20190115 Late CorrespondenceJanuary 22, 2018
Ms. Grace Robinson Hyde
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
1955 Workman Mill Rd.
Whittier, CA 90601
RE: AFSCME Negotiations
Dear General Manager and Chief Engineer:
It has come to my attention that almost 1000 of your professional, energy recovery, professional
supervisory, supervisory, technical support, and white collar employees have recently affiliated
with AFSCME and that labor-management negotiations between AFSCME and your office appears
to be strained. You should understand that I have a great working relationship with AFSCME and I
feel it appropriate to weigh in on the importance of addressing their concerns.
It has been my experience that LACSD employees provide exceptional service to the agency and
the community. Such service shouldn't be degraded by proposals that seek to take benefits, or
otherwise diminish employe~ earnings -especially when your agency is blessed with strong
financial capacity.
I understand their proposal for a full swap and COLA not only addresses their concerns about
longstanding agreements and vesting, but also meets the agency's mission to attract and retain
exceptional employees. I urge you to reach that settlement and honor your great workforce and
recognize their value to the community.
Thank you in advance for your consideration and for your leadership on this pressing issue. If you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office at XXXX
What is still in dispute @ the Sanitation Districts (''The Districts'')?
The Districts' Position: Sanitation workers would progressively increase their contribution to CalPERS by 0.5%
each year -after a five year period contributing 2.5%. Sanitation Workers would also have their final
compensation reported to CalPERS reduced by 0.5% each year.
• The net effect on sanitation workers would be a 2.5% cut in their pension AND a 2.5% cut in their
career earnings, with the expectation that the Districts would go for the entire 7% CalPERS contribution.
For most employees, this would result in a loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars over their career. ..
Union's Position: Sanitation workers would pay ALL 7% of their contribution to CalPERS and in return get a
corresponding pay increase.
• The net effect on sanitation workers (and the Districts) is neutral.
o The vast majority of member cities have already taken the same approach.
Important Points
The Districts' sanitation workers have provided a historical culture of excellence:
• The Districts' rates are lower than any similar agency in the nation. Rates are about half that of the City
of LA and Orange County.
• Sanitation workers have won countless industry awards and continually make important scientific and
environmental advances that protect public health.
In Fact-Finding, the neutral Fact Finder found the following:
• The Districts can afford to pay the cost of the Union's proposal.
• Rates won't change because the Districts' budgets and rates already incorporate the costs of the
Union's proposal.
• The Union made a persuasive argument to preserve vested pension rights.
o In 1982, the Districts started paying full EPMC on behalf of sanitation workers instead of giving
a 7% COLA. The Districts promised the EPMC was still sanitation worker's property.
o Case law makes clear that vested rights must either be replaced with a "new comparable
advantage" or be clearly preserved in the MOU.
Recruitment and retention is at an all-time low:
• About 30 openings have gone months unfilled-even after lowering the requirements for engineers. It's
so bad, the Districts mailed 30,000 letters to every registered engineer in the tri-county area in an effort to
fill vacancies. The response was still abysmal.
• There's about 10% voluntary attrition amongst newly hired sanitation workers over the last two years.
Employee satisfaction is at an all-time low:
• Nearly 1000 sanitation workers (almost two-thirds of the workforce) recently signed a petition of
no confidence in upper management.
• Hundreds of sanitation workers signed a letter citing ethical violations by upper management.
o The Chief Engineer/General Manager was fined by the FPPC for failure to report a personal
relationship with an employee at the Districts' law firm which has received numerous no-bid,
contract renewals.
o The Union filed 7 unfair labor practice complaints in the last two years.
11 The Districts has unlawfully held two-year's worth of COLAs hostage.
11 The Districts repeatedly tried to silence sanitation workers' complaints about
negotiations.
11 The Distrfots refused to provide information and bargain over policy changes.
The Union suggested numerous types of compromises to address the Districts' concerns:
• A cost saving committee with specific savings goals.
• Various different contributions similar in value to that of Blue Collar workers.
ALL ideas were rejected by upper management who has not offered even ONE alternative ...
For guestions or more detailed information, ,please call or e-mail Steve Koffroth at 213-305-9344 or skoffroth@afscme36.org
Gevl· . 'i
Dear city eGmA9 ~~9,:s 1A-U!-1h~
I would like to express (again) my frustration and show what we have to endure during
the GH operating hours and sometimes even outside these hours. We have seen
visitors late at night! I have no idea how they were still in the park , but obviously, there
is no good control over that. Pictures taken in December, 1st, 2018 , around 5:30PM.
With all that said, I want to turn to you to ask you to do the right thing about GH. You
should not allow GH to do what they want, where they want and when they want.
The City cannot control the density and intensity of development of the Cemetery
without a Master Plan. Either there exists a Master Plan on development, or there does
not. The City Council needs to clarify what the situation is ... and until that is done,
there needs to be a moratorium on all earth interments in the Inspiration View sub -area
of Area 4 .
Before any further development of the cemetery is permitted to occur, Green Hills must
formally ask that the Master Plan's density and intensity limits be clarified ... and that a
formal baseline of development be established. If the Council wishes to allow
development on a "site -by-site" basis, without any base -line limitations , then the Council
needs to officially say so in the context of a formal amendment application to the Master
Plan. The Council has not done this, and because of it, Green Hills is acting unlawfully.
There exists another 1000 (or so) buried vaults on the roof of the Inspiration Slope
Mausoleum. Green Hills has acknowledged in writing it has no vested right to inter
human remains in those buried vaults. A firm count of the number of those vaults must
be made. Green Hills must also be told that the recordation of plots for sale on the roof
of the Inspiration Slope Mausoleum is not authorized by the City.
So Green Hills is telling the public by recording the plots with the County Recorder it has
the right to sell those plots to the public! This is a another deceit by Green Hills and I
wonder why the City counsel allows it!
The City has informally and improperly allowed Green Hills to ignore the Master Plan's
density and intensity limitations ...... The City has refused to enforce the conditional
use permit's limitations by issuing grading permits in lieu of or as a substitute for formal
development permits for earth interments ..... .
It is time this Council cease patronizing and pandering to Green Hills and require it to
follow the mandates of the City's cemetery zoning law and its general zoning laws.
Your people count on you and trusted you to do the right thing!
Thank you for your tim e,
Nad ejda Georgieva (Vi sta V er de owner)
. RPV CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 15, 2019
HANDOUT: 5 pages
Email Chain -So Kim-Public Records Request -Maps
for Inspiration View and Morning Light Valley -
December 2018
On 12/19/2018 10 :15 AM, So Kim wrote:
Hi Noel,
That's correct. Resolution No. 2018-07 requires the submittal of an application for mass installation of
vaults in Area 4. Green Hills has not submitted such application for the Inspiration View portion of Area
4 . Also, Individual interments are permitted without an application submittal.
Sincere ly,
So Kim, AICP
Deputy Di rector/Plan ni ng Ma nager
Commu ni ty Deve lopment Department
Cit y of Ra n cho Pa los Verdes
www.rpvca .gov
(310) 544-5222
From: Noel Weiss [mailto:noelweiss@ca.rr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 10:09 AM
To: So Kim <SoK@rpvca .gov>; Sharon Loveys <sharonloveys@icloud.com>
Cc: Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpvca.gov>; Emily Colborn <ecolborn@rpvca .gov>
Subject: Re: Untitled document
Ok So ....
Just so I am clear , can you please confirm that there is nothing in the City's records which reflect any
permit (grading or otherwise) to inter human remains in the earth in the "Inspiration View" sub-area of
Area 4.
Thanks.
Noel
(310) 822-0239
On 12/19/2018 9:56 AM, So Kim wrote:
Hi Noel,
I don't have anything related to the development of 'Inspiration View' portion of Area 4. As for the
number of plots, the City does not keep track of that.
Sincere ly,
So Kim, AICP
Deputy Director/Plann i ng Manager
Community Development Department
Cit y of Rancho Pa los Verdes
1
www.rpvca.gov
(310 ) 544-5222
From: Noel Weiss [mailto:noelweiss@ca.rr.com ]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 10:20 PM
To: So Kim <SoK@rpvca .gov>; Sharon Loveys <sharonloveys@icloud .com>
Cc: Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpvca.gov>; Emily Colborn <ecolborn@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Untitled document
So :
Whether or not it was required prior to 2017 , it is important for the City to obtain this information officially
because Green Hills has exhibited a pattern and practice of recording plots before the City has officially
authorized them ..... The Inspiration View sub -area of the Cemetery was and is open space under the
Master Plan .... and the Map was recorded and the Inspiration View sub -area developed without official
City approval. .... .
So, please consider this an amendment to Sharon's public records request. ... for all documentation in
the City's possession which relates in any way to the development of the "Inspiration View" sub-area of
Area 4 of the Cemetery ...... By "development", what is meant is either (1) the grading of the "Inspiration
View" sub -area , or (2) the earth interment of human remains in the "Inspiration View" sub -area of Area 4
of the cemetery .
If the City maintains any counts on the number of plots actually used versus the the number of plots
which remain unused , please include that information as well.
Noel
(310) 822-0239
On 12/18/2 018 4:47 PM, So Kim wrote:
Hi Noel,
Yes, they are required to submit maps to be recorded at least 30 -days prior to recordation as well as a
recorded copy afterwards. This has been memorialized in the 2017 -and 2018-Council -adopted
resolutions . I'm not sure if this was required prior to 2017.
Sincerely,
So Kim, AICP
Deputy Director/Planning Manager
Community Development Department
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
www.rpvca .gov
(310) 544-5222
2
From: Noel Weiss [mai lto:noelweiss@ca.rr.com )
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 3:33 PM
To: So Kim <SoK@rpvca.gov>; Sharon Loveys <sharonloveys@icloud .com>
Cc: Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpvca.gov>; Emily Colborn <ecolborn@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Untitled document
So :
Thanks fo r the response ....
To complete your files, Green Hills needs to be required to supply the Inspiration View Plat Map ..... as
recorded .... sometime in 2011 .
I appreciate your effort So ....
Noel
(310) 822-0239
On 12/18/2018 3:2 8 PM, So Kim wrote:
Hi Noel,
What I provided you is all I have.
Sincere ly,
So Kim, A ICP
Deputy Di rector/Planning Ma nager
Community De v elopment Department
Cit y of Ra ncho Pa los Verdes
www.rpvca.gov
(310) 544-5222
From: Noel Weiss [mai lto :noelweiss@ca .rr.com )
Sent : Monday, December 17, 2018 7:09 PM
To: So Kim <SoK@rpvca .gov>; Sharon Loveys <sharonloveys@icloud.com>
Cc: Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpvca .gov>; Emily Colborn <ecolborn@rpvca .gov>
Subject : Re: Untitled document
So :
T hanks for this ..... The Inspiration View Plat Map was not included ... Could you please provide that
as well?
