20150804 Late CorrespondenceRe: PVDS Roadside View Restoration ?
Page 1 of 2
From: emenhiser <emenhiser@aol.com>
To: AmyS <AmyS@rpvca.gov>; MichaelT <MichaelT@rpvca.gov>
Cc: JoeIR <JoelR@rpvca.gov>; AraM <AraM@rpvca.gov>; thaack <thaack@destination hotels.com>; dwillmore
<dwillmore@rpvca.gov>; pvdave2011 <pvdave201 1 @gmail.com>; sbhoa.lund <sbhoa.lund@gmail.com>;
jolaine <jolaine@jolainemerrill.com>; raboll <raboll@aol.com>; chuck.tucker <chuck.tucker@cox.net>; sharon
<sharon@horizon mgmt. com>; SeanL <SeanL@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: PVDS Roadside View Restoration ?
Date: Mon, Aug 3, 2015 8:32 am
Amy:
Given your previous email about coordinating with Public Works on Monday, I
was a bit surprised to come home on Friday to see that the cutting had begun.
And, from my perspective it looks make the border along the roadway look
worst - I would encourage you and Michael to take a look at what's been done
so far.
Amy and Michael:
Some thoughts and questions for you both:
1. 1 understand the City's right to cut the trees and scrub along its 14 foot right
of way, but shouldn't the goal be to also beautify PV Drive, not make those
areas bordering the entrance to Terranea's entrance look worst?
2. Isn't this the wrong season to be cutting trees? I was taught that
trimming/cutting in the Summer (and in the middle of the drought) had a
tendency to kill vegetation.
3. Words and labels have power, titling this project Roadside View Restoration
is a misnomer, no views are being restored by the City action, in fact the view
of chopped up trees along PV Drive South will degrade the view as seen from
the roadway.
4. Given the impact of the City's tree trimming, how can we speed up the City's
process of planting CA native, low height vegetation on the City's right of way
that will cover up the mess that the tree trimming is revealing? Per my earlier
email, Terranea has an interest how we can beautify the 100 yards of roadway
that bordered their entrance along PV Drive.
Please drive out to PV Drive South and take a look at wants been done so far.
Thanks again for your notice and my thanks in advance for your responses.
Dave Emenhiser, President
Sea Bluff HOA
RECEIVED FROM 4-.UV4r— rrr i
AND MADE A PART OFT E REC RD AT THE
COUNCIL MEETING OF. 07
OFFICE OF THE Cl CLf RK
CARLA MORREALE, CITY CLERK
https:Hmail.aol.com/webmail-std/en-us/PrintMessage 8/4/2015 (
�, ,%•w. - / •, � � "•��,y}n ter+' �. �� ti _� , /•' � .�� _
ii-.�_. '�.' � `�"R .1.+; ik.�6' :'IF I �• �i�.,, ezr'�i.c.�r A ,�r',i yT %; �y -
`{i ,T�'s,-'4a 3 � 'C � }`. ,rf �r, '..-'F�t✓.c r /' ^ f�.i f.,� ��'! � �M � �. � tjrr ',C.
_ h ti._„ Yom•/ �+K r:•.-� c :a q'a" # X'., ' ,.' . ; ! ,6�' ",il -!{c ..: _.'�► �i1 , 1, .� �?f
'- ` T14� _ mfr "� , -'ii) 'P'- ' \� .- - __ S � ,'� +, '•1 -. ! �
41
ae
f.
yR �
va.
a
F� 'Y
LJ A,
Z
Z
44
.(� 'c ,��jiti4a�r �: fF�^
+'
'�? %►� t�t �'� � �s ii j�%/"1\''t r , ` ,
`�~ ~i1"�`h.�� •. /•. .NCR :f � ,!� s�. � ���w f.� �+�.. L.f.`,
va.
a
F� 'Y
LJ A,
Z
Z
is /ttir #Vj% 0ttf
f r2,ip J e u- IA'2)
Aug 4, 2015 Caiyt,&_ `v
To: RPV City Council
�QWp_°� ""10x_) AAr/A41 (_l f t�pv
Ref: Case No. ZON2015-00326 (RPV peafowl Management Plan & Environmental
Assessment):
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to the City Council.
The peafowl management plan as proposed will cause environmental harm to the peafowl
population, and the city of RPV in the following ways:
1. Peafowl by nature are social birds. The proposed plan cannot be executed in a way so as
to preserve the social structure of the peafowl in RPV
• Many of the flock(s) are chicks and/or youngsters that will be subject to a lack of
protection by the flock if members of the social structure are removed.
• In particular, it is not clear how the proposed program can or will identify and
leave in place the mothers of the young and or other flock members that protect
the young.
2. Peafowl by nature are territorial birds. The proposed plan cannot be executed in a way so
as to preserve the territorial nature of the peafowl in RPV
• Peafowl by nature live in just a few, quite isolated areas of RPV, perhaps 3 or 4
"hubs".
• Residents can literally drive for miles in RPV without seeing a peafowl.
• The proposed plan would relocate the birds from RPV, CA to Lancaster, CA.
Lancaster, CA is a semi -desert area, with highs in May through September
exceeding 100 degrees, up to 113 degrees, and lows in January through October
typically below 30 degrees (i.e. freezing). This environment would seem
unsuitable for peafowl.
• How many of the City Council members would think that it was "humane" if
they were forced to live in Lancaster instead of RPV?
• The peafowl have lived in the RPV area for close to 100 years, and do not
deserve the inhumane treatment as proposed in the reference peafowl
management plan.
3. As citizens of RPV, we believe the referenced plan to be ill conceived. We recommend
cancellation of the plan, and associated contract, paying the termination fee if necessary,
and will look forward to an appeal to the California Coastal Commission if passed.
Regards,
Concerned RPV Citizens
CEIVED FROM /Vt I K -C EV5161E
D MADE A PART OF4CITC4K
COR AT T
UNCIL MEETING OFD
OFFICE OF TH
CARLA MORRE/ALES, CITY _CLERK
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: AUGUST 4, 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
C Memorandum from Senior Administrative Analyst Fox
E Email from Sunshine
J Revised Resolution
2 Emails from: J.R. Munoz; Elaine Matsuda; Dave Emenhiser
3 Letters from: Anonymous; Shirlee Patch; Emails from: Dottie
Hash; Sherree & Russ Greenwood; Elizabeth Sala
5 Emails from: Barbara Ailor; Eva Cicoria; Letter from Andrea
Vona
Respectfully submitted,
Carla Worreale
** PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted
through Monday, August 3, 2015**.
W:WGENDA\2015 Additions Revisions to agendas\20150804 additions revisions to agenda.doc
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: KIT FOX, AICP, SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST
DATE: AUGUST 4, 2015 0
SUBJECT: LATE CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE RANCHO LPG
BUTANE STORAGE FACILITY IN LOS ANGELES (BORDER
ISSUES STATUS REPORT — AGENDA ITEM `C')
Rancho LPG Butane Storage Facility, Los Angeles (San Pedro)
Attached is an additional e-mail chain related to the Rancho LPG facility's proximity to the
Palos Verdes fault zone, which was received after tonight's Staff report was completed.
Attachments:
Additional e-mails related to Rancho LPG (dated 7/18-20/15) (page 2)
MABorder Issues\Staff Repo rts\20150804_CC_LateCorrespondence.docx
C.
Kit Fox
From:
Janet Gunter <arriane5@aol.com>
Sent:
Saturday, July 18, 2015 5:21 PM
To:
det310@juno.com; connie@rutter.us; noelweiss@ca.rr.com; MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net;
igornla@cox.net; dwgkaw@hotmail.com; amartinez@earthjustice.org;
tattnlaw@gmail.com; pmwarren@cox.net; burlingl02@aol.com;
lonnacalhoun@me.com;jnm4ej@yahoo.com; mr.rpulido@gmail.com;
jhwinkler@me.com; irene@miraclegirlproductions.org; fxfeeney@aol.com;
kaiephron@yahoo.com; Jody fames@sbcglobal.net; darlenezavalney@aol.com;
sarahnvaldez@gmail.com; rreg55@hotmail.com; Kit Fox; jdimon77@yahoo.com;
president@centralsanpedro.org; leneebilski@hotmail.com;
claudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com; pjwrome@yahoo.com; radlsmith@cox.net;
alsattler@igc.org; AnnGadfly@aol.com; VernCHE@aol.com
Cc:
richard.vladovic@lausd.net; lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov; lara.larramendi@mail.house.gov;
sabiha_khan@feinstein.senate.gov; heather.hutt@sen.ca.gov; rob.wilcox@lacity.org
Subject:
What do you know???? .... they are going to "study" the Palos Verdes earthquake rupture
zone now .... see link.
NOW... if the City of LA and all other public officials would just take a hard look at exacly "what" they have put on "top"
of this big fat earthquake opportunity and do what is necessary to protect their constituents!!! That includes taking another
serious look at building 600+ new "Ponte Vista Homes" within 1 mile of the Plains/Rancho site, in this very vulnerable
seismic zone and endangering the lives of yet another couple thousand people to this high and unacceptable risk!
