City Attorney advised that this Code section allows the City itself to initiate an after -the fact variance. Indeed, we assumed this was the type of variance the City was contemplating when it first suggested Green Hills obtain a variance for the Mausoleum last year, at one of the Planning Commission hearings. The Planning Commission, however, made it quite clear that it intended for Green Hills to apply for a variance anew, as though it had never obtained approval of any kind for the Mausoleum, and certain members of the Planning Commission implied they very well might deny the variance request as a way to impose further punitive measures on Green Hills. Obviously, Green Hills cannot put itself in that position, and the Staff Report's continued suggestion that Green Hills seek a variance is untenable. 2. The City Cannot Impose a Moratorium on a Lawfully Approved Use. In previous correspondence,4 we advised the City that it could not impose a moratorium on rooftop burials on the Mausoleum unless the City complied with the provisions of Government Code Section 65858, applicable to urgency zoning ordinances. The Staff Report scoffs at that suggestion, noting that the moratorium was not proposed as an urgency zoning ordinance, and implying that the moratorium was imposed pursuant to some other legal authority. However, there is no other legal authority that would justify the imposition of a moratorium on a lawfully approved ongoing activity, unless the activity constitutes a distinct and definable public nuisance. Here, the City has not, and cannot, find that the burial services conducted at Green Hills are a public nuisance.-' C. The Lilley Planning Group Supplemental Report. Although dated December 2, 2014, we received a copy of the "Third Party Peer Review — Revised" report (the "Peer Report") prepared by the Lilley Planning Group ("Lilley") only a few days ago, as part of the "Public Correspondence Received following the Release of the Staff Report since January 9, 2015." The Peer Report indicates a lack of familiarity with the approvals permitted pursuant to the 2007 Master Plan Revision, with City Code provisions, and with critical planning and building concepts. Either Lilley is ill-equipped to conduct a review of this nature, or 4 The legal standard(s) relating to moratoria were discussed in greater detail in Green Hills' November 25, 2014 appeal to the City Council, and its August 6, 2014 letter correspondence to the Planning Commission. 5 Any effort to do so would be contrary to State law which provides that "nothing which is done or maintained under the express authority of a statute can be deemed a nuisance." See California Civil Code Section 3482. G583-000 -- 1523524.1 Honorable City Councilmembers January 20, 2015 Page 6 the desired conclusion — no doubt guided by Staff's effort to demonstrate, at whatever cost, that Green Hills is not in compliance with its conditions of approval — dictated the analysis. The Peer Report concludes, for example, that the Mausoleum exceeds the 30 foot height limit based on several erroneous assumptions. For one, the Peer Report adds four (4) feet to the building's height by measuring the building to the top of the guardrail and pilasters, notwithstanding the fact that the guardrail and pilasters are excluded from height calculations as indicated in both the project approvals and pursuant to the Code. (See Code Section 17.48.050(B), which allows the Planning Commission to approve architectural elements above height requirements.) As evidenced in the approved plans for the Mausoleum, the pilasters and guardrails were not calculated as part of the structure's height. Therefore, the Mausoleum does not exceed 30 feet in height. There are other problems with the Peer Report's conclusions, many of them more technical in nature. To address these issues, Green Hills will have a more detailed report prepared by a qualified individual familiar with the Code, engineering calculations and the approvals issued for the Mausoleum. Suffice it to say that the City's reliance on an allegedly impartial peer reviewer, clearly pre -determined to reach a conclusion maligning Green Hills, is disturbing. D. A Word on How we Got Here. The Staff Report notes that the Planning Commission conducted an annual review in November, 2008, and then did not conduct another one until this annual review, first begun almost one year ago. The reason for the 6 year delay was that no issues arose during that time that warranted a formal review; if minor issues were brought to Green Hills' attention, they were promptly addressed. Thus, as admitted by Staff, Green Hills was conducting its operations without incident. Last year, however, the City heard from residents of the adjacent Vista Verde condominiums, largely complaining that the Mausoleum impacted their views. They also complained about noise — exaggeratedly characterized as wild "parties" by drunken revelers on the Mausoleum roof—and other issues created by living in proximity to cemetery operations and services. As a result, this annual review was commenced. Green Hills met with representatives of the Vista Verde Homeowners' Association and their former legal counsel, in an effort to see if the parties could mutually work out some acceptable operational measures and conditions that would improve the residents' quality of life. Green Hills honestly and sincerely believed that it could come to some agreement that would, at least in part, address the concerns presented to G583-000 -- 1523524.1 Honorable City Councilmembers January 20, 2015 Page 7 it. Unfortunately, those discussions were curtailed when the HOA advised that the only acceptable resolution would be for Green Hills to move, tear down, or partially demolish the Mausoleum to lower the building and eliminate all rooftop burials. The attorney for the HOA made clear that future offers to meet would not be fruitful unless Green Hills was willing to make physical alterations to the building and eliminate existing burials. This, of course, is not a realistic solution. Once negotiations carne to a standstill, the City went from treating Green Hills as a valued community partner serving the needs of families throughout the region, to demonizing Green Hills as liars, cheats, "drug dealers," and worse - now accusing Green Hills of willfully deceiving the City through a host of nefarious and dishonest practices. Something is very wrong here. We have trouble understanding why and how certain City officials and representatives could and would allow this to happen. We cannot fathom that this City would encourage businesses to go through a planning process spanning years, advise them as to the appropriate submittals to obtain approval for their project, accept their applications as complete, conduct public hearings, grant approvals, issue building permits, conduct inspections on the building while it is undergoing construction, sign off on the construction...., only to deny, years later, that such approvals were ever granted. We do not see how a City can simply "erase" approvals it validly issued, or purport to impose a moratorium on lawful activity expressly authorized by the City's actions. In light of this, we believe a serious and meaningful impartial review of the City's practices is warranted. Green Hills hopes that the City Council will bring some needed sanity to this matter, and work with Green Hills to develop a pragmatic resolution that will avoid the expense and divisiveness that might be caused by protracted litigation or through other political measures - a situation we expect all parties will want to avoid. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and we look forward to the upcoming City Council hearing. Very truly yours, Ellen Berkowitz, of GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN, A Professional Corporation EB:dff/crb Enclosures G583-000 -- 1523524.1 EXHIBIT A Exhibit A Detailed Response to Staff Report Allegations Please note that this Exhibit was prepared to follow the order of the alleged "misleading" statements as set forth in the Staff Report. ➢ The Staff Report correctly notes that when Green Hills originally contemplated revisions to the Master Plan, back in 2003, Green Hills proposed to increase the size of the Mausoleum from the size originally approved in 1991 by a certain amount. The Staff Report also correctly explains that when Green Hills submitted its final application for the Master Plan Revision in 2007, Green Hills proposed to increase the size of the Mausoleum by an amount different from that contemplated in 2003. In the staff report prepared for the February 2007 Planning Commission hearing on the Master Plan Revision, Staff incorrectly listed the size proposed in the 2003 draft proposal, rather than from Green Hills' final application for the 2007 Master Plan Revision submitted in 2007. (Staff Report, page 1-5.) The implication is that Green Hills somehow played tricks with the numbers. On the contrary, all this story reveals is that Staff made an error. When it put together the staff report for the February 2007 hearing, it pulled the numbers for the proposed increase from a 2003 draft proposal, rather than take the numbers from the actual final submittal package from 2007. Why it did so is anyone's guess. But certainly, Staff's error is not Green Hills' fault. Green Hills correctly indicated the proposed size increase of the Mausoleum in its application package which was provided to all Planning Commissioners. Green Hills therefore did not mislead the City as to the amount of the increase, and it is not responsible for the City's error in the staff report. ➢ Staff suggests that somehow Green Hills is to blame for its error, because Green Hills submitted its final application package for the 2007 Master Plan Revision in January, 2007, which gave Staff only one month to review the final application before the February, 2007 hearing. (Staff Report, page 1-5.) There are several problems with this line of thinking. First, Green Hills actually submitted a draft application package in September, 2006. The size and location of the Mausoleum did not change from the September, 2006 draft application to the final January, 2007 version. Thus, Staff should not have been "surprised" by any new information relative to the Mausoleum when it received the final application package in January, 2007, as Staff had the information in its possession since September, 2006. Additionally, Staff should have been very familiar with the G583-000 -- 1523525.1 contents of the September, 2006 application as Staff attended community meetings held by Green Hills in November, 2006 describing its plans to interested neighbors.' Second, one month is generally ample time for a city's staff to review submittal packages of this nature. If, however, Staff felt one month was not adequate, then Staff could very well have suggested continuing the hearing until it did have adequate time to review the material and prepare its staff report for the 2007 Master Plan Revision. And in fact, the February hearing was continued to April, 2007 to provide all interested individuals more time to review and comment on the matter. Again, if Staff felt "rushed" and unable to perform its functions properly, then it should have taken steps to correct the situation. Green Hills is not responsible for Staff's decisions and errors. ➢ The Staff Report contains a number of excerpts from its February, 2007 staff report, and states that these excerpts indicate the proposed 2007 Master Plan Revision was not anticipated to modify any existing setbacks. (Staff Report, page 1-6.) The February, 2007 staff report was prepared by Staff, and any errors or inaccuracies in the report cannot be imputed to Green Hills. It is the City's responsibility, and the City's responsibility alone, to accurately draft its own resolutions and public notices. More importantly, however, Green Hills never suggested, implied, stated, or misled the City into thinking that the setback for the Mausoleum would be 80 feet. A simple look at bath the draft 2006 application package and the Chial 2007 application package that Green Hills s0initted to the City cleartil evidence that the Mausoleum was to be placed at the northern property line, with virtually no setback whatsoever. There is nothing confusing about the location of the Mausoleum as shown in the plan contained in the application package; one does not have to be an engineer or have any expertise in building and planning issues to see that the Mausoleum is not setback 80 feet, 40 feet, or even 20 feet. It appears literally on the property line, at approximately the same distance as the buildings located on the western side of the Park, which have a 5 foot setback. Again, why Staff claimed to be unaware of this setback — when they had those plans before them since at least September, 2006 — is anyone's guess. But the proposed location of the building was certainly no secret. ➢ The Staff Report suggests that Green Hills only advised the City about the proposed location of the Mausoleum when it made revisions to the language contained in Condition No. 7 shortly before the April, 2007 continued Commission hearing. The implication is that Green Hills "changed" the setback for the Mausoleum from 80 feet to 8 feet. (Staff Report, page 1-7.) This is categorically false. The Mausoleum was never proposed to be 80 feet from the property line. Again, this claim is belied by a simple look at the plans (drawn to scale) Greed Hills submitted in both its 2006 draft As previously noted, a copy of the notice distributed by Green Hills to its neighbors inviting them to attend meetings to learn more about the proposed Master Plan Revision, together with the mailing list indicating to whom those notices were sent, is attached as Exhibit "C." G583-000 -- 1523525.1 application package and the 2007 final application package. The Mausoleum was never setback 80 feet. Green Hills' submitted the revision to Condition No. 7 (among others) to correct the error made by Staff in the February staff report. The correction was highlighted in the materials Staff prepared for the April, 2007 continued Planning Commission hearing; Staff expressly noted that the correction was "acceptable to Staff." ➢ Staff advises that the notice regarding the proposed 2007 Master Plan Revision was incorrect because it stated that there would be an addition to the Mausoleum previously approved in 1991 located "southeast of the Green Hills maintenance yard," when in fact the Mausoleum previously approved in 1991 was located "south" of the maintenance yard. (Staff Report, page 1-15.) Again, Staff faults Green Hills for this error because Green Hills allegedly provided this "inaccurate" project description. Once again, there are several problems with this "spin" on the facts. While Green Hills provided the City with a general description of the project, the City is responsible for the content of its public notices. If Staff disagreed with Green Hills' description about the location of the previously approved Mausoleum, believing that it was located "south," rather than "southeast" of the maintenance yard, then Staff should have made that correction before issuing the notice. In any event, whether the previously approved Mausoleum was "south" or "southeast" of the maintenance yard is of no consequence to the issues about where the proposed expansion of the Mausoleum would be located. The important point, and the one that we understand is of concern to the Vista Verde residents, is that they could not glean from the notice that the Mausoleum would be expanded to the west. In other words, the problem was not what the notice said; it is what the notice didn't say that is the cause of concern. We have repeatedly heard from Vista Verde residents that had they understood where the proposed expansion was to occur, they would have participated in the public process. That Staff chose to include a cryptic reference to the location of the Mausoleum's proposed expansion the notice is unfortunate, but once again, it is not the result of anything Green Hills did or didn't do. Green Hills' application package (both the September 2006 and the January 2007 version) contains a scaled drawing of the proposed expansion clearly showing the large Mausoleum building running along the northern side of the park, far to the west. Perhaps the City should have included this plan as an attachment to the public notice, which would have left no doubt as to the extent of the proposal. But again, the failure to provide more detail in the notice were not the result of inaccurate information provided by Green Hills, as the Staff Report insinuates. ➢ The Staff Report also claims the cross sections contained in Green Hills' submittal package were inaccurate. (Staff Report 1-15.) This is not true. For one, these cross sections are schematics — defined as a "preliminary sketch or basic layout representing a G583-000-- 1523525 1 concept, but not showing the fine details of the ultimate design" 2; they are not construction drawings. They are a representation of how the Mausoleum would be conceptualized at three random points along the continuum of the proposed approximately 820 foot long Mausoleum. Because only 170 feet of the entire 820 foot long Mausoleum was ever constructed (only a portion of the western section, and none of the central and eastern sections), the schematics depict sections that have not yet been constructed. The City requested that the cross sections depict those points along the Mausoleum that would involve the most grading activities. In any event, had the Planning Commissioners had any questions about the cross- sections or evidenced any concern about what was or was not depicted, they certainly could have asked. A review of the tapes of those hearings indicates that the Commissioners asked only one question about the proposed Mausoleum at their February and April, 2007 hearings, choosing instead to focus on other areas of the proposed Master Plan Revision. That the Mausoleum was not a topic of interest to the Planning Commission at that time is, once again, not because of any failing on the part of Green Hills. ➢ The Staff Report discusses at length why a variance should have been required for the Mausoleum's 8 foot setback. (Staff Report, pages 1-17-19.) Although this Staff Report does not attempt to assign blame to Green Hills for failing to obtain a variance, Staff nevertheless attempts to suggest that Green Hills made a deliberate decision not to apply for one. In applying for the 2007 Master Plan Revision, however, Green Hills prepared forms and applications pursuant to the City's instructions. In November, 2006, Staff deemed the application complete. Staff never suggested that Green Hills needed to obtain a variance for its plans. After dissecting all of the alleged "misleading" actions surrounding the Mausoleum, it is clear that Staff cannot point to one single action on Green Hills' part that would constitute "bad faith." Green Hills never misrepresented the facts about the proposed Mausoleum's size, location or setback even remotely sufficient to overcome a claim of vested rights. Green Hills submitted its application, obtained its approvals, obtained its building permits and constructed the Mausoleum in good faith reliance on those permits. Accordingly, Green Hills has a vested right to maintain the Mausoleum, and the City is estopped from claiming otherwise. 2 See http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/schematics. G583-000 -- 1523525.1 *-, wi two utiZ� ,J. STUART TODD INC. MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN MASTER PLAN ARCHITECTURE GREEN HILLS MEMORIAL PARK INTERIORS RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CALIFORNIA PLANNING SEPTEMBER 7120 tip LANDSCAPE ,9 -A EXHIBIT C f g Utter to Neighbors within 500 ft. of GHMP a November, 2006 r"i L.d November 21, 2006 Dear Neighbor: Green Hills Memorial Park is currently working with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes to amend its Conditional Use Permit. We are providing two opportunities for you to review the design and provide your input as neighbors of Green Hills Memorial Park. You are invited to join us either 7.00 pm, on Monday, December 11 or 7.00 pm on Monday, December 18 Green Hills Memorial Park Chapel The administration of Green Hills Memorial Park and the Architect will present the proposed Master Plan and discuss our vision of the future of Green Hills Memorial Park. We hope to share our exciting design concepts that will enhance the beauty of Green Hills and the community at large when we meet in this informal setting. Join us as we welcome your input and look forward to meeting our neighbors. Please R.S.V.P. to the Green Hills Memorial Park Events line at (310) 521-4460. Mailing List of Neighbors within 500 ft. of GHMP November, 2006 GREEN HILLS MEMORIAL PARK 1 JESSICA VLACO, CFO 27501 S WESTERN AVE RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 2 METROPOLITAN WATER DIST 1 GATEWAY PLAZA LOS ANGELES CA 90012 3 OCCUPANT 2300 PALOS VERDES DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 90274 4 OCCUPANT 2221 PALOS VERDES DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 90274-4219 5 OCCUPANT 2222 PALOS VERDES DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 9027411220 6 ROLLING HILLS COVENANT CHURCH INC 2222 PALOS VERDES DR N ROLLING HIS EST CA 902744-220 7 CHARLES J. O LONE LONE 8 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 90274-4215 8 WOOD FAMILY TRUST 10 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-4215 9 DIANA & AMY D. FORTUNE 12 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-4215 10 JAMES S. COHN 14 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-4215 11 MARY JO KOMADA TRUST 16 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-4215 12 JUNG FAMILY TRUST 18 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 902744215 13 RICHARD J BOBERG TRUST 20 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-4215 14 MARTIN L & KIM MINK TRUST 22 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 90274-4215 15 RICKEY A. MOTON & KLIER MOTON 24 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-4215 16 GARY R. & SANDRA L. LLOYD 26 ENCANTO DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 9027414215 17 OCCUPANT 2037 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 18 OCCUPANT 2039 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 19 OCCUPANT 2041 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 20 OCCUPANT 2043 PALOS VERDES DR LOMTTA CA 90717-3724 21 OCCUPANT 2047 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 22 OCCUPANT 2055 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 23 OCCUPANT 2057 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 24 OCCUPANT 2059 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 25 OCCUPANT 2061 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 26 OCCUPANT 2063 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 27 OCCUPANT 2065 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 28 OCCUPANT 2075 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3724 29 SHIRLEY A MAAG TRUST 23717 HAWTHORNE BL STE 30(TORRANCE CA 90505-5999 30 JOHN R HARRIS JR TRUST 2127 PALOS VERDES DR N LOMITA CA 90717-3702 31 OCCUPANT 2121 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3702 32 MICHAEL IMANOEL GAS & CARWASH DETAIL IN 914 S HOLT AVE LOS ANGELES CA 90035-2008 33 OCCUPANT 2085 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3701 CHECKER BOARD PROPERTIES INC E PROPERTY 34 TAX DEFT 401 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE AZ 8526111900 35 BP WEST COAST PRODUCTS LLCBP PROPERTY TAX PO BOX 5015 BUENA PARK CA 90622-5015 36 OCCUPANT 2031 PALOS VERDES DR LOMITA CA 90717-3701 37 EMMANUEL N. OKONKWO PO BOX 3777 PLS VRDS PNSL CA 90274-9528 38 OCCUPANT 8 CERRITO PL ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-4207 39 HENDRIK J ROUWENHORST TRUST 26862 VIA DESMONDE LOMITA CA 90717-3620 40 JOHN AUDREY & LILY CHAN 26856 VIA DESMONDE LOMITA CA 90717-3620 41 JAMES R. & CYNTHIA P. ATENCIO 26850 VIA DESMONDE LOMTTA CA 90717-3620 42 PAUL N. FUNK 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 101 LOMITA CA 90717-3728 43 DEBORAI I K. LANDES 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 102 LOMITA CA 90717-3728 44 CARL J. & LINDA M. EICI IERT 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 103 LOMITA CA 90717-3728 45 CURTIS D. WUFSTENHAGEN 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 104 LOMTTA CA 90717-3728 46 SHARON B. LOUIE 