It is referenced as Document No . 2011 -0595214 , Map Book 46, Page 56.
Thanks again So .....
3
Noel
(310) 822-0239
On 12/17/2 018 6 :08 PM, So Kim wrote:
Hi Sharon/Noel,
Please see attached maps in response to your PRA.
Si So Kim, AICP
Deputy Director/Planning Manager
Community Development Department
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
www.rpvca .gov
(310) 544-5222
From: Noel Weiss [mailto:noelweiss@ca.rr.com ]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2018 7 :28 PM
To: So Kim <SoK@rp vca.gov>; Sharon Loveys <sharonloveys@icloud.com>
Cc: Teresa Takaoka <Ter iT@rpvca.gov >; Emily Colborn <eco lborn@ rpvca .gov>
Subject: Re: Untitled document
So :
Thanks for your email. ...... .
Here is a Map (enlarged) depicting the location of the Inspiration View and Morning Light Valley sub -
areas of "Area 4" (north east corner portion) of the Cemetery for your use in responding to Sharon's
public records request.
I have also attached copies for your use in gathering the Plat Maps (Recorded or otherwise) for these
sub-areas which should be in the City's files .
Noel
(310) 822-0239
On 12/13/2018 6 :07 PM, So Kim wrote:
Hi Sharon,
In your PRA request below, I do not know what area Inspiration View and Morning Light Valley pertains
to. Are you requesting specific parts of Area 4? If so, can you attach a map and identify which area you
are referencing? It is easier for me to look for maps/plans for the entirety of Area 4. Would that suffice?
4
Sincere ly,
So Kim, AICP
Deputy Director/Pl anning Manager
Community Deve lopment Department
City of Rancho Pa los Verdes
www.rpvca.gov
(310) 544-5222
From : Sharon Loveys (via Google Docs) <drive-shares -norep ly@goog le.com >
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2018 1:02 PM
To: Emily Colborn <eco l born@rpvca.gov >
Cc: noe lweiss@ca .rr.com
Subject: Untitled document
sharon .loveys@yahoo.com has attac hed th e fo ll owin g docum e nt:
Untitled document
Hi Girls, So sorry about the mix up regarding PRA re quest s, thi s is the a rea w e a re in terested in ..
If you have any questions you have my phone # 3 10 -413-568 3
Tha nks , Sh a ron
Goog le Docs: Create and ed it documents online.
Goog le LLC , 1600 A mphith ea tre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94 04 3, USA
Yo u have recei ved thi s email because so meo ne s hared a do cum e nt w ith you from Goog le
Docs.
5
Goog le··
," • Water Reliability Project Project Update
January 15, 2019
Quality. Service. Value. e
California Water Service (Cal Water) is working on the Palos Verdes Peninsula Water Reliability Project, an
important infrastructure upgrade that will install seven miles of new drinking water pip eline and a new pump
station. More than 17,200 feet of pipeline have already been installed, which will help ensure that all 90,000
of the Peninsula's residents continue to have safe, reliable water service for everyday and emergency needs .
Pe n1nsu1a
Community Church
•·,
"""•
Community Outreach Update
• Dir ec t ma il t o Pa los Ver d es Pe nin s ula res id e nt s
• Ne ig hb o rho od Outreac h Co mmitt ee
Di g ital a nd print ad ve rti se m e n r.s---------r-...--..,...~-:-----i
Co mmunit y eve nt s AG E NDA ITEM: l I~ I 'J •
•
Em a il upda te s R l;:CEl \!E D F R,OM: _, ~ C~....-:
Tex t a le rts M~e q,, brlDK
Voice ma il s AND MAD E PART OF TH E R E~RDl ATTH E
COUNCIL MEE TIN G O F: ~-S _/"t
O FFIC E OF TH E CITY C L E R
•
•
•
\
'
c;J www.pvpwaterproject.com lfJ facebook.com/pvpwaterproject a PVPWaterProject@calwater.com
'LEGEND
ii ii
" z .'J ,
~ Q
J
Verdes o
School Y
-
~.,,
~.,
lJFackhorse Rd
§'<i/'·°'...J
Q'(.>¢;:;~
a1.,"°''1o...,.
'"Q~d
/'/'"'
~",}~~
"' S\\ie' ;:..t~O"-i
Cha dwick Sc~oo l q
~
§
" Soleado O
Elementary School Y
lo,,9'11//or
~ ~ ..... -&
"'• q.
" ' ~ : ' ' " ' ;;
~?
(1';.i\Cfg"o,.
1deOn A
1insu la ""' oe1acro11t" Rd
Vista De l
Norte Reserve
• J)iv.
~~s.
"'"'lid
·-_
~. "1'<>_.,,~,,C,.
... -v..~. -.... ._ .... ....._., .. Qi\""' ~· ~ -"i>?. ·17"''0. ·.c$C'/,
~ ~ ::-
<l'
'1-h .,. ,,. .•.
((;. ·:1 · .. -j--
,J
" ,,,_,../' ,.l.--.<;1
Agua ,M~gna
t:;anyon' ,
.. s
'I' ,,..
Ji ',.
.,.~
~\\~f:!f"
~§'<!"
" ~#"<;:-, ...... "'
,#<;, .. •• .i Storm
Hill Park
,, :'
·. ..
< .;~
j
"?!~
jJ'
Ii;
':" E ,
..g'"".i _,,.
~.
~· 2 '
a w..
Char.dlN fbneti R~
P11m;o•1 ~;aric.lt Ro•d
... ... ... 0
Rolling Hills ai
Country Club V
Ch.:mole' q..-::.(\<;il Rev,,.
<,),~;/
· Linden H. Q _.,_ -g 9-chandl~r'Pi:eierve ./' · l :
-~~ '\t,:::-->'-·-'-----" ~-----._, ;... p
11
°'+ ~"°'\0\,.II
'\ .o,.<>1r~'j7
"' o" \ ';§ <n 0.
;;
....... _ / ,:.. ... __ "\
'<. / '; i>Ol'Y\."' '.,., I
~ ·'-' l l ........
" t i: ~
Q#.-
.-
Hif/SJdeLn ...
"-·~ 1!, ·-----\ ...... ____ {_ 4 Q-
: ' f
---; ,' I c; . . • ___ .-.; f i
'i ; , .5 """'• ,l ~ '0 ' ' ~ ' "' . ~ ·---. ,' ~ ' ~C'3_.,,1> -.:: ______ ,, -:;_ :-~ -~:---r~-_v ;e ---<=· ---~'A';-""' ____ ,,_ , . -
~~ ,./·
p • .ge F C ~ re?erve and N:izr9n . ._ ~ e.,.. '-
'·
s
.§ ~
~ /~
Jioactt'l(\(\O'"Rrt
,' C;)1i1:
Cw1,rl'Stt!ffarc -<:_:.~ 1-... __
-:· 1,, "' HrirborS1uh' (,'3.~c."t
e School
"01;s1;10'.-.
"'(la..-
~() q. ,,.,,
o'-l1r:P
'·P !l.,o\
_,,cQ' _{','-
.... _,/
:---
,\ __ .. \
· .... ~<'>
C1,fl_,fT.1urtn ~
''• 0 ,' C.:inyonRet y St. John Fisher School · •• ,
,./':
1· ... •
;-
>$ .,.
ff
I ·, ~
"
: --~
i ~---
! ..
;;-
}
j ··.
i
""c:,
'.
#""" ,, s,,.os-(; ~ .. c-s----1 ~------,
i / s .. ·.~. ./
'" -'i ~'. .. ---...
·,,,-'' ~..,, u.:...cn~110 ht,esse's G·ap
,' Q #(} .. ,;
~ ~~
,/,~
G o gle.My Maps --·--" °' , -...
<
I
-.. ,. cr.<i>i'Nr4 t in
Marti-;gale
Trailhead:Park
.... ~ ... ~
~:..-:_
0
-\
"•, •o,.
s,..o..,coo,
"" "?()Yl..n
~-°"~· ~t.
Oe+!rfu!IOr
o
~ c
'5 ,/}
"" 0
" " 1?
~
" !i!
q"'
-(!, ,,.
¢· C'ci,. •
\/IL ~ ~s'\J\
<Y.. i .... ~ a,. "'" ~<"
"-"n~O(\C rE
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY CLERK
DATE: JANUARY 15, 2019
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
Public Comments Email from Angie Gilbride (California Water Service)
G Email exchange between Community Development Director
Mihranian and Eva Cicoria; Email exchange between Associate
Planner Anaya and Sunshine
2 Emails from: Cheryl Frick; Julie and Paul Winter
4 Email exchange between City Manager Willmore and Romas and
Angela Jarasunas; Email from Barry Rodgveller; Letter from John
Girardi; Julie and Paul Winter
**PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted
through Monday, January 14, 2019**.
Respectfully submitted,
L:\LATE CORRESPONDENCE\2019 Cover Sheets\20190115 additions revisions to agenda.doc
From: Elias Sassoon
Sent:
To:
Tuesday, January 15, 2019 11:53 AM
CityClerk
Cc: Doug Willmore; Gabriella Yap
Subject: FW: Cal Water PVPWRP update for tonight
Attachments: Cal Water_Project Update Handout_l.15.19.pdf
Pis see the bottom email from CalWater.
Angie plans to speak during the Public Comments for 2 to 3 minutes and give a quick update on the project and hands out a
copy of the attachment. Pis let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks:
Elias K. Sassoon, Director
Department of Public Works
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Tel: 310-544-5335
From: Gilbride, Angie [mailto:agilbride@calwater.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 11:02 AM
To: Elias Sassoon <esassoon@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Natalie Chan <nataliec@rpvca.gov>; Bradbury, Korey S.<kbradbury@calwater.com>
Subject: Cal Water PVPWRP update for tonight
Hi Elias,
Attached is the project handout I will present during public comment tonight. Korey Bradbury will also attend. If you have any
questions or know of additional information the Council may want to know, please let us know. Thanks and I look forward to
meeting you tonight!
Angie Gilbride
Regional Community Affairs Speda!ist
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE
310-257-1437
Quality. Service. Value.
calwater.com
1
This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain California Water Service Group proprietary information and is
confidential. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are
not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail and then
deleting it from your system.