See news link:
http://www.scpr.org/news/2015/07/17/53200/la-developers-in-quake-prone-areas-must-now-look-f/
Kit Fox
From: Diane Smith <radlsmith@cox.net>
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2015 6:21 PM
To: 'Janet Gunter'; det310@juno.com; connie@rutter.us; noelweiss@ca.rr.com;
MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net; igornla@cox.net; dwgkaw@hotmail.com;
amartinez@earthjustice.org; tattnlaw@gmail.com; pmwarren@cox.net; burling102
@aol.com; lonnacalhoun@me.com;jnm4ej@yahoo.com; mr.rpulido@gmail.com;
jhwinkler@me.com; irene@miraclegirlproductions.org; fxfeeney@aol.com;
kaiephron@yahoo.com; Jody fames@sbcglobal.net; darlenezavainey@aol.com;
sarahnvaldez@gmail.com; rreg55@hotmail.com; Kit Fox;jdimon77@yahoo.com;
president@centralsanpedro.org; leneebilski@hotmail.com;
ciaudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com; pjwrome@yahoo.com; alsattler@igc.org;
AnnGadfly@aol.com; VernCHE@aol.com
Cc: richard.vladovic@lausd.net; lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov; lara.larramendi@maii.house.gov;
sabiha_khan@feinstein.senate.gov; heather.hutt@sen.ca.gov; rob.wilcox@lacity.org
Subject: RE: What do you know???? .... they are going to "study" the Palos Verdes earthquake
rupture zone now .... see link.
Janet,
My feeling is that people need to be fully aware of the risks before they purchase property to live in, whether it be 1
mile or 6 or whatever - be fully aware that this area may be/is highly vulnerable to earthquakes, terrorists, deteriorated
railroad tracks, etc.
We have crazy people that move near airports and then complain about the airplane noise.
We have crazy people that move near farms and then complain about mooing cows and manure. Anyone who moves
next to a seaport should be fully aware of what is being stored there and what is moving in and out of such seaport.
Residents should sign an acknowledgment that they understand the risks of the properties they are about to purchase —
that these properties are in close proximity to the busiest port on the U.S. West Coast, with much higher air -borne
pollutants than, say, Santa Barbara. Also acknowledging that the property they are about to purchase will expose them
and their families to West Coast underground fuel storage reservoirs as well as the highly combustible fuel stored in the
above -ground Tanks, etc.
Before investing in real estate in which people intend to live they must research the area to make sure it is in harmony
with what they want for their family. Everyone should watch the movie "Erin Brokovich" -
http://www.brockovich.com/the-movie/ to "get the picture."
If those residents in the movie, a true story, knew the water would give them cancer and if they had signed an
acknowledgment of this and still decided to move there then maybe Pacific Gas & Electric would not have had to pay so
much in damages.
Diane Smith
From: Janet Gunter [mailto:arriane5@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2015 5:21 PM
To: det310@juno.com; connie@rutter.us; noelweiss@ca.rr.com; MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net; igornla@cox.net;
dwgkaw@hotmail.com; amartinez@earthjustice.org; tattnlaw@gmail.com; pmwarren@cox.net; burling102@aol.com;
lonnacalhoun@me.com; jnm4ej@yahoo.com; mr.rpulido@gmail.com; jhwinkler@me.com;
irene@miraclegirlproductions.org; fxfeeney@aol.com; kaiephron@yahoo.com; jody.james@sbcglobal.net;
darlenezavainey@aol.com; sarahnvaldez@gmail.com; rreg55@hotmail.com; kitf@rpv.com; jdimon77@yahoo.com;
president@centralsanpedro.org; leneebilski@hotmail.com; claudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com; pjwrome@yahoo.com;
radlsmith@cox.net; alsattler@igc.org; AnnGadfly@aol.com; VernCHE@aol.com
Cc: richard.vladovic@lausd.net; lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov; lara.larramendi@mail.house.gov;
1
Kit Fox
From:
Janet Gunter <arriane5@aol.com>
Sent:
Sunday, July 19, 2015 10:08 AM
To:
radlsmith@cox.net; det310@juno.com; connie@rutter.us; noelweiss@ca.rr.com;
MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net; igornla@cox.net; dwgkaw@hotmail.com;
amartinez@earthjustice.org; tattnlaw@gmail.com; pmwarren@cox.net; burling102
@aol.com; lonnacalhoun@me.com; jnm4ej@yahoo.com; mr.rpulido@gmail.com;
jhwinkler@me.com; irene@miraclegirlproductions.org; fxfeeney@aol.com;
kaiephron@yahoo.com; Jody fames@sbcglobal.net; darlenezavalney@aol.com;
sarahnvaldez@gmail.com; rreg55@hotmail.com; Kit Fox; jdimon77@yahoo.com;
president@centralsanpedro.org; leneebilski@hotmail.com;
claudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com; pjwrome@yahoo.com; alsattler@igc.org;
AnnGadfly@aol.com; VernCHE@aol.com; marciesmiller@sbcglobal.net
Cc:
richard.vladovic@lausd.net; lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov; lara.larramendi@mail.house.gov;
sabiha_khan@feinstein.senate.gov; heather.hutt@sen.ca.gov; rob.wilcox@lacity.org
Subject:
Re: What do you know???? .... they are going to "study" the Palos Verdes earthquake
rupture zone now .... see link.
Yes, Diane. I am in agreement. There are a number of real estate folks and even residents that want to steer clear of this
issue due to their fears of the hazardous disclosure affecting real estate values, financing and insurance costs. I well
understand that, as potentially this surely could. However, the public outrage created from a loss in the PV and harbor
area's resident's net worth, and increased associated costs due to risk exposure, etc.would serve us in creating the
political pressure necessary to "eliminate" some of our most high risk situations. Plains/Rancho being the most obvious.
Because of the huge money in the "giant" petroleum and energy industry (that which provides it such great political
manipulation) .... the "people's" battle here is not being fought on equal ground. However, in my humble view ..... the
complacent public would be clearly "unnerved" and angered by how it would be affected monetarily under the scenario
you describe. Frankly, as a matter of ethics ... I completely agree with you. And, again ... I think that this would bring a
groundswell of public outrage that would ultimately force our political representatives to do "the right thing". It would
elevate the issue of public safety to (where it is supposed to be) "top priority." High time ... and perhaps we might even
"beat" the inevitable catastrophe. What a concept!
Thanks so much. Please keep the pressure up. God knows we need it!
Best,
Janet
-----Original Message -----
From: Diane Smith <radlsmith@cox.net>
To: 'Janet Gunter' <arriane5@aol.com>; det310 <det310@juno.com>; connie <connie@rutter.us>; noelweiss
<noelweiss@ca.rr.com>; MrEnvirlaw <MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net>; igornla <igornla@cox.net>; dwgkaw
<dwgkaw@hotmail.com>; amartinez <amartinez@earthjustice.org>; tattnlaw <tattnlaw@gmail. com>; pmwarren
<pmwarren@cox.net>; burling102 <burling102@aol.com>; lonnacalhoun <lonnacalhoun@me.com>; jnm4ej
<jnm4ej@yahoo.com>; mr.rpulido <mr.rpulido@gmail. com>; jhwinkler <jhwinkler@me.com>; irene
<irene@miraclegirl prod uctions.org>; fxfeeney <fxfeeney@aol.com>; kaiephron <kaiephron@yahoo.com>; jody.james
<jody.james@sbcgloba1.net>; darlenezavalney <darlenezavalney@aol.com>; sarahnvaldez <sarahnvaldez@gmail. com>;
rreg55 <rreg55@hotmail.com>; kitf <kitf@rpv.com>; jdimon77 <jdimon77@yahoo.com>; president
<president@centralsanpedro.org>; leneebilski <leneebilski@hotmail.com>; claudia.r.mcculloch
<claudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com>; pjwrome <pjwrome@yahoo.com>; alsattler <alsattler@igc.org>; AnnGadfly
<AnnGadfly@aol.com>; VernCHE <VernCHE@aol.com>
Cc: richard.vladovic <richard.vladovic@lausd.net>; lisa.pinto <lisa.pinto@mail. house.gov>; lara.larramendi
<lara.larramendi@mail.house.gov>; sabiha_khan <sabiha_khan@feinstein. senate.gov>; heather.hutt
<heather.hutt@sen.ca.gov>; rob.wilcox <rob.wilcox@lacity.org>
Sent: Sat, Jul 18, 2015 6:21 pm
Subject: RE: What do you know???? .... they are going to "study" the Palos Verdes earthquake rupture zone now .... see
link.
Kit Fox
From:
Al Sattler <alsattler@igc.org>
Sent:
Sunday, July 19, 2015 11:51 AM
To:
Janet Gunter; radlsmith@cox.net; det310@juno.com; connie@rutter.us;
noelweiss@ca.rr.com; MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net; igornla@cox.net;
dwgkaw@hotmail.com; amartinez@earthjustice.org; tattnlaw@gmail.com;
pmwarren@cox.net; burlingl02@aol.com; lonnacalhoun@me.com;jnm4ej@yahoo.com;
mr.rpulido@gmail.com; jhwinkler@me.com; irene@miraclegirlproductions.org;
fxfeeney@aol.com; kaiephron@yahoo.com;jodyjames@sbcglobal.net;
darlenezavalney@aol.com; sarahnvaldez@gmail.com; rreg55@hotmail.com; Kit Fox;
jdimon77@yahoo.com; president@centralsanpedro.org; leneebilski@hotmail.com;
claudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com; pjwrome@yahoo.com; AnnGadfly@aol.com;
VernCHE@aol.com; marciesmiller@sbcglobal.net
Cc:
richard.vladovic@lausd.net; lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov; lara.larramendi@mail.house.gov;
sabiha_khan@feinstein.senate.gov; heather.hutt@sen.ca.gov; rob.wilcox@lacity.org
Subject:
Re: What do you know???? .... they are going to "study" the Palos Verdes earthquake
rupture zone now .... see link.
How big will the tsunami be, even down here, from The Really Big One in the Northwest?