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 105 LOMCI'A CA 90717-3728 47 JULIE M. REYNOLDS 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N# 106 LOMITA CA 90717-3728 48 VERONICA E. LAtiVLOR 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 107 LOMITA CA 90717-3728 49 ASTBURY BARBARA K. & BARBARA K HUGH 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N #108 LOMITA CA 90717-3729 50 LANE MAYHEW 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 109 LOMITA CA 90717-3729 51 JOIINN. SHADEED 2110 PALOS VRDS DR # 11 LOMITA CA 90717 52 CARLALOYCE SHAW 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 110 LOMITA CA 90717-3729 53 NEVADA E. PREWTIT 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 111 LOMI'I'A CA 90717-3729 54 ANTHONY & ATTILIA TERRALAVORO 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 11 LOMITA CA 90717-3729 SS LISA PTEIISON 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N# 114 LOMTI'A CA 90717-3731 56 R9ATHIEW & CASEY GEIER 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 20 LOkffi'A CA 90717-3730 57 LINDA B SPFA.RS TRUST 2110 PALOS VRDS DR # 20 LOMITA CA 90717 58 LINDA B. SPEARS 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 202 LOMITA CA 90717-3730 59 JACK D. GRODZIENSKI 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 203 LOMITA CA 90717-3730 60 JAMES A. & NANCY R. ALPOUGH 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 204 LOMITA CA 90717-3730 61 LORRAINE S. BROWN 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 205 LOIvTft'A CA 90717-3730 62 ELMER W. SCIIEEL 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 206 LOMITA CA 90717-3730 63 NADEJDA V. GUEORGUII?VA 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 207 LOMI*FA CA 90717-3730 64 WILLIAM K. & ALISON D. HOFFMAN 2110 PALS VRDS DR N # 208 LOMITA CA 90717-3731 65 PAUL F. & JULIE KEYS 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 209 LOMTfA CA 90717-3731 66 RMS WILLIAMS 2110 PALOS VRDS DR# 210 LOMIi'A CA 90717 67 LILY Y ODAKA TRUST 2152 STANFORD AVE APT 108 CLOVIS CA 93611-4059 68 OCCUPANT 2110 PALOS VERDES DR 211 LOMITA CA 90717-3731 69 GREG E. & ELENA DAVIS 2110 PALOS VRDS DR N # 212 LOMITA CA 90717-3731 70 JENNIFER TOOMEY 1982 ROLLING VISTA DR # 2 LOMITA CA 90717-3768 71 CHRISTOPHER W. CARLSON 1982 ROLLING VISTA DR # 3 LOMITA CA 90717-3768 72 KATHERINE J. GATELY 1982 ROLLING VISTA DR # 4 LOMITA CA 90717-3768 EUGENE J. & JANICE L. WRAY[ 1 73 BANK OF THE WEST SC-MPK-03-M 4560 CHANTRY CT CYPRESS CA 90630-3501 74 OCCUPANT 1984 ROLLING VISTA DR 5 LOMITA CA 90717-3767 75 PAUL D. & CHERIE L RONDINELLI 1984 ROLLING VISTA DR # 6 LOMITA CA 90717-3767 76 WAYNEL ANGUTANO 1984 ROLLING VISTA DR # 7 LOMITA CA 90717-3767 77 EDITH C. ROBERT'S 1984 ROLLING VISTA DR # 8 LOMITA CA 90717-3767 78 OCCUPANT 1984 ROLLING VISTA DR 9 LOMITA CA 90717-3767 79 JAMES & REBECCA SALZETTI PO BOX 3245 ROLLING HILLS CA 90274-9245 80 EINO A. & GLORIA G. JUSSI 1986 ROLLING VISTA DR # 10 LOMITA CA 90717-3766 81 OCCUPANT 1986 ROLLING VISTA DR 11 LOMITA CA 90717-3766 82 JOHN M & HILDA M ENGELMAN TRUST 2379 W 236TH ST TORRANCE CA 90501-5713 83 MICHELE T. ODONNELL 1986 ROLLING VISTA DR # 12 LOMITA CA 90717-3766 84 PATRICIA L. SCHWARTZ 1986 ROLLING VISTA DR # 13 LOMITA CA 90717-3766 85 GARY & KAREN PASCIAK 1992 ROLLING VISTA DR# 14 LOMITA CA 90717-3765 86 KAREN BINZ 1992 ROLLING VISTA DR #15 LOMITA CA 90717-3765 87 J. & MEREDITH HICKS 1992 ROLLING VISTA DR # 16 LOMITA CA 90717-3765 88 SCOTT D. GAVER 1988 ROLLING VISTA DR # 17 LOMTTA CA 90717-3761 89 ANJAN MANNA 1988 ROLLING VISTA DR #18 LOMITA CA 90717-3761 90 STEVE S. BARBERIC 1988 ROLLING VISTA DR # 19 LOMITA CA 90717-3761 91 ERROL F. PLATA 1988 ROLLING VISTA DR # 20 LOMITA CA 90717-3761 92 JOSEPH M SARTORIS TRUST 1988 ROLLING VISTA DR # 21 LOMITA CA 90717-3761 93 LISE FILLION 1988 ROLLING VISTA DR # 22 LOMITA CA 90717-3761 94 DON G. & ROSEMARY BLAYLOCK 1988 ROLLING VISTA DR # 23 LOMITA CA 90717 95 PAUL & LOVILDA HAMANN TRUST 1988 ROLLING VISTA DR # 24 LOMITA CA 90717-3761 96 RENE M. OLVINA 1988 ROLLING VISTA DR #25 LOMITA CA 90717-3761 97 ROBERT K. & MARIA T. GREEN 1978 ROLLING VISTA DR# 26 LOMITA CA 90717-3764 98 OCCUPANT 1978 ROLLING VISTA DR 27 LOMITA CA 90717-3764 99 ELEANOR H HUSNICK TRUST 11255 AFFINITY CT NO 43 SAN DIEGO CA 92131 100 LEONA P. SMITH 1978 ROLLING VISTA DR #28 LOMITA CA 90717-3764 101 OCCUPANT 1978 ROLLING VISTA DR 29 LOMITA CA 90717-3764 102 CHANDA ZAVERI 6740 LOS VERDES DR APT 8 RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-5563 103 LOUIS & CHARLENE A METZLER TRUST 1978 ROLLING VISTA DR # 30 LOMITA CA 90717-3764 104 OCCUPANT 1978 ROLLING VISTA DR 31 LOMITA CA 90717-3764 105 MOORE FAMILY TRUST 27808 CONESTOGA DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 90274-5108 106 LAURA E. FABIAN 1958 ROLLING VISTA DR # 32 LOMITA CA 90717-3763 107 GERALD & VIRGINIA POSELL TRUST 1958 ROLLING VISTA DR # 33 LOMITA CA 90717-3763 108 OCCUPANT 1958 ROLLING VISTA DR 34 LOMITA CA 90717-3763 109 RICHARD O. & LINDA C. JOHNSON PO BOX 100-390 MAMMOTH LAKES CA 93546-0100 110 OCCUPANT 1958 ROLLING VISTA DR 35 LOMITA CA 90717-3763 111 SCOTT C. MOORE 23 BERESFORD CT SAN MATEO CA 94403-4522 112 MCENTYRE FAMILY TRUST 1958 ROLLING VISTA DR # 36 LOMITA CA 90717-3763 113 KATHERINE A. SIPPEL 1958 ROLLING VISTA DR #37 LOMITA CA 90717-3763 114 PATRICK J. HEALY 1948 ROLLING VISTA DR # 38 LOMITA CA 90717-3769 115 MARK & MADELON MAININI 1948 ROLLING VISTA DR# 39 LOMITA CA 90717-3769 116 GLORIA F. VALENTI 1948 ROLLING VISTA DR # 40 LOMITA CA 90717-3769 117 DANIEL S. & BRIDGET K. FUNG 1948 ROLLING VISTA DR # 41 LOMTTA CA 90717-3769 118 ROBERTS. RAMSAY 1951 ROLLING VISTA DR # 42 LOMITA CA 90717-3772 119 OCCUPANT 1951 ROLLING VISTA DR 43 LOMITA CA 90717-3772 120 PAOLA V. HIRSCH 304 PASEO DE GRACIA REDONDO BEACH CA 90277-6104 121 DAVID L. BRANSON 1951 ROLLING VISTA DR # 44 LOMITA CA 90717-3772 122 FAZLOLLAH ROWHANI 1951 ROLLING VISTA DR # 45 LOMITA CA 90717-3772 123 MICHAEL & RENA NELSON 1951 ROLLING VISTA DR # 46 LOMITA CA 90717-3772 124 LINDA S. MILLER 1969 ROLLING VISTA DR #47 LOMITA CA 90717-3770 125 OCCUPANT 1969 ROLLING VISTA DR 48 LOMITA CA 90717-3770 126 SHERRY L. JOHNSON 160 E REMINGTON DR NO C 1? SUNNYVALE CA 94087 127 OCCUPANT 1969 ROLLING VISTA DR 49 LOMITA CA 90717-3770 128 VERONICA M. FLYNN 1960 ROLLING VISTA DR # 49 LOMITA CA 90717-3703 129 ALAN & MAUREEN MELGAARD 1969 ROLLING VISTA DR # 50 LOMITA CA 90717-3770 130 JOSEPH JAKOS PO BOX 383 HARBOR CITY CA 90710-0383 131 OCCUPANT 1969 ROLLING VISTA DR 51 LOMITA CA 90717-3770 132 OCCUPANT 1985 ROLLING VISTA DR 52 LOMITA CA 90717-3762 133 JOANNA B. PERRY 30129 MIRALESTE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-6475 134 MICHAEL RHEE 1985 ROLLING VISTA DR # 53 LOMITA CA 90717-3762 135 SUSAN F. JONES 1985 ROLLING VISTA DR # 54 LOMITA CA 90717-3762 136 PAULA LONG-ROBERTS 1985 ROLLING VISTA DR # 55 LOMITA CA 90717-3762 137 HAROLD H. JENSEN 1%7 ROLLING VISTA DR # 56 LOMITA CA 90717-3753 138 ROBERT R. BROSS 1967 ROLLING VISTA DR # 57 LOMITA CA 90717-3753 139 LAURINE M DIPALMA TRUST 1967 ROLLING VISTA DR # 58 LOMITA CA 90717-3753 140 PETER RANCH 1967 ROLLING VISTA DR # 59 LOMITA CA 90717-3753 141 VINCENT WEYRICK 1949 ROLLING VISTA DR # 60 LOMITA CA 90717-3771 142 PATRICIA A. DIAZ 1949 ROLLING VISTA DR # 61 LOMITA CA 90717-3771 143 OCCUPANT 1949 ROLLING VISTA DR 62 LOMITA CA 90717-3771 144 MITCHELL & CYNTHIA OTERA 26314 REGENT AVE LOMITA CA 90717-3518 145 REBECA R. & JOHN U. JOHNSON 1949 ROLLING VISTA DR #63 LOMITA CA 90717-3771 146 OCCUPANT 26607 S WESTERN AVE LOMITA CA 90717 147 L A COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY 2 S CORAL CIR MONTEREY PARK CA 91755-7404 148 FRANK & MAGGIE M. HAN 26903 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 149 FERDINAND & CONSUELO SANTOS 26909 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 150 JULIO & FLORA IBARRA TRUST 26915 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 151 OGAWA REIKO TRUST 26919 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 152 FRANK L & TERUKO MATSUYAMA TRUST 26925 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 153 NAM C. SHIN 26931 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 154 JACK T. & HIDEKO AOKI 26935 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 155 FARIS & KATHLEEN FARIS 1895 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1000 156 DARRYL C. & GRIGCELIS BRANDON 1909 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1054 157 VALERIE L. JOHNSON 1939 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1054 158 ELIZABETH M. LACY 1945 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1054 159 EDGAR F. & RITA M. DE PAZ 1955 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1054 160 DANIEL R TARKINGTON TRUST 1958 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 161 MOZEL J. SPRIGGS 8117 W MANCHESTER AV # 19 PLAYA DEL REY CA 90293 162 OCCUPANT 1954 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 163 ALBERT J CAMPBELL TRUST 1948 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 164 JAMES Y & REIKO M HOJO TRUST 1942 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 165 MARIO J & LINDA MARCHISIO TRUST 1936 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 166 ROBERT C. & NANCY L. CRESSEY 1932 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 167 PATRICIA M. STRATFORD 1928 W PENINSULA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 168 TREVOR & MONICA HOWARD 1926 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 169 GERALD M & DEBRA L PAIZ TRUST 1922 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 170 THOMAS & GLORIA CROWLEY TRUST 1918 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 171 JEFFREY K. ACRES 1914 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 172 CLIFFORD B. & MICHIKO N. AGNEW 1910 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 173 RICHARD & BEVERLY & R. J. & B. S. B 1906 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 174 R. BOOTH & LOIS R. TARRINGTON 1902 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1053 175 MICHAEL E. & FRANCEEN MCCLUNG 1896 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 176 EDWARD J. & DEBORAH GLENWRIGHT 1890 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 177 YASUKO OHM 1884 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 178 BRIAN CHILDERS 1878 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 179 ANGELO P. NAPOLITANO 1872 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 180 OCCUPANT 1868 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 181 NAMHYUNG KIM 1858 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 182 GRADICH HELEN TRUST 1860 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 183 JAMES H ROBERTS TRUST 1856 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 184 JAMES L. & GWENDOLYN K WEBB 1848 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 185 GULABI & NASIR H. SAMNAN 1842 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 186 ROBERT & GLORIA H GIEDT TRUST 1836 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 187 DAVOD & DAVID SEQUEIRA 1832 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 188 FRED A. & FLORENCE K GREY 1826 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 189 SHIRLEY M. BLUSH 1820 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 902755-1051 190 WENDY R. KATAGI 1814 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 191 LEONARD M. MAZZA 1808 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 192 NORBERT R. & GLORIA STEPHENSON 1802 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1051 193 GERALD R & VIVIAN J HOLMES TRUST 26902 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 194 GARY L. NOFZIGER 26912 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 195 VINCENT S & KIM REHER TRUST 26918 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 1% JAMES R & MARY J STRUBERG TRUST 26926 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 197 JOSE P. & DEBORRAH R. COMANDANTE 26934 CIRCLE VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1055 198 FRANK E & PATRCIA AKINS TRUST 26911 LUNADA CIRCLE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1050 199 PRIMO D. & ROSITA B. LIM 26905 LUNADA CIRCLE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1050 200 EARL G. & EMIICO FUKUMOTO 26901 LUNADA CIRCLE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1050 201 BIENWNIDO B. & NANCY D. BRAGAS 26900 LUNADA CIRCLE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1050 202 ANTHONY C. & EVELYN FAILLA 26904 LUNADA CIRCLE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1050 203 FRED & GLORIA M SABATH TRUST 26910 LUNADA CIRCLE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1050 204 JIRYLS & MANAL F. SAYEGH 1829 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1052 205 SANNI & MOHANA WEHBE 1819 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1052 206 REGINA & AUGUSIINE BONILL 1821 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1052 207 ARTEMIO & BARBAR A. LAGLEVA 1815 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1052 208 STEPHEN J. & HILDA G. FOX 1811 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1052 209 OCCUPANT 1805 PENINSULA VERDE DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1052 210 JOHN H. SIBBLSON 4030 PALOS VRDS DR N STE 20: ROLLING HIS EST CA 90274-2562 211 US GOVT 1740 PALOS VERDES DR W PALOS VERDES ESTATE CA 90274-1849 212 OCCUPANT 1704 WESTERN AVE RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 213 OCCUPANT 1724 WESTERN AVE A RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 214 OCCUPANT 1724 WESTERN AVE B RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 215 OCCUPANT 1724 WESTERN AVE C RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 216 OCCUPANT 1740 WESTERN AVE RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 U S GOVT/ DEPT OF HOUSING & URBAN 217 DEVELOPMENT- PROPERTY MNGT DIVISION 2500 WILSHIRE BLVD LOS ANGELES CA 90057 218 DONALD E CASE TRUST 27642 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1011 219 DONALD A. IANNITTI 27636 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1011 220 KEITH L. JONES 27630 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1011 221 RAYMOND & LIDIA GALLARDO 27624 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1011 222 GIOVANNI & MARIA INCAVIGLIA 27618 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1011 223 ALFREDO & SHERRY & ELIZABETH HERNAN 26712 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 224 TRINIDAD C COOPER TRUST 27604 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1011 225 RICHARD M. & VERA SMIRNOFF 27600 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1011 226 JOEL ESPIRITU 1803 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1004 227 MUM & RITA CASTANLA 1807 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1004 228 JOHN L. FRENCH 1813 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1004 229 MARTHA E. ROBBERSTAD 1819 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1004 230 JOHN W & ANNA M SHANNON TRUST 1825 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1004 231 PATRICIA L. JENSEN 1831 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 232 LLOYD & BETTY WATSON TRUST 1837 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1004 233 RENO DIAS 1903 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 234 RICHARD & PATRICIA SHERMAN 1909 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 235 LA R. A. EDGAR 1915 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 236 ROGER A. & HELEN G. METZLER 1921 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 237 KENNETH & LEE BARBARA ODWONG 1929 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 238 STEVE C. & MARGIE CHENEY 1935 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 239 OCCUPANT 1941 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 240 ALLEN Y. & HELEN L. HAYASH PO BOX 22 TORRANCE CA 90507-0022 241 MARK L. HILL 1947 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 242 MICHAEL J LOCOCO TRUST 1953 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 243 JOSEPH R & DORIS L MILLER TRUST 1959 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 244 LISA M. & BO A. HANSEN 1965 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 245 MARY C. MATTINGLY 1971 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 246 OKSENKRUG FAMILY TRUST 1979 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 247 NORMA E. BAUER 1985 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 248 DJOKO & RUBY K. SOEJOTO 1991 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1006 249 CHARLES V. & BEVERLY O. GLENN 2003 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 250 GORDON L. GOLDBERG 2009 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 251 TIMOTHY J. & MONIQUE M. ESPOSITO 2017 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 252 MARLIN & EURA WILLIAMS TRUST 2021 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 253 JAMES M. & CRYSTAL L. QUARRY 2029 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 254 WILLIAM & JOJEAN MARKS TRUST 2035 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 255 DIVNA M. MUELLER 2041 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 256 ERIC C. & JANICE L. PEREZ 2049 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 257 ANTHONY J. & VICKIE A. MANCUSI 2055 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 258 JAMES J & MARIE FASTIGGI TRUST 2061 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 259 GERARD D. & CHRNTINE E. BECKER 2067 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 260 MANNAS FAMILY TRUST 2073 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 261 HAL S. CLAYSON 2081 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 262 M & K CORDOVA 2005 FAM TRUST 2087 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1008 263 L A QTY DEPT OF WATER & POWER PO BOX 51111 LOS ANGELES CA 90051-5700 264 SHELLY FLETCHER 2090 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1033 265 GO NOBORU & AKEIvII SUNAGA TRUST 2086 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1033 266 LAURENCE J & JEAN E JONES TRUST 2080 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 267 DANIEL R. & LOIS A. TREGARTHEN 2074 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1033 268 LEW15 T. & KATHY J. BERTRAND 2068 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1033 269 CARL & LINDA ANTONOVICH 2062 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1033 270 ROBERT H & SHIRLEY J BRAUN TRUST 2056 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1033 271 GREGORY & DIANE T. SPURLOCK 27605 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1002 272 MICHAEL J. & CATHY E. OLSON 27611 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1002 273 WOLLEAT FAMILY TRUST 27617 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1002 274 DANIEL & CONNIE GREGORY TRUST 27625 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1002 275 CARL J & ILA I HOLZBAUER TRUST 27630 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1023 276 SIMONE M. KOTSMITH 27624 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1023 277 DENNY W. WARD 27620 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1023 278 TERRY S. TAMBLE 27612 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1023 279 SEKO TRUST 27606 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1023 280 HARRY G. & DOROTHY HARTMAN 27602 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1023 281 DAVID J. & BRENDA BAUNE 27603 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1022 282 BURGESS W. & JOYCE M. SLAGLE 27605 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1022 283 BETTY J. & A. STEFFES 27611 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1022 284 SANDRA J. SCHUCK 1816 VELEZ DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1422 285 OCCUPANT 27617 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1022 286 PETER V. FIAMENGO 27621 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1022 k 287 ERIC T. & MARY J. FUJLSAKI 27642 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1023 288 ROLAND S. & B. WEBER 27636 ELDENA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1023 289 SCOTT A & KARLA I GLOVER TRUST 27631 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1002 290 WILLIAM R & LOU HAGEMEIER TRUST 27637 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1002 291 SALVATORE & VIRGINIA DIBENNARDO 27643 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1002 292 & ADAMMA AJUFOH 27648 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1003 293 JOHN & CATHERINE L. DULZO 27642 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1003 294 LOUIS HEIMFELD TRUST 27636 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1003 295 STEPHEN D & JANICE A TAUS TRUST 27628 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 296 IRVING & SANDRA M RZEPNICK 27620 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1003 297 ROY E & C C HALE 2003 TRUST 27612 AVENIDA DELMESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 298 ROBERT & DONNA S. BRANDELLI 27604 AVENIDA DEL MESA RCH PALOS VRD CA 902754003 299 SIDNEY M & TERYL D CULVER TRUST 2022 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1009 300 JOSEPH & SHIRLEY FE 2016 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 301 BYRON W. BISCOE 2008 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1009 302 STEVE M. & JENNIFER D. APPELBAUM 2002 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1009 303 THEODORE R. & MARY C. ERLANDSON 1990 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 304 ROBERT D. & RAMONA A. R. MERRICK 1984 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 305 OCCUPANT 1978 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 306 JUAN C. & NEOME D. VELASQUEZ 2532 COLT RD RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-6504 307 MILAN & MARIJA DOMINIS 1970 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 308 JOSEPH J. & BEVERLY A. SVORINICH 1964 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 309 YVONNE M CARR 1958 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 310 PHILLIP & LISA L CALIFANO 1952 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 311 NOLLS FAMILY TRUST 1946 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 312 MISETICH FAMILY TRUST 2015 REDONDELA DR SAN PEDRO CA 90732 313 JOSEPH A. & VICTORIA M. WHITMAN 2009 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1029 314 TIMOTHY P. & RIMA M. OLINGER 27607 BANDRA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1020 315 IRVING H & MARY C EHRLICH TRUST 27603 BANDRA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1020 316 JAMES P. O'DONNELL 276M BANDRA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1020 317 OCCUPANT 27600 BANDRA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1021 318 JOHN T. & MICHELLE S. BURWASSER 8614 CHEVIOT HTS SAN ANTONIO TX 78254-2302 319 MARY J FULLER TRUST 27606 BANDRA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1021 320 LEONID & ALICIA SICHAN 1983 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 321 BEVERLY J. PICKETT 1977 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 322 GERALD A. & PHYLLIS rACONA 1971 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 323 JOHN L. & CHERYL L. LUCERO 1965 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 324 PATRICK & BARBRO CHARTRAND 1957 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 325 R & I SAMUDIO LIVING TRUST 1951 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 326 MATTHEW & DOLORES OLSEN 1945 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 327 DAVID R. & NICOLA J. PALMER 1939 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 328 JOHN P. & ANTHONY M. KRUZIC 1933 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 329 PAULINE K. HOSPE 1927 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 330 GUY A. & SANDRA K. PUGLIESE 1921 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 331 JOHN F. & SHARON M. GOGGINS 1915 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275.1027 332 SALVATION ARMY 180 E OCEAN BLVD LONG BEACH CA 90802-4709 333 OCCUPANT 1909 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 334 R E & J S RTTZKE LIVING TRUST 1903 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1027 335 EMERY L. & DIANA L. LARA 27605 ALVESTA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1018 336 HYMEN & DEENA M GOLDMAN TRUST 27601 ALVESTA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275.1018 337 MARTIN L. LONKY 27600 ALVESTA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1019 338 JUAN C & N D VELASQUEZ TRUST 2532 COLT RD RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-6504 339 OCCUPANT 1851 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1036 340 OCCUPANT 27604 ALVESTA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1019 341 DOUGLAS G. & LAURA A. ARZOUMANIAN 1843 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275.1036 342 AMERICAN PACIFIC SURETY SVCS I 2215 VIA ANACAPA PALOS VERDES ESTATE CA 90274-2674 343 OCCUPANT 1837 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1036 344 ARTURO A. & MONICA FUENTES 27645 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1010 W ANASTASIOS GIONIS 27639 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1010 346 TOMSON T. & INGER A. ONG 27633 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275 347 BILL J & NORMA A KOSTICH TRUST 27627 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1010 348 GEORGE P. & FLORENCE J. DILLON 27621 TARRAZAA DR SAN PEDRO CA 90732 349 FERRANDINO PEARL TRUST 27613 TARRASA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1010 350 DANIEL A. & ANNA GRAFF 1812 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1005 3511 C & M C VELASQUEZ FAM TRUST 27604 ALVESTA PL RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1019 352 OCCUPANT 1818 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1005 353 JOB M. DRAGICH 1824 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1005 354 SERGIO BANUELOS 1830 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1005 355 JAMES W NACE TRUST 1836 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1005 356 ROBERT S. & JOYCELIN C. LAWRENCE 1902 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 357 OCCUPANT 1908 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 358 PHILIP & PATRICIA ZALENSK 1056 W 13TH ST SAN PEDRO CA 90731-3908 359 ROBERT M JOYCE FAMILY TRUST 1914 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 360 BYUNG S. & YUNG N. KIM 1920 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 361 GIUSEPPE & ROSALIA ORLANDO 1928 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 362 ADRIAN & BETH A. GROVE 1934 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 363 JUAN C. & NEOIVIE D. VELASQUEZ 1940 AVENIDA FELICIANO RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1007 364 VINT TRUST 1856 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1037 365 BORIS ANTOLOS 1904 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 366 DEBORAH A. & BRIAN R. MOSSBERG 1912 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 367 SLAVKO J. & PAULA M. ANTOLOS 1918 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 368 JOHN W. & ROSETTA C. LA FOREST 1926 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 369 ANTHONY & MARTHA MUNOZ 1934 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 370 ROSE A. BATTU 1942 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 371 KERSTIN DE VIRGILIO 1950 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 372 DAVID R & JUDITH E SCOTT TRUST 1956 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 373 CRAIG B. & CAROLYN KELFORD 1964 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 374 DINO & ANNA M. ANDRIE 1972 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 375 DOROTHY H. SIKORA 1982 REDONDELA DR RCH PALOS VRD CA 90275-1028 376 WALTER J. & GLORIA G. POTRZUSKI 27616 SADDLE RD ROLLING HILLS CA 90274-5128 377 PHILOMENA M APARICIO TRUST 27608 SADDLE RD ROLLING HILLS CA 90274-5128 378 CLAUDIA R. GRIECO 27602 SADDLE RD ROLLING HLS FST CA 90274-5128 379 E & S MAGANA LIVING TRUST 2201 CARRIAGE DR ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-5101 380 OCCUPANT 2209 CARRIAGE DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 90274-51M 381 APARICIO FAMILY TRUST 27608 SADDLE RD ROLLING HIS EST CA 90274-5128 382 FRANKLIN A. WEISMAN 2211 CARRIAGE DR ROLLING HIS FST CA 90274-5101 383 SHELLEY NASH GOODIN FAMILY TRUST 418 MALAGA IN PALOS VERDES ESTATE CA 90274-1305 384 OCCUPANT 2219 CARRIAGE DR ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-5101 385 BRIDGET K CARMAN 2225 CARNAGE DR ROLLING HIS EST CA 90274 386 IRVING M ZIFF TRUST 27603 SADDLE RD ROLLING HLS EST CA 90274-5127 387 JPL ZONING SERVICES INC. #5512 6263 VAN NUYS BL VAN NUYS CA 91401 Neighbors that Attended Information Meeting December, 2005 From: Michael N. Friedman <mnfesq@hfllp.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 3:12 PM To: CC Cc: Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>; Carla Morreale; Carolynn Petru; 'Ellen Berkowitz'; 'Brian Carter'; 'Matt Martin'; 'Julie Keye' Subject: Green Hills' Appeal - Case No. ZON2003-00086 - Hearing Date: January 20, 2015 Attachments: Green Hills 2005 Application.pdf; Green Hills 2003 Application.pdf Dear Council Members: I apologize for sending you an email regarding the above -referenced appeal, set for hearing at this evening's meeting. Unfortunately, Green Hills' attorney has the habit of sending lengthy correspondence at the very last minute in an effort to avoid having anyone respond to her. The use of the "11th hour" tactic is, perhaps, one of the reasons we are in this situation in the first place. If the applicant would give others a reasonable opportunity to review and respond to the information they supply, it would not now be complaining about the City's mistakes in its erroneous approval of Green Hills' amended master plan. At this point, I do not know how much of what I write will be properly "digested" by the council members and am, more likely, contributing to the administrative record that is being compiled for the likely Superior Court review of this matter. Nonetheless, it is important that the record be complete. Ms. Berkowitz made several references to the application package submitted by Green Hills in September 2006. She did not attach a copy of that package to her letter although it contains several other exhibits. According to her, all of the information regarding the "true" nature of the project is contained in this application package. Vista Verde resident, Matthew Martin, however, made request of the City Manager to provide copies of Green Hills' application for its revised master plan and was provided with an initial application filed with the City in 2003 and a revised application filed with the City in 2005. The erroneous and misleading information regarding the Memorial Terrace Mausoleum is contained in these two applications. I have attached them hereto for inclusion in the record of this proceeding. The exact words which I complained about in my letter to you dated January 12, 2015, are found in these applications. It appears, however, that Green Hills' application was deemed complete on November 22, 2006. Despite Mr. Martin's request, he was not provided with any revised application filed in September 2006. It appears, then, that the investigation of this matter remains incomplete and, before a decision is reached, Vista Verde urges the City to make a complete investigation of the facts underlying its approval of Green Hills' revised master plan. Thank you for considering this so near in time to tonight's meeting. Michael Friedman Michael N. Friedman HIRSCHBERG & FRIEDMAN, LLP 5023 N. Parkway Calabasas Calabasas, California 0:1302-:1421 'del/Fax (818) 225-9593 Cell (818) 642-0822. Email mnfesaPhflln.com Website www.hfilp.com CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING, BUILDING, & CODE ENFORCEMENT GRADING APPROVAL PPLICATION NUMBER # -666V<::�, APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR: 'Y -q - I / �. (Name) ��t (Address)) ,%, A-4 —C)6 Z Telephone: Home LANDOWNER: Work 'Z 1�. 52Z, 40 3 � (Name) T-eyi-r-a 14 c--4 sr� n F Grp 0 z- S (Address) Telephone: Home Work 31©. 0 $ t Lot and Tract No: Project Location Project Description General Information: 5© ' 2. 3Q2 I Do 'f 3. Co.9 Ar-) 5b 1 G'2- 5 4. ( (8 .-' Ate) e2'j 5 0 � S. W GS-ce 2r-'3 �v M; -Ce- tz ;t MA 5 -C 2 Maximum height of project, measured from top to lowest foundation wall to ridge. Maximum height of project above finished grade. Square footage of project. (Building footprint) If addition, square footage of existing structure (including any Page 10 30940 HAW 1 HORNE BLVD. / RANG to N -os Wil DE& CA 90275.5391 PLANNING/GORE ENFORCE. EN 1 (310) 544-5220 / BLiILDIN(1(;10) 541-7702/ DEPT F.AX (310) 544-5293 /E-MAIL PLANNING@RPb:COM Are-) �3 0/. 7. -1 V, 8. Grading Information: Lot Type: Pad covered or enclosed patios). Square footage of driveways and parking areas. sq u a ax�rA.c, of w� 5 �,�' p n awe ►.s c.� • �i-7,�t a o s. �, Square footage of lot. Percentage of existing open space. Percentage of open space after development. Upslope Downslope a�e=S - 1. Maximum depth of cut. 2 ;26 /I 1 w 2. Total cubic yards of cut. I Ola o&I A. Under the building (excluding footings). I © B. Outside of building footprint. � 4-a;i L -s 3. Maximum height of fill. 26 p 4. Total cubic yards of fill. A. Under the building. c B. Outside of building footprint. Total volume of earth to be moved. o � A. Under the building (sum of lines 2A & 4A). 36 B. Outside of building footprint (sum of lines 2B & 4B). 3 n oke 6. Maximum percentage of created slopes. VkF-%mss 7. Total average slope of site. N/A-- 8. Maximum height of downslope retaining wall. N /A. 9. Maximum height of upslope retaining wall. 3 °1a 10. Maximum percentage grade of driveway. 4A& -i C --,s 11. Maximum percentage of existing slope. Page 11 Does the project involve any work, activity, or encroachment in the public right-of-way or public drainage structure? . �1 o . If so, you must obtain approval from the Public Works Department prior to issuance of construction permits. Does the project require any off-site gra ing (remedial, contour, utilities, etc.) or stockpile of excavated materials? INO If so, provide a written explanation as to why it is necessary, the quantity, and length of time the stockpile will remain. Also, delineate on a plan the limits of off-site grading and/or stockpile. if off-site grading is required provide proof of landowner approval. Information to Determine if a Foliage Analysis is Necessary Does the proposed project involve an addition or structure which is 120 square feet or more in size and which can be used as a gathering space and viewing area (i.e., decks, covered patios)? Does the proposed project involve an addition or structure which consists I of 120 square feet or more of habitable space (i.e., room expansions, additions, conversions)? If the answer is "no" to both questions, the proposed project is exempt from the "foliage removal" requirements, and a foliage analysis of the applicant's property is not necessary. If the answer is "yes" to either question, a foliage analysis must be conducted by Staff prior to approval of the Grading Permit Application to determine if any existing foliage on the applicant's property, which exceeds 16 feet orthe ridgeline of the primary residence, whichever is lower, impairs a view from any surrounding properties. Voluntary Neighborhood Compatibility Pre -application Step Was the voluntary Neighborhood Compatibility Pre -application step completed? A) Yes B) No If yes, please include the Neighborhood Compatibility Consultation Form (NC -F) at the time of application submittal. COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER 70 OF THE CITY BUILDING CODE Upon approval of the application by the Director of Planning or Planning Commission, the application must still conform to all conditions imposed by Chapter 70 of the City Building Code, including all required fees, and approval by the Director is not final until approval has been granted by the City Engineer. Continued on next page Page 12 CONTRACTORS PLEASE READ AND INITIAL I UNDERSTAND that a City business license is required for all work performed in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. This license is obtainable from the City's Finance Department prior to obtaining a building permit from the Building and Safety Division. (initials) Sighatura,bf Applicant/Contract Dated: 1 1 2-c, • 20c-�5 Staff Signature: Date Received: WAForms\Pinglapps\Grading Applicalion.doc Revised: 06-24-03 Signature of Landowner Dated: Page 13 vl;�ep lll� zco 005 C1TVOFL1k RANCHO PALOS VERDES CO o � x zxxl ?�� CONDITIONAL U PERMIT �o -A - APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR: (Name): ?DAeLLV P-ANNING, BUILDING, & CODF ENFORCLMEN-i. APPLICATIO NO.� LANDOWNER: (Name): ftPA-i-4 (Address):]. S uxp- of,o I N4 (Address): 2'l�0 . L�) sT� ► 4-V:::1. S91 1� . r 1z�� Phone: Work: �j22.,33 Phone:Work: Home: ( ) Home: ( ) Project Location: t Sad S. w %-rs— fnl Project Description: (r 41 LA -C, kA — 02i44- PAS -t -- Lot & Tract Number: Current Zoning: ce 8:6-t -e y=±1 GENERAL INFORMATION Existing Development 1. Square footage of existing structure foot rint (including any covered or enclosed patios and garage). ,518>,loo --6 2. Square footage of driveways and parking areas. 5.'2-1 0 1GQ %F 3. Square footage of lot or parcel. 'loo +32-5 sF 4. Square footage of existing lot coverage [line 1 + line 21. �3 ply 5. Percentage of existing open space. [100% - (line 4 divided by line 3)], Proposed Development (PLEASE COMPLETE ONLY IF A NEW STRUCTURE IS PROPOSED) 6. Maximum height of project, measured from the highest point of existing grade covered by the structure to ridge. 7. Maximum height of project, measured from the finished grade adjacent to the lowest foundation to ridge. 30940 HAWT; IORK 13LVD ! IWCHO PALos VEIN -)r -s. GA !)0275-;5310 P1 ANi 111`)(,1! :ODL !.Nr-OlI (:E^1L.N 1 {310) 544.5226 i BLJJLf)1N t 1:310) 541-77021 rll1 I FAX (310) 1)44-5293!E `'TAIL PL.ANN1NG@R1'VG0M 1% A,,N 6 S. a ca 4 sr - 9 st- 10 L -2sblbLC- 11 12 Square footage of proposed A. First Story = B. Second Story= new floor area. Square footage of proposed new structure footprint. Square footage of driveways and parking areas. 4 Square footage of new lot coverage [lint + line 9 + line 101. Percentage of new open space [100% - (line 11 divided by line 3)]. GRADING INFORMATION Are any of the following conditions proposed? ✓ Yes _ No If yes, a separate Grading Application is required. .k Total volume of earth to be moved (cut and fill) is 20 c.y. or greater. Height of fill or depth of cut is 3 feet or greater. Does the project involve any public drainage structure? __ activity, or encroachment in the public right-of-way or 01 If so, you must obtain approval from the Public Works Department prior to issuance of construction permits. Describe in detail the nature of the proposed use or development: d., -.A Ot-,J = >t'M t'KT Ar c C Burden of Proof Statements Explain how the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use. USExTK,) Slo►3 S c�`t= Q 1 s"C1 titer c�, RrE4 S�Tr3ne l r,s �2: wt��i�iST►►��_ �Gq` �ppa::00 m Kkk-s-CE)p- PL'A�. 2. Explain how the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways properly designed to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. kL.1- `T tai G tO L,l,.r- C3 c C44 -P'-1 I) Qzs-1 G`� _LS -C «l G SLt S T _- C_c M c`ze Q pA.r s Pa��2 � uu. v c t �i7 ` (le ru�fl-e vL,&'T,crl. 3. Explain how the proposed use at this specific location will have no significant adverse effect on adjacent properties or the permitted use thereof. k1- zi I ..l~ S t GA ra dr 50 1 -01 to V't i U iy.. C tx _M �'�. i�',a �-! ►Vl tl' C' �2� -� S W fl S c -k -L -c 71D 4. Explain how the proposed use is not contrary to the General Plan. 17 -S'r2u C_7 U i -!'� ArR,c w 1T o,CA i tai P— G, �-1 S: 9=&L fSr- df- MGI ` Pc �r�-� . 1, F cIV- :aS �� +.� c.4.i""C' ► t� N l S � (z ��fJ I�C'►,'~a ►� rte--- Ct R-� � tSC� Amitay rTC� I..l��-�s,fict� r0{� Ga krC' 1 IJ U I:E h 12 Ct RE -C60"4 cxN: RA -C t o hl S A -N <J U (3) PT 1 N G, 6F 6�t sTIN� rl��S�c �.� . I HER BY CERTIFY, under penalty of perjury, that the information and materiels -� sqbmAfed with�is application are true and correct. and Sign ture of Applicant/Cont act6r Signature of Landowner / �• srup,P.r ` cep, lo . ted: \J u,&eg c 'Z.� Dated: CONTRACTORS PLEASE READ AND INITIAL: I UNDERSTAND that in order to perform work in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, a business license must be obtained from the City's Finance Department prior to obtaining a building permit from the Building and Safety Division. (initials) Staff Signature W \rorms\Ping\apps\Ccnditional Use Permit doc updated 7101 Page 6 CITUOFIL RANCHO PALOSVERDES PLANNING, BUILDING, &C ODE ENFORCEMENT HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT The California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) has compiled lists of Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites for the entire State of California. Although the current list for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (reproduced below) is based upon data retrieved from the Cal/EPA web site on September 16, 2003, you should be aware that these lists are revised periodically. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5(f), before the City can accept an application as complete, the applicant must consult the list and indicate whether the project and any alternatives are located on a site, which is included on any such list, and shall specify any list, 114PACT CM: RANCHO PALOS VERDES STREET, ADDRESS CURRENT USE FDRMER USE RWQCB CASE No. CASE STATUS 3860 CREST ROAD i FAA radar site Same R-13308 Closed 56.56 CREST ROAD Demolished Unocal service station I-06500 (Open 5837 CREST ROAD Cal. Water offices Same R-05395 Opera 5841 CREST ROAD Verizon facility Same R-12296 Closed 28103 HAvvTHORNE BOULEVARD Mobil service station Same R-01504 Open 28732 HIGHRIDGE ROAD Hilltop Automotive Unocal service station I-06434 Closed 96 NARCISSA DRIVE _ Residence Same R-23219 Closed 6100 PALOS VERDES DRTve SourH Residence (1 Sea Cove Drive) Shell service station R-36348 Closed 6124 PALOS VERIDEs DRxve SOUTH -Fire Station No. 53 T Same � R-12757 Closed 6560 PALOS VF-RDES DRIVE SOUTH Two residences (32504 & 32508 Seawolf Drive) Chevron service station R-14832 Closed 6600 PALOS VERDES DRIVE SOUTH Partially demolished Marineland and Texaco service station R-01409 Closed 31.200 PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST Unocai service station Same I-11074 Closed 31.501 PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST Point Vicente Interpretive Center U.S, Military rifle range N/A Open 27501 WESTERN AvENurd Green Hills Memorial Park Same R-12803 Opera 29421 WESTERN AVENUE Chevron service station Same I-15523 Closed 29505 WEMRm AVENUE Shopping center Mobil service station - R-03558 Open 29701 WESTERN AVENUr s T Shopping center - - Unocal service station R-05958 Closed In the event: that the project site and any alternatives proposed in the application are not contained on the Cal/EPA lists, please certify that fact as provided below. t have consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65952.5 of the Government Code and hereby certify that the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not contained on :hese lists, (Applicant) (Signature) . ___.. (Date) 30(Iq(1'I;IV-kr' '101ML 131_VD I CA ()ill(; 1;:1f11 rYilll'll iii l i( )I I, 11 l !21 7 Mf I (:OW 5.14 hi98 %';I III -_)I( Il i t {i(il h l4 ii(tS' ' it I'= I \ i:!I(li re 1 I ,,PI'I ?I -MA11 11 "IlIVIfV(;t?fki":` YY -I HAZARQOUS 'WAVE AND SUBUANCES STATEMENT If the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are contained on the CAL/EPA lists, please complete the following statement. I. Name of Applicant: (:L -EC— I t.L.S M o 2i A -t. &2�–= 2, Address: 21 C�0 1 S Tt:E- tl Li rJ v 3, Phone Number: Day C! i®) - �3� • 2 G ! � Evening L._J - 4. Address of Site (Street name and number if available, and ZIP code): 5. Local Agency (City/County) Jr— (Z -.4N c-iA- I b. Assessor's Book, Page, and Parcel Number: - - 7. Specify any list pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code: 13. Regulatory Identification Number; R- -- l2 'bo 9. Date of List: (Applicant) (Signature) Ul; FOR STAFF USE ONLY C (Date) I have consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and hereby certify that the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are located on a site which: (check one) Is not included in these lists. Is Included in these lists, and the project applicant has completed the statement required by Section 65962,5(-) of the Government Code, Is included in these lists, and I have notified the applicant, pursuant, to Section 65943 of the Government Code, that he or she has failed to complete the statement: required by Section 65962.5(f) of the Government Code by letter dated Staff Signature Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement Page 2 of 2 Revised March 1, 2004 W:\Forms\PingVnisc\Hazarddu;; Waste & Substances Statement.doc ILLCITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING, BUILDING, & CODE ENFOI'RGEMENT CERTIFICATION OF PROPERTY Obi HERS" MAILING USI' Applicaflon(s) _ I \N sTeR- -A+J kV"t'E-N3M tic �t Name !� rJ 4t 1.Ln�l�rZ( A� 1� -rz_e App _ -__ 1..._ Subject Prepeirty Address Notice: Raditm Required ._..__-- j oc>' Number of property ovvneirs to be notified 3 4-o t S c—C I certify that the property owners' mailing list submitted with the application(s) listed above includes all of the persons listed on the latest adopted LA County Tax Roll as the legal owners (and if applicable Occupants) of all parcels of land withinfeet of the subject property noted above. 1 certify that the property owners' mailing list has been prepared in accordance with the City of.Rancho Palos Verdes De velopment Corte and "Vicinity iWap Instructions Sheet. " / also understand that if more than 20% of the notices are retumed by the post office after mailing due to incorrect address information, orif the address information is not complete, that I will have to submit a new property owners' list that has been prepared and certified as accurate by a Title Company or other professional mailing list preparation service, and the project notice will have to be re -mailed. Prop ►n+r7er (applicant) ignatl�re Dat( RYt; (Please Print) I/V,\Forms\Ping\misc\CerGflcaUon of Property Owners' Mailing List.doc 3(1N(l 1 l.'t\VTFI(}n E B IM i RANG1IO i'Ai_f}.5ifI DES GASloolb',:i`rl -\YPilf1 ' ,i .i). I 9 i'I"(I P11 rI1 (:iIf}j nill ;,; (i / III RI I;IM 1,?.O 1,41 ,'r(i) / 1 Af'I f \\ (?,IM i,,I 7kl;i / L.•I-INI P1 A ihlIN' 9, NJ)\ Ci 111 City of Rancho Palos Verdes ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (To be completed by City Staff) Date Filed: (To be completed by applicant) General Information APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR Name JTUP27 Address City/State/Zip Home Phone Work Phone Proiect/Site Information Case No. LANDOWNER j 1� f�.�-�� 141, . a « :� Ate- r ah K Name Address rL-'11tNc- t�Arw 1�2�J`. 4u2�i� City/State/Zip iD}g�I�D�v� (,*G)652.2�i Home Phone Work Phone Address of project: fl �o ( S. lQ 2 S'it:�: (Lr� k LI Assessor's Parcel Number: Existing General Plan Designation: Existing Zoning: List and Describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by City, Regional, State, and Federal agencies: k k S -c r -Q. S T -7c- 4 r.) M ( ✓Q- Pv) Environmental Information Form Page 2 Project Description Proposed use of the property (please provide a detailed description): 1 N GI_v 0 t N to Ct r2=c u r.z rN tom. -e2' t_ AS ---.2 -, J _ A 9 ef'a rl Of. t;-- M 9�, W_�Q AAL S� C. Rye eve ca -A r t i u f2� M l`i�1 1wN Ry 2 i Site Size: Project Square Footage: F�.rzwW 6 A'L.Co c:7) Number of floors of construction: I Amount of off-street parking provided: � AA Proposed Phasing: S LZ - s✓ S 1-('c PL.Af-4 Anticipated Incremental Development: If this is a residential project, please indicate the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and household sizes expected: If this is a commercial project, please indicate the type of project, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square foot of sales area, and loading facilities. it= 2y P,-uNj_ _ A Mt +Q C-) ►\A - t�- ArL-- - A, c)ta- LQ p.(3 1 N c' PSA C -t I L1 M I If this is an industrial project, please indicate the type of project, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: -- - t,4 ( X---- -- --- - — Environmental Information Form Page 3 If this is an institutional project, please indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: t13 IA - If the project involves a City discretionary permit (such as Variance, Conditional Use Permit, or Zone Change application, etc.) please indicate why these applications are required: Are any of the following items applicable to the project or its effects? (for any items checked yes, please describe why on separate sheet of paper) YES NO ✓ 1 ✓ 2. Change in existing feature of any bays, tidelands, beaches, hills, or substantially alter ground contours. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas, or public lands or roads Change in pattern, scale, or character of general area of project. Produce significant amounts of solid waste or litter. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes, or odors in vicinity. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream, ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns Substantially change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. Site is on filled land or on slope of 10% or more. Use or dispose of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammables, or explosives. _.. 7. 8. ✓ 9. Change in existing feature of any bays, tidelands, beaches, hills, or substantially alter ground contours. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas, or public lands or roads Change in pattern, scale, or character of general area of project. Produce significant amounts of solid waste or litter. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes, or odors in vicinity. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream, ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns Substantially change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. Site is on filled land or on slope of 10% or more. Use or dispose of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammables, or explosives. Environmental Information Form Page 4 10. Substantially change the demand for municipal services (i.e. police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). 11. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (i.e. electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). ,/ 12. Relationship to a larger project or a series of projects. Environmental Setting On a separate page, please describe the project site, as it exists before the project. Please include information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Additionally, please describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of said structures. Please attach photographs of the site and the structures (snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted) On a separate page, please describe the surrounding properties. Please include information on plants and animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Please indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of the land use (single-family, multi -family, shops, department stores, etc.) and the scale of development (height, frontage, setbacks, etc.). Please attach photographs of the vicinity (snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted) NOTE: Before the City of Rancho Palos Verdes can accept this application as complete, the applicant must consult the lists prepared pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and submit a signed statement indicting whether the project and any alternatives are located on a site which is included on any such list, and shall specify any list (Please see attached Hazardous Waste and Substance Statement). Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: Please complete the attached Exhibit "A" Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statement, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature I Print Name Jjt�y o t2j,4e _ Z.6 . rLo o �j For Date Environmental Information Form Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM EXHIBIT "A" Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: Please check of level of impact for each question. In comment box, please provide reasons and supporting evidence for the section (attach additional pages if necessary). Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal plan, or zoning ordinance? b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use ✓ in the vicinity? d) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? Comments: `pp,poSz7o MptTeya_ P -•0 -t -J L's ..1 C, VTi4 kPi'Po� h (9.1 t AAA�"rA-(2, PLAA. 1 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would thero osal: p p a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or ✓ local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? Environmental Information Form Page 6 Issues and Supporting information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated d) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction , of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: �rz rA.,:, % _-,o nr a.D r a-oA4--. r.r V-rri-�- (�fpPlizJ-z-o 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the proposal: a) Expose people or structure to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? ✓' iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ✓ G) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off site landslide, lateral spreading, ✓ subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in the Uniform Building Code, thus creating substantial risks to life or property? Environmental Information Form Page 7 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated e) Have soils incapable or adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, where sewers are not ✓- available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: ^ S Pf IJ i'-t-0PMC�'rIrJ L1r-E' sAf=E"v( T�F�G?ut(l,L Mch�s , 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any water quality standard or wastewater discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer ✓ volume or a lowering of the local groundwater? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or v - amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Environmental Information Form Page 8 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area, as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area, structures which would impede / ✓ or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death Involving flooding, including flooding 1/' as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Expose people or property to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Have construction impact on storm water runoff? 1) Have post construction activity impact / on storm water runoff? Comments: (�tzaPvSzo Po.=a,Ec`C5 arLot�3A 0 1�5 -c,, a zr % < M P P c -T A D -S A �"*rr 'P n-. P rt -C i e�- p)o n-- t n sG, cars r2 v c �C ( a i V -Mr e - "t- Sh-r�2 Af3Ptcntof ��aCr�err ws [�14ASCala0-) 1 c. - +4Q' 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected ./ air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Environmental Information Form Page 9 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated e) Conflict with or obstruct the / implementation of any applicable air ✓ quality plan? Comments: T RE 'V Lc P -,,,--Y> P l ---N Fc" rlan S J mT n4 A t T A 1 R A" k 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal, a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street ✓ system? b) Exceed either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C) Result in inadequate emergency access or inadequate access to nearby uses? d) Result in insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? e) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? f) Conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e,g. farm equipment? Comments: /Z:(] A fz i NTc r� r.1 4 C� w V` H p v /N)P cT to PA-L� T1 &L c. k" A- D �-' O u1ti7 r "T hF c Environmental Information Form Page 10 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or ✓ by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc...), ✓ through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impF,de the use of native wildlife nursery sites e) Conflict with any local polices or ordinances protecting biological ✓ resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Comments: ��G P2o �o S .�.) 9W Ar S "C' C'-Yz.. � � t N[a..•u D�.� �D::_v L= -'La f �tl�� cSF �.l S`C"i ►-�' G� � du�'C�: R-�-1 t`�rL-n !7 �`f y w •-t'tt nrb i"�� a c.-c�; t c,A�- (�-c'"�s�-tJ. R..r c Environmental Information Form Page 11 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy ✓ conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ✓ c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be ✓ of future value to the region and the residents of the State? c) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local General Plan, Specific Plan, or other land use plan? Comments: Tk� Pn,oe - t s -rt rx zntz-rp IQ 174, r3 I Y14,P Ac.'1 `Co fu � r1 `� tia pd.1 p _ �t t 2► , 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL. Would the proposal involve: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous material? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the „✓ release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of and existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site, which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government / Code Section 65962.5 and, as a V result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Environmental Information Form Page 12 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wiidlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: F(2— I. P4–Pl V-rkt_Izu fi (n12-4>4JNn ,2ifisc.5 ani�41 peso J ; "q4, JL-' L 4AAJ PPST Tb 4�A2A�fz��c> S M A'c &Yl 1 10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Environmental Information Form Page 13 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: �n t>tc"T i t S Irl l rJ G Gates :-;rC2-0 C: -r I S zi 4 Wit-' M S , N v �l = c= L, -V -'-t- S . 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: i) Fire protection? ✓... ii) Police protection? iii) Schools? ✓ iv) Parks? v) Other public facilities? .✓ Comments: 1 lkc CE ftA C- "C .0-� tr"% `T a 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ✓ Regional Water Quality Control Board? 14 Environmental Information Form Page 14 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated b) Require or result In the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which / could cause significant environmental ✓ effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand In addition ✓ to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statures and regulations related to solid waste? Comments: 'Tl, �fLA-k I &k % t3 ( NA k4.,_. t A k (�A Cr" I" 43A S To (2- �.L 1nJ h"'tto tic, F- P&-Yr-�- Si>t-i f -I w n. S T'Z p(5 P- S Pte- . 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Have a substantial effect on a scenic �= vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historical buildings, within a state scenic highways? Environmental Information Form Page 15 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site ✓ and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the ✓ area? Comments: 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the f State CEQA Guidelines? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? e) Disturbed any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: M R $ %-T Pkv WW:' 0'J. l LJA-+J? t Environmental Information Form Page 16 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 15. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Qoes the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: 1� C c`n'1 c Tom. a l U S � cam- T !� (� -"may %t� Oz� �s s r� c �' L �^ 7 A c , 'C it PAa14S» - R (Z' C '2 Ar -r k" - n! lk� t=p-C-i -�1'T e T , 16. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resource Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? G) Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of ✓ Farmland, to a non-agricultural use? Comments: 4Y-" P -S L'� r( -k ( sT1 ti (� a -o P� C�- 1-11 eK tt Environmental Information Form Page 17 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Comments: `1 i-k,� tpC-v: PM r - rj + �t�� - +(�l.�c�+� s �4 c rzrI r3 U t --r' ►�✓ vP0F"-o ' eF ^rte MtaSzCP- P� a Prz�J rrJ I`�� t , b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Comments: MA S -c ��P-- P ra r r� t►� I+tiA-(-- Rc-4r� I ��► t P h C - -r 04 tz i MT c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either ✓ directly or indirectly? Comments: pc-At--� L-�4 Y M I N I M A-(— GQ J 1 'CZZ7- r.I M F I�iTA1 1 IM PA d; T. Environmental information Form Page 18 18. SOURCE REFERENCES w:/forms/Environmental Information Form STORM °"'ATER PLANNING PP#)GRA f R PRIORITY PROJECT CHECKLIST NCHO PAIOS VERDES Pm dNemo pxryrNoms I � eeveloperNaree ✓ -} ti.t C C W 2� Act J. Mjp-a-rTboo 1 as c . rged Addross 000IM&M Developer Addmss VeY): 70 YJLI o P%cos �:Maf, C4, �a `i�`� S T 7 ZI Owtx/rrec(Numbor l oNmrPrrono DOMPor 8) Redevelopment projects as defined on back* _I 3to 3t. o31I `'I`t -\-ZZ,qyI's Part I m Type of Project Does the proposed project fall into one of the following categories? Yes No 1) Ten or more unit homes, including single and multiple family homes, condominiums, apartments etc.* ✓ 2) An industrial or commercial development with 100,000 square feet or more of impervious surface* 3) An automotive service facility 4) A retail gasoline outlet 4) Outdoor handling or storage of hazardous materials 5) A restaurant ✓ 6) A parking lot with either 5,000 square feet of impervious surface or with 25 or more parking spaces* 7) Single family hillside - *(one acre or more of surface area) 8) Redevelopment projects as defined on back* 9) project located in, adjacent to or discharging directly to an ESA (defined on back) AND creates 2,500* square feet or more of impervious surface area = r If any of the boxes in Part 1 is checked "Yes", this project will require the preparation of a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) along with a Maintenance Agreement and Transfer (defined on back). 'Numerical criteria will apply. Part 2 - Project Specific Concerns Does the proposed project Include any of the following elements? 1) Vehicle or equipment fueling areas (retail or private) C,) Yes No 2) Vehicle or equipment maintenance areas, including repair or washing s, 3) Commercial or industrial waste handling or storage 4) Outdoor handling or storage of hazardous materials 5) Outdoor manufacturing areas 6) Outdoor food handling or processing 7) Outdoor animal care, confinement, or slaughter 8) Outdoor horticulture activities If any of the boxes in Part 2 is checked "Yes", this project will require the preparation of a Site Specific Slormwater Mitigation Pian (SSSMP) along with a Maintenance Agreement and Transfer (defined on back). If boxes in Parts i and 2 are both checked "Yes", a combined urban slormwater plan will need to be submitted. e . ic-n a raiz r= Applicant Name cc: One copy of document to Public Works A9.u+tTC c Applicant Tule Signature Date Form HKA-Mruv.5102 STOIth, WATER PLANNING PRtDGR. ,l PRlORIT`! DEVELC2PINEIdT112EC9EVE40PMENY PROJECTS NCHO PALOS VERDES Project Name a -i Project Location Rt°� 1'�o E7 Company Name Address — - Contact Name / Title Phone / FAX/Email Farm Pi General Project Certification A completed original of this form must accompany all SUSMP submittals Best Management Practices (BMPs) have been incorporated into the design of this project to accomplish the following goals: 1) Minimize impacts from storm water runoff on the biological integrity of Natural Drainage Systems and water bodies in accordance with requirements under CEQA (Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 21100), CWC § '13369, CWA § 319, CWA § 402(p), CWA § 404, CZARA § 6217(g), ESA § 7, and local government ordinances. 2) Maximize the percentage of permeable surfaces to allow more percolation of storm water into the ground. 3) Minimize the amount of storm water directed to impermeable surfaces and to the MS4. 4) Minimize pollution emanating from parking lots through the use of appropriate Treatment Control BMPs and good housekeeping practices. 5) Properly design and maintain Treatment Control BMPs in a manner that does not promote breeding of vectors. 6) Provide for appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in stormwater from the development site. I certify that this Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. The information contained herein is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and complete. Property Owner Developer (signature) — Property Owner Developer (printed) Title Date Post Construction i Maintenance Certification Proper operation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) is an important component of reducing pollutants in urban and storm water runoff. As the responsible party, I certify that the BMPs will be implemented, monitored and maintained to ensure their continued effectiveness. In the event of a property transfer, the new owner will be notified of the BMPs in use at this site and must include written conditions in the sales or lease agreement, which requires the recipient to assume responsibility for maintenance and conduct a maintenance inspection at least once a year. Property Owner (sfgrrature) — - -- — - .Property Owner (printed) -- — - Title Date [., ignatory requ rementsi — ----—_�-------- _.--._—.-- `t'his section shall be signed by the landowner. If the landowner Is not an individual, the signatures may be from a corporate officer, a manager If the authority to sign has been delegated to the manager, a general partner, or a solo proprietor. Piann' I Best Management Practicr- Please refer to the California Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbooks for more information. BMP Identification No. Check If to 13MP Name and Name be use Car Wash Facility SC3, Vehicle and Equipment Washing and Steam Cleaning Constructed Wetlands TC3, Constructed Wetlands Control of Impervious Runoff Not applicable Efficlent Irrigation - No applicable Energy Dissipaters ESC40, Outlet Protection Extended Detention Basins TC5, Extended Detention Basin Infiltration Basins TC1, Infiltration Infiltration Trenches TC1, Infiltration Inlet Trash Racks Not applicable Landscape Design ESC2, Preservation of Existing Vegitation;u ECS10, Seeding and Planting; ESC11, _ Mulching Not applicable Linings for Urban Runoff Conveyance Channels Materials Management SC5, Outdoor Loading/Unloading of Materials; SC6, Outdoor Container, lStorage of Liquids; SC8 Outdoor Storage of Raw Materials, Products and By -Products Media Filtration TC6, Media Filtration Motor Fuel Concrete Dispensing SC2, Vehicle and Equipment Fueling Areas Motor Fuel Dispensing Area SC2, Vehicle and Equipment Fueling Canopy Oil/Water Separators and Water TC7, Oil/Water Separators and Water Quality Inlets Quality Inlets _ Outdoor Storage SC6, Outdoor Container Storage of Liquids; SC8, Outdoor Storage of Raw Materials, Products and By -Products Porous Pavement and Alternative TC1, Infiltration Surfacesu. Protect Slopes and Channels ECS40, Outlet Protection; ESC42, Slope Roughening and Terracing SC3, Vehicle and Equip. Washing and Steam _ Self -Contained Areas for Vehicle or Equipment Washing, Steam Cleaning, Cleaning; SC4, Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance, Repair, or Material Maintenance and Repair; SC7, Outdoor Processing Process Equipment Operations and Maint. e _ Storm Drain System Stenciling and Y SC30, Storm Drain Systems Signs Signage SC9 Waste Handling and Disposal rJr= Trash Container Areas Vegetated Swales and Strips , Bio -Filters Wet Pond Wet Ponds �AfTC2, Please refer to the California Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbooks for more information. �• V ED t 5Ul1-D1NG, IAV '1CNO Acw.ci+l,.•�-ice CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTTCONTRACTOR: (Name): Jbttta v -rte PALOSVERDES DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, EIU1LDIN4, AND CODE EN oiliCEmENT APPLICATION NO. ( SS- eNlo ZU2c66dKv LANDOWNER; (Address): 275bj S-11LmrlaN PVcJ Address): `x.'iSa [ -y 1�rte-t~ v � - Phone: Work: (5u4 3t g1t` Phone: Work: (3#4__E51 3 L Home: Home: Project Location: G Q9-" tA-Ak,i tLA�o m P, �- ?AES Project Description: T'e Aa t%N(L-aiA-] Lot & Tract Number: Current Zoning,* dtwhc.Tt 2 1SX GENERAL INFORMATION Existing Development 1. Square footage of existing structure footprint (including any covered or enclosed patios and garage). 2. Square footage of driveways and parking areas. t2t 3. Square footage of lot or parcel. 4. Square footage of existing lot coverage dine 1 + line 2J. b. Percentage of existing open space. [100% w (line 4 divided by line 3)]. Proposed Development (PLEASE COMPLETE ONLY IF A NEW STRUCTURE IS PROPOSED) 6. Maximum height of project, measured from the highest point of existing grade Covered by the structure to ridge. 7. Maximum height of project, measured from the finished grade adjacent to the lowest foundation to ridge. 30949 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD t RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275-5391 PLANNIHGiGODE ENFOR.CEPAENT; (310) 544-5226 BUILDING: 01Cj 641=7702 DEPT. FAK (,310)544-5203 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 3, Square footage of proposed new floor area. A. First Story -- _ B. Second Story= Sea tAct�- 9 41 C" V) 10 Square footage of proposed new structure footprint_ Square footage of driveways and parking areas, Square footage of new lot coverage [line 1 + kine 3 + line 101. 12. Percentage of new open space [100% - dine 11 divided by line 3)1. GRADING INFORMATION Are any of the following conditions proposed? Yes � No If yes, a separate Grading Application is required. Total volume of earth to be moved (cut and fill) is 20 c.y, or greater. * Height of fill or depth of cut is 3 feet or greater. Does the project involve any work, activity, or encroachment in the public right -of -gray or public drainage structure? t-.10 If so, you must obtain approval from the Public Works Department prior to issuance of construction permits. Describe in detail the nature of the proposed use or development, Burden of Proof Statements 1, Explain how the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use. EXtS�r�G Cen.�¢.� � 'LP_Q.w�.+� by CuaO trnticrt aV, sem_ O'C-- CP.\,4 Itj ti4 2: Explain how the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways properly designed to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. 3. Explain how the proposed use at this specific location will have no significant adverse effect on adjacent properties or the permitted use thereof. ek. 4 -r -a- o'.J ks 4. Explain how the proposed use is not contrary to the General Flan, r., tZ '* herd? OL ! HREBY CERTIFY, under {penalty of perjury, that the information and materials s m' ith this application are true and couea and Si atur of Applicant/ContractorIgn '�do nr r Dated: s ''� - bated: al i24g3 CONTRACTORS PLEASE READ AND INITIAL. I UNDERSTAND that in order to perform work in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, a business license must be obtained from the City's Finance Department prior to obtaining a building permit from the Building and Safety Division. (initials) Staff Signature vpjaled M 1 Page 6 NCHO PALOS VERDES �...,.VAENT OF P1 ANNING, Q1 r7l nING AtJ.E3 Gt'LE E11Fn0rrMrlLT HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT The California Environmental protection Agency (Cal/FPA) has compiled lists of Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites for the entire State of California, Although the current list for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (reproduced below) is based upon data retrieved from the Cal/FPA web site on March 4, 2002, you should be aware that these lists are revised periodically. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65962,5(l, before the City can accept an application as complete, the applicant must consult the list and indicate whether the project and any alternatives are located on a site, which is included on any such list, and shall specify any list. IMPACT CITY: RANCHO PALOS VERDES ET ADDRESS n -- Ls� CURRENT USE FORMER USEY T RWQCB CAs[° No. CASE STATus 3860 CREST ROAtS FAA radar site Same R-13308 Closed 5656 CREST ROAD Demolished Unocal service station 1-06500 Open 5637 CREST ROAD .Cal. 'dater offices Same R-05395 Open 5841 CREST ROAD — Verizon facility Same R-12296 Closed 28103 HAwWHORNE BOULEVARD Mobil service station Same R-01504 Open 28732 HIGHRIDOE ROAD Hilltop Automotive'.--- Unocal service station I-06434 Closed 96 NARCISSA DRIVE Residence Same R-2:3219 Closed 6100 PALOS VERDES DRIvE SOUTH Office building Shelf service station R-36348 Closed 61:24 PALOS VERoEs DRIVE SOUTH Fire Station No. 53 Same R-12757 Closed 6560 PALOS VERDES DRIVE SOUTH Two residences (32504 & 32508 Seawolf Drive) Chevron service station R-1,1832 Closed 6600 PALLS VERDES DRtvE SOUTH Partially demolished Marineland and Texaco service station R-01,409 Closed 31200 PALOS VERDES DRAPE WEs7 Unocal service station Same I-11074 Closed 27501 WESTERN AVENUE Green Hills Memorial Park Same R-12803 Open 2-421 WrrsTER l AvIENUE Chevron service station Same I-15523 Closer! 