2
. : _ Water Reliability Project Project Update
January 15, 2019
Quality. Service. Value.®
California Water Service (Cal Water) is working on the Palos Verdes Peninsula Water Reliability Project, an
important infrastructure upgrade that will install seven miles of new drinking water pipeline and a new pump
station. More than 17,200 feet of pipeline have already been insta ll ed, which will help ensure that all 90,000
of the Peninsula's residents continue to have safe, reliable water service for everyday and emergency needs.
tl• •J/j /a~ /
New
\.
"""
r,,, .. ,°"'"""'
"""' Q
\
'
Community Outreach Update
• Direct mai l to Palos Verdes Peninsula residents
• Neighborhood Outreach Committee
• Digital and pr int advertisements
• Community events
• Email updates
• T ex t alerts
• Voicemails
~ www.pvpwaterproject.com 11 facebook.com/pvpwaterproject a PVPWaterProject@calwater.com
From:
Sent:
To:
Teresa Takaoka
Friday, January 11, 2019 9:54 AM
Nathan Zweizig
Subject: FW: Consent Calendar Item G--Trails Network Plan
Late corr
From: Eva Cicoria [mailto:cicoriae@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 7:05 AM
To: Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Irving Anaya <ianaya@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Consent Calendar Item G--Trails Network Plan
Thanks, Ara!
Eva
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 10, 2019, at 10:16 PM, Ara Mihranian <Aral'vff({J,rpvca.gov> wrote:
Hi Eva.
Happy New Year!
Yes, Alta will be given clear direction that any suggested trail guidelines exclude the PTP to avoid any conflicts
with the NCCP.
As I stated during the public workshops, and as noted in the January 15tti CC Staff Report, the PTP (in its
entirety) will be folded into the TNP update without any modifications unless directed by the City Council. This
includes trail routes, uses, widths, prisms, etc.
I do recall the two years plus of public meetings on this subject matter.
That said, the TNP update will go through an open and transparent public process to ensure such matters are
not overlooked or modified.
So please don't be concerned.
Any suggested trail guidelines for multi-use trails, or other trails, will not apply to the Preserve.
I will make sure this email is part of the public record for future reference by Staff (including me).
Ara
From: Eva Cicoria [mailto:cicoriae@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 12:16 PM
To: Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Consent Calendar Item G--Trails Network Plan
Hi Ara,
Happy New Year!
1
I had understood that the TNP would just be a set of maps, so when you informed us at the
TNP public workshops that the PTP would be incorporated into the TNP upon completion of
the workshops, I wasn't concerned. Now that there will be additional material--textual
material describing trail guidelines to be applied to the TNP--1 have some concerns.
Will the Alta consulting firm be given clear instruction that any textual materials they develop
that are associated with the TNP will indicate that the PTP is not subject to the trail guidelines
and other over-planning of trails that can happen when consultants get involved?
As you know, during the two years that the public weighed in on development of the PTP and
PUMP, we heard many, many opinions on trail width. It was very clear that there was a
nexus between the goals of the NCCP (minimize habitat impacts) and the public in general
(do not widen trails). Thus, before decisions were made regarding which user groups would
be permitted on particular trails, a commitment was made that trails would not be widened
regardless of the use designation. Thus, design guidelines for multi-use trails outside of the
PV Nature Preserve must not apply to multi-use trails within the PVNP
Thank you,
Eva
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Good afternoon,
Irving Anaya
Tuesday, January 15, 2019 3:24 PM
CityClerk
Ara Mihranian; Katie Lozano
FW: Trails related Agenda Item on 1/15/19 City Council Meeting Agenda
Please include this as Late Correspondence for tonight's City Council meeting.
Consent Calendar (Item G)
Regards,
Irving Anaya
Associate Planner
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Planning Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Y!._'0£YY..:IP..VCa.gov
Phone: (310) 544-5225 -Fax: (310) 544-5293
ianay:a@rpvca.gov
From: SUNSHINE <sunshinerpv@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 12:09 PM
To: Irving Anaya <ianaya@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Gabriella Yap <gyap@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Trails related Agenda Item on 1/15/19 City Council Meeting Agenda
Hi Irving,
I respectfully disagree, have read the Agenda Report and have submitted comments to the Council.
Who gets to fix the Trails "Master" Plan listing on ListServe? Since you are the named contact person, is it
discretionary for you to send a special "heads up" notice to your subscribers? ... S 310-377-8761
In a message dated 1/15/2019 11 :55:27 AM Pacific Standard Time, ianaya@rpvca.gov writes:
Sunshine,
Tonight's consent item is to consider entering into a professional service agreement with AL TA Consultants
to assist the City in completing the update to the Trails Network Plan.
This agenda item will not impact trail users or the City's circulation system.
There will be public noticed meetings on the updated document later this year.
1 G[.
You can view the staff report for tonight's meeting at:
https://rpv.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view id=5&event id=1273&meta id=64445
Regards,
Irving Anaya
Associate Planner
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Planning Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
www. rpvca.ggy
Phone: (310) 544-5225 -Fax: (310) 544-5293
ianaya@rpvca.gov
From: SUNSHINE <sunshinerpv@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 9:25 AM
To: Katie Lozano <KatieL@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Gabriella Yap <gyap@rpvca.gov>; Irving Anaya <ianaya@rpvca.gov>; Lukasz Buchwald
<lbuchwald@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Nature Preserve Related Agenda Items on 1/15/19 City Council Meeting Agenda
2
Improve citizen involvement
Hi Katie,
I received the following ListServe Notice and became aware of another multi-departmental
complication. You have not listed the Trails Network Plan Update (tonight's Council Consent
Calendar Item G) which will have a huge impact on Preserve visitors. On the other hand, nobody
has sent out notices to those subscribed to the Equestrian and/or Trails Master Plan topics who are
also, potentially, impacted by these circulation restricting proposals.
The pattern appears to be that you get to choose when to send out special "heads up" notices to
the people subscribed to the PV Preserve topic without considering who else might like to
know. This is indicative of the City's current "fiefdom" method of management which is not very
"transparent". As trails coordinator, you have not had an occasion to notice that we have a Trails
Master Plan topic. RPV has a Trails Network Plan, not a Trails Master Plan. I pointed out this error
to Irving Anaya nearly a year ago and it still has not been corrected.
A lot of people who were in charge of some ListServe topics retired last year. Actually, Julie
Peterson retired in 2017. The contacts given on the ListServe subscription list have not been
updated.
Who would you suggest that I contact about who is supposed to be doing what? ... S 310-377-
8761
In a message dated 1/9/2019 2:22: 11 PM Pacific Standard Time, listserv@civicplus.com writes:
View this in your browser
The Rancho Palos Verdes City Council will be considering four City Council agenda items related to the
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve at its January 15, 2019 City Council Meeting. The items are:
1. Consideration and possible action to receive and file a report on the Preserve Permit Reservation
System
2. Consideration and possible action to revise the existing Palos Verdes Nature Preserve Night Hike
Policy
3. Consideration and possible action to implement certain measures to minimize unauthorized uses and
activities in the general area of the Rattlesnake Trail
4. Consideration and possible action regarding access and parking along Park Place at Del Cerro Park
3
The City Council Meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at Hesse Park in McTaggart Hall located at 29301
Hawthorne Blvd. Please find the Council Meeting Agenda with staff reports linked below. Please contact
Administrative Analyst/Open Space Manager Katie Lozano at katiel@rpvca.gov or 310-544-5267 for
more information. Thank you.
http://rpv.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?view id=5&event id=1273
*************************************************
This message is been sent by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes as part of a "Notify Me" Listserv category
you are signed up for. Please do not press "reply" when responding to this message, it is an
unmonitored email address. You can make changes to your subscription by
visiting http://www.rpvca.gov/list.aspx.
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to Palos Verdes Nature Preserve on
www.rpvca.gov. To unsubscribe, click the following link:
Unsubscribe
4
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Late correspondence.
Katie Lozano
Tuesday, January 15, 2019 11:40 AM
CityClerk
FW: Palos Verdes Nature Preserve Night Hike Policy
From: Cheryl Frick [mailto:cfrick@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 11:31 AM
To: Katie Lozano <Katiel@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Palos Verdes Nature Preserve Night Hike Policy
Hello Katie: Many thanks for the information Attached and many thanks for the recommendation being put forth in
front of the council tonight. I will try to make the meeting tonight, weather permitting. I truly appreciate all of your
help with resolving this issue!!
Best regards
Cheryl Frick
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
9, 19, l l :l 9 <KatieL@rpvca.gov> wrote:
Thank you again for your interest in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes' Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
night hike policy. This email is to let you know that the City Council will be considering a revised
night hike policy at its January 15, 2019 City Council Meeting. The City Council Meeting will be held
at 7 p.m. at Hesse Park in McTaggart Hall located at 29301 Hawthorne Blvd. at 7 p.m. Please find the
staff report linked below. Please contact Administrative Analyst/Open Space Manager Katie Lozano
at katiel@rpvca.gov or 310-544-5267 for more information. Thank you.
https://rpv.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view id=5&event id=1273&meta id=64449
1 d.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Teresa Takaoka
Tuesday, January 15, 2019 3:12 PM
Nathan Zweizig
FW: Access to Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve at Del Cerro Park
From: The Winter Family [mailto:monkeyswag@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 2:52 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Access to Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve at Del Cerro Park
Dear RPV City Council,
I oppose closing the Del Cerro Park entrance to the Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve.
I am a longtime resident of the Peninsula, and feel fortunate that the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy, with
the support of the community at large, successfully preserved so much open space for ALL to enjoy. I believe many
residents of Del Cerro, in particular, also feel fortunate to live in such close proximity to nature, rather than yet more
development.
I understand a small, but vocal, minority in the Del Cerro neighborhood believes these beautiful open spaces should
only be for them to enjoy. I have read a letter being circulated by a Del Cerro resident who hopes to "disincentivize
visitors" to the preserve. I am one of those visitors.
Over the years, I have been a volunteer for the PVPLC, without whom, none of us, including the author of the letter,
would have the preserve to enjoy. So I feel put off that this person feels ownership of open space that is intended for
all.
I hike the trails in the preserve weekly and have experienced zero evidence of the complaints listed in her letter. I do
not see trash or evidence of cookouts or parties. I do not experience confrontational behavior. On the contrary, fellow
hikers and bikers are pleasant and considerate. People out in nature tend to be happy.
The author of the letter complains about illegal night time activity. The solution to that problem, if it exists, is to
enforce hours of use already in place. Possibly issuing more permits to the Sierra Club for night hikes could be a way
to monitor that kind of activity, since it is contrary to Sierra Club values. (The author of the letter opposes Sierra Club
permits for night time hikes.)
To disincentivize visitors to the Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve is contrary to the mission of the PVPLC: "to
provide open space for all to enjoy". To go against this mission, is to go against the multitude of donors, grants,
volunteers, local high school clubs, and residents from all over the hill, whom without, there would be no preserve.