See:
http://www.newyorker. com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one?intcid=mod-most-popular
Annals of Seismology July 20, 2015 Issue
The Really Big One
An earthquake will destroy a sizable portion of the coastal Northwest. The question is when.
By Kathryn Schulz
On 7/19/15 10:08 AM, Janet Gunter wrote:
Yes, Diane. I am in agreement. There are a number of real estate folks and even residents that want to
steer clear of this issue due to their fears of the hazardous disclosure affecting real estate values,
financing and insurance costs. I well understand that, as potentially this surely could. However, the
public outrage created from a loss in the PV and harbor area's resident's net worth, and increased
associated costs due to risk exposure, etc.would serve us in creating the political pressure necessary
to "eliminate" some of our most high risk situations. Plains/Rancho being the most obvious. Because of
the huge money in the "giant" petroleum and energy industry (that which provides it such great political
manipulation) .... the "people's" battle here is not being fought on equal ground. However, in my humble
view ..... the complacent public would be clearly "unnerved" and angered by how it would be affected
monetarily under the scenario you describe. Frankly, as a matter of ethics ... I completely agree with you.
And, again ... I think that this would bring a groundswell of public outrage that would ultimately force our
political representatives to do "the right thing". It would elevate the issue of public safety to (where it is
supposed to be) "top priority." High time ... and perhaps we might even "beat" the inevitable
catastrophe. What a concept!
Thanks so much. Please keep the pressure up. God knows we need it!
Best,
Janet
-----Original Message -----
From: Diane Smith <radlsmith@cox.net>
Kit Fox
From:
Lonna Calhoun <lonnacalhoun@me.com>
Sent:
Sunday, July 19, 2015 4:40 PM
To:
'Janet Gunter'; radlsmith@cox.net; det310@juno.com; connie@rutter.us;
noelweiss@ca.rr.com; MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net; igornla@cox.net;
dwgkaw@hotmail.com; amartinez@earthjustice.org; tattnlaw@gmail.com;
pmwarren@cox.net; burlingl02@aol.com;jnm4ej@yahoo.com; mr.rpulido@gmail.com;
jhwinkler@me.com; irene@miraclegirlproductions.org; fxfeeney@aol.com;
kaiephron@yahoo.com; jody fames@sbcglobal.net; darlenezavalney@aol.com;
sarahnvaldez@gmail.com; rreg55@hotmail.com; Kit Fox;jdimon77@yahoo.com;
president@centralsanpedro.org; leneebilski@hotmail.com;
claudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com; pjwrome@yahoo.com; alsattler@igc.org;
AnnGadfly@aol.com; VernCHE@aol.com; marciesmiller@sbcglobal.net
Cc:
richard.vladovic@lausd.net; lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov; lara.larramendi@mail.house.gov;
sabiha_khan@feinstein.senate.gov; heather.hutt@sen.ca.gov; rob.wilcox@lacity.org
Subject:
RE: What do you know???? .... they are going to "study" the Palos Verdes earthquake
rupture zone now .... see link.
In 1979 I bought a lot in Rancho Palos Verdes to build a home. I did find out that the Palos Verdes Fault was
about 6 lots away. I spent a substantial amount of money to have the house foundation engineered above code to
what was considered the "gold standard" of earthquake engineering. It was worth some peace of mind. I wonder
if the Ponte Vista Developers will do the same — somehow I doubt it. The issue with the Plains/Rancho LPG
tanks is that they were built in close proximity to schools and homes that were already existing. The risk they
pose far exceeds the normal very dangerous potential earthquake risk. It's called "cascading events" which is
the worse fear of emergency managers, like myself, and first responders alike. There is no completely safe
location — life is not safe. In a minute our world can be shattered from a myriad of unexpected forces. The only
thing we can do is be proactive, mitigate our risks and prepare our households. Then we should try to enjoy
every minute and be grateful for all the good in our lives.
My two cents worth!
Lonna Calhoun, CEM
From: Janet Gunter [mailto:arriane5@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2015 10:08 AM
To: radlsmith@cox.net; det310@juno.com; connie@rutter.us; noelweiss@ca.rr.com; MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net;
igornla@cox.net; dwgkaw@hotmail.com; amartinez@earthjustice.org; tattnlaw@gmail.com; pmwarren@cox.net;
burlingl02@aol.com; lonnacalhoun@me.com; jnm4ej@yahoo.com; mr.rpulido@gmail.com; jhwinkler@me.com;
irene@miraclegirlproductions.org; fxfeeney@aol.com; kaiephron@yahoo.com; jody.james@sbcglobal.net;
darlenezavalney@aol.com; sarahnvaldez@gmail.com; rreg55@hotmail.com; kitf@rpv.com; jdimon77@yahoo.com;
president@centralsanpedro.org; leneebilski@hotmail.com; claudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com; pjwrome@yahoo.com;
alsattler@igc.org; AnnGadfly@aol.com; VernCHE@aol.com; marciesmiller@sbcglobal.net
Cc: richard.viadovic@lausd.net; lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov; lara.larramendi@mail.house.gov;
sabiha_khan@feinstein.senate.gov; heather.hutt@sen.ca.gov; rob.wilcox@lacity.org
Subject: Re: What do you know???? .... they are going to "study" the Palos Verdes earthquake rupture zone now .... see
link.
Yes, Diane. I am in agreement. There are a number of real estate folks and even residents that want to steer clear of this
issue due to their fears of the hazardous disclosure affecting real estate values, financing and insurance costs. I well
understand that, as potentially this surely could. However, the public outrage created from a loss in the PV and harbor
area's resident's net worth, and increased associated costs due to risk exposure, etc.would serve us in creating the
Kit Fox
From: kathleen dwgkaw <dwgkaw@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 8:36 AM
To: Janet Gunter; radlsmith@cox.net; det310@juno.com; connie@rutter.us;
noelweiss@ca.rr.com; MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net; igornla@cox.net;
amartinez@earthjustice.org; tattnlaw@gmail.com; pmwarren@cox.net; burling102
@aol.com; lonnacalhoun@me.com;jnm4ej@yahoo.com; mr.rpulido@gmail.com;
jhwinkler@me.com; irene@miraclegirlproductions.org; fxfeeney@aol.com;
kaiephron@yahoo.com; jodyjames@sbcglobal.net; darlenezavalney@aol.com;
sarahnvaldez@gmail.com; rreg55@hotmail.com; Kit Fox;jdimon77@yahoo.com;
president@centralsanpedro.org; leneebilski@hotmail.com;
claudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com; pjwrome@yahoo.com; alsattler@igc.org;
AnnGadfly@aol.com; VernCHE@aol.com; marciesmiller@sbcglobal.net
Cc: richard.vladovic@lausd.net; lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov, lara.larramendi@mail.house.gov;
sabiha_khan@feinstein.senate.gov; heather.hutt@sen.ca.gov; rob.wilcox@lacity.org
Subject: RE: What do you know???? .... they are going to "study" the Palos Verdes earthquake
rupture zone now .... see link.
Good concept, Diane ...... but the risks that industries expose us to are purposefully understated ..... so we would
be singing off onto a false premise.
Kathleen
Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S@4, an AT&T 4G LIE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Janet Gunter <arriane5@aol.com>
Date:07/19/2015 10:08 AM (GMT -08:00)
To: radlsmith@cox.net, det310@juno.com, connie@rutter.us, noelweiss@ca.rr.com,
MrEnvirlaw@sbcglobal.net, igornla@cox.net, dwgkaw@hotmail.com, amartinez@earthjustice.org,
tattnlaw@gmail.com, pmwarren@cox.net, hurling 102@aol.com, lonnacalhoun@me.com, jnm4ej@yahoo.com,
mr.rpulido@gmail.com, jhwinkler@me.com, irene@miraclegirlproductions.org, fxfeeney@aol.com,
kaiephron@yahoo.com, jodyjames@sbcglobal.net, darlenezavalney@aol.com, sarahnvaldez@gmail.com,
rreg55@hotmail.com, kitf@rpv.com, jdimon77@yahoo.com, president@centralsanpedro.org,
leneebilski@hotmail.com, claudia.r.mcculloch@gmail.com, pjwrome@yahoo.com, alsattler@igc.org,
AnnGadfly@aol.com, VernCHE@aol.com, marciesmiller@sbcglobal.net
Cc: richard.vladovic@lausd.net, lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov, lara.larramendi@mail.house.gov,
sabiha_khan@feinstein.senate.gov, heather.hutt@sen.ca.gov, rob.wilcox@lacity.org
Subject: Re: What do you know???? .... they are going to "study" the Palos Verdes earthquake rupture zone
now .... see link.
Yes, Diane. I am in agreement. There are a number of real estate folks and even residents that want to steer clear of this
issue due to their fears of the hazardous disclosure affecting real estate values, financing and insurance costs. I well
understand that, as potentially this surely could. However, the public outrage created from a loss in the PV and harbor
area's resident's net worth, and increased associated costs due to risk exposure, etc.would serve us in creating the
political pressure necessary to "eliminate" some of our most high risk situations. Plains/Rancho being the most obvious.
Because of the huge money in the "giant" petroleum and energy industry (that which provides it such great political
manipulation) .... the "people's" battle here is not being fought on equal ground. However, in my humble view ..... the
complacent public would be clearly "unnerved" and angered by how it would be affected monetarily under the scenario
you describe. Frankly, as a matter of ethics ... I completely agree with you. And, again ... I think that this would bring a
From: SunshineRPV@aol.com
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 7:02 PM
To: CC
Cc: Doug Willmore
Subject: August 2, 2015 City Council Consent Calendar Item E
MEMO from SUNSHINE
TO: RPV City Council. Copy to Staff and interested parties
RE: August 2, 2015 City Council Consent Calendar Item E
What have you done? What do you expect?