29505 WESTERN AveNuE Shopping center Mobil service station R-03558 Open 29701 WESTERN AvEr uE Shopping center Unocal service station R-05958 Closed In the event that the project site and any alternatives proposed in the application are not contained on the CaIJEPA lists, please cartIfy that fact as provided below. I have consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65952.5 of the Government Code and hereby certify that the development project and any alternatives proposed In this application are no contained on these lists. (Applicant) - -- (Signature) (mate) 30940 Hawthorne 8oulevord / I -Rancho o Palos Veru, CA 90275-5391 Planning & lade Ehl cem*nt Dl+ &wis; (31€3) W-52.28 / Buildnq Division,.. (310) 541.7702 / Depazt,-meflt FAX; (320) 544-5293 www.pa.16sverdes,com/rpv Ft 1aKI .0— 5IMY_ If the development project and any alternatives proposed In this application are contained on the CAL/EPA lists, please complete the following statement. 1. Name of Applicant: 6-Qoe— 1> KA".:f Ls ` 2, Address: 2-1 S--?/ % S. W 04u-- AV -4 t") 3. Phone Number: Day -A 3Z "tt- ung" - 4. Address of Site (Street name and number if available, and ZIP code): 5, Local Agency (City/County): _ 1-0 5, Ps..l.QC c 6. Assessor's Book, Page, and Parcel Number: - — _-- - - — 7. Specify any list pursuant to Section 65962,5 of the Government Code: B. Regulatory Iderrtiflcation Number: tL \1&0 &0 -� 9. Date el~tist: ht +tc t+ 4, za a'2— (Signature) '2- (Signature) (Date) FOR STAFF USE ONLY I havee consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and hereby certify that the development project and any alternatives proposed In this application are located on a site which: (check ane) Is not included in these lists. Is Included In these lists, and the project applicant has completed the statement required by Section. 65962,5(f) of the Government Code. Is included in these lisp, and I have notlfied the applicant, pursuant to Section 65943 of the Government Code, that he or she has failed to complete the statement required by Section 65962..5(f) of the Government Code by letter dated -- - Staff Signature Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement Page 2 of 2 Revised March h, 2002 WAF-ormAPIrMmisc\Hazardous Waste & Substances Staternent,doc CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDr iNSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING A VICINITY MAP AND PROPERTY OWNERS LIST In order to satisfy public noticing requirements, certain planning applications require the submittal of a vicinity map and accompanying property owners list. The size of the vicinity map varies by application and may involve either adjacent properties, a 100' radius, or a 500' radius. Please check on the application form you are submitting For the vicinity map size you must subrr-K With the exception of "Adjacent Properties" maps, a vicinity map and property ovrners list must bo prepared by a Title Company or other professional mailing list preparation service. The mailing labels must be certified as accurate by the agent preparing the mailing list. Attached Is a list of firms that provide services in preparation of vicinity maps and certified mailing labels. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list and the cost of the services provided will vary. If you have any questions regarding properties of the vicinity snap or property owners list, as described below, please contact a planner at (310) 5"-5228. VICINITY MAP The purpose of the vicinity map is to clearly show all properties within the required radius of the subject lot (applicant). The vicinity map must clearly show the required radius line, dimensioned and drawn from the exterior boundaries of the subject lot, as shown below. All neighboring properties (including lots outside R.P V. city limits) which fall completely within, partially within or are just touched by the radius line, must be consecutively numbered and the names and the addresses of [tie owners provident to the City as doscr[bed b0ow. Please devise your own consocutive numbering system on the; snap and ignore the lot number, Assessors number, or any other number already found on the lots on the vicinity wraps. An "adjacent properties" vicinity map does riot involve a set radius but rather needs to identify all properties behind, beside, and in front of the proposed project site, as shown below. The city's planning staff can provide (tie base map for preparing the vicinity map for a nominal charge. Applicants may also prepare their own maps, at a clearly marked scale of not less than I" = 200', PROPERTY DINNERS MAILING LIST The property owner of every parcel (even if vacant, rented or government owned), which falls completely or partially within the required radius on the vicinity map must be identified, placed on a mailing list and submitted to the City. The narne and address of every property owner along with the assigned lot identification number, which corresponds to the vicinity map, must be neatly typed on 8 %z' x 11 sheets of Xerox or Avery self-adhesive labels, as shown below. Two (2) sets of self-adhesive labels and a Xerox copy of (lie list must be provided to the City with your subject application. These labels will be used by the City to mall notice of your subject application to neighboring property owners. The property owners list must be obtained frorn the most current L-A. County Tax Assessor's roll. The_Clty does not provide this service. The Assessor's office located at 500 W. Temple Street, doom 205, Los Angelos, CA 90012. Office hours are 8:00 am to 4:30 pin Monday -Friday. The telephone number is (213) 974.3441, Assigned Lot LID, Number Property Owner Marne Address City, State, Zip Code W'V Forr t.54PinrjVnisc\Vicin4.dot SAMPLE M (LING LABELS FT-�-2 Harold Jackson Malcolm Hill f 773 Grayiog 4117 Greenwood Meadow RPV, CA 90275 Torrance, CA 90503 j SAMPLE VICINITY MAPS 'Adjacent Propenes" Map Makers, Ownership Listing Services & Title Companies that may prepare radius maps and retailing lists 1. Angeles Planning Group 5515 York Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90042 (323) 259-3573 (Ownership Listing Service) 2. Bute Energy P.O. Box 3:05 Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA (31 b) 465-1825 Attn: Natalie Kay (Ownership Listing Service) 3. G.C. Mapping 711 Mission Street, Suite'B' South Pavidena, CA 91030 (626) 441-1080 Attn: Gilbert Castro (Ownership listing Service) 4. Kimberly Wendell P,O. Box 264 Los Alamitos, GA 90720 (562) 431-9634 (562) 431-6175 -- FAX (Ownership Listing Service) 5. Teves & Associates 115 S. Juanita Ave. Redondo Beach, CA 90277 (31.0) 543-3090 (Ownership Listing Services) 6. Susan W. Case 917 Glenneyre St., :Suite ##7 Laguna Beach, CA 92651 (949) 494-6105 (Ownership Listing Service) 7. 1Nestcoast Mapping 5147 W. Rosecrans Hawthorne, CA 90250 (310) 973-4519 (Ownership Listing Service) 8. Commonwealth Land Title Company 801 N. Brand Blvd 90274 Glendale, CA, 91203 (818) 552-7000 Data Pro Attn: Michael Higgerson (800) 568-7104 WzkFormslPlag' misc�Maphiakers, ov#lerohipLlstlriegsr~rs,Tlle c ornpanles.dor; (Updated 0/17102) 9. Southland Title Corporation 7530 N. Glenoaks Blvd., 2"d Floor Burbank, CA, 91504 (310) 603-0191 10. Lawyers Title Company 251 So. Lake Pasadena CA, 91101 (800) 347-7800 x395 11. JPL Zoning Services, Inc. 6257 Van Nuys Blvd., Suite 101 Van buys, CA 91401-2711 (818) 781-0016 Attn' Maria Faiasca t2ANCHO PALOS VERDE Deparlrrtent M Ptna►Ing, Hulidfng &Coda Enforcement CERTIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS` MAILING 1-I403T Application(s) Applicant Name Subject Property Address Notice Radius Required Number of property owners to be notified I certify that the property owners' mailing list submitted with the application(s) listed above includes all of the persons listed on the latest adopted LA County Tax Roll as the legal owners (and if applicable occupants) of all parcels of land within feet of the subject property noted above. 1 certify that the property owners' mailing list has been prepared in accordance with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code and "Vicinity Map Instructions Sheet," I also understand that if more than 20 of the notices are returned by the post office after mailing due to incorrect address information, or if the address information is not complete, that I will have to submit a new property owners' list haat has been prepared and certified as accurate by a Title Company or other professional mailing list preparation service, and the project notice will have to be re -mailed. Property Owner (Applicant) Signature Late Name (Please Print) WTofms'PIn9im1s0Cor4ifr 90on of Property Owners' Mailing Ust.doc 30940 HAWTHORNE SOLILEVARDIRANCHO PALLS VERDES, CA 90275-5391 PL.ANNiNWWOE ENFORCEMENT; (310) 544-6228 BUILDING: (3101) 541-7702 DEPT, FAX (310)544.5293 PRINTED(M RCOYCI_ED PAPER APPENDIX H ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (To be Completed By Applicant) Date Filed: General Information 1 . Marne and address of developer of project sposor: ?. Address of project: za-s-b I S, Wq-" fFrkt_ P�Jc,O� J s - Assessor's Bloch & Lot No, 3. dame, address, and telephone number of person to be contated concerning this project: id tf- 6's 1 0 5i i 4, Indicate number of the permit application for the project to which this form pertains: 5. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by City, regional, state and federal agencies: 6. Existing zoning district: C'tft_c-t-CA- 1 7. Proposed use of site {(Project for which this form is filed): 1: rJ aZ aA Esc Ht/KJI*,� Project Description . Site size. 12-t + - � g. Square footage. 10, !Number of floors of construction. 11. , Amount of off-street parking provided. 12. Attach plans, 13. Proposed scheduling. 14. Associated project, 15. Anticipated Incremental development. 16, If residential, Include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected. 17. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities. M If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. 19. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project, 20. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required. Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all Items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). Yes No 21. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, v' or hills; or substantial alteration of ground contours. 22. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public land or roads. 23, Change in patter, scale or character of general area of project, ✓' 24. Significant amount of solid waste or litter. r 25. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. V11, 26. Change in ocean, by, lake, stream or ground water quality or quantity, ►' or alteration of existing drainage patterns. 27. Substantial change In existing noisee or vibration levels in the vicinity. 26, Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more. ✓ FA 2 . Use of disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic 'l� substances, flammables or explosives. 30. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). 31. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc,). 32. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. Environmental Setting 33. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, Including infor- mation on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site, Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. 34. Describe the surrounding properties, Including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one -family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set -back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification _M I hereby certify that the statements fumished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and in formation presented are true and cQ(rect to the t of my knowledge and belief. S� N It o'er Date re 4csas For (Note: This is only a suggested form. Public agencies are free to devise their oven format for initial studies.) SAV.%Fprtn,,;�F'ing�n'aSCAEnvfonmentai info Form - Appendix Kdoo M Appendix I ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM t . Project Title: 2, Lead Agency Name and Address: I Contact Person and Phone Number: 4. Project Location: 8, Project Sponsor's Name and address: 6. General Plan Designation: 7, Zoning: 8. [description of the Project: (Describe the whole action involved, Including but not limited to later ,phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. (Attach additional sheets if necessary) 0. Surrounding Land uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings) 10. Other public agencies whose approval Is required (e.g, permits, financing approval, or participation agreement),. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages, DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency). On the basis of this Initial evaluation, I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a Land use and Planning NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Biological Resources I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there Aesthetics will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an Population and Housing attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared, Energy and Mineral Resources I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one Cultural Resources effect (1 ) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal Geological Problems standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as Hazards described on attached sheets, N the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Recreation Significant Unless Mltlgated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must Water analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. Noise I find that although tate proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there Mandatory Findings of Significance WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1) have Air Quality been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been avoided or Public Services mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed Transportation and Circulation Utilities and Service Systems DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency). On the basis of this Initial evaluation, I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared, I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1 ) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, N the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mltlgated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although tate proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, 2 Signature Date Printed Name :For EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the Information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A"No Impact" answer is adequately supported If the referenced Information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e, g, the project fails outside a fault rupture tone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e. g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. based on a project-spertific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action Involved, including off-slte as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational Impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there Is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect From "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency most describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross- referenced). ) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEGyA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). Earlier analyses are discussed In Section 17 at the and of the checklist. by Lead agencies are encouraged to lnmrporate Into the checklist references to information sources for potential Impacts (e.g, general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different ones, t 1AND VU AID FIMIM W'0111111 So oreloul. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? Innes Ud 1111111111forms"In Sources sure" patinaft fltllually lea TUN No 31;01MCant 3111MCCOt shalnclot Impact lidos Nolen !tarot Mideadet P) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or Minority community)? I0CIrmarstel t 1AND VU AID FIMIM W'0111111 So oreloul. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ---Explain choice of impact below each item; multiple lines may be entered or Delete this row if no explanation is required --- b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. Impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land users)? P) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or Minority community)? 2. RIIEP1111111ATION AND NeDSINii. Would me Droossek a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or Indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or major infrastructure? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential Impacts involving. a) Fault rupture? b) Seismic ground shaking? Issues ad Samieffloo Infer odou Sources Mor* Pst"May Potmally tMThU No $1121MIR 81181ftlat Sbnlftm IMMt Bills III$= IIP"t f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? MMISUBB g) Subsidence of the land? J c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? I I --F d) Seichs, tsunarni, or volcanic hazard? T e) Landslides or mudflows7 f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? J h) Expansive soils? 1) Unique geologic or physical features? 7- 4. WATER, Would the proposal result In: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, of the rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Oischarge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbldlty7 d) Changes In the amount of surface water in any water body? Issues and Supperdag Intanuallen Seems s. es FMIU V Pn"Vnhr 1nan tic f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by guts or excavations or through substantial toss of groundwater recharge capability? 81">dtMt 11110mtcAat SIRMISM Impact lMas nun NMI Mttl1etl$n �nc�n�nta� 1) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? e) Changes In currents, or the course or direction of water movements? f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by guts or excavations or through substantial toss of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? 1) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? j) Storm Water system disdarges from areas for materials storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehiwle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste dandling, hazardous materials handling or storage delivery or loading doers, or other outdoor work areas? k) A significantly environmentally harmful increase in the ftow rate or volume of storrri crater runoff"? l) A signiflcanily environmentally harmful increase in erosion of the Project site or surrounding areas? m) Storni water dls barges that would significantly impair the beneficial asses of receiving waters or areas that proMe water quality benefits (e.g,, riparian corridors, wetlands,, etc.)? n) Nara to the biological Integrity of drainage systems and water bodies? Inues 11111116 supperung IMIMMUM $iOfC Soiree% lretawalllt htaM ov Melilla M lfMM lgntllMI Mt car" Impact I1aMltsli /aNii IIct Itm12des d) Create objectionable odors? luManuM 6. TRANS PO RTATI ONICIRCULAT I ON. Would the proposal result in: S. Alin QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an exiting or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pirliutants c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? 6. TRANS PO RTATI ONICIRCULAT I ON. Would the proposal result in: a) Increasers vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment))? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? 7-1 e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? 7_1 f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? Issues and supolu®g 1818MKW seems seeress PrleN01W teteededti toes me No T slinmeeet lllteltiaet We111ceet impad Isles felon leuect 111dpdee d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool? lecerfaeter e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 7, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result int a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insec(s, animals or birds)? I T b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? F__T_ c) vocally designated natural communities (e.g, oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? c) Result in the lass of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? issues "d sappifto Infamullsoms swress FKIMNRV petesdolly tonsil go 111111MIncont 011111111111801111 walilleent IMPACA Issin eldess Inset MOTION 10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in, a) Increase in existing noise levels? Incer"Mall b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass of trees? 10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in, a) Increase in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? C) Schools? d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?, e) Other governmental services? ISM10 alld 80098rdog bllemefta Sillil'Rees 8e11rses Petenoldr Petentlany tennee No 3110mCem ssitumcent Stlttlllten[ Impact %was dates: Impact 11111111111110011 lncenentefa 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities; a) Power or natural gas? b) Communications systems? c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? I I I I I I d) Sewer or septic tanks? e) Storm water drainagd? f) Solid waste disposal? I g) Local or regional water supplies? j I I I I I 13. AESTHETICS, Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway! b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? I I I r,) Create light or glare? 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological resources? { I I I I I 10 153893 and SuPordal INUMMON Sources SeBrool htowally rolsoddiv tan neon No 312"M 11"InSoNt 11"Munt knpid Isms Won 11mct =111 in a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? 11848118retti b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 11 c) Affect historical resources? d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses vAthln the potential impact area? 15, RECREATION, Would the proposal, a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 16, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? --- Explain here b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? --- Explain here 11 Issas and SUPPI 9210mWen Saffees saarces PiHM11V ll OWN11111l lMTUn No cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" =11111rllfealrt titttelbeettt 3110"m Impact means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of Ilaeee tueaa Immul the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the one" effects of prcbeble future projects) IdcaMratar 17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Eadier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, Section 15063 (c) (3) (D), In this case a discussion should identify the foliowing items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review, --- Explain here b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by ritigation measures based on the earlier analysis. -- Explain here ---- ,c) Mitigation measures. For effects (hat are '"Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the nrltigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. 12 c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of prcbeble future projects) a-. Explain here _. d) Dees the project have environmental effects which Wil cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or Indirectly? --- Explain here _.. 17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Eadier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, Section 15063 (c) (3) (D), In this case a discussion should identify the foliowing items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review, --- Explain here b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by ritigation measures based on the earlier analysis. -- Explain here ---- ,c) Mitigation measures. For effects (hat are '"Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the nrltigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. 12 ISBN" and supperang halmakill Somas surest V111120111Y rallefflilft LouThin No 4 31"I"tall S1111FICIA1 sinincini Impact lulls 11111813 Implel 111110111tion Iffeemeritat -- Explain here -- Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087. Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21060 (c), 210801, 21080.3, 21082,11, 21083, 21083.3,21093,32,1094,21151, Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal, App. 3d 296 (1988); Leonoff v. It Board of Supervisors, 222 Cel. App, 3d 1337 (1990). 