Please consider the number of people served by the preserve, for whom it is a source of physical and mental health,
and joy.
Julie and Paul Winter
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi Angela,
Doug Willmore
Monday, January 14, 2019 3:31 PM
Angela Jarasunas; CC
RE: 1/15/2019 City Council Meeting
Thank you very much for your email.
! want you to know that there is no proposal to move parking spaces from Park Place into Del Cerro Park, or to build any
kind of parking lot in Del Cerro Park.
The only proposal recommended by staff is to make the parking spaces in Park Place/Del Cerro permit parking only.
Sincerely,
Doug
Doug Willmore
City Manager
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
310-544-5202
_dwillmore_@~
From: Angela Jarasunas [mailto:angelaromasj@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 1:51 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: 1/15/2019 City Council Meeting
Dear Mayor Duhovic and Council Members,
Thank you for your continued efforts to support our neighborhood in
addressing the large number of visitors to the nature preserve and Del Cerro
Park.
Given our home backs up to Del Cerro Park, we continue to be concerned
about nighttime use and gatherings in the park and would support either
closing the park after hours with a gate or increased enforcement to deter
nighttime use.
Further, regarding Item #4 on tomorrow's agenda -Modification of Access and
Parking Restrictions on Park Place -we are AGAINST moving the existing
parking spaces on Park Place into Del Cerro Park itself. Any reconfiguration of
the parking spaces would likely decreas
1
e the amount of green space in the Jf
park. A parking lot at the top of Del Cerro Park would take away from the
pastoral beauty of the park. Additionally, we purchased our home several
years ago with no expectation of having a parking lot next to our back yard.
For all residents of the Del Cerro and Palos Verdes Park Place HOAs, we
support maintaining the semi-rural ambience of the area.
Thank you for your time.
Romas and Angela Jarasunas
3 Burrell Lane
Rancho Palos Verdes
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Barry Rodgveller <rodgfamily@gmail.com>
Tuesday, January 15, 2019 6:21 AM
CC; pvpprof
Del Cerro Park and Park Place
Dear City of Rancho Palos Verdes Council members,
In my letter a few days ago I mistakenly left out an important item when I listed those who should be allowed
to use the 16 non-ADA parking spaces in Del Cerro Park. In addition to those I mentioned in my previous
email, residents and their guests should also be permitted to use those spaces. Thank you for your consideration.
Barry Rodgveller, President, PVPPHOA
1
GIRARDI KEESE
LAWVERS
January 14, 2019
Via Electronic JJfail: cc(t/)tpvca.gpv
Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Re: Gate Access and Crenshaw and Park Place Parking Situation
Dear Honorable Members of the City Council:
We are aware that City Council and staff have spent considerable time and effort in
evaluating the issues of parking and hikers in the Preserve. The events of the last few
days have called to mind one glaring shortcoming in the control of access at the Burma
Road entrance to the Preserve. During and for some short time alter rain, a large sign and
a small sawhorse are placed identifying the trail is closed to the public. Unfortunately, a
large percentage of the "public" does not think the admonitions apply and hike or bike
the trail without hesitation. While this rernains an enforcement issue, it is also an access
issue and a more substantial gate (by height or other means), would substantially improve
the public's abiding by the control of access by the Parks Department. It also occurs to
us that such a gate would decrease the likelihood of someone hurting themselves on the
trail hence diminishing the demand for emergency services. We would request (either by
enfr)rcement or structure) consideration of this issue.
And at the risk of treading the same ground again, we would urge t1iat the staffs
suggested limitations on the 16 Del Ceno spaces is an appropriate and economical
solution to the parking issues. Paving some portion of the park to install a parking lot
would have significant negative implications to the community and to the homeowners.
That would not be the neighborhood to which people first moved, would significantly
alter the use (and beauty) of the park setting and (what may be the greatest concern to the
City) would negatively impact property values. Over the course of the two or so years
that issues of hikers and the parking have been under discussion this idea has been
l l26 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD. Los ANGELES, CALirORNlA. 90017-1904
TELEPHONE: 213-977-0211•FACSIMILE:213-481-1554
WWW.GI RARDIK EESE. COM L{.
January 14, 2019
Page 2
mentioned and discarded. It should so remain.
Respectfully Submitted,
John Ginn-di
cc: Doug Willmore, City Manager, gwillmo..r_~@J]Jvca.gov;
Elias Sassoon, Director Department of Public Works, publicworks(Q),rpvca.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY CLERK
JANUARY 14, 2019
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received
through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, January 15, 2019 City Council meeting:
Item No.
F
G
1
2
3
4
Description of Material
Emails from: Del Cerro Community members and former Board
Members; Rick Daniels
Emails from: Eva Cicoria; Sunshine
Emails from: Del Cerro Community members and former Board
Members; Rick Daniels
Emails from: Judy Herman; Eva Cicoria; William Lavoie
Emails from: Del Cerro Community members and former Board
Members; Rick Daniels; Eva Cicoria
Emails from: Del Cerro Community members and former Board
Members; Rick Daniels; Eva Cicoria; Barry Rodgveller; Thomas Olson;
Romas and Angela Jarasunas
Respectfully submitted,
W:\01 City Clerk\LATE CORRESPONDENCE\2019 Cover Sheets\20190115 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.doc
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Al and Kathy Edgerton <alnkathye@msn.com>
Sunday, January 13, 2019 7:54 PM
cc
City Council Jan 15th Meeting Agenda Items #F, #1,#3, and #4
Voting Results.pdf
Dear Mayor Duhovic, Council Members and City Staff,
We, the undersigned members of the Del Cerro community and former board members of the Del Cerro
Homeowners Association, want to thank you for your continued support of our neighborhood in finding ways
to reduce the negative impacts our residents have experienced as a result of the large number of visitors to
the nature preserve adjacent to our community. The changes to parking and traffic patterns that the city has
implemented over the last several years have substantially ameliorated our concerns.
Our current HOA board recently sponsored a survey concerning the continuing impact of
preserve activities and possible additional actions that the city might take to further mitigate those impacts.
The results are included in the attachment to this email and offered for your review and consideration.
We confirm that the results of the survey accurately reflect the neighborhood's level of support for the
various recommendations. We also concur that the process used to complete the survey was conducted in
accordance with the bylaws of the HOA and that the results accurately represent the consensus of the
neighborhood.
Thank you for your consideration of these recommendations. And thank you for your service to our
community.
Sincerely,
Al and Kathy Edgerton
Former Del Cerro HOA President, Secretary and Treasurer
Miriam Varend
Former Del Cerro HOA President
Megan Moore
Former Del Cerro HOA President
Mark Martin
Former Del Cerro HOA President
1
Lynda Heran
Former Del Cerro HOA President
Ajay Singh
Former Del Cerro HOA Board Member
Mark Schoettler
Former Del Cerro HOA Board Member
Mark Goldberg
Former Del Cerro HOA President
Ray Seager
Former Del Cerro HOA President
Doris Leimer
Former Del Cerro HOA Secretary
Wouter and Kim van Biene
Former President and Secretary of Del Cerro HOA
Olga and Bob Jones
Former Del Cerro HOA Board Members
I G §!?-J Virus-free. www.avg.com
2
Del Cerro Homeowners Association
December 9, 2018 Special Membership Meeting
Voting Results
The HOA should ask the City of Rancho Palos Verdes to take the following actions:
1. Move forward expeditiously to enhance existing trailheads or open one or more new trailheads that are
reasonable distances from residential neighborhoods and to provide free entrance and free parking at those
locations, with amenities such as restrooms, picnic tables, and shady rest areas.
2. Work with Google and other search engines to re-direct internet searches for Palos Verdes trails, open space,
and similar searches to other trailheads that are reasonable distances from residential neighborhoods.
3. Place signs on the Crenshaw Extension and at the Burma Rd. trailhead to remind visitors that residents live
nearby and ask that visitors remain quiet while near the homes and respect residents' privacy.
4. Work with a designated HOA representative on behalf of the Amber Sky neighbors who are negatively affected by
noise and intrusions by nature preserve visitors entering the preserve through the Burma Rd. trailhead to put
landscaping, unobtrusive fencing, or other buffers that would keep trail users away from residents' back yards and
reduce the impact of noise produced by the trail users.
5. Install tall gates at the Burma Rd. and Rattlesnake Trail entrances and lock them when the nature preserve is
closed to prevent illegal entry as a means to greatly improve the safety and tranquility of the neighborhood.
6. Shorten the regular hours the nature preserve is open to sunrise to sunset to improve the peace and quiet of the
surrounding neighborhoods during dark hours.
7. Approve a night hiking policy that permits no more than 3 or 4 small-group night hikes per month beginning from
Burma Rd. and ending no later than 8:30 pm, and that requires the proper vetting of the organizations that apply
for permits and notification of the HOA when such hikes are approved.
8. Develop approaches to controlling/reducing the number of tour bus companies that drop large numbers of tourists
in the area and wait while the tourists hike the preserve or visit the overlook at Del Cerro Park (e.g., requiring
special permits, re-directing tour companies to other drop-off locations, etc.)
1
9. Defer consideration of implementing an online reservation system for Burma Rd. and Rattlesnake Trail entrances
that would require all visitors (including Del Cerro and other RPV residents) to obtain reservations before entering
the preserve until items #1 through #8 above are implemented and their effectiveness evaluated.
10. Defer consideration of installing parking meter pay stations along Crenshaw Blvd. from the intersection of Park
Place to the Island View entrance until items #1 through #8 above are implemented and their effectiveness
evaluated.
11. Defer consideration of permanently closing Rattlesnake Trail until items #1 through #8 above are implemented
and their effectiveness evaluated.
12. Leave the existing parking spaces on Park Place where they are currently located and reserve the spaces for use
by RPV city staff, PVP Land Conservancy volunteers and RPV recreational permit holders. The city council
should not consider relocating the spaces toward the center of Del Cerro Park or toward the front of the Park
(next to the trees and near the Crenshaw Extension), as such action would severely compromise the usefulness
of the park for sports team practices, large gatherings such as the pancake breakfasts we have hosted for
firefighters, and other neighborhood events.
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Del Cerro HOA <DelCerro_HOA@hotmail.com>
Sunday, January 13, 2019 2:27 PM
cc
Subject:
Attachments:
Letter to City Council Re: 1/15/2019 City Council Meeting Agenda Items
Signed Letter to City Council for Jan 15, 2019 Meeting.pdf
Dear Mayor Duhovic, Council Members, and City Staff,
Please find the attached letter from the Del Cerro Homeowners Association regarding the following agenda
items for the Jan. 15, 2019, City Council Meeting:
• Item F Consent Calendar): Preserve Online Reservation System
• Item #1: Preserve Night Hikes
• Item #3: Rattlesnake Trail
• Item #4: Park Place Parking Spaces
Thank you for your consideration of our comments.