Staff has brought only the zoning change back to you. On July 21, 2015, you approved an Amendment to the
General Plan Land Use Map. The Staff Report for 10 Chaparral did not illustrate where the new boundaries of
the Hazard Zone are to be. Hazard Zones are supposed to be based on geologic risks and 35 percent or more
slopes.
The City owns several lots in the Portuguese Bend Area which are zoned both Residential and Open Space
Hazard. Is that what you expect to happen here? Did you inadvertently approve grading on an extreme slope?
Is everyone supposed to wait for the Building Department people to decide whether or not the proposed
development intrudes on or mitigates the active landslide? What happens to the adjacent property owners
development rights?
This sort of complicated issue should not show up on your Consent Calendar.
There is no point in bringing up the trails issue while the General Plan is in limbo.
E.
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: KIT FOX, AICP, SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST®
DATE: AUGUST 4, 2015
SUBJECT: LATE CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE AUTHORIZING
RESOLUTION FOR THE GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE POINT
VICENTE INTERPRETIVE CENTER LIGHTHOUSE LENS EXHIBIT
(AGENDA ITEM `J')
Based upon recent discussions with the City's grant consultant, Blais & Associates (B&A),
Staff recommends expanding the scope of the proposed grant application for the
California Cultural and Historical Endowment (CCHE) Museum Grant Program. The draft
authorizing resolution included in tonight's Staff report focused solely on the exhibit for
the 3rd -order Fresnel lens from the Point Vicente lighthouse. In order to make a more
compelling and competitive grant application, Staff now recommends expanding the
scope to the project to include a portion of the renovation of the Point Vicente Interpretive
Center (PVIC) exhibits to open up an exterior wall so that the City's existing whaling boat
exhibit (currently visible only from the exterior of PVIC) would be visible from the new
interior exhibit space as well. This renovated exhibit space adjoining the whaling boat is
proposed to focus upon "Hunting at Sea" and the effect of the whaling trade upon the
physical and cultural history of the Palos Verdes Peninsula.
Attached is a revised resolution that reflects this expanded scope for the City Council's
consideration and approval (additional language underlined and deletions S+r�k out).
Attachments:
Revised Resolution No. 2015-_ (page 2)
MABorder Issues\Staff Reports\20150804_CC_LateCorrespondence.docx
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR
GRANT FUNDS FOR THE CALIFORNIA CULTURAL AND
HISTORICAL ENDOWMENT'S MUSEUM GRANT
PROGRAM UNDER THE CALIFORNIA CLEAN WATER,
CLEAN AIR, SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, AND
COASTAL PROTECTION ACT OF 2002 (PROPOSITION
40)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the Legislature and Governor of the State of California have provided
funds for the program shown above; and,
WHEREAS, the California Cultural and Historical Endowment has been delegated
the responsibility for the administration of this grant program, establishing necessary
procedures; and,
WHEREAS, said procedures established by the California Cultural and Historical
Endowment require a resolution certifying the approval of application(s) by the Applicants
governing board before submission of said application(s) to the State; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant, if selected, will enter into an agreement with the State
of California to carry out the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes does
hereby resolve as follows:
1. Approves the filing of an application for the Point Vicente Interpretive Center (PVIC)
Lighthouse Lens, "Hunting at Sea" and Whalinq Boat €xNbit Exhibits; and,
2. Determines Applicant is eligible to apply for a State grant due to status as a 501(c)(3)
non-profit organization, government entity, or Federally -Registered tribe; and,
3. Certifies that applicant understands the assurances and certification in the application
herein, and,
4. Certifies applicant organization has long-term control of the property and will provide
satisfactory documentation of the long-term control as part of the grant agreement
development process; and,
5. Certifies that applicant or titleholder will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain
the project consistent with the land tenure requirements; or will secure the resources
to do so; and,
6. Certifies the proposed project/organization is free of any legal challenges that could
undermine progress on the project; and,
7. Gives State permission to publish any provided digital image to its website and to crop
or resize the image; and,
8. Agrees to acknowledge State's support in any news media, brochures, articles,
publications, seminars, exhibits, buildings, displays, products, or other promotion
materials about the funded project; and,
9. Certifies that it will comply with the provisions of Section 1771.5 of the State Labor
Code regarding payment of prevailing wages on Projects awarded Proposition 84
Funds, and,
10.Agrees that projects involving construction, renovation, repair, rehabilitation, or
ground or visual disturbances must comply with all current laws and regulations which
apply to the Project, including, but not limited to, labor codes related to prevailing
wage, legal requirements for construction contracts, building codes, environmental
laws, health and safety codes, disabled access and historic preservation laws and
environmental laws. Grantee will be required to certify that, prior to commencement
of construction, all applicable permits and licenses (e.g., state contractor's license) will
be obtained; and,
11. Agrees to adhere to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and the 2010
ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Title III of the ADA covers places of public
accommodation (such as museums, libraries, and educational institutions) and
includes a specific section regarding new construction and alterations in public
accommodations; and,
12.Agrees that projects involving construction, renovation, repair, rehabilitation, or
ground or visual disturbances must comply with the National Historic Preservation Act
and NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act); and,
13. Waives all rights to privacy and confidentiality of the material submitted to State, and,
14. Agrees to execute a grant agreement prior to the encumbrance deadline of June 30,
2017, and will caused work on the project to be commenced within a reasonable time
after encumbering the funds, so that the project will be complete and the final invoice
submitted to the State by May 1, 2019; and,
15. Agrees that for all property acquired or developed with Museum Grant funds, applicant
will accept, sign, notarize and record a declaration of covenants, conditions and
Resolution No. 2015 -
Page 2 of 3
restrictions (deed restrictions) which attaches the conditions of the grant, as set forth
in the grant agreement, on the use and enjoyment of the property until the end land
tenure date specified in the grant agreement; and,
16. Appoints the City Manager, or designee, as agent to conduct all negotiations, execute
and submit all documents including, but not limited to applications, agreements,
payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion of the
aforementioned project(s).
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this _t" day of August 2015.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
State of California )
County of Los Angeles ) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )
I, Carla Morreale, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby
certify that the above Resolution No. 2015-_, was duly and regularly passed and
adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on August 4, 2015.
City Clerk
Resolution No. 2015 -
Page 3 of 3
From: J.R. Munoz <jrmun@msn.com>
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 7:36 PM
To: CC
Cc: Doug Willmore
Subject: Permit parking for Channel view ct
Major Knight and members of the council
Last year I moved in to the neighborhood on Channel view ct. The city is well represented by such a lovely street nestled
immediately up against the amazing Terranea resort golf course.
One of the challenges we have since we moved in is everyday street parking. Channel view runs up against sea wolf drive
which has one residence and plenty of parking. For some reason (maybe to avoid a ticket) beach goers and employees of
Terranea like to park on our street.
They will sometimes leave their car there for many days and it makes It difficult for residences to have access to normal
curb side space for friends and families. This is especially an issue on weekends. I support the potential for permit
parking only on Channel view ct and would hope you, the fellows residences can see this from our perspective.
Thank you very much for your consideration.
Sent from my Wad
From:
Elaine Matsuda <ESMATSUDA@COX.NET>
Sent:
Monday, August 03, 2015 8:52 PM
To:
CC; Doug Willmore; Melissa Countryman
Cc:
Dave Emenhiser <emenhiser@aol.com>
Subject:
Permit Parking for Channelview Ct
Dear Mayor Knight and members of the Council,
I own a house on Channelview Court and I wanted to express my support for Permit Parking for our street. I am a big
supporter of Terranea Resort. They have added a lot to our community and have been very good neighbors.
Unfortunately, the challenge of parking has been growing as Terranea's popularity grows.
-On weekends the street is very crowded with cars primarily from their staff. I see them getting out of their cars
carrying their apron or uniform for the hotel. They used to park primarily on the side nearest to PV drive but recently
parking is now spilling over to the house side. At times it is so crowded it is difficult to pull my vehicle
into/out of my driveway. During holidays, the street is almost impassable.
-The other night around 11:00pm I had to leave my house and I noticed a double parked car with its lights off
but people inside the vehicle. It seemed suspicious since they were there for well over 15 minutes. I was reluctant to
leave because it didn't look right. Finally as I passed the vehicle i stopped and asked if I could help them.
They male driver was a bit irritated as he said he was dropping off his friend. They were definitely not from the
neighborhood and appeared to work at the hotel
-1 walk by the public parking lot next to Terranea and I see several hotel staff parking in that lot. I also see them
parking on Terranea Drive. As a result, guests or visitors are forced to park along Terranea Drive or on Channelview.
Some potential ideas to overcome the parking issue:
-Post a sign for "Parking with Permit Only" - I support this
-Arrange for the "offsite Terranea staff parking" to have more frequent shuttles. I understand the shuttles force
them to wait for awhile. Ask Terranea to please reinforce, with their staff, the need to park at the offsite parking and to
leave the public parking lot and Terranea Drive available for guests/visitors to the area. Somehow they also need to
patrol the area or do random checks to see if that rule is being followed.
Thank you for your support in keeping Channelview Ct a neighborhood and not an ongoing parking lot.
Elaine Matsuda
6626 Channelview Court
�w
From:
emenhiser@aol.com
Sent:
Tuesday, August 04, 2015 9:16 AM
To:
ESMATSUDA@COX.NET; CC; Doug Willmore; Melissa Countryman
Cc:
greg.candy@me.com
Subject:
Re: Permit Parking for Channelview Ct
Elaine:
Thank you for sharing your first hand perspective on the parking issues that we all face on Channelview. I hadn't thought
about the late night concerns you mentioned, so thank you for including it.