18. SOURCE REFERENCES I General Plan Update, Every City, 1994, pages 7, 9 2 3 4 --- Do not Discontinue the Header Gn this page until the entire Checklist Is complete; material may shift forward and the Header may be needed--- W:�FofmsIPli)gl.misOEnviTunrnentaI Checklist Form - Appendix 1,doc 13 LJ STOr M WATER PLANNIN PROGRAMA FORM PRIORITY PROJECT CHECKLIST PC NCHO PALOS VERDES Part '1 - Type of Project Does the proposed project fall Into one of the following categories? Yes No 1) Ten or more unit homes, including single and multiple family homes, condominiums, apartments etc," � 2) An industrial or commercial development with 100,000 square feet or more of impervious surface* .i 3) An automotive service facility 4) A retail gasoilne outlet 5) A restaurant --- - _ -T-- --- — 5) A parking lot with either 5,000 square feet of impervious surface or with 25 or more parking spaces'- �. ,✓ 7) Single family hillside - *(one acre or ure of suftoe area) t) Redevelopment projects as defined on back' •� 9) Project located in, adjacent to or {discharging directly..to an ESA (defined on back) AND creates 2,500' ►� square feet or more of impervious su ace area - 7-� �21 If any of the boxes in Part 1 is chocked 'Yes', this project will requke 6* preparation of a Standard Urban Stormwater i011igalion Plan (SUSMP) along with a Maintenance Agreement and Transfer (defined on back). *hlurnenc i Criteria will apply, Part 2 - Project Specific Concerns Does the proposed project Include any of the following elements? ---- — -- 1) Vehicle or equipment fueling areas (retail or private) 2) Vehicle or equipment maintenance areas, Including repair or washing Yes fro 3) Commercial or industrial waste haMling or storage 4) Outdoor handling or storage of hazardous materials — ---- - - r 5) Outdoor manufacturing areas 6) Outdoor food handling or processing 7) Outdoor animal care, confinement, or slaughter 8) Outdoor horticulture activities If any of the boxes in Part 2 is checked 'Yes", this project will require the preparation of a site Specific Storrnwater Mitigation Plan (SSSMP) along w b a Mairntenanoe Agreement and Tram *fined on bark). It boxes In Fails 1 and 2 are both cheaeU "Yoe', a 0=151ned um®rr Ston er Aran wle NeC Eo tie sirbr ISCI. 9e,—w Ql 3, NfW JAG* Appficant Rrarrro cc! one copy of docurnent to Publbc Forks %C Appflwnt 4�119109- ,Rafe Definitions: Pervious surfaces are those that allow storm water runoff to percolate through. Typical pervious surfaces include: grass, gravel, concrete pavers, and some specially designed asphalts. Hillside means property where the slope is 25% or greater and where grading contemplates cut or fill slopes. Redevelopment means land -disturbing activity that results in the creation, addition, or replacement of 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area on an already developed site. Redevelopment includes, but is not limited to: the expansion of a building footprint; addition or replacement of a structure; replacement of impervious surface area that is not part of a routine maintenance activity; and land disturbing activities related to structural or impervious surfaces. It does not include routine maintenance to maintain original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, or original purpose of facility, nor does it include modifications to existing single family structures, or emergency construction activities required to immediately protect public health and safety. Environmentally Sensitive Area: (ESAs) means an area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which would be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments. Also, an area designated by the City as approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. (See picture below) Maintenance Agreement and Transfer: All developments subject to SUSMP and site specific plan requirements provide verification of maintenance provisions for Structural and Treatment Control BMPs, including but not limited to legal agreements, covenants, CEQA mitigation requirements, and or conditional use permits. Verification at a minimum shall include: - The developer's signed statement accepting responsibility for maintenance until the responsibility is legally transferred; and either A signed statement from the public entity assuming responsibility for Structural or Treatment Control BMP maintenance and that it meets all local agency design standards; or Written conditions in the sales or lease agreement, which requires the recipient to assume responsibility for maintenance and conduct a maintenance inspection at least once a year; or - Written text in project conditions, covenants and restrictions (CCRs) for residential properties assigning maintenance responsibilities to the Nome Owners Association for maintenance of the Structural and 'treatment Control BMPs; or Any other legally enforceable agreement that assigns responsibility for the maintenance of post - construction Structural or Treatment Control BMPs. STORM WATER PLANNING PRuGRAM IqLPRIORITY' DEVELOPMENTIREDEVELOPMENT PROJECTSRANCHOP`ALOS VERDES Project Name Project Location GGIT514 �. { �• '` PWf P, p Company Nance (Rctr-J � i&i_�44X_ Address 7-110 t S� 'o w% - Contact Name / Title :ZW*J 29StcA-4 "AI Phone / FAXiEmaW 9-31 Form P1 General Project (Certification _ I A completed original of this form must accompany all SUSMP submittals Best Management Practices (BMPS) have been Incorporated into the design of this project to accomplish the following goals: 1) Minimize impacts from .storm water runoff on the biological integrity of Natural Drainage Systems and water bodies In accordance with requirements under CEQA (Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 21100), CWC § 13369, CWA § 319, CWA § 402(p), CWA § 404, CZARA § 6217(g), ESA § 7, and local government ordinances . 2) Maximize the percentage of permeable surfaces to allow more percolation of storm water into the ground. 3) Minimize the amount of storm water directed to impemleable surfaces and to the MS4. 4) Minimize pollution emanating from parking lots through the use of appropriate Treatment Control BMPS and good housekeeping practices. 5) Properiy design and maintain Treatment Control BMPS in a manner that dues not promote breeding of vectors. 6) Provide for appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in stormwater from the development site. I certify that this Standard urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan and all attachments were prepared ander my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the Information submitted. The Information contained herein is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and complet arty O ar/Developer (signature) Prop€i'rty Owner/ Developer (printet j Title Date Post Construction I Maintenance Certification Proper operation of Best Management Practices (BMPS) is an important component of reducing pollutants in urban and storm water runoff. As the responsible party, I certify that the BMPs will be implemented, monitored and maintained to ensure their continued effectiveness. In the event of a property transfer, the new owner will be notified of the 13MPs in use at this site and must include written conditions In the sales or lease agreement, which requires the recipient to assume responslblllty for maintenance and conduct a maintenance inspection at least once a year. Property owner (signature) Property Owner (printed] Title Date Signatory r$qulroments: Thls soctlon %heti be signed by the landowner. if the landowner Is not an IndJvlduel, the signatures may be from a corporate otilcer, a manager If the authority to sign has bean delegated to the manager, a general partner, or a solo proprietor. P ainn.. j Best Management Practic Please refer to the Cafifornia Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbooks for more information. BNP Identification No. Check If to BMPName and Nance be used Car Wash Facility SC3, Vehicle and Equipment Washing and Steam Cleaning Constructed Wetlands TC3, Constructed Wetlands Control of Impervious Runoff Not applicable Efficient Irrigation Not applicable Energy Dissipaters ESC40, Outlet Protection Extended Detention Basins TCS, Extended Detention Basin Infiltration Basins TC1, Infiltration Infiltration Trenches TC1, Infiltration Inlet Trash Racks Not applicable Landscape Design ESC2, Preservation of Existing Venation; ECS10, Seeding and Planting; ES911, Mulching Linings for Urban Runoff Not applicable Conveyance Channels Materials Management SCS, Outdoor Loading/Unloading of Materials; SC6, Outdoor Container, Storage of Liquids; SC8 Outdoor Storage of Raw Materials, Products and By -Products Media Filtration TC6, Media l=iitratIon Motor Fuel Concrete Dispensing SC2, Vehicle and Equipment Fueling Areas Motor Fuel Dispensing Area SC2, Vehicle and Equipment Fueling Canopy Oil/Water Separators and Water TC7, Oil/Water Separators and Water Quality Inlets Quality Inlets Outdoor Storage SC5, Outdoor Container Storage of Liquids; SC8, Outdoor Storage of Raw Materials, Products and By -Products Porous Pavement and Alternative TC1, Infiltration Surfaces Protect Slopes and Channels ECS40, Outlet Protection; ESC42, Slope ° Roughening and Terracing Self -Contained Areas for Vehicle or SC3, Vehicle and Equip. Washing and Steam Equipment Washing, Stearn Cleaning, Cleaning-, SC4, Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance, Repair, or Material Maintenance and Repair; SC7, Outdoor Processing Process Equipment Operations and Maint. Storm Drain System Stenciling and SC30, Storm Drain Systems Signs Signage Trash Container Areas SC9, Waste Handling and Disposal Vegetated Swales and Strips TC4, Bio-Fllters ✓ Wet Ponds I TC2, Wet Pond Please refer to the Cafifornia Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbooks for more information. L 3 '� U a 2��r1PA 1L41�G. RANCHO PAL-OSVERDES DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, AND CODE: ENFORCEMENT GRADING APPROVAL APPLICATI N NUMBER # � �—b4off( APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR: a 0 z--tsvI ` &, Q%T5,ttN Ajesjuz (Address) RR 4 i 114P.) IZS� Ci Telephone: Home (&U) 9-3 t w'-1! t Work Biu 1 La 2. Zr,(e LANDOWNER: l l S A 0Aj & t is (Name) 2-J s -y t S. W ea �— t2srn a �N Ve42&.,, (Address) Telephone: !-tome Work _ Lot and Tract No: Project Location: Cn.+2k. L- P rt,L, Project Description: General Information: 0 3. Maximum height of project, measured from top to lowest foundation wall to ridge. Maximum height of project above finished grade. Square footage of project, (Building footprint) 4. If addition, square footage of existing structure (including any covered or enclosed patios). Page 6 30940 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD f RANCHO P'ALOS VENDES. CA 90275-5391 RLANNINGICODE ENf6BCEMENTF (310) 544-5229 BUILDING: (319) 541-7702 DEPT FAX: (3W) 544-5293 PRATED ON RECYCLED PAPER 5. Square footage of driveways and parking areas. A, 10, Maximum percentage grade of driveway. ` TO ! 11. Maximum percentage of existing slope. Page 7 6. Square footage of lot. 7. Percentage of existing open space. B. Percentage of opera space after development, Grading (Information-, Lot Type: Pari Upslope Downslope 1. Maximum depth of out. 2. Total cubic yards of out. -10)000 A. Under the building (excluding footings, B. Outside of building footprint. 3. Maximum height of fill. 4. Total cubic yards of fill. A. Under the building. B. Outside of building footprint. 5, Total volume of earth to be moved. A. Under the building (sum of limes 2A & 4A). B. Outside of building footprint (sum of limes 2B & 4B). 3 T-0 i 6. Maximum percentage of created slopes, -z' TO 1 7. Total average slope of site. .► � 8. Maximum height of downslope retaining wall. r-+ g, Maximum height of upslope retaining wall. A, 10, Maximum percentage grade of driveway. ` TO ! 11. Maximum percentage of existing slope. Page 7 Does the project involve any work, activity, or encroachment in the public right-of-way or public drainage structure? N`o . If so, you must obtain approval from the Public Works Department prior to issuance of construction! permits. Does the project require any off-site grading (remedial, contour, utilities, etc,) or stockpile of excavated materials? PJc-P . If so, provide a written explanation as to why it is necessary, the quantity, and length of time the stockpile will remain. Also, delineate on a plan the limits of off-site grading and/or stockpile. If off-site grading is required provide proof of landowner approval. COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER 70 OF THE CITY BUILDING CODE Upon approval of the application by the Director of Planning or Planning Commission, the application must still conform to all conditions imposed by Chapter 70 of the City Building Code, including all required fees, and approval by the Director is not final until approval has been granted by the City Engineer. CONTRACTORS PLEASE READ AND INITIAL I UNDERSTAND that a City business license is required for all work performed in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. This license is obtainable from the City's Finance Department psie%,to obtaining a building permit from the Building and Safety Division. ApplicanVContractor Dated: z -I m I V) Staff Signature: Date Deceived: 5Y bfix�nns f Im} artgxl{nC! tilKAPP,doe WOM Signature of Landowner Dated: l Page 8 Soulhern Callfamia Re Tonal Office 36TI South Harbor Boulevard suite 260 Sa.%ta Ana, CA 92704 (714) 431.4100 Fax (714) 825-0683 lanuary 26, 2000 Mr. Jolm Resich Clayton ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS RECEIVED i` I B i rp 2003 attorney at Law [IiANNING-, BUIWING, 840 W. 9"' Street FP%ffD�,,,EIAEW San Pedro, CA 910731 Clayton Project No, 80-99248,00 sukj ect: S-:.izc;fications to Complete Final Covcr per Ren,.,-dia! Action 114'an R4-,quiremtnts for Green Hills Memorial Park, Ran. -ho Palo.,; Verdes, California Dear Mr, Resich. Per your request, 0ayton reviewed the Revised Remedial A clion Plan, Green HfIts Mfntorlal Park, -.,.o determine the requirements approved by the Los Angeles County Fite Department regrdinthe Final grade on the fonner "East Pit" located in , the undeveloped 0 g - po.nion of Green. Hills Memorial Park. As you may remember this portior of the site was covered with an impenneable membrane and perimeter drain system to p,.cvent ranoff 0 M ater horn running through the soil underneath the membrane. Page 6-6 of the ;.pproved Revised Remedial ,4 , crion Plan states that " the Iiiier N -will be covered tiv 1th crnsI-.,cd concrete or similar site derived material, if suitable, and a 10 -foot (estimated) buff"er of clean soil will be added as cover material," In addition, pa,.2 of Appendix B (Propos :d Grading for Remedial Action Plan prepared by Srnirh-Errier; GeoServices) of the :Sod Rernediarion Report for the Sou"hern Groen HfIls Af=ncrial Fark, dated Junt! 1999, also refetrs to tht I O• foot cover abov.,- the liner. -1 hope, this provides you the information you requested, if you have any questions regarding this lktter, please feel free to contact me at (714) 431-41001 Sincerely, 4Io a divia rject Enginecr Environmental Risk Management and Remediation Southern California Regional Office "'10SA NWO) DATtkIErTrr'PR0AY982481C0 M 248.lan2 el is un&u tants i a Clayton E"conrn W-8 11 %0 loat of Clayton Group servIcel, Inc. Mama • Boston I C)MMAND 6 CUVelaAd P Danbury - Detroit Honolulu & Indranapolis I Los AJ%gelt4 4 M-vmk Min-aeaoohs r Ne", York - PhiladcIphia a PGrtfand a Rockford $an Franclizc; - Savannah P Seat0e - 'Mchita- G-xffl�f--N-T MUMOPIALPARK February 19, 2003 RECEIVED Joel Rojas F E B t 9 2033 Director of Planning :wilding and Code Enforcement PLANNING, BUILDING, City of Rancho Palos Verdes 3WOODE ENFORCEMENT 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Pales Verdes, Ca 90275 Re: Master Playa Amendment and Remedial Grading Green Hills Memorial Park, 27501 S. 'Western Avenue CUP 155 Dear Joel: I have completed the application For an amendment to the CUP # 155 for Green Hills Memorial Paris and am submitting the same for consideration and approval. I have also enclosed a grading application which you have requested. Since this Grading application is not for anyone, specific building but an overall grading application I have answered the questions generally and not specific to anyone development. Attached to this application are copies of plans which show the Plat Map for Green Hills, which have identified existing buildings, together with: proposed footprints for future Mausoleum developments. Some of these locations are not changed from the original CUP which was approved, Others have been relocated based upon the Rernerliation which occurred and for which a grading plan was issued by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. In this grading plan and the requirements for the Remediation no building could be construction over the liner or in those areas which were not compacted. The Rancho Palos Verdes building pennit provided that no building could be built in liner area and all building pads in those locations were relocated. These footprints do not exceed the original size of the footprints which were previously approved. I have also enclosed the information from the Clayton Environmental Consultants pertaining, to completion of the Revised Remedial Action Plan which clarifies the requirement for placing a 10 - foot buPFer of clean soil over the liner (Memo's and Letters from Clayton). This procedure followed the RAP as issued and building permit issued by theRancho Palos Verdes Building Department. I have also enclosed letters from the County of Los Angeles Fire Department, Site Mitigation Unit pertaining to the requirements of the cap over the liner. The new proposed grading plan takes into consideration the 10 foot cap and drainage on the property. This proposed grading plan is consistent with the previous plana as approved by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes in the original application on the CLIP taking into consideration the requirement of the County of Los Angeles Fire Departments requirements, 27501 South Western Avenue - Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 - (3141) 831-11311 City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Department February 19, 2003 Page Two The following, are answers to the issues set forth in Kit Fox's letter dated December 19, 2002: Green Hills is requesting an amendment to the CUP which would allow importation of sail into the site in excess of the 5000 cubic yards previously granted, This request for importation would cover previous imported soil, which was imported to comply with LARWQCB requirements to channel storm water runoff The violations have Leen rectified and it is the belief that Green Hills is in compliance with LARWQCB and NPDES requirements, The LARWQCB violation was for not having; a new plan for storm water runoff after the partial completion of the remediation of the site. Since 10 feet of soil was not placed over the liner Green Hills did not prepare a new plan but such plan has been completed and submitted to the appropriate authorities. Since all sail has not been placed over the protective liner a complete resolution of the project could not be completed and all storm water could not be diverted without soil. The soil which was imparted, (approximately 1,500 cubic yards) was placed over the protective liner to divert the storm water run off so that it didn't drain into the neighbors property nor dirt it drain into the County Storm Drains carrying silt. l have attached a storm water pian which has been submitted to the appropriate agencies and has been implemented at Green Hills Memorial Park, In the development of Green Hills Memorial Park and its daily operations, Green Hills digs individual Grave sites and also places vaults in the ground for future interment: When each grave site is dug, approximately i, l cubic yards of soil is removed, A portion of that soil is then returned to fill the site, which amount is based upon the type of out burial, container and the number of interment place in each grave site, State Law requires that a minimum of 18 inches of soil be placed over each burial unit. On a yearly basis, Green Hills handles approximately 2000 interments of which approximately 1600 are ground burials. This soil is then relocated in the undeveloped areas of Careen .Hills and is then compacted, consistent with the master plan for development. If all the arca. of Green Hills Memorial Park were used for ground burials the total volume of Grave soil that would be removed and replaced would be approximately 22.0,000 cubic yards of sail. In the completion of the requirement of the RAP and the building permit granted by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, a requirement exists to place 10 feet of soil over the liner. In order to bury over the liner, Green Hills would have to generate soil sufficient to cover the liner and then remove the soil .for burials:. At the present time Green. Hills does not have sufficient soil nor does it generate sufficient soil quickly enough to cover the liner within a reasonable time as set forth in the assurances to the City of Los Angeles, Fire Department and then be able to bury remains on City of Rancho Pales Verdes Planning Department February 19, 2003 Page 3 this site. In a neighborly gesture, Green Hills has stated to Rolling Hills Covenant Church that if the City of Rolling Hills Estates and the City of Rancho .Palos Verdes would consent that they would be willing to accept approximately 20,O00 cubic yards of sandy material form the proposed new development project to Green Hills if appropriately compensated so that Green Hills could meet the requirements of covering the liner and work the material without cost or expense or detriment to Green Hills. A copy of the letter is attached hereto for your review. As for the soil which was previously imported from a site on Western Avenue, No contaminated material was imported for the Instorage Site. .All material was examined and tested and an independent laboratory (Wayne Perry, Inc.) has indicated that no contaminated soil was imported to Green Hills, A copy of the report has been provided to the City previously and is included in this request for an amendment to the CUP. All requirements of LARWQCB and NPDES have been addressed and a plan is in existence which brings Green Hills into compliance with the Storm Water Runoff requirements. Green Hills will continue to amend the plan as required to stay in compliance with all requirements of LARWQCB and NPDES, Such a plan is an ever-changing plan as soil is moved over the site and until the completion of the covering of the liner a permanent plan cannot be completed and submitted, In addition to the Grave Dirt which has been estimated at approximately at 220,000 cubic yards of cut and fill over the life of the park. Green Hills is seeking the approval for an additional 70,040 cubic yards of Cut and Fill. This cut and fill would be for the completion of the building of Mausoleum building on the pads as outlined in the plan submitted. The sites which would generate the majority of the cuts are the building of below ground Mausoleum in the following locations. One being the area known as Pacifica Mausoleum, which has been previously approved and Green Hills, in this application is requesting an amendment to the CUP which would allow for the underground building of Mausoleum up to the property line in this location, As for all other requirements they would be consistent with those requirements of the previous CUP pertaining to above ,ground ,setbacks. In addition, Green Hills is requesting in this application the approval to build an Under Ground Mausoleum in that area known as Court of Devotion, consistent with the present Mausoleum at that location_ Of these buildings, neither would have any impact on any view corridors nor would they be inconsistent with the present developments of the area. The remainder of the 70,000 cubic yards of Cut and Fill would be for the development of other .Mausoleum on and throughout the site, City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Department :February 19, 2003 Page Four A Radius Map and Property Owners List is being prepared by Elizabeth Srour, of Stour and Associates and will be submitted forthwith, As of this date these property lists were not available but will be submitted forthwith. Please accept this application without the Radius Map and Property Owners hist as such is in the process