Rick Daniels
President
Del Cerro HOA
1 F; I I .?/ 1f
Del Cerro Homeowners Association
PO Box 3704
Palos Verdes CA 90274
Dear Mayor Duhovic and Council Members,
First of all, on behalf of the Del Cerro HOA, I want to sincerely thank you and the city staff for
your continued support of our neighborhood in finding ways to reduce the negative impacts our
residents have experienced as a result of the large number of visitors to the nature preserve
next to our community. The situation has been greatly improved by the changes to parking and
traffic patterns that the city has implemented over the past several years, including approving
the neighborhood permit parking program, restricting parking to one side of Crenshaw Blvd.,
and more recently prohibiting nighttime parking on Crenshaw Blvd.
As you are aware, the Del Cerro neighborhood is composed of 120 properties located at the
end of Crenshaw Blvd., some of which are adjacent to the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve. Our
HOA is an organization whose membership is totally voluntary and 111 (92%) of those
properties are members of the HOA.
This past December our HOA sponsored a survey concerning the continuing impact of preserve
activities and possible additional actions that the city might take to further mitigate those
impacts. The survey asked those HOA members to indicate whether they supported 12 possible
actions -some of which are currently being developed by staff for council consideration, while
others were raised by residents during discussions within the neighborhood. 71 HOA members
(64%) responded to the survey and this letter represents the view of those residents.
An item-by-item summary of the results, including the level of support for each survey item, is
included in the attachment to this letter. Of the 12 items surveyed, 1 O were supported by 90% or
more of the respondents; 1 was supported by 85% (deferring parking pay stations until other
recommended solutions are implemented and evaluated for effectiveness); and 1 was
supported by 73% (a limited night hike policy for Burma Rd.). The rationale for each item is
included in this letter, with emphasis on the items on the agenda for the council meeting on
January 151h.
As with most communities, there are competing interests that need to be considered and taken
into account when developing a neighborhood-wide consensus. Regarding the preserve issues,
there are 3 sets of resident needs/desires that we are trying to balance:
• We want to minimize the noise and disruption that preserve visitors cause (particularly at
night) -primarily to Amber Sky residents, but also to residents on Lower Oceanaire
whose properties back up to Crenshaw Blvd. and the Crenshaw Extension.
• For residents who enjoy frequent hiking and biking in the preserve, we want to minimize
impacts to them from some of the solutions the city is currently considering.
• And for all residents, we want to maintain the semi-rural ambience of the area
Our HOA's recommendations include smaller, targeted solutions that address specific problems
that residents nearest to the preserve are experiencing. These targeted solutions should have
minimal, if any, negative impact on the residents who don't experience those problems. We also
believe that our recommendations will be less costly than some of the larger approaches that
the staff has been considering.
1
Del Cerro Homeowners Association
PO Box 3704
Palos Verdes CA 9027 4
Our recommendations have been organized around the four city council agenda items that
apply to preserve visitor management issues.
1. Item F (Consent Calendar): Online Reservation System
Over 90% of the residents supported deferring implementation of an online reservation
system for the Burma Rd. and Rattlesnake Trail entrances. This is based on the
understanding that city staff has confirmed that preferential treatment regarding preserve
access cannot be given to Del Cerro and other RPV residents, which means our
residents would be required to obtain reservations before entering the preserve. Many of
our residents enjoy frequent hikes in the preserve and feel that the need to obtain
reservations would be a significant burden on them. They would be impacted if they
decide to hike at the last minute (such as on a nice Saturday morning or warm evening)
and find that all reserved spots have already been taken. Reservations are intended to
restrict the number of visitors on a given day, and our residents would likely to be the
last ones to obtain reservations and may very well be unable to obtain them at the last
minute.
Based on these reasons, the residents would like the city to first implement the other
less restrictive, and more targeted solutions discussed later in this letter. The
effectiveness of those solutions should be evaluated before a reservation system is
considered.
2. Item #1: Night Hikes
Approximately 73% of the residents supported a city policy that would allow a limited
number of night hikes through the Burma Rd. entrance. Residents would support a
policy that: 1) permits no more that 3 or 4 group hikes per month of up to 20 people, 2)
requires such hikes to end by 8:30 PM, 3) requires proper vetting of the organizations
that apply for permits and 3) that notifies the HOA when hikes are approved.
Residents whose properties are immediately next to the preserve are concerned when
they hear noise at night, and they don't know whether it is from legitimate permitted
hikers or by people who have entered the preserve illegally. The general feeling is that if
people are entering Illegally, they may be there to burglarize homes or start fires or
cause some other kinds of damage. If residents are notified when a legitimate, approved
night hike is scheduled, that knowledge may help to reduce their concerns. It will also
help residents identify people entering the preserve without a permit and will allow them
to notify law enforcement personnel accordingly.
City staff indicated that under the city's previous night hike policy that was suspended in
July, the only organization that ever requested and received permits was the Sierra
Club. The Sierra Club person who organizes night hikes, reported that over the last 2
years, the organization has sponsored a total of 20 night hikes, consisting of a maximum
of 18 hikers per hike, all of which ended by 8: 30 or 9:00 PM.
The main cause of nighttime noise may be due to visitors who enter the preserve after
hours and without the required permits and who stay in the preserve well beyond the
time when the preserve closes and beyond the time that approved night hikes should
end. Data we have analyzed from the city's trail counter at Burma Rd. indicates that
after-hour visitors often exceed 100 per month -sometimes by significant amounts
(particularly in the months where days are short, and nights are long). The large number
of nighttime visitors is far more than can be explained by permitted Sierra Club hikers.
2
Del Cerro Homeowners Association
PO Box 3704
Palos Verdes CA 90274
Assuming the city installs a tall gate at the Burma Rd. entry that will be locked at sunset,
un~permitted night hikers will be prevented from entering the preserve after hours. That
gate, in conjunction with the recently implemented nighttime parking restrictions on
Crenshaw Blvd. which prohibit parking when the preserve and Del Cerro Park are
closed, should greatly improve the nighttime peace and tranquility of our neighborhood.
If the nighttime noise is not reduced to acceptable levels, our residents will certainly let
the city know.
3. Item 3: Measures to Minimize Unauthorized Uses and Activities in the General
Area of Rattlesnake Trail
The residents agree with staff's recommendations to reduce unauthorized activities in
the general area of Rattlesnake Trail. We appreciate staff's approach to reducing
unauthorized access to Island View properties without restricting access to that trail.
Approximately 90% of the residents want that trail to remain open. Many of our residents
enjoy using that trail as a more challenging exercise routine than can be obtained on
many of the other nearby trails.
4. Item #4: Modification of Access and Parking Restrictions on Park Place
Del Cerro residents support staff's recommendation to restrict parking on Park Place to
RPV city staff, PVP Land Conservancy volunteers, RPV recreational permit holders, and
handicapped visitors as a means to reduce the number of visitors lining up to wait for a
parking space to open up on Park Place.
While we would not object to any specific treatment of the parking spaces where they
are currently located on Park Place (as it does not directly affect our residents in the
manner that it affects Park Place residents), we do ask the council not to consider
moving the parking spaces into Del Cerro Park itself. Doing so would significantly
degrade the usefulness of the neighborhood park. The park serves a very different
purpose from the preserve. It is often used for family picnics and kite flying, Land
Conservancy events, and even an occasional wedding. Over the years, it has been the
location for many soccer and football team practices. In addition, after we experienced
wildfires in the preserve in 2005 and 2009, all of the surrounding neighborhoods joined
together to host pancake breakfasts for the firefighters and deputies who protected our
homes to thank them for their service. In 2009, firefighters from 15 separate jurisdictions
fought the fire here and came to the event to give us the opportunity to personally thank
them. Over 300 people attended each event. Where else in the area would we be able to
hold such a special event?
5. Additional Suggestions for Council Consideration
Listed below are additional suggestions the HOA recommends the city take. We feel that
these would also improve the peace, tranquility and overall quality of life in our
neighborhood:
A Shorten the hours that the Burma Rd and Rattlesnake Trail entrance gates are open,
to be from sunrise to sunset. This will improve the peace and quiet of the
surrounding neighborhoods during hours of darkness.
The preserve is currently open from one hour before sunrise to one hour after
sunset. It is still quite dark during those additional hours, so shortening the hours that
3
Del Cerro Homeowners Association
PO Box 3704
Palos Verdes CA 90274
the entrance gates are open will assure that there is light when visitors enter and
leave the preserve.
These suggested times will also help to keep the neighborhood quieter in the early
morning so that residents who live on the preserve side of Amber Sky as well as
Lower Oceanaire residents who live next to Crenshaw Blvd. will be able to sleep later
without being disturbed by slamming car doors and loud voices.
B. Place signs on the Crenshaw Extension and at the Burma Rd. entrance to remind
visitors that residents five next to the trail and ask that they remain quiet while near
the homes and respect residents' privacy.
C. Work with a designated HOA representative on behalf of the Amber Sky neighbors
who are negatively affected by noise and intrusions from nature preserve visitors to
plant landscaping and install unobtrusive fencing, and/or other buffers between
Burma Rd. and residents' properties to reduce the impact of noise produced by the
trail users, to protect residents' back yard privacy, and to discourage use of that area
as a bathroom or trash disposal area.
D. Place signs along Burma Rd. indicating where bathroom facilities are located.
E. Defer consideration of installing parking meter pay stations along Crenshaw Blvd.
until the other requested items are implemented and their effectiveness is evaluated.
Our residents feel that the cumulative effect of additional signage and pay stations
will diminish the semi-rural ambience of the area and will make our neighborhood
feel like a commercial zone. The addition of pay stations and associated signage will
impact the ocean views from Lower Oceanaire residences along Crenshaw Blvd. In
addition, residents generally are not convinced that pay stations will reduce the
number of visitors to the preserve.
The demand for parking in the area is so much greater than the 41 spaces that were
intended to be covered by pay stations, that we believe there will always be people
who are willing to pay a reasonable hourly rate to use those spaces on Crenshaw
Blvd.
We are not saying that we will never ask to implement parking meter pay stations.
We're just saying that residents do not feel that current conditions warrant the impact
that the stations and signage will have on the neighborhood.
Conclusion
The nature preserve is a wonderful city asset and we appreciate the city's commitment to
maintaining open space, as it is a major contributor to our quality of life. We also greatly
appreciate the council's continued efforts to protect adjacent neighborhoods from the impacts of
the many people who visit the preserve. Approval of the additional actions discussed here will
continue to help reduce the negative impacts without compromising residents' enjoyment of
living near the preserve.