I'm going to the Council meeting tonight to represent the other owners on Channelview and the Board of the Sea Bluff
HOA. I'll let you about the outcome.
Dave
-----Original Message -----
From: Elaine Matsuda <ESMATSUDA@COX.NET>
To: cc <cc@rpvca.gov>; dwillmore <dwillmore@rpvca.gov>; melissac <melissac@rpvca.gov>
Cc: EMENHISER <EMENHISER@aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Aug 3, 2015 8:52 pm
Subject: Permit Parking for Channelview Ct
Dear Mayor Knight and members of the Council,
I own a house on Channelview
Court and I wanted to express my support for Permit Parking for our street. I
am a big supporter of Terranea Resort. They have added a lot to our community
and have been very good neighbors. Unfortunately, the challenge of parking has
been growing as Terranea's popularity grows.
-On weekends the street is
very crowded with cars primarily from their staff. I see them getting out of
their cars carrying their apron or uniform for the hotel. They used to park
primarily on the side nearest to PV drive but recently parking is now spilling
over to the house side. At times it is so crowded it is difficult to pull my
vehicle into/out of my driveway. During holidays, the street is almost
impassable.
-The other night around 11:00pm I had to leave my house and I
noticed a double parked car with its lights off but people inside the vehicle.
It seemed suspicious since they were there for well over 15 minutes. I was
reluctant to leave because it didn't look right. Finally as I passed the
vehicle i stopped and asked if I could help them. They male driver was a bit
irritated as he said he was dropping off his friend. They were definitely not
from the neighborhood and appeared to work at the hotel
-I walk by the
public parking lot next to Terranea and I see several hotel staff parking in
that lot. I also see them parking on Terranea Drive. As a result, guests or
visitors are forced to park along Terranea Drive or on Channelview.
Some
potential ideas to overcome the parking issue:
1 c:�
-Post a sign for "Parking
with Permit Only" - I support this
-Arrange for the "offsite Terranea staff
parking" to have more frequent shuttles. I understand the shuttles force them
to wait for awhile. Ask Terranea to please reinforce, with their staff, the
need to park at the offsite parking and to leave the public parking lot and
Terranea Drive available for guests/visitors to the area. Somehow they also
need to patrol the area or do random checks to see if that rule is being
followed.
Thank you for your support in keeping Channelview Ct a
neighborhood and not an ongoing parking lot.
Elaine Matsuda
6626
Channelview Court
2
Dear Mr. Ara Mihranian
7/31/2015
After looking thru the "City Council Staff Report" of August 4, 2015 on page 57 (of the staff
report) it says at the bottom pg. 1 of 2. Somehow "Pg. 2 of 2" is not included, these 2 pages were stapled
together. In addition there was another page titled "Questions you should....." (pg 58 in the staff report)
which has totally different content.
Included are several copies of the missing "pg. 2 of 2". This missing page should be on pg. 58
of the staff report to fully understand the content on these 2 pages.
The information on the "missing pg 2 of 2 " needs to be reviewed by the City Atty. , the City
Council & other interested parties & should be included in the staff report.
Thanks for your time.
fyi: Several very small peacock chicks (2-3 weeks old at most) have been sighted in the past
few days in several areas of the city. If these young birds are trapped they may not make it.
This was mailed on Friday, July 31, 2015 @ about 3 pm. with overnight delivery.
COMMUNITY
rd
Cal. Fish & Game Code
§465.5 (g)(3). Trap Placement Requirement. Traps may not be set within 150
yards of any structure used as a permanent or temporary residence, unless such
traps are set by a person controlling such property or by a person who has and is
� I carrying�� •�� with,*
r 1,- 'tit. •
directionsThe above says that traps can't be set within 450 Ft.from a house in all
•use. If someoneobjects be no traps
s
�` i radius.; ri • • ss below).
•• • • •• • • •'• 1 1111 111111111 •• •
putting out a document like the one on previous page. That document no
only violates the law & is misleading. Any & all future documents, regardless
the subject, must be unbiased &easily understood by the residents of RPV.
As all • both citizensiciby ties, must abideCalifornia
State over d " local
• " i
tit. 1. r1;r7ffA.1,I11i71M7MJM=.
Would allow trapping but
can't as they are in the 450
ft. radius no trapping area.
€ o f., to pi gig area
a
900 hundred feet diameter
pg2of2
Subject: FW: Peafowl
From: dottiehash [mailto:dottiehashL@cox.net]
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 11:08 PM
To: Ara Mihranian
Subject: Peafowl
I have lived in my home since before RPV was a city. I live at 22 Coveview Drive (Del Cerro homes) and
haven't seen a single peahen or peacock in over 10 years. Put a few of your captures back over here!
I am a long, long time resident who thinks our City is not becoming better.
Dottie Lancaster Hashizumi
dottiehash;u cox.net
310.210 4269
C: ottichash(W.cov€let
...............................:.:... _...._...._............
Subject: FW: Peafowl Management Plan
From: Russell Greenwood [niailto:be,achjak G sbcb �global.nt]
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2015 11:06 PM
To: Ara Mihranian
Subject: Peafowl Management Plan
We have resided on Sunnyside Ridge Road in Rancho Palos Verdes for 28 years. The peafowl
population on Sunnyside Ridge Road has recently declined and we are against the trapping of the
peafowl. We have seen peacocks dead on the side of PVDE, mother birds missing their
babies, dogs on the loose attacking and pulling the peacocks tail feathers out, peafowl with one leg
missing and peafowl with pellets that have been shot into them. Environmental and predator modes
are destroying and reducing our neighborhood peafowl population which needs to be protected and
cared for. We have heard of young adults with pillow cases capturing the peafowl to let them loose
in their neighborhood. The peafowl count needs to be accurate and adjusted for the life cycle of the
birds and the conduct of people.
The Sunnyside Ridge Homeowner's Association's survey leaves a lot to be desired as members who
did not respond to the survey were counted as being for trapping the peafowl. Residents were given
little time to respond, access to computers are limited,and it is not the American way to say, " if you
do not vote your vote will automatically transulate in favor of peafowl trapping. "
Well the group against peafowl trapping was larger than the group for peafowl trapping ----until you
count the obstain votes !!!!! The survey should not count.
Please dispurse this as late corraspondance to the RPV City council meeting Aug. 4, 2015.
From Sherree & Russ Greenwood
2543 Sunnyside Ridge Road
From: Elizabeth Sala <etsala@live.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 9:42 AM
To: CC
Subject: Peafowl Management Plan - please accept
Mayor Knight and City Council Members,
Please accept the Peafowl Management Plan as it is being presented to you. The peafowl issue in Rancho
Palos Verdes is complicated, and I believe the plan to reduce the numbers in the four neighborhoods presents
a good beginning to controlling their population. I believe it is a humane plan, and also provides relief to the
residents in the targeted areas.
I also believe that continued monitoring of this population is warranted throughout RPV. Peafowl have made it
to my neighborhood in the last few months, and many of the residents are not happy about this. As is written
in the report, they are destructive to landscaping, make noise at all hours of the day and night, and it appears
that once they get a foothold in an area, they do not leave. This is a grave concern of mine. These animals
were not present in my neighborhood when we purchased our home. If they continue to infiltrate our area,
they will degrade the quality of my life in many ways:
1. 1 am an avid gardener and will have to take additional steps to guard my landscape from them;
2. My sleep will continue to be disrupted, as it currently is by them, since I like to sleep with the windows open
and their loud calls are throughout the night;
3. The value of my home will be affected since it will be harder to sell our home at some future date if peafowl
are in the area.
Thank you for listening to my concerns,
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Sala
3111 Martingale Drive
RPV
3.
Mayor Knight, Mayor ProTem Brooks, and Councilmembers Campbell, Duhovic, and Misetich,
Thank you for your time and effort to address the community's concerns about trash, graffiti,
crime, safety, and vandalism at City Parks and open space areas.
As you know, the Volunteer Trail Watch volunteers are seeing the same type of vandalism on
the PV Nature Preserve as is happening in Abalone Cove. Things like graffiti, removal of signs,
removal of post -and -cable fences, and destruction of habitat are common. The Conservancy
has a full time employee that works very hard to close off unauthorized trails, but these efforts
are repeatedly thwarted. In fact, the volunteers in the Keeper program, the Volunteer Trail
Watch, and the trail crew continually try to re -close spurs and areas closed for restoration, pick
up trash and report graffiti. We're finding it difficult to get the attention of perpetrators of such
vandalism, and the Conservancy feels the financial pain of re -doing and re -doing our efforts. I
believe you will likely have the same problem with an education -only approach.
I've found that some organizations managing large preserves near large population centers also
have education programs, but supplement that with enforcement. For example, they coordinate
with the local police who use hidden cameras, work during hours when the vandalism is most
likely to occur - usually at night, and have periodic random high intensity enforcement exercises
for a week or a month at a time. Since the Conservancy does not have the authority to conduct
enforcement, you may consider doing something similar for the City Parks, and we certainly
need this type of enforcement on the Preserve.
The challenge of educating hundreds of visitors on a Saturday or even coaxing small groups
can help to some degree, but true success in managing and protecting our open spaces and
parks depends on effective enforcement. Until enforcement takes a stronger role, more money
spent on staffing may not be the whole solution.