of being; completed In summary, Green Hills, in this application is looking to amend the CUP in the following manner: To approve the new grading plan as submitted (Please refer to the Map which is attached), To allow for the previous importation and passible future importation of soil, in the amount of approximately 22+QOOOtubic yards; For the approval of the footprints for future mausoleums to be built on the site (as set forth in the attached Plan); For the movement of soil both for graves under a master grading plan without the requirement for obtaining grading permits l`or interment and the placement of vaults and burials and for cut and fill volumes for fixture developments (for a total cut and fill for grave soil in. the amount of 220,000 and for Buildings of 70,000 cubic yards of sail). Other than those items above listed Green Hills is requesting that no changes be made to any of the other requirements and conditions of the Original CLIP nor the requirements or conditions to any amendments to the CUP previously granted, It is the belief of Green Hills that as for an Environmental Impact Report that this application does not require such a report as it is a Negative Declaration. Thank you for your consideration in accepting and processing this application, S* cer y Jahn J. Resich, Jr. Chairman of the Beard Green Hills .Memorial Park JJR Encl. X RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: JANUARY 19, 2015 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 Closed Session Letter from M.M. Email exchange between: Acting City Manager and Sharon Yarber; Emails from: Ellen Berkowitz; Matt Martin; City Attorney Lynch; Debbie Landes: Sharon Loveys; Linda Ott Respectfully bmitted, Carla Morreale W:WGENDA\2015 Additions Revisions to agendas\20150120 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.doc January 15, 2015 Mayor and City Council City of Rancho Palos Verdes Re: City .Manager Interviews Dear Mayor and Council - I have lived off of Rue Beaupre for more than 35 years. My church is in the city, my home is in the city, and my business was in the city until I retired. I mostly have stayed out of the way of the work of the city and how you run things, but the events last month have deeply disturbed me and my husband. What has prompted me to write is a recent Daily Breeze article (that I've enclosed) that quotes Mayor Steve Aspel of Redondo Beach in announcing the selection of Interim City Manager Joe Hoefgen to the position of City Manager. Mr. Aspel and the rest of the his council seems to readily understand the importance of continuity and consistency in staffing a city as well as the importance of government experience in keeping the ship running. Which brings me to the point of my letter. Why don't you? I happened to attend the city's holiday festivities last December at the whale center and was happy to hear that all of you thought our current Assistant City Manager Ms. Carolynn Petru has been doing an outstanding job. So when I then read about the nonsense with Mr. Bill Widmer, I wondered why in the world he had even been considered at all when obviously you have a capable and professional dedicated life -time city employee right in front of you! It's scary to think of what might have happened to our lovely town had Miss Megan Barnes not been so diligent in her reporting or if Mr. Widmer had not been so unfortunately for him candid in his interview with his own home town newspaper. The comments by council when Mr. Widmer's contract was before you were particularly disturbing! Do you really expect the public to be present to comment after 1 I o'clock at night? Particularly when you have spent weeks behind closed doors negotiating with someone? I thought I had read last year that ALL negotiations would be public for the community to review, once a contract option had been rejected. And yet that did not happen here. I see that you will be meeting on the 18t' to interview more candidates. Each of you talks a lot about transparency and openness. So why do we not know what pool of candidates you will be interviewing or what their qualifications are? Who are these people, and what is the process for protesting if the candidate you end up choosing this time is as tone deaf or inept to the needs of this town as your last pick? If these candidates are anything like your recent selection, I urge you to reconsider your entire process. I went onto the city's website and saw that the surveys you received from the public are still on line. If you disregard the usual citizens - against -virtually -everything minority responses, it seemed like people are happy with the things are being run mostly. And your own words in public seem to concur in regards to her capabilities. I like to think we do things in this city better than Redondo Beach. I encourage you to ask Ms. Petru if she would be gracious enough to accept appointment, and if her answer is yes, urge you to sign a contract with her sooner than later. But if I were her, I'd run screaming for the hills before signing with you folks. If somebody is doing a great job and then is not offered the position permanently, and is expected to train her boss, well that doesn't seem like a good idea any which way you slice it. I like to tell my husband -watch whether or not people's feet match their lips! Sincerely, M.M. � CLt7.S� SEss�a�% Joe Hoefgen named city manager in Redondo Beach By Ellen Robinson, ellen.robinson@tbrnews.com, @EllenCoolBreeze on Twitter Posted: 01/11/15, 12:04 PM PST I Updated: 2 days ago 3 Comments A familiar face will be taking the reins at Redondo Beach City Hall. Joe Hoefgen, who has served as interim city manager since last year, was handed the job on a permanent basis Saturday by the City Council after a special meeting. Mayor Steve Aspel announced the unanimous decision after a lengthy closed -door session. "Joe is a quiet, confident man who listens to people, whether they are elected, an employee or a community member," Aspel said. "On top of that, Joe is a genuinely nice guy. He will be a pleasure to work with. The fact that the council chose Joe in a unanimous vote speaks volumes for the confidence we have in him." Hoefgen, who has nearly 30 years of public service experience, was appointed interim city manager after Bill Workman was fired as the city's top administrator last April because of persistent strife with employee unions. Hoefgen said he applied for the position because, after serving as the community development director for three years and then as interim city manager for almost nine months, he felt it was a good fit for both him and the city. "I had the skills and the experience needed for the position," Hoefgen said. "There are a lot of projects underway in Redondo Beach and I have experience working with the city on these. We have come a long way since April, but there is still a lot of work that remains to be done." Hoefgen developed the 2014-15 fiscal budget and oversaw negotiations leading to compensation deals with four of the city's six employee unions. He is currently working with the city to navigate the environmental process for the waterfront revitalization project along with managing the city's many services. Hoefgen said he is looking forward to filling open department head positions, moving forward with plans for the AES power plant site and finalizing next year's budget. Previously, he served as the city manager for Palos Verdes Estates from 2007 until he was fired in June 2011. City Council members in the Palos Verdes Peninsula's oldest community did not reveal why they parted ways with Hoefgen, but emphasized that no misconduct was involved. Councilman Stephen Sammarco said Hoefgen was selected because of his performance as the city's interim city manager. "During a difficult time, Joe stepped in and kept the city moving forward," Sammarco said. "I trust him to keep our city on track as our new city manager." Councilman Pat Aust said Hoefgen was selected using a new-age type process that included input from department heads, employee unions and a citizens group. "It was a good vetting process," Aust said. "This is the first time the city has involved the employees as a part of the input process." Aspel said that once contract negotiations with Hoefgen are finalized, the City Council will consider it for approval at its Jan. 20 meeting. By law, details of the contract must be discussed in a public forum and are not available to the public until that time. Previously, Hoefgen served as the city manager for Palos Verdes Estates from 2007 until he was fired in June 2011. City Council members in the Palos Verdes Peninsula's oldest community did not reveal why they parted ways with Hoefgen, but emphasized that no misconduct was involved. Hoefgen said he served there successfully, and it was that council's prerogative to change management. He was released without cause. "It's an occupational hazard of the job when you're employed at will," Hoefgen said. "Each day can be the last and one day it was mine." Hoefgen's longest stint in city government was in the city of Del Mar in San Diego County, where he served as assistant city manager from 1992 to 2007. He previously had worked as a management analyst for the city of Encinitas from 1990 to 1992. The Kansas native began his career in municipal government in Texas. From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2015 1:53 PM To: momofyago Cc: CC Subject: Re: Green Hills Sharon - Like most planning staff reports, the information contained in the January 20th report comes from a wide variety of sources. Although I wrote most of it, I cannot claim sole authorship of all the language included, as much of it came from other pre-existing documents that part of the public record, some dating back to the original 1991 Master Plan approval, and some as recent as letters between the City Attorney and counsel for Green Hills regarding the current appeal. I was not involved in any way with the 2007 processing of the Green Hills Master Plan Revision, which resulted in the construction of the Memorial/Pacific Terrace Mausoleum. I only became involved in the 2014 Master Plan Compliance Review in August 2014 when Green Hills and the Vista Verde Condominium association were unable to come to an agreement regarding the burials taking place on the roof of the Mausoleum. During that point in the project's history, I did speak with both Joel and Eduardo about the Mausoleum, I attended the Planning Commission meetings that took place between August and November 2014, and reviewed the staff reports before they were issued during this same period of time. I also initiated the personnel investigation last year, which is currently in process. Generally, I don't find it to be good practice to take disciplinary action until all of the facts are known and the accused have a chance to answer any specific charges. As is evident by the information included in the January 20th staff report, the facts surrounding this case are very complex and multi -faceted. It has taken a great deal of effort to assemble the narrative. However, I will repeat again that neither Joel or Eduardo were consulted or contributed to the January 20th staff report in any way, except for the inclusion of documents they prepared or processed, which were already part of the public record before I began work on the report. I independently verified information from the prior reports based on my review of the plans and documents as well as the compliance review that was performed by the Lilley Planning Group. Carolynn Sent from my iPhone On Jan 16, 2015, at 9:20 PM, momofyago <momofyago a,gmail.com> wrote: Surely you jest. Whence comes the information in the report? You did not at all inquire of staff what happened? You wrote the entire staff report yourself? Based on what? On what basis do you personally make the comments about the information being misleading? Were you working directly with Eduardo in the department at the time? Are you to blame, then, for this debacle? What is the status of the allegedly independent investigation? Is it done or still under way? Why hasn't Joel been fired? There are so many complaints about him and so many instances of ineptitude that it is inexcusable that someone so incompetent, or heaven forbid corrupt, is still on our payroll. Are you prepared to be a true City Manager and do what needs to be done? Sent 6ont un+ Veri om Wu, less dG LIE smarq}hone U -------- Original message -------- From: Carolynn Petru <Carolynn a,rpv.com> Date:01/16/2015 9:00 AM (GMT -08:00) To: sharon yarber <momofyago@gmail.com> Cc: CC <CC@rpv.com> Subject: RE: Green Hills Hi Sharon — Thank you for your email. I would like to correct your assertion that the January 20th staff report "is written by the staff being investigated and who participated in all the conduct that caused the City to be in this situation in the first place." in fact, my name is on the staff report, and it was not written, reviewed, or contributed to in any way by the staff involved in either the 2007 Master Pian Revision or the 2014 Compliance Review of the Green Hills project. Sincerely, From: sharon yarber [mailto:momofyago@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 9:30 PM To: CC; Carolynn Petru Subject: Green Hills Dear Mayor Knight and Members of the City Council, The threshold question that needs to be addressed when the appeal by Green Hills comes before you is whether Green Hills is an innocent party entitled to rely on the approvals granted by the City's Planning Commission and staff, or was it somehow complicit with members of the staff in circumventing our ordinances and procuring approvals that should never have been granted based on false and/or misleading information provided to the staff and/or Planning Commission by Green Hills. The answer to that question will come from the results of an independent investigation. There is allegedly an independent investigation being conducted by an outside investigator retained by the City. What are the results of that investigation? When will the Council and the public find out the results of this taxpayer funded inquiry? If Green Hills is innocent of any wrongdoing and has "clean hands" then the decisions rendered through a probably flawed process are irreversible and steps will need to be taken by the City to compensate the owners of the adjacent condominiums for the wrong that our staffs ineptitude caused. If Green Hills participated in any wrongdoing then it is not entitled to any relief before this body and the mausoleum in question should be ordered moved and Green Hills can suffer the consequences. Until that investigation is concluded and the results made public, you are not in a position to decide what action to take. The staff report is unreliable as it is written by the staff being investigated and who participated in all the conduct that caused the City to be in this situation in the first place. I have read many a staff report and have never seen such a finger pointing, cover my ass report in my life. It is worthless and not to be relied upon. It is self-serving and devoid of credibility. So the bottom line for me is this. First, a few heads need to roll because either our staff is corrupt or inept, neither of which is tolerable or acceptable. Second, you need to delay taking action on this matter until a full and complete investigation by the independent investigator is concluded and the results disclosed. Only then will you know which direction to pursue and whether Green Hills is entitled to any relief from this body. Sincerely yours, Sharon Yarber From: Ellen Berkowitz <Ellen.Berkowitz@GreshamSavage.com> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 7:49 AM To: CC; PC; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com> Subject: RE: Burial Service at Green Hills Please be advised that another individual who previously purchased a plot on the roof of the Pacific Terrace Mausoleum passed away. His service will be held today, Friday the 16th, at approximately 12:00 p.m. We will again abide by all of the conditions referenced below, among others. Thank you. Ellen From: Ellen Berkowitz Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 8:18 AM To: cc@rpv.com; pc@rpv.com; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com> (clynch@rwglaw.com) Subject: Burial Service at Green Hills On behalf of Green Hills, we want to advise you that an individual who previously purchased a plot on the roof of the Pacific Terrace Mausoleum passed away, and will be buried there today. We will, of course, have a Green Hills representative present for the service, ensure that the service is concluded no later than 3:00 p.m., prohibit the use of amplified sound, use effective screening methods, perform all site work between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. and endeavor to shield the adjacent residents from any noise and visual intrusions. We expect the mourners to honor the privacy concerns of the adjacent residents, and we hope that the adjacent residents will honor the concerns of the grieving family. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Ellen Ellen Berkowitz Shareholder Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden, PC 333 South Hope Street 35th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Office direct: (213) 873-8395 Office main: (213) 213-7249 Fax: (213) 213-73911 Cell: (310) 592-3479 www.GreshamSavage.com<http://www.greshamsavage.com/> 1. Privileged and Confidential Communication. The information contained in this email and any attachments may be confidential or subject to the attorney client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, you may not use, disclose, print, copy or disseminate the same. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender and destroy all copies of this message. 2. IRS Circular 230 Notice. In accordance with Circular 230 of the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this email, including any attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other recipient for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties that may otherwise be imposed by the IRS, or (b) supporting, promoting, marketing, or recommending any transaction or matter to any third party. 3. Transmission of Viruses. Although this communication, and any attached documents or files, are believed to be free of any virus or other defect, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free, and the sender does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. 4. Security of Email. Electronic mail is sent over the public internet and may not be secure. Thus, we cannot guarantee the privacy or confidentiality of such information. This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com From: Matt Martin <matthewhmartin@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 1:08 PM To: PC; Carolynn Petru; Carol Lynch <clynch@rwglaw.com>; CC; Michael N. Friedman Subject: Green Hills Dear City Representatives, Green Hills has now held another funeral today. By my count, this is the 3rd one they've held since the Planning Commission motion and the 2nd one this week. I thought the intent of the PC's motion was very clear. The intent was to save more individuals and families from being involved in this situation until the City Council had a chance to a decision on it. I want to make it very clear that the "mitigation measures" which Green Hills has forced upon us don't mitigate anything at all. Their tiny, ugly retractable screens don't block anything from view. The impacts from operations and activities from the Area 11 Mausoleum are so adverse on our community that there are no operational changes that can effectively mitigate them. If the City Council meeting on this subject is postponed it appears that Green Hills will continue to draw more innocent families into this situation. If the meeting is postponed then the Moratorium needs to be enforced. Can I get an explanation as to why the Moratorium isn't being enforced? Regards, Matt Martin MatthewHMartin@yahoo.com This message and any attached documents contain information that may be confidential and/or privileged. The information herein may also be protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this information. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message to include any attachments. 9 From: Carol W. Lynch <CLynch@rwglaw.com> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 7:39 PM To: 'Ellen Berkowitz' Cc: CC Subject: Green Hills Appeal Dear Ms. Berkowitz: In recent communications from you, including the letter that you sent to the City Council yesterday, you have alleged a denial of due process regarding the Green Hills appeal. You have incorrectly asserted that the same individuals who advised the Planning Commission in 2007 are advising the City Council regarding the appeal from the Planning Commission's decision regarding the annual review, which was completed in November. I disagree with many of the statements in your correspondence for several reasons, which are set forth below. First and foremost, neither Carolynn Petru nor I had anything to do with the hearings that occurred in 2007 in connection with the Green Hills Master Plan. Neither Carolynn nor I attended those hearings or provided any advice to the Planning Commission in 2007 about the Green Hills Master Plan. Thus, to the extent that Staff did or did not properly advise the Commission in 2007, neither Carolynn nor I were involved and are not, as you suggest, covering our own alleged misdeeds. You have asserted that Staff, including Carolynn and myself, should have advised the Commission that a variance was required for the Mausoleum in 2007; however, Carolynn and I did not render advice about that issue, since we were not even aware of the approvals that were issued by the Commission to Green Hills. Second, you appear to incorrectly assume that Eduardo Schonborn and Joel Rojas were involved in preparing the staff report for the City Council appeal hearing. However, neither Joel nor Eduardo drafted or reviewed the staff report that Carolynn prepared for the City Council in connection with the appeal. Furthermore, as you know, Carolynn retained the Lilley Planning Group to independently conduct a review of the facts in connection with the compliance review that was requested by the Planning Commission. Thus, Carolynn has endeavored to ensure that the facts that were presented recently to the Planning Commission and to the City Council on appeal are complete, accurate and impartial. You also assert that the ruling in the Nightlife Partners case requires that a different law firm advise the City Council in connection with the appeal. In Nightlife, the court ruled that it was impermissible for the attorney, who advised staff and determined that an application to renew a permit was incomplete, to advise the hearing officer in the appeal from the staff's determination. The court found that the attorney had taken on an advocate's role regarding the determination that the application was incomplete, so that it was not proper for him to provide procedural advice to the hearing officer who heard the appeal. While I believe that the facts in Nightlife are distinguishable from my role of providing advice to the Planning Commission about the annual review of the operation of Green Hills, which would be the same advisory role that I would provide to the Council during the appeal hearing, I do not believe that it is productive for the City Council to have to address an issue that will distract from the real issues raised by the appeal. Accordingly, I have consulted with Carolynn, and she has retained a land use attorney from another law firm to attend the City Council hearings regarding the Green Hills appeal so that he can provide advice to the City Council regarding the appeal. Very truly yours, Ocwo-b w. Lys. Richards, Watson & Gershon 355 South Grand Avenue 40th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 (213) 626-8484 NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this communication to the intended recipient, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you. From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 9:27 AM To: Debbie Landes Cc: CityClerk Subject: RE: Fwd: ►f' NAKWI Thank you for your email. Staff will make sure that it is included in sate correspondence that is sent out this evening for the Green Hills Appeal hearing tomorrow night. Unfortunately, we don't have a way to include the video clip in the printed materials, but the Council members should have all had an opportunity to view it before the meeting tomorrow night. Please let me now if you have any questions. Hest regards, Carolynn Petru Acting City Manager (310) 544-5203 From: Debbie Landes [mailto:dlbodesi@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2015 11:55 AM To: CC; Carolynn Petru Subject: Fwd: Dear Honorable Council and Ms. Petru, Please find attached a video I took this morning from the front window of our Vista Verde Condominium. This was a group of approximately 20 mourners who arrived this morning at 8:30 AM to visit their gravesite on rooftop of the Pacific Terrace Mausoleum. I only captured about 45 seconds of the visit, they were there approximately 20 minutes or so. Visits can last up to 1-2 hours at at time. Please know, I am in no way saying these mourners should not be here; my point is again, this is the kind of intrusiveness that occurs both for the mourners and the Vista Verde residents when visitations occur at graves. Mourners can visit from "dusk until dawn ", during park hours. I was just about to sit at my usual window to have coffee and read the paper when the group arrived. They can't help but look at and into our condominiums, several balconies are quite close to the area. I also want to share my experience with two funerals that have taken place on January 9 and January 16 on the rooftop of the mausoleum. I believe you have already seen pictures from our vantage point. The first one on January 9 began at 10:30 AM with the privacy screens erected and the grave being dug. It ended at approximately 2:40 PM when the last mourners left. I do not know when the screens were removed. The second one on January 16, I was only at home to see the screens erected at approximately 11 am. The grave was dug the day before on January 15, again with screens erected and removed. 