We also appreciate the city council commitment to searching for trailheads at other locations
that are a reasonable distance from residential neighborhoods and that offer amenities that will
draw visitors. We understand that this is a longer-term objective. It will be important to establish
such trailheads with enhancements before attempting to re-direct visitors to those areas.
Hopefully those additional trailheads will draw more people away from Del Cerro, thus lessening
the impact to our neighborhood. If those additional trailheads have the appropriate amenities
4
Del Cerro Homeowners Association
PO Box 3704
Palos Verdes CA 90274
such as ample parking, restroom facilities and access to desirable trails, visitors will have the
kind of enjoyable experience they will want to repeat.
We also thank the Recreation and Parks and Public Works staff for working cooperatively with
us and for sharing data with us to aid in developing our recommendations.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Kathy and Al Edgerton (310-544-7390,
alnkathye@msn.com).
Thank you for your service to our community.
Sincerely,
Rick Daniels
President
Del Cerro Homeowners Association
5
Del Cerro Homeowners Association
December 9, 2018 Special Membership Meeting
Voting Results
The HOA should ask the City of Rancho Palos Verdes to take the following actions:
1. Move forward expeditiously to enhance existing trailheads or open one or more new trailheads that are
reasonable distances from residential neighborhoods and to provide free entrance and free parking at those
locations, with amenities such as restrooms, picnic tables, and shady rest areas.
2. Work with Google and other search engines to re-direct internet searches for Palos Verdes trails, open space,
and similar searches to other trailheads that are reasonable distances from residential neighborhoods.
3. Place signs on the Crenshaw Extension and at the Burma Rd. trailhead to remind visitors that residents live
nearby and ask that visitors remain quietwhile near the homes and respect residents' privacy.
4. Work with a designated HOA representative on behalf of the Amber Sky neighbors who are negatively affected by
noise and intrusions by nature preserve visitors entering the preserve through the Burma Rd. trailhead to put
landscaping, unobtrusive fencing, or other buffers that would keep trail users away from residents' back yards and
reduce the impact of noise produced by the trail users.
5. Install tall gates at the Burma Rd. and Rattlesnake Trail entrances and lock them when the nature preserve is
closed to prevent illegal entry as a means to greatly improve the safety and tranquility of the neighborhood.
6. Shorten the regular hours the nature preserve is open to sunrise to sunset to improve the peace and quiet of the
surrounding neighborhoods during dark hours.
7. Approve a night hiking policy that permits no more than 3 or 4 small-group night hikes per month beginning from
Burma Rd. and ending no later than 8:30 pm, and that requires the proper vetting of the organizations that apply
for permits and notification of the HOA when such hikes are approved.
8. Develop approaches to controlling/reducing the number of tour bus companies that drop large numbers of tourists
in the area and wait while the tourists hike the preserve or visit the overlook at Del Cerro Park (e.g., requiring
special permits, re-directing tour companies to other drop-off locations, etc.)
1
9. Defer consideration of implementing an online reservation system for Burma Rd. and Rattlesnake Trail entrances
that would require all visitors (including Del Cerro and other RPV residents) to obtain reservations before entering
the preserve until items #1 through #8 above are implemented and their effectiveness evaluated.
10. Defer consideration of installing parking meter pay stations along Crenshaw Blvd. from the intersection of Park
Place to the Island View entrance until items #1 through #8 above are implemented and their effectiveness
evaluated.
11. Defer consideration of permanently closing Rattlesnake Trail until items #1 through #8 above are implemented
and their effectiveness evaluated.
12. Leave the existing parking spaces on Park Place where they are currently located and reserve the spaces for use
by RPV city staff, PVP Land Conservancy volunteers and RPV recreational permit holders. The city council
should not consider relocating the spaces toward the center of Del Cerro Park or toward the front of the Park
(next to the trees and near the Crenshaw Extension), as such action would severely compromise the usefulness
of the park for sports team practices, large gatherings such as the pancake breakfasts we have hosted for
firefighters, and other neighborhood events.
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hi Ara,
Happy New Year!
Eva Cicoria < cicoriae@aol.com >
Wednesday, January 09, 2019 12:16 PM
Ara Mihranian
cc
Consent Calendar Item G--Trails Network Plan
I had understood that the TNP would just be a set of maps, so when you informed us at the
TNP public workshops that the PTP would be incorporated into the TNP upon completion of the
workshops, I wasn't concerned. Now that there will be additional material--textual material describing
trail guidelines to be applied to the TNP--1 have some concerns.
Will the Alta consulting firm be given clear instruction that any textual materials they develop that are
associated with the TNP will indicate that the PTP is not subject to the trail guidelines and other over-
planning of trails that can happen when consultants get involved?
As you know, during the two years that the public weighed in on development of the PTP and PUMP,
we heard many, many opinions on trail width. It was very clear that there was a nexus between the
goals of the NCCP (minimize habitat impacts) and the public in general (do not widen trails). Thus,
before decisions were made regarding which user groups would be permitted on particular trails, a
commitment was made that trails would not be widened regardless of the use designation. Thus,
design guidelines for multi-use trails outside of the PV Nature Preserve must not apply to multi-use
trails within the PVNP
Thank you,
Eva
1 fl I
From:
Sent:
To:
Ara Mihranian
Friday, January 11, 2019 3:00 PM
CityClerk
Subject: FW: RPV Trails Network Plan. Fwd: Seriously flawed recommendation on January 15,
2019 Council Consent Calendar
Late correspondence.
Ara Michael Mihranian
Community Development Director
CIT\lOF l~CHO PALOS \IEHDES
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310-544-5228 (telephone)
310-544-5293 (fax)
aram@rpvca.gov
www.rpvca.gov
Do you really need to print this e-mail?
contains information belon9in9 to the confidential and/or protected from
;ntnrm'1tinn is intended only for use of the or entity narnecL Unauthorized ck;tribution, or copyinq is strictly prnhibitcd. If
you received this ernail in error, or ore not on intended rceipient, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you for your assistanct' and cooperation.
From: SUNSHINE <sunshinerpv@aol.com>
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 2:26 PM
To: PC <PC@rpvca.gov>; Bill Gerstner <wgg@squareoneinc.com> <wgg@squareoneinc.com>; smhvaleri@cox.net;
ksnellOOOl@aol.com; jessboop@cox.net; bwr1083klr@cox.net; reslmbro@verizon.net;
george.fotion@homeispalosverdes.com; j1000@cox.net; jeanlongacre@aol.com; Paul Funk <PFunky@dslextreme.com>;
vdogregg@aol.com; pvpasofino@yahoo.com; yojay67@hotmail.com; cdukew11@hotmail.com;
amcdougalll@yahoo.com; cmoneil@aol.com; momofyago@gmail.com; pvpra.president@gmail.com;
lowell975@gmail.com; ken.delong@verizon.net; theyorkproperties@gmail.com; amrobin@aol.com;
andre@ruggerimarble.com
Subject: RPV Trails Network Plan. Fwd: Seriously flawed recommendation on January 15, 2019 Council Consent Calendar
Send a short note to the RPV City Council. right now. This is one of those situations in which the
quantity of comments really counts even if it is "late correspondence". Write something to the affect
that non-motorized access to City owned property is important to your "health, safety and
1 G.
welfare". Your "quality of life" and "property values" should not be infringed upon in favor of Staff's
preferences for less civil liberty. Think of it this way. As long as Staff will not pursue voluntary offers
of public access to private property nor maintain our existing "legal" trails, how is anyone supposed
expect to continue to enjoy the Peninsula's trails network?
Ask the RPV City Council to, on Tuesday evening, direct Staff to come up with a more effective way
to spend our taxpayer dollars on preserving and enhancing the off-road and roadside circulation we
had in 1984 .
... S 310-377-8761
From: sunshinerpv((i),aol.com
To: ccJ:@x12vca.gqy
Sent: 1111/2019 11 :48:38 AM Pacific Standard Time
Subject: Seriously flawed recommendation on January 15, 2019 Council Consent Calendar
Dear Mayor Duhovic and Council Members:
Item G on your January 15, 2019 Consent Calendar is a recommendation that Council enter
into a Professional Services Agreement which is totally controlled by Staff until the draft Trails
Network Plan (TNP) is completed. The existing TNP does not need a rewrite from
"scratch". It simply needs the post 1984 Council decisions to be inserted. It does not take a
Consultant to do that. Apparently, hiring a Consultant is what it going to take in order for Staff
to gather together these "additional City documents" in a timely fashion.
Another good thing about hiring a Consultant is that Staff will have to define the "expected
challenges and constraints". I see the "challenges" as getting Staff to make the "data"
available. The "constraints" are going to be making several engineering decisions and
assigning CRITERIA trail TYPE's without benefit of public input.
For the past 20 years, I have devoted a lot of time and attention to assisting the City with
implementing our Trails Network Plan. The Scope of Services as provided in this Agenda
Report makes no mention of the observations, suggestions and offers of professionally
qualified assistance made by both me, personally and by the Open Space Planning and
Rec.& Parks Task Force.
Please move and approve the option that Staff come back with a rewritten Scope of Services
after Council has had the opportunity to discuss and rule on the following omissions:
2
1. Forty-five years later and the City of RPV doesn't have a City-wide Signage Plan. Public
Works needs one place to look for direction. The signage section of the TNP, the Preserve
Signage Plan, the signage in the Coastal Vision Plans, City entrance, park entrance and
whatever other directional, landmark and other uniquely RPV discretionary signage should be
pulled together in one place. Given that the Trails Network Plan is the most comprehensive
guide for both motorized and non-motorized circulation in the City and beyond, my
recommendation is (and has been) that this be a part of the TNP update. I am not seeing any
specific skill set nor Consultant time to accomplish this in Staff's recommendation.
2. The division of the City into five (5) trail planning sub-regions was done completely
arbitrarily to assist the Planning Department with locating development application sites in
relation to nearby trails and trail opportunities. Now that implementing and maintaining the
trails network is substantially a Public Works responsibility, my suggestion is (and has been)
that the planning and status narratives and maps be detailed per the same sub-divisions as
the residential streets rehabilitation program. In this case, Public Works is the primary user
who needs a "user-friendly" Plan.
3. There is still no procedure for Staff to maintain our foundational documents as "living
documents". Now that we have in-house word processing and graphics technology, we need
a directive for Staff to budget for and actually keep our documents updated on a Council
Meeting-to-Council Meeting basis. And, we need a methodology for citizen input to be
registered into some sort of path of consideration. Per the Conceptual Trails Plan,
suggestions of amendments are to be submitted in writing, addressed to the Recreation and
Parks Committee. Since there is no longer such a Committee, all such suggestions, offers
etc. have gone nowhere. Our Parks Master Plan is also lacking such a defined methodology
and citizen review.