Sincerely,
Barbara Ailor
<J,
From: E Cicoria <cicoriae@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 7:36 PM
To: CC
Cc: barbailor@gmail.com
Subject: Increased staffing to address destructive activity in our City
Mayor Knight, Mayor Pro -tem Brooks, and Council Members Campbell, Duhovic and Misetich,
As you consider the allocation of resources to address destructive activity in areas of our City that
bring scenic and recreational value to our residents, please consider the following:
What activity did by far the largest number of respondents to the Parks Master Plan Survey indicate
they do most? Walking and hiking.
Where does walking and hiking occur most in our City --in our parks or in our Preserve? In our
Preserve.
Where does the most costly vandalism and other destructive activity occur in our City --in our parks or
in our Preserve? To my knowledge, in our Preserve.
What areas of our City bring the most scenic value to our City? Our coastline and our Preserve.
How much is the City proposing to allocate to address vandalism and other destructive activity in our
Preserve? Zero.
Given all the benefits that accrue to our City through the Preserve, including via volunteerism and
donor dollars, it is unfathomable to me that the Preserve would be dropped from the City staff
proposal for increased staffing to address destructive activity. Please reconsider.
Sincerely,
Eva Cicoria
LAND LUNSLIWANC:Y
PRESERVING LAND AND RESTORING HABITAT FOR THE EDUCATION AND ENJOYMENT OF ALL
July 31, 2015
Cory Linder, Director, Recreation and Parks
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Subject: Enhancing Parks and Open Space Operations
Dear Cory,
We appreciate the recent staff and council support that was granted on July21, 2015 toward
the expansion of services to address trash and graffiti removal in Parks as well as the Palos
Verdes Nature Preserve. The current recommendation to the Rancho Palos Verdes City
Council to enhance parks and open space maintenance does not include any specific provisions
for the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve. One of the identified tasks in the RPV staff report of
additional staff for the parks and open spaces would be to assist with graffiti removal, enforce
park rules, educate the public about the appropriate use of parks and open space areas and
provide higher levels of responsiveness to public complaints or concerns. Each of these
elements is very much needed in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve and falls within the City's
purview to provide. We urge that there be consideration and approval of increased staffing at
the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.
Supporting the need for staffing enhancements, data collected from the volunteer trail watch
participants from October 2013 -August 2014 show us that there were 95 reports of things
such as defacing or removing signs, littering, vandalism and poaching. There were 142
observations of dogs off leash and not picking up dog waste. There were 203 observations of
off -trail users, new trail creation or damage of the existing trail and habitat. This remains a
current state as the first seven months of this year, from January- July show 102 reports of
vandalism and 106 reports of dogs off leash and not picking up dog waste. There were 362
observations of off -trail users, new trail creation or damage of the existing trail and habitat. In
addition, five reports of smoking or evidence of smoking.
The Land Conservancy remains extremely committed, through community fundraising and
great volunteer support toward helping the City meet and exceed its conservation obligations
in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve by proving the required habitat restoration, protocol level
bird surveys, covered plant surveys, monitoring and management reports, invasive plant
control, and trail signage. We spend about $500,000 a year toward these projects for the Palos
Verdes Nature Preserve and provide the dollar equivalent of $212,000 in volunteer time
specific to the Preserve. While the Land Conservancy is often referred to as the manager of
the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve, I would like to clarify that this represents the habitat
916 SILVER SPUR ROAD # 207. ROLLING HILLS ESTATES. CA 90274-3826 T 310.541.7613 WWW.PVPLC.ORG
5
management and species management as well as other specified tasks, but does not mean the
overall management of the site for enforcement of Preserve rules, waste removal, etc.
Over the past couple of years we have expanded our support of the Palos Verdes Nature
Preserve to address some gap areas. We have provided a staff person dedicated to the
implementation of the City's trail plan as well as launched a volunteer trail watch program
dedicated to serve as eyes and ears of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and the Land
Conservancy with a view to 1) protect the natural resources of the Palos Verdes Nature
Preserve, including the flora and fauna as well as the geology, topography and scenic landscape,
and 2) enhance the safety of, and promote an enjoyable experience for all Preserve visitors.
The increased staffing in the Preserves will support what the City has committed to provide.
Namely: public services, preserve safety, security, sanitation and maintenance. These
foundational elements are critical to the success of the Preserve.
Sincerely,
Andrea Vona, Executive Director
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy
cc: Doug Willmore, City Manager
RPV City Council
A few recent photos from the Preserve
916 SILVER SPUR ROAD # 207. ROLLING HILLS ESTATES. CA 90274-3826 T 310.541.7623 WWW.PVPLC.ORG
916 SILVER SPUR ROAD # 207. ROLLING HILLS ESTATES. CA 90274-3826 T 310.541.7623 WWW.PVPLC.ORG
3
916 SILVER SPUR ROAD # 207. ROLLING HILLS ESTATES. CA 90274-3826 T 310.541.7623 WWW.PVPLC.ORG
AM-N 4V
:<: 4 {
y.
�,F RANCHO P11A-ALOS
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: AUGUST 3, 2015
SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO
AGENDA
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received
through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, August 4, 2015 City Council meeting:
Item No. Description of Material
E Email from Sharon Yarber
2 Emails from: Richard Norris; Jill Norris; Dave Emenhiser;
Letter from Robert A. and On Tai Waddell
3 Email exchange between Staff and Kathy Snell; Emails
from Yolanta Schwartz; Susan Zotti; Sunshine; Robert and
Carolyn Lindholm; Elizabeth Sala
Respectfully fitted,
Carla Morreale
W:\AGENDA\2015 Additions Revisions to agendas\20150804 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.doc
From: sharon yarber <momofyago@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 7:46 AM
To: CC
Subject: Staff report inadequacies
Dear Mayor Knight and Members of the Council,
I am chagrined to learn that the City had the opportunity to acquire tax defaulted property in George F Canyon
last year which would have resolved or at least significantly ameliorated the issue of the loss of the trail at 10
Chaparral. Please go back and look at the staff report for the August 19, 2014 meeting.
The staff report that was presented to you failed to provide you with adequate information. It should have been
made clear to you that the applicant for the 10 Chaparral property had already made it abundantly clear that he
was not going to grant an easement over his property that would allow for the continued use of the existing trail,
and thus to continue using the remaining portions of the trail, hikers and equestrians would need to go down the
Martingale trail, hook up to Willow Springs and then be able to traverse the gap trail that would be put in place
in the tax defaulted property, which would then connect to the trail easement being granted by Mr. Chen along
the north boundary of his property, which would then connect to the existing portion of the George F
Canyon trail in Rolling Hills Estates. The importance of this trail was not pointed out to you appropriately (or to
the public, for that matter). You need CONTEXT, and the maps just showing the property without putting them
in the context of how they impact the trail network by hooking up to adjacent trails leaves you clueless as to the
significance of the decisions you are being asked to make. And then recommending deferring to the PVPLC to
see what it would do caused you to shirk your responsibility to acquire properties that will enable the
Conceptual Trails Plan to come to fruition!
We have already seen the scathing report about the incompetence of Eduardo, Joel and Greg in connection with
the disgraceful Green Hills debacle. How much more incompetence do we citizens need to endure? Can we
please also chastise Fox Kit for his poor performance in preparing a pitiful staff report devoid of significant
material concerning this property and the importance of its acquisition?
Please do something about the staff! ! ! ! Even if you cannot directly cause these folks to be terminated, you can
certainly "encourage" Mr. Willmore to replace these dreadful, overcompensated incompetent employees if he
wants to retain his job!
Sincerely,
Sharon Yarber
E
From: Norris, Rich [NEUUS] <RNorri2@its jnj.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2015 1:32 PM
To: CC; Doug Willmore; melisssac@rpvca.gov
Subject: Permit Parking for Channelview Ct
Dear Major Knight and members of the council;
I am a permanent resident living on Channelview Court in RPV. Over the last 6 months, there has been an increasing
inability to street park on Channelview ct for my guests and in some cases my own vehicle. This gets even more
challenging on the weekends. On some weekends, the entire street is lined (sometimes on both sides) with vehicles.
have asked several of the drivers if they are residents and all have replied "no". Most of which reply they are
employees of Terranea Resort or visiting Terranea Resort for the day.
Overall, I am concerned about my ability to park on Channelview CT in addition to my guests. Specifically my children
who usually come home on the weekend. I am also concerned about the safety of the resident elders and dog walkers
whom are at greater risk due to the increased vehicle congestion. This is real as most of the vehicle drivers exceed the
speed limit while driving onto or exiting Channelview ct. In addition, they tend to throw their trash in and around
where they are parking vs. using a trash receptacle.
I am asking you to implement permit parking on Channel CT as soon as possible as a tax paying and voting resident of
RPV. Improving my own and guest parking ability as well as improving the safety and environmental aspects of RPV.
Sincerely,
Richard S. Norris
6634 Channelview Ct
Rancho Palos Verdes, Ca 90275
From: jillnorris26@gmail.com
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2015 1:35 PM
To: CC; Doug Willmore; Melissa Countryman
Subject: Permit Parking For Channelview Court
Dear Major Knight and Members of the Council,
I am a permanent resident living on Channelview Court in RPV. Over the last 6 months, there has been an
increasing inability to street park on Channelview Ct for my guests and in some cases my own vehicle. This
gets even more challenging on the weekends. On some weekends, the entire street is lined (sometimes on both
sides) with vehicles. I have asked several of the drivers if they are residents and all have replied "no". Most of
which reply they are employees of Terranea Resort or visiting Terranea Resort for the day.