9 We are assuming these are "companion" graves, but who is to really know? Due the moratorium on rooftop burials placed by the Planning Commission, except for "companion" plots, I hope there is a process in place to assure this is the case. Since these were the first funerals we have experienced since the moratorium was placed, it was disturbing to me to feel the strong reactions that welled up in me when the first preparations started on January 9. Feelings of anxiety and disappointment and reminders of all the negativity these ceremonies bring into our lives. Now, I have had a family member diagnosed with an incurable illness, which now makes being forced to view these ceremonies even more aggregous and unbearable. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Debbie <dlbodesi@gmail.com> Date: Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 10:58 AM Subject: To: Landes Debbie <dlbodesiggmail.com> Sent from my iPhone From: Sharon Loveys <sharon.loveys@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2015 11:44 AM To: Carolynn Petru; CC; B.campbell@cox.net Subject: Cameras Attachments: photo.JPG; ATT00001.txt This is at the bottom of hill north/ west between cemetery and now metropolitan Water District, as church property ends. I just thought everyone should know where the " Gang Bangers " hang out. Still adjacent to cemetery and not by VVOA where cameras are located . By the way no cameras as of yet.. Shall keep you posted . Thank you, Sharon Loveys 9 V MOO AQ alp, From: Sharon Loveys <sharon.loveys@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2015 11:33 AM To: Carolynn Petru; CC; B.campbell@cox.net Subject: Cameras Attachments: photo.JPG; ATT00001.txt If you keep walking down that path you will see what the " gang bangers" do before entering Green Hills the path is adjacent to the cemetery. It is a lovely walk during daylight. Thank you , sharon Loveys II From: Sharon Loveys <sharon.loveys@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2015 11:29 AM To: Carolynn Petru; CC; B.campbell@cox.net Subject: Possible places for cameras Attachments: photo.JPG; ATT00001.txt Hi If you follow the path surrounding the cemetery, the north/ west side that sits between Green Hills and Rolling Hills Church and you were to continue walking you will fine another broken/ torn chain link fence. It appears that the " gang bangers" who vandalize the cemetery are getting into the cemetery through these areas. If I were running the cemetery, I would put cameras along this side of their property and remove the silly ones I sent you a photo of yesterday ( the one that is facing our condos, that is watching our every move). If the idea is to watch for vandalism I believe the cameras are not in the correct spot. The next photo is what the " gang bangers"do before they attempt to vandalize Green Hills . I bring this to your attention as it has been discussed many times that Green Hills has a right to guard their property. I agree, it seems they need a little help, as to where to put their cameras and who they are guarding against. Thank you, Sharon Loveys I From: Sharon Loveys <sharon.loveys@yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2015 2:22 PM To: Carolynn Petru; B.campbell@cox.net; CC Subject: Cameras Attachments: photo.JPG; ATT00001.txt Hi Carolyn, City Council Members I think you might recognize these cameras, they are behind the Monster mausoleum pointing directly at a few of our owners balconies.. Oh, I forgot to explain to you that Mr. Nick Resich , on August 11, 2014 said they were used for measuring the water flow behind the Monster. Of course I explained to him there is no water flow and we both knew what they were there for. He just sort of ignored me. I am putting it nicely !!! I am suggesting perhaps they could move at least one camera to the north/ west side of Pacifica where I showed you the cut fence.this is where the " gang bangers" hang out. This is where the graffiti is, but Nick will tell you they have no water problem there, so cameras are not needed. I am still looking for the other cameras that are protecting the cemetery and will keep you posted. Thank you, Sharon Loveys 9 u w..11wlw�. r -'M % .-Am, 4, J 409ba From: Sharon Loveys <sharon.loveys@yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2015 11:52 AM To: Carolynn Petru; CC Subject: Camera!!! Attachments: photo.JPG; ATT00001.txt Hi Carolyn, I was walking around the perimeter of Green Hills and on the north west side behind Pacifica Mausoleum I noticed a hole in the fence. If you look carefully you will see the wires are cut. I kept wondering about the cameras that are facing our condos, actually there are three of them pointing at us. In the next photo I will send, you will notice not one camera watching for " gang bangers" who are constantly invading the cemetery on the north/ west side. The graffiti is a chronic problem. Perhaps they should move the cameras where they can be of Honest service to the cemetery/ community. Not watching our personal movements. In the next few days I will walk the perimeter and look for the cameras, as Mr. Resich claims are there. I promise to keep you posted. Thank you , Sharon Loveys 1 From: Sharon Loveys <sharon.loveys@yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2015 11:56 AM To: Carolynn Petru; CC Subject: Where are the cameras? Attachments: photo.JPG; ATT00001.txt This the whole wall behind the Pacifica mausoleum .. Still looking for cameras. Thanks. Sharon Loveys Q om I - ""It, Subject: FW: Of Baseball, Burials and Ritual -----Original Message ----- From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 10:18 AM To: Carolynn Petru Subject: Of Baseball, Burials and Ritual Page 28 of 202. Footnote #1 I quote: "To put the Lomita neighbors' complaints into perspective, we note that there on average about 3 burial services per month on the Mausoleum roof, which last Including per and post preparation) approximately 1 hour. This means that on average, for about three hours each month, the neighbors hear some noise and observe activity on Green Hills' property across the way. Given the many intrusions most people residing in cities experience, the relative "disturbance" for a few hours a month is not substantial and not significantly different from those those disturbances common to all residential neighborhoods. In truth, the extent of the disturbance is no greater than a neighboring park hosting baseball games a few times a month. " Three sentences. I encourage you to study each carefully, while pondering the words. It is indeed to these words, I offer the following. As the girls and boys of Lomita play softball and baseball in the shadows of the refineries, one can hear the sounds of devoted parents, siblings and friends. Of a youngster who connects with a ball for the first time. Of a Willie Mays' basket catch in center field ending the 5th inning with a victory. Of a young girl rounding home base to the cheers of all. Baseball. You gotta love it. A burial stands as a ritual of passing, of remembrance, of celebration, of weeping and joy. Of a prostrate son. Of a holy transit. Of women clutching each other holding the fence for seeming support. Of a sacred ritual honoring patriarchs and matriarchs for lives well spent. Baseball. Burials. Say it once again. Baseball. burials. Were ever 3 sentences to encapsulate the failure to grasp the most basic of understanding of the issues we now face together. "about 3 hours a month" "not substantial and not significantly different from those disturbances" "in truth, the extent of disturbance is no greater than a neighboring park holding baseball games a few times a month".... Ellen, Ellen, Ellen. As Counsel to Green Hills, I encourage you to recite a mantra. Baseball. Burials. Burials. Baseball. Until the differences well up within you. o �. One might imagine a proposal sent to a Planning Commission. One for a field to be built 8 feet from the property line of 25 homes. With my personal love of the game, one would imagine the request would be thoughtfully denied. Another mantra, in mini quatrain form might be added to you pondering. 30 minutes. 5 hours. A lifetime. In perpetuity . This is a shared ritual of passage. A sacred ritual. Say it again and again. You speak of us as neighbors. We are witnesses of a near collective 1000 years of the sacredness of being indeed neighbors of such a holy ground. Think on these things. Baseball. Burials. Rituals. You may come to an understanding. Respectfully offered with regards, Linda S Ott A resident of Vista Verde. Sent from my iPa 0 From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:06 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:38 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: 1/12/2015 Preparation Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom e aol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:05:50 PM PST To: lsottcom(2aol.com (Z) From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Carolynn Petru Monday, January 19, 2015 11:06 AM Carla Morreale Teresa Takaoka FW: Vista Verde 1/12/2015 From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:40 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Vista Verde 1/12/2015 Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:06:59 PM PST To: lsottcomAaol.com 0 W -,P --Wk _: -4- ' °Carte 1 .17 - II r ii' From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:06 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: Vista Verde 1/12/2015 From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:41 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Vista Verde 1/12/2015 Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomAaol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:06:15 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com 1D 1--fiffil �11 1 villillipflol � From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:06 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: VV 1/12/2015 From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:42 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: VV 1/12/2015 Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:05:50 PM PST To: lsottcomga,aol.com 101 �Nl�llllnlll ... i 6A6 �YX�M��wll� ��I�IIIIIfImom IM��N�n I�IItlI�pIIIIII,. From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:05 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: VV 1/15/2015 From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:44 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: VV 1/15/2015 Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom(cr�,aol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:09:31 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com r. Ilk* Fw Orr�. .�, a. . _ � — -- ---. - — From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:05 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:44 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom e,aol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:09:56 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com 'W& jw From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:05 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: 3:30. 1/12/2015 From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:45 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: 3:30. 1/12/2015 Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomkaol.com>. Date: January 14, 2015 3:11:18 PM PST To: lsottcom(kaol.com -JyTf' i ro From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Carolynn Petru Monday, January 19, 2015 11:05 AM Carla Morreale Teresa Takaoka FW: 1st eve of rain storms weekend of 1/13-14/2015 From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:48 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: 1st eve of rain storms weekend of 1/13-14/2015 Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomkaol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:16:32 PM PST To: lsottcom(2aol.com From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Carolynn Petru Monday, January 19, 2015 11:05 AM Carla Morreale Teresa Takaoka FW: cont'd rain storm eve From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:49 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: cont'd rain storm eve Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:17:39 PM PST To: lsottcorngaol.com 0 ��. .�►' Y �� , ►fit �' i i 4.. • ..n �� r�_.� _. �._� �� r 1 Mn'u' From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:05 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: VV Sunset From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:50 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: VV Sunset Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom(aaol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:18:28 PM PST To: lsottcom aol.com Sent from my Whone From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:04 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: VV Sunset From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:52 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: VV Sunset Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:18:57 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com 0 Sent from my iPhone From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:04 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: VV Sunset From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:53 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: VV Sunset Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 14, 2015 3:18:57 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com F Sent from my iPhone From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:04 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:32 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom(cr�,aol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 1:58:01 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com 0 New Properties Beillu ne�e(,i ped at (;teen E Nie . ie 1t makes sense to purchase at pre -develop pent pting. f'aciric Terrace .Ilatisol A serene and beautifalf- mea drndoa For families and individuals Clear markings in beautiful stone, protected from the An affordable choice I'he Churchur'd, a histuric relocamw 4wrin it Sun Pedro's rich This very unique property includes the St. Peter's Sent from my iPhone z ae' From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:04 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:33 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom e,aol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 1:58:22 PM PST To: 1sottcomgaol.com Sent from my iPhone 3a From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:04 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: The bringing of enclosures to the rooftop From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:34 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: The bringing of enclosures to the rooftop Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomkaol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 6:21:52 PM PST To: lsottcomkaol.com Subject: The bringing of enclosures to the rooftop Sent from my Whone 0 From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:04 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: The brown loamy earth creating illusion of in ground burials From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:37 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: The brown loamy earth creating illusion of in ground burials Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 6:18:18 PM PST To: lsottcom °,aol.com Subject: The brown loamy earth creating illusion of in ground burials (9) Sent from my iPhone From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Carolynn Petru Monday, January 19, 2015 11:03 AM Carla Morreale Teresa Takaoka FW: The earth from a single tabletop From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:38 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: The earth from a single tabletop Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom e aol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 6:13:14 PM PST To: lsottcom(a,aol.com Subject: The earth from a single tabletop 0 -i- Sent from my iPhone V. -0 4 A&- From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:03 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: GH Leadership and Counsel. Note heads of 2 residents speaking from the deck From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:39 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: GH Leadership and Counsel. Note heads of 2 residents speaking from the deck Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomAaol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 6:15:50 PM PST To: lsottcom(a�aol.com Subject: GH Leadership and Counsel. Note heads of 2 residents speaking from the deck 0 From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:03 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: One Evening From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:41 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: One Evening Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:01:12 PM PST To: lsottcom e aol.com Subject: One Evening 0 Sent from my Whone From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:03 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: Numbering well over 200 From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:42 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Numbering well over 200 Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:02:22 PM PST To: lsottcom a,aol.com Subject: Numbering well over 200 e) I ADS 1 t r ! f , 4 � From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:03 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: A single service From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:43 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: A single service Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom(a,aol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:08:17 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com Subject: A single service 0. From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:03 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: Cont'd From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:44 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Cont'd Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom(,,aol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:08:53 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com Subject: Cont'd 01 .r-l- . i ` i 1 it ►� ), -"�'� , From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:03 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: Sunset at Vista Verde From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:45 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Sunset at Vista Verde Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom(a�aol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:09:28 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com Subject: Sunset at Vista Verde D Sent from my Whone From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:02 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: Remnants of a Day of the Dead revelry tucked between the Church and Pacifica. Brass instruments, drums, amplifiers, yelling resulting in calls to security, A PC member and ultimately the Lomita Police Depts From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:46 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Remnants of a Day of the Dead revelry tucked between the Church and Pacifica. Brass instruments, drums, amplifiers, yelling resulting in calls to security, A PC member and ultimately the Lomita Police Depts Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomkaol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:17:35 PM PST To: lsottcom °,aol.com Subject: Remnants of a Day of the Dead revelry tucked between the Church and Pacifica. Brass instruments, drums, amplifiers, yelling resulting in calls to security, A PC member and ultimately the Lomita Police Depts Sent from my iPhone From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:02 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: The Church From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:47 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: The Church Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:18:33 PM PST To: lsottcomkaol.com Subject: The Church Sent from my Whone From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:02 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: The Ramp From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:48 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: The Ramp Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom e,aol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:18:54 PM PST To: lsottcomkaol.com Subject: The Ramp Sent from my Whone e From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:02 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: Undeveloped GH Property From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:49 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Undeveloped GH Property Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcom e aol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:19:27 PM PST To: lsottcomgaol.com Subject: Undeveloped GH Property 0 Sent from my Whone From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:02 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: The Bell From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:50 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: The Bell Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:19:48 PM PST To: lsottcomnaol.com Subject: The Bell Sent from my Whone 14 From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 11:02 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: Pacific Terrace Mauseleum From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:51 PM To: Carolynn Petru; brianscarter@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Pacific Terrace Mauseleum Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomgaol.com> Date: January 15, 2015 2:20:32 PM PST To: lsottcom(a�aol.com Subject: Pacific Terrace Mauseleum �W III Iii��N��ll.'��IIR From: Carolynn Petru Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 10:51 AM To: Carla Morreale Cc: Teresa Takaoka Subject: FW: As we speak... From: Linda Ott [mailto:lsottcom@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2015 2:44 PM To: brianscarter@gmail.com; Carolynn Petru Subject: Fwd: As we speak... Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Ott <lsottcomkaol.com> Date: January 17, 2015 11:25:24 AM PST To: lsottcom e aol.com Subject: As we speak... gel _ �. it � _ i ` _