4. The SCOPE OF SERVICES Items F and G are either redundant or are calculated
obfuscations. The "narrative for each trail" should be rewritten as a directive to the Public
Works Department or the hired Consultant to design, per Best Engineering Practices, all of
the point-to-point trails which now traverse City owned property. The actual construction of
said trail connections (as opposed to isolated trail segments) need to be prioritized and
budgeted along with all other infrastructure projects. The existing TNP contains such a
prioritized list. I must point out that the highest priority trail on the 1984 list has not yet been
"enhanced" from Category Ill to a Category I. I see the skill-set but not the Engineer hours in
the Staff Recommendation.
Look again at page 7 of the December 15, 2018 Power Point Presentation on the draft RPV
STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS for 2018-2019. Buried under a "Project" called
CITYWIDE PRESERVE PARKING PLAN is a totally absurd "goal" to create what we already
have by April 30, 2019. Where is the directive that Staff should read and implement what our
3
City Councils have adopted? To put it another way, what is the "penalty" when they
don't?
A "comprehensive update" won't do anything about Staff's lack of performance. Where is the
SMART?
In general, what is lacking is "screening by the public" prior to a recommendation to the
Council. If asked, I would have responded to the RFP. I have already done all that can be
done without Staff's cooperation. As written, this Scope of Work is to pay someone thousands
of dollars to nag Staff for information in the same way that I have been, for years, for free.
I repeat. This Consent Calendar Staff Recommendation is "half-baked" because it
accomplishes nothing on behalf of the citizens of RPV. I should not have to show up and
submit a request to speak in order for my elected representatives to put a stop to this local
control abuse .... S 310-377-8761
4
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
SUNSHINE <sunshinerpv@aol.com>
Friday, January 11, 2019 11:49 AM
cc
Seriously flawed recommendation on January 15, 2019 Council Consent Calendar
Dear Mayor Duhovic and Council Members:
Item G on your January 15, 2019 Consent Calendar is a recommendation that Council enter into a
Professional Services Agreement which is totally controlled by Staff until the draft Trails Network Plan
(TNP) is completed. The existing TNP does not need a rewrite from "scratch". It simply needs the
post 1984 Council decisions to be inserted. It does not take a Consultant to do that. Apparently,
hiring a Consultant is what it going to take in order for Staff to gather together these "additional City
documents" in a timely fashion.
Another good thing about hiring a Consultant is that Staff will have to define the "expected challenges
and constraints". I see the "challenges" as getting Staff to make the "data" available. The
"constraints" are going to be making several engineering decisions and assigning CRITERIA trail
TYPE's without benefit of public input.
For the past 20 years, I have devoted a lot of time and attention to assisting the City with
implementing our Trails Network Plan. The Scope of Services as provided in this Agenda Report
makes no mention of the observations, suggestions and offers of professionally qualified assistance
made by both me, personally and by the Open Space Planning and Rec.& Parks Task Force.
Please move and approve the option that Staff come back with a rewritten Scope of Services after
Council has had the opportunity to discuss and rule on the following omissions:
1. Forty-five years later and the City of RPV doesn't have a City-wide Signage Plan. Public Works
needs one place to look for direction. The signage section of the TNP, the Preserve Signage Plan,
the signage in the Coastal Vision Plans, City entrance, park entrance and whatever other directional,
landmark and other uniquely RPV discretionary signage should be pulled together in one place.
Given that the Trails Network Plan is the most comprehensive guide for both motorized and non-
motorized circulation in the City and beyond, my recommendation is (and has been) that this be a
part of the TNP update. I am not seeing any specific skill set nor Consultant time to accomplish this
in Staff's recommendation.
1
2. The division of the City into five (5) trail planning sub-regions was done completely arbitrarily to
assist the Planning Department with locating development application sites in relation to nearby trails
and trail opportunities. Now that implementing and maintaining the trails network is substantially a
Public Works responsibility, my suggestion is (and has been) that the planning and status narratives
and maps be detailed per the same sub-divisions as the residential streets rehabilitation program. In
this case, Public Works is the primary user who needs a "user-friendly" Plan.
3. There is still no procedure for Staff to maintain our foundational documents as "living documents".
Now that we have in-house word processing and graphics technology, we need a directive for Staff to
budget for and actually keep our documents updated on a Council Meeting-to-Council Meeting basis.
And, we need a methodology for citizen input to be registered into some sort of path of consideration.
Per the Conceptual Trails Plan, suggestions of amendments are to be submitted in writing, addressed
to the Recreation and Parks Committee. Since there is no longer such a Committee, all such
suggestions, offers etc. have gone nowhere. Our Parks Master Plan is also lacking such a defined
methodology and citizen review.
4. The SCOPE OF SERVICES Items F and G are either redundant or are calculated obfuscations.
The "narrative for each trail" should be rewritten as a directive to the Public Works Department or the
hired Consultant to design, per Best Engineering Practices, all of the point-to-point trails which now
traverse City owned property. The actual construction of said trail connections (as opposed to
isolated trail segments) need to be prioritized and budgeted along with all other infrastructure
projects. The existing TNP contains such a prioritized list. I must point out that the highest priority
trail on the 1984 list has not yet been "enhanced" from Category Ill to a Category I. I see the skill-set
but not the Engineer hours in the Staff Recommendation.
Look again at page 7 of the December 15, 2018 Power Point Presentation on the draft RPV
STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS for 2018-2019. Buried under a "Project" called CITYWIDE
PRESERVE PARKING PLAN is a totally absurd "goal" to create what we already have by April 30,
2019. Where is the directive that Staff should read and implement what our City Councils have
adopted? To put it another way, what is the "penalty" when they don't?
A "comprehensive update" won't do anything about Staff's lack of performance. Where is the
SMART?
In general, what is lacking is "screening by the public" prior to a recommendation to the Council. If
asked, I would have responded to the RFP. I have already done all that can be done without Staff's
cooperation. As written, this Scope of Work is to pay someone thousands of dollars to nag Staff for
information in the same way that I have been, for years, for free.
2
I repeat. This Consent Calendar Staff Recommendation is "half-baked" because it accomplishes
nothing on behalf of the citizens of RPV. I should not have to show up and submit a request to speak
in order for my elected representatives to put a stop to this local control abuse .... S 310-377-8761
3
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Ms. Lozano:
Judyherman <judyherman@cox.net>
Wednesday, January 09, 2019 1:30 PM
Katie Lozano
cc
Re: Palos Verdes Nature Preserve Night Hike Policy
Thanks for letting me know about the upcoming city council meeting at which night hiking permits for the Sierra Club
will be discussed. And thanks to you and the rest of the staff for taking the time to hear the views of interested parties
and to craft a well-thought-out plan and procedure for permitting limited night hiking in the nature preserve. Sierra Club
members are concerned about the habitat as well as the birds and other animals that make it their home. We thank you
for advising the city council that we should be allowed to return to our respectful enjoyment of the preserve during
limited evening hours when we can observe owls, scorpions and other nocturnal creatures.
Sincerely,
Judy Herman
RPV
>On Jan 9, 2019, at 11:19 AM, Katie Lozano <KatieL@rpvca.gov> wrote:
>
>Thank you again for your interest in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes' Palos Verdes Nature Preserve night hike policy.
This email is to let you know that the City Council will be considering a revised night hike policy at its January 15, 2019
City Council Meeting. The City Council Meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at Hesse Park in McTaggart Hall located at 29301
Hawthorne Blvd. at 7 p.m. Please find the staff report linked below. Please contact Administrative Analyst/Open Space
Manager Katie Lozano at katiel@rpvca.gov or 310-544-5267 for more information. Thank you.
>
> https://rpv.gra nicus.com/MetaViewer.php ?view _id=5&event_id=1273&meta _id=64449
>
>
Judy Herman
www.judyherman.com
1
From: Katie Lozano
Sent:
To:
Friday, January 11, 2019 2:39 PM
CityClerk
Cc:
Subject:
Cory Linder; Ara Mihranian
FW: Monday Night Hike
Here is an additional email for late correspondence. (Night Hike Policy staff report)
From: mrmnply@aol.com [mailto:mrmnply@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2019 1:39 PM
To: Katie Lozano <KatieL@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Monday Night Hike
From: rnnw.JP1Y10A.Q1com
To: katicl((iJ,rpv.ca.gov
Cc: alsattler<2V,igc.org
Sent: 1/4/2019 10:44:32 AM Pacific Standard Time
Subject: Monday Night Hike
Katie
Thank you, Katie and Cory for all you have done to help the Sierra Club keeps its Monday Night Conditioning
Hike in the Portuguese Bend Preserve. One of the Sierra Clubs missions is to work to preserve and protect
open space and as the Vice Chair of the Palos Verde South Bay Group of the Sierra Club, I want to endorse the
new Night Hike Policy as proposed for the Preserve. I think this new policy will help to ensure the protection of
the Preserve.
Sincerely
William Lavoie, Vice Chair
Sierra Club, PVSB Group, Angeles Chapter
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Eva Cicoria <cicoriae@aol.com>
Saturday, January 12, 2019 10:22 AM
cc
Regular Business Items 2,3 and 4 for 1/15/18
Mayor Duhovic, Mayor Pro Tern Cruikshank, and Councilmembers Alegria, Brooks, and Dyda,
I am writing as a resident of RPV and not in any other role, regarding Regular Business Items 2
(PVNP night hike policy), 3 (Rattlesnake Trail measures), and 4 (Park Place measures). I support
RPV Staff's recommendations for each of these items. The recommendations offer targeted,
reasonable measures to address specific issues that have arisen. Let's implement these and allow
some time to see whether they have the positive impacts we hope for.
I suggest that Section 3 of the Park Place parking resolution be tweaked a bit, however, to substitute
"sunrise" and "sunset" for "dawn" and "dusk", respectively, since reference to "dawn" and "dusk" may
be subject to interpretation as a degree of light in the sky, whereas the public and enforcement
personnel will have access to an objective measure of the time that the sun rises and sets.
I want to compliment the residents of Del Cerro who prepared and participated in a survey to try to
identify reasonable measures targeting the issues they have encountered, without being unduly
restrictive of others who wish to responsibly enjoy the PV Nature Preserve. Compliments to RPV
staff, as well, for their diligent efforts to do the same.
That said, if additional measures beyond what are specifically identified in Items 2, 3 and 4 of the
Staff Report are to be considered, I hope they will be duly noticed such that others will have an
opportunity to weigh in.