Overall, I am concerned about my ability to park on Channelview CT in addition to my guests. Specifically my
children who usually come home on the weekend. I am also concerned about the safety of the resident elders
and dog walkers whom are at greater risk due to the increased vehicle congestion. This is real as most of the
vehicle drivers exceed the speed limit while driving onto or exiting Channelview ct. In addition, they tend to
throw their trash in and around where they are parking vs. using a trash receptacle.
I am asking you to implement permit parking on Channel CT as soon as possible as a tax paying and voting
resident of RPV. Improving my own and guest parking ability as well as improving the safety and
environmental aspects of RPV.
Sincerely,
Jill Norris
6634 Channelview Court
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Sent from Windows Mail
From: emenhiser@aol.com
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 10:28 AM
To: Nadia Carrasco; Melissa Countryman; Jim Knight; CC
Cc: Doug Willmore; Traffic; Michael Throne
Subject: Re: Channelview Ct. Permit Parking - Late Correspondence from the HOA President
Mr. Mayor and Members of Council:
I'm writing in support of the staff recommendation, and plan to be in attendance on Tuesday
as the applicant for this agenda item.
My thanks to Nadia and Melissa for sharing the staff report with me in advance of the Council meeting
Just a couple quick items to bring to your attention
1. Channelview Ct is a block long street (of about 100 yards) that contains 16 residents, that has a walkway that connects
it to the entrance of Terranea.
2. This walkway makes Channelview a convenient place for Terranea employees and visitors to park their vehicles
(although I believe the Terranea management has made great strides toward dissuading their employees from using our
street as external parking, the visitor problem continues).
3. We made our original request for relief to the City in 2013 (although the staff reports indicates the request didn't arrive
until 2014). We've been at this for two years.
4. Twice we have received favorable votes from the Traffic Safety Committee, once in 2014 (not noted in the staff report)
and again in 2015.
5. The Sea Bluff HOA Board voted in support of permit parking for Channelview in 2013. And in 2013 we obtained
the required resident signatures in support of permit parking (86% singed vs. the 60% requirement).
7. The Parking Study completed by the City's consultant found that 72% of the cars parked on our street was my non
residents in 2014 (page 40) and a year later the problem had increased to 80% (page 65).
8. Terranea has made strides toward reducing the number of employees parking on Channelview and page 86 of the
staff report contains an email from Terri Haack in support of our request.
9. One quick note on the two letters of opposition (one is from a neighbor who doesn't live on Channelview, but a couple
blocks away), and the other is from someone who doesn't live in Sea Bluff who seems to have an axe to grin with
Terranea.
10. Conclusion: This is an easy vote in support of the staff recommendation: you
have: 1) signatures in support by 86% of the people living on the street, 2) the
support of the affected HOA Board, 3) two votes by the Traffic Safety Committee,
and 4) the support of Terranea's management.
My thanks in advance for your consideration and your support.
Dave Emenhiser, President
Sea Bluff HOA
Original
From:Nadia Carnasoo«NadiaC.gov>
To: Dave Emenhiaer<emenhimar@aminom> <emenhinor@aoioonn>; Robert Nelson <ne|oongeng@aoinnm>
<no|aongang@aoinom>
Gant Fri, Jul 31.2O158:55am
Subject: Channelview Ct. Permit Parking Staff Report
Good Morning,
Please follow the link below toview the final staff report for the Permit Parking onChannelview Court. |hod
tried sending you the file vie e-mail yesterday but it was too big to be sent out.
NodioCorraoco
Assistant Engineer
City cfRancho Palos Verdes
30Y4DHawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA9O27J
ROBERT AND ON TAI WADDELL
32504 SEAWOLF DRIVE
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275
(310)377-5138
July 31, 2015
Ms. Nadia Carrasco
Assistant Engineer
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Public Works Department
30940 l-lawthome Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
REMVFD
011 of Roncnm Paft Vetdes
AUG �l 21.) 1
PUX3U ORKS DE PAWMEN`1
Re: City Counsel Dearing of 08/04/2015
Item: Coastal Permit for Parking along Channelview Court
Case No: ZON2015-00348
Dear Ms. Carrasco:
My wife and I reside at 32504 Sealvolf Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 which is
adjacent to Channelview Court.
Regarding the proposal to limit on street parking on Channelview Court to residents only,
we acknowledge that parking in our area often becomes impacted due to what we believe
is off site parking by the employees, and perhaps guests, of th.e Terranea Resort.
While we fully empathize with the concerns of those living on Channel View Court, we
do object to a piecemeal approach to the problem inasmuch as restricting parking on
Channel View Court will most certainly exacerbate the crowding along Seawolf Drive.
The problem appears to be most acute on weekends and holidays, and we suggest that
parking along both Channelview Court and Seawolf Drive be limited to residents on
weekends and holidays only.
Thank you for your kind consideration of our concerns.
ery-tr yours,
Robert A. and On Tai Waddell
a
Subject: FW: Peafowl Management Plan #3 Public Hearing August 4, 2015
---Original Message -----
From: Ara Mihranian
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 9:53 AM
To: Kathy; Susan Brooks; Brian Campbell; Jerry Duhovic; Anthony Misetich; jim.knight@rvpca.gov
Cc: Carla Morreale; Doug Willmore
Subject: RE: Peafowl Management Plan #3 Public Hearing August 4, 2015
Kathy,
Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with the proposed peafowl trapping program. Your email will be
provided to the Council at the August 4th. With that said, I think you raise some excellent safeguard suggestions and I
will make sure to incorporate them into the screening process when selecting new homes for the peafowl. I am also
forwarding your email to the City's trapper.
Thank you again!
Ara
Ara Michael Mihranian
Deputy Director of Community Development
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310-544-5228 (telephone)
310-544-5293 (fax)
aram@rpvca.gov
www.rpvca.gov
WE ARE IN PROCESS OF SWITCHING TO A NEW WEB AND EMAIL DOMAIN. IF YOU HAVE ME IN YOUR CONTACTS, PLEASE
SWITCH MY EMAIL FROM ARAM@RPV.COM TO ARAM@RPVCA.GOV.
Id Do you really need to print this e-mail?
This e-mail message contains information belonging to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be privileged,
confidential and/or protected from disclosure. The information is intended only for use of the individual or entity
named. Unauthorized dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, or
are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation.
-----Original Message -----
From: Kathy [mailto:ksneII0001@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 10:11 PM
To: Susan Brooks; Brian Campbell; Jerry Duhovic; Anthony Misetich; jim.knight@rvpca.gov
Cc: Carla Morreale; Doug Willmore; Ara Mihranian
Subject: Peafowl Management Plan #3 Public Hearing August 4, 2015
With the objective of "humanely managing" the Peafowl population within the boundary limits of the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes, I am requesting that additional safeguards be placed in the PMP for the requirements of the Peafowl's
transfer locations. The areas that Peafowl are re -located to should have year round food sources, water and trees to
roost in. The welfare of the previously transferred Peafowl should be checked prior to trapping and relocating more
Peafowl annually.
Several trapping companies working in some ports in Los Angeles harbor have "humanely" trapped and relocated feral
cats for years. Later it was discovered that many of the cats met with horrible deaths and were not relocated as
contracted.
Peafowls have been on the Peninsula for almost 100 years. If the city is claiming that the Peafowls are being relocated
to safe locations in a humane manner, please verify that those previously re -located Peafowls are in safe surroundings
and have year round food and water available. Welfare checks could be done by volunteers.
When I moved to my property in 1973, 1 counted 49 peacocks/hens in my big yard. Now I have 8. Due to the drought, I
haven't seen any chicks in my area for over 5 years. I would enjoy having the peacocks & hens return as they alert when
the coyotes are close by and when strange cars pull into the driveway late at night. Peacocks & hens have also kept my
property rattlesnake free over the years.
Please add new safeguards for the protection of the Peafowl so the citizens of Rancho Palos Verdes will be assured that
those trapped and relocated are not suffering or dead.
Thanks, Kathy Snell
Subject: FW: Peafowl hearing
----Original Message -----
From: Yolanta Schwartz [mailto:yolantaschwartz@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 6:41 PM
To: Ara Mihranian
Subject: Peafowl hearing
Hello Ara, I'm a resident on Rothrock Drive (and you probably know me as the Planning Director of RH). I would like to
address the Council regarding the study and neighborhoods where the trappings will take place.
I see that Vista Grande Neighborhood encompasses one of the worst corners where the peacocks roam (Trailriders and
Eddinghill) but does not go far enough. That neighborhood should include Trailriders as well as Rothrock Drive. On any
given day and at any given time, there is at least 6-8 peacocks on my property including on the roof. My roof has been
damaged by them before. They roam the entire street. I would be willing to allow trapping on my property.
I will be at the meeting on Tuesday.
thaks
Yolanta
3,
Subject: FW: Peafowl Management Plan - Public hearing Aug 4, 2015
From: Susan Zotti [mailto:susanzotti@verizon.net]
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2015 2:42 PM
To: Ara Mihranian
Cc: Planning
Subject: Peafowl Management Plan - Public hearing Aug 4, 2015
Dear Joel —
This email is in regard to the Public Notice dated July 9, 2015, which I recently received by mail. I plan to attend the
above public hearing concerning the growing population of peafowl in my area. Although I have no specific written
comments or testimony to submit in advance of the hearing, I will be present on Aug 4 in order to learn more about the
Peafowl Management Plan. In addition, I would like be included in the list of residents who will receive notification of
the City Council's decision in the matter.
Thankyou
Susan Zotti
27005 Grayslake Rd
RPV
3,
From: SunshineRPV@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 6:21 PM
To: CC; Ara Mihranian
Subject: Proposed Peafowl Management Plan. August 4, 2015 Agenda Item 3
MEMO from SUNSHINE
TO: RPV City Council, Staff and interested parties
RE: Proposed Peafowl Management Plan. August 4, 2015 Agenda Item 3
If you are inclined to have a Peafowl Management Plan, I have a suggestion to make it more efficient in the
long term. The City already has designated "semi -rural" Districts commonly known a Q Zones. Staff has a
better chance at enforcing whatever you approve when the Council does not create something that makes it
more complicated. New and different maps. Why?
Remove the peafowl from the urban areas like Grandview. Make the maps of trapping areas match the areas
already designated as OVERLAY DISTRICTS.
Personally, I liked living in my home, better, when the peafowl were only screaming in the distance to the west.
Now, the whole PB census count comes through my barn every morning and every evening.
Whatever happened with Carol Lynch's promise to ask the County about some special dispensation to allow
residents to use small firearms to deplete the flocks?
Subject: FW: Peacocks
From: Ara Mihranian
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 3:45 PM
To: Carla Morreale <CarlaM@rpvca.gov>; Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpvca.gov>
Subject: FW: Peacocks
Late correspondence
Ara Michael Mihranian
Deputy Director of Community Development
G1FF\/0FLik',\N(.','l 10 RALOSVERDES
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310-544-5228 (telephone)
310-544-5293 (fax)
aram(@_rpvca.gov
www.rpvca.gov
WE ARE IN PROCESS OF SWITCHING TO A NEW WEB AND EMAIL DOMAIN. IF YOU HAVE ME IN YOUR CONTACTS,
PLEASE SWITCH MY EMAIL FROM ARAM@RPV.COM TO ARAMP RPVCA.GOV.
Do you really need to print this e-mail?
las c mal me5sage, cvrita;n: ink raw _.i h *lon vnq to tNr City (A Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be p?iv;1ege(1, confidential and/or prolecte'd from
<< Y -Ur i oftn'iaLion vsintended oNy f.ori5t' of 01� individual nr a3ntity n7arned, I nauthonzed � kserninati£�n, di,3tr:bution, or copying iS at: €ctly prohibit -ed,
you i ed This .9r'iail in r,: (;'fir, o3 _! £. of an 'nte ;,IgG1 ec.f.ien!', pk,,as.v ,, notity the sender inirneda`£ely. Thank you and cooperation.
From: Joel Rojas
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 1:45 PM
To: Robert L; Carolyn Lindholm; Ara Mihranian; Joe Tabor; rhalder@cox.net
Subject: RE: Peacocks
Robert
We will transmit all of your correspondence to the City Council.
Joel
From: Robert L [mailto:robert921@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 10:44 AM
To: Carolyn Lindholm; Joel Rojas; Ara Mihranian; Joe Tabor; rhalder@cox.net
Subject: Re: Peacocks
Joel, et al.
My wife wants me to make it more clear that the Ovocontrol food is a contraceptive, and not a pesticide. I was
just quoting the websites as to how it is classified for the purpose of unrestricted use as opposed to using trained
and licensed people to distribute it to the birds.
Anyone can feed the peafowl with Ovocontrol, and it is used ONLY DURING THE BREEDING SEASON,
which I gather is April -May. The company sells bags of the food as well as feeding devices that can be
automated (I even might have fed it to my sons back in the day LOL).
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Carolyn Lindholm <clindholmna,bonnebrid eg_ s.eom> wrote:
I don't think it is clear from this that the food is for birth control, since you refer to it as a pesticide.
From: Robert L [mailto:robert921@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 9:52 AM
To: Joel Rojas; Ara Mihranian; Carolyn Lindholm; Joe Tabor; rhalder@cox.net
Subject: Re: Peacocks
Joel and Ara,
I wanted to update both of you about my progress on the peacock management issue that is set for review by
the RPV City Council in a couple of days.
First of all, my wife will be in contact with Dr. Attila Molnar, DVM, who is an avian specialist and has treated
her several parrots over many years (most are 30 and 40 years old and rescued), hopefully this morning. She
thinks Dr. Molnar was on vacation last week.
However, the entire issue of neutering these birds may be moot, because a little internet research over the
weekend, especially on petMD, has made me aware that "flock control" of almost every type of bird (pigeons,
geese, ducks and even peafowl) is easy using dry bird food with Ovocontrol P, made by Innolytics, which is an
"unrestricted" or "general -use" pesticide that does not require a special license of permit in 49 of the 50
states. Someone just needs to buy and feed the peafowl with this bagged food during the breeding period, and
I will purchase and provide this food to peafowl enthusiasts within the Portuguese Bend community. Along
with whatever veterinary care the birds require (when they get none now) to monitor the feeding and births,
this should entirely solve the problem over a couple of years as the bird population adjusts. Since the
Portuguese Bend peafowl population has not increased much over the decades, and the community supporters
of the birds will make certain feeding does not occur near the complaining community members, this should
not be a future issue while I arrange for more areas where the birds are welcomed.
I understand that several housing tracts exist where there are no good areas for peafowl, but that is not the case
in Portuguese Bend, where the community proper is only a tiny part of the available land.
Besides the many negative possibilities in trapping the birds as proposed in the Plan, there are many more bad
results than good, and our solutions are both cost-effective at ZERO COST TO THE CITY, as well as not
risking the lives of trapped peafowl and the possibility that they become pheasant dinners or wall ornaments of
demented hunters. THE PLAN SPECIFICALLY TRANSFERS OWNERSHIP OF THE BIRDS TO THE
VENDER THE MOMENT THEY ARE TRAPPED, and the possible location in the Santa Monica Mountains
to take the birds has been closed for several years to new animals because of waste removal issues (with the
"hope" that it will reopen, but as we know from Dave Ramsey, "HOPE IS NOT A PLAN").
I would ask now that this matter be postponed for more specific study this next month, or permanently tabled
with the understanding that I will continue to communicate and seek guidance from City staff.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Robert Lindholm (cell) 949-610-4631
Carolyn Lindholm, Shareholder, Bonne Bridges, Mueller, O'Keefe and Nichols, direct line (213) 738-5837
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Joel Rojas <JoeIR rpvca.gov> wrote:
Robert
This sounds like a very interesting proposal. I take it that you're proposal is directed at the peafowl population in the
Portuguese Rend area as opposed to the entire City. Please feel free to present this alternative solution to the City
Council at Tuesday's hearing. The Council may possibly agree to this alternative solution for the Portuguese Bend area if
it was supported by the PBCA and the majority of the residents in that area.
Joel
From: Robert L [mailto:robert921@Rmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 11:19 AM
To: Joel Rojas; Ara Mihranian; Carolyn Lindholm; Joe Tabor; rhalder@cox.net
Subject: Peacocks
Good morning ! I have reviewed the Peafowl Management Plan briefly and would like to open a dialogue at
this late date about privately controlling the population with a combination of neutering and selective feeding
that would cost the City NOTHING.
As Joel knows, I have a number of connections within RPV who I believe would help out, and the positive
publicity through the local news would help offset the negatives of the recent Green Hills mistakes, and in fact
I hope to talk to Mr. McInerney about some help from their end. I know Mayor Riordan through my attempts
to buy the Plumtree parcel, I graduated from USC with Jim York, and I know the owners of Golden Cove as
well as most of the realtors in PV.
My wife Carolyn has been involved in avian rescue for most of her adult life, and not only do we have two bird
rooms in our home, but we have numerous rescued parrots and a great avian specialist as her vet. We know
what we are doing.
I can be reached on my cell at (949) 610-4631.
Thank you and have a nice weekend !
Robert and Carolyn Lindholm
Subject: FW: Birth Control is for the Birds: Pigeons, Geese, and Peafowl Too! I petMD
From: Joel Rojas
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 1:58 PM
To: Ara Mihranian
Subject: FW: Birth Control is for the Birds: Pigeons, Geese, and Peafowl Too! ( petMD
From: robert921@addthis.com [ma iIto: robert921@addthis.com] On Behalf Of robert921@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 1:56 PM
To: Joel Rojas
Subject: Birth Control is for the Birds: Pigeons, Geese, and Peafowl Too! I petMD
Joel, this is the petMD.com website explanation about Ovocontrol P food.
The 'pesticide' issue has only to do with who is authorized to 'apply' the substance, in this case it is now for
'unrestricted' or 'general -use'. It is over-the-counter.
http://www.petmd.com/blogs/fLtllyvetted/2010/sept/bii-th control for birds-10362#.Vb Vb3pNCxw.email
--- This message was sent by robert921Lgmail.com via http://addthis.com. Please note that AddThis does not
verify email addresses.
Make sharing easier with the AddThis Toolbar: http://www.addthis.com/go/toolbar-em
To stop receiving any emails from AddThis, please visit: http://www.addthis.com/privacy/email-opt-
out?e=PfOiZ, I kOk 6g_ eD5rKSYvZz4
Subject: FW: Peafowl Management
From: Elizabeth Sala [ma ilto:etsala@ rive.com]
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 1:17 PM
To: Ara Mihranian
Subject: Peafowl Management
Mr. Mihranian,
Is the purpose of the meeting on August 4th to voice our consent or disagreement with the Peafowl
Management Plan? I, personally, am in agreement with the proposal to reduce the number of peacocks in
RPV. The method stated seems sound to me.
However, the plan does not address any peacocks outside of the areas in the report. How will these numbers
be reduced? Would this meeting be a forum to voice my concerns over that, or would a written email to the
City Council be more appropriate?
Thank you,
Elizabeth Sala
3111 Martingale Drive
RPV
! -9