Eva Cicoria
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
hildashands@aol.com
Sunday, January 13, 2019 10:01 AM
CC; Jerry Duhovic; John Cruikshank; Eric Alegria; Susan Brooks; Ken Dyda;
dhgirardi@cox.net; pvpprof@gmail.com; Rodgfamily@gmail.com; hildashands@aol.com
Del Cerro Park, Park Place
Dear City of Rancho Palos Verdes Council Members,
After all of the help our neighborhood has received from the city council, there is still an enormous public safety issue
surrounding Park Place and Del Cerro Park. Throughout the day on a continuous basis and worse on weekends there is
a never ending line of cars that drive onto Park Place to find parking. When the spots are filled the cars often wait for a
spot to open up, sometimes blocking the driveways of the residents on Park Place. On more than one occasions,
residents on park Place have had to ask the occupants of the waiting cars to move because they were blocking their
driveways. The residents have been verbally and on one occasion physically accosted by the drivers of these cars. One
resident with two young children was no longer allowing her children to play in her enclosed driveway let alone the
street. She has since moved because of these issues.
Having access to the park at night creates additional risk, not only to the residents on park Place, but to those homes that
back up to the park and to the residents of the neighborhood at large. On a regular basis there is partying and the use of
drugs and alcohol in the park at night. It has made this once quiet neighborhood less safe. Not only is this a public safety
issue but it has diminished the enjoyment our families can have living in our own neighborhood. Not to mention a
decrease in our property values. We would like the city council to help us with these increasing dangerous
situations. Below are some suggestions that have been made for the city council to consider.
1. Allow only parking in Del Cerro park for police, fire, RPV employees and volunteers
2. Gate park Place from one hour after dusk to one after before sunrise
3. Open up additional trail heads to the preserve and use social media to increase their use
4. Gate the entrance to the preserve at the end of Burma road that would be closed from one hour after dusk to one hour
before sunrise. Egress would be allowed at anytime.
Unfortunately I will not be able to make any presentation at the City council meeting on January 15,concerning these
issues, as I will be out of the country at that time.
Sincerely,
Barry Rodgveller
President, PVPPHOA
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
pvpprof < pvpprof@gmail.com >
Monday, January 14, 2019 12:43 PM
CC; Jerry Duhovic; John Cruikshank; Eric Alegria; Susan Brooks; Ken Dyda
Additional notes and comments to Park Place HOA email from Barry Rodgveller,
President
National Park Service March 27 2017 email to RPV.PDF; Park Place Permit Parking
Resolution draft Jan 14 2019.PDF
Dear City of Rancho Palos Verdes Council Members
Continuing from HOA President Barry Rodgveller's email, and being out-of-town and not able to attend the City
Council meeting for 1/15/19, please find below the following:
First, Specific Suggestions:
and
Second, Specific (legal reference and other) Facts:
First, Specific Suggestions:
Below are additional specific suggestions to Park Place street and HOA and Del Cerro Park for the City Council to
consider:
These notes are provided verbally to Barry in advance of his letter to City Council and remain separate to make
specific to Resolutions suggestions. Some specific info is provided that reference to Park Place's originating right-
of-way deed and the Plan of Utilization (POU) for Del Cerro Park. Each of these documents affects Park Place
street now AND any suggestions looking forward.
Please note that Park Place residents have consistently stated and voted 100% by applications to the City that the
Plan of Utilization (POU) is the legal basis for any Staff and/or City Council action.
This includes 100% support from all Park Place residents for any parking lot internal to Del Cerro Park -especially
noting that per National Park Service, this is a local matter, and City may well decide not to have any parking for
the Del Cerro Park at all. This was the 100% supported position of all HO As, including Park Place HOA, proximate
to Del Cerro Park for the Council unanimous vote to remove all parking from Park Place.
The Staff suggestion is for a "Recreation Permit" for all of Park Place. However, the 'Recreation Permit' is targeted
to the Park and Trails AND does not address suggestions for Park Place Resident property rights.
As the 'Recreation Permit' does not include any Park Place Resident property rights', additional major
suggestion needs to include 'Park Place street & HOA Resident Permit Parking Only' for Park Place street and HOA
in lieu of all 16 spaces for 'Recreation Permit Parking'. Park Place resident home property owners must have
Park Place street parking just as all other property owners have street parking. This 'Resident Permit Parking'
needs be included as a part of resident's purchase rights of homes and their property.
Key Suggestion is to either:
a. Leave all 'Recreation Parking on Crenshaw and provide 'Park Place HOA Resident Permit Parking Only' to
all 16 slots on Park Place ... or
b. Move the 1 o slots on Crenshaw and make the remaining 6 stalls for 'Resident Permit Parking Only' on Park
Place to allow residents to park overnight their own vehicles.
1
Please see the attached draft Resolution for Park Place Resident (HOA) Permit Parking Only that is based on and
copies the same Resolution for Del Cerro HOA.
Specific Facts regarding Park Place street and Del Cerro Park include:
1. All the residential properties on Park Place street were purchased with approximately 20 Resident vehicle curb
parking spots. In the years during the 1980s and 1990 and early 2000s, there were little, if any, major issues with
Park Place Resident parking their person POVs on Park Place in the 'right-of-way' street overnight 365 -24/7. This
is a very important and valuable right for which each homeowner paid when purchasing their homes.
2. Now, though, particularly since 2015/6, City has removed all public right-of-way parking without resident
compensation or due process by City to provide any acceptable Park Place Resident street and/or HOA Parking
alterative (as by 'redesign I reassignment' of the spots on the N side or change of stalls on the S side of Park Place
at Del Cerro Park).
3. The parking on the N side of Del Cerro Park along Park Place was researched as was parking for Del Cerro Park
itself. And review of the Plan of Utilization as the 'founding legal document' indicates that parking for Del Cerro
Park should be internal to the Park. This is supported by David Siegenthaler, National Park Service, US
Department of Interior, in his email to the City.
4. Today, there is no parking available for residents or HOA on Park Place street overnight. Per the POU
the parking for Del Cerro Park was not constructed as described within the POU. This is supported by Mr. David
Siegenthaler, National Park Service, email. Further, City 'red curbing' eliminated all right-of-way overnight parking
for all Park Place residents.
5. Park Place residents have been deprived of property purchase rights without due process and do not have legal
spots to park personal POVs legally overnight. This would be 'corrected by 'Park Place HOA Residents Only
Permits'.
Please note that this 'correction' would provide the same rights as are currently provided to other HOA Resolutions
including those for Del Cerro, Island View and Valley View HOAs.
6. Park Place residents legally require same and equal treatment (as with Resolutions for parking, i.e., 'Park Place
HOA RESIDENT ONLY' parking). This allows Park Place RESIDENTS to park their own vehicles overnight on
street just as Del Cerro HOA and Island View and Valley View too.
7. What Staff proposes is only 'Recreation Parking -good for the Park and Trails, BUT does not correct Resident
purchased property parking Rights I benefits acquired when each residence home purchased. . This is only
·Recreation (2 hour limit) permit parking'. There is no language or equal treatment for Park Place HOA RESIDENT
Parking Only.
8. Park Place street was all red curbed to try to stop congestion.
Unfortunately, traffic and adverse safety increased when red curbed.
Red curbing did and does not work to limit traffic and adverse safety.
Red curbing further totally limits/stops Park Place street and HOA residents from parking their own Vehicles as
every single homeowner in neighborhood proximate to Del Cerro "neighborhood' Park can do now.
9. Park Place residents do not receive equal treatment -especially regarding the other Resolutions provided to
other proximate HOAs, BUT not for Park Place HOA. This is discrimination concern.
2
10. Park Place HOA residents do not now receive, yet require ,equal treatment as all others (as in Del Cerro HOA,
Valley View and Island View) proximate to Del Cerro Park
11. Park Place HOA residents require longer than 2 hours and permit to park personal and guest POVs for longer
than 2 hours. This was discussed between City Council and City Manager in the midnight discussion on August 31,
2018 for parking that included equal Park Place Resident parking overnight as all other HOAs proximate to Del
Cerro Park.
Knowing from the past 2 meetings regarding this Agenda item (4/3/18 and 8/31/18) that Council did not get to this
item until 11 pm and midnight respectively, and verbal statements were shortened from 3 minutes to 1 minute, we
are providing comments and suggestions above by written note to reference for the 1 /15/19 meeting.
Due to medical et al issues, we of Park Place are hopeful to attend 1 /15/19 meeting. However, with late evening
and fading health, this may not be possible.
In this regard, please accept now and for discussion tomorrow the above written suggestions and supportive facts.
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas Olson
Park Place HOA
3
From: Siegenthaler, David [rn~Jltg:g;:i_y_icj_~ir=_g~r:it.b<i.l~r_@nP?,gc:>.Y.l
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 5:50 PM
To: Nicole Jules <f:l_i~9l~j@_r:Q.Y.~?..,KQ.Y.>
Subject: Re: Rancho Palos Verdes -Del Cerro Park (LADA Nike Site 55 Pt. Vicente 4.49 acre upper
site GSA#9-D-Calif_1088)
Nicole,
Parking is part of the Program of Utilization for the park, so as long as you're providing parking
that fits for the park along with the other use th~ City intended for it,. yo1/r~ w,i.tf1irJ.. the q!Jeyved
p~bHc park and recreation area purpose. ' • u ~rovid.e1t/tsf~al!Y:'a 1&aPm~ila~~l'TieJilf1 ·
declsiof1~ I don't see anything in the deed that would provide additional particular limitations and
l don't think there have been LWCF grants at the site have there? In fact, it looks like the
original concept plan for that area had the parking more internal to the park. I guess that might
mean taking some of the open play field area (that people are used to using for that purpose) for
parking -but that's a local decision.
Does that answer it well enough for you for now? I'd be glad to look at different scenarios if you
want, but it's not required that I do so unless you do find that something might contravene the
original intent of an LWCF grant.
Thanks,
David
David Siegenthaler
Pacific West Region
National Park Service
333 Bush Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104-2828
v: :!:li:<J.'.4,1..:b.)_;\4
F: +LS.:.923:);)3]_
Federal Lands to Parks
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program
National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Program
;;:!.. ..• {) 1<(-
RESOLUTION NO. · ·-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
ESTABLISHING PERMIT PARKING ON-~RIOUS STREETI' IN THE .£>El~ HOA
NEIGHBORHOOD. ·"''f'i~~i<.'.._ 'fLt:y.:::,t:e·
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY
FIND, ORDER AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, Chapter 10.20 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code authorizes the
City Council to establish permit parking in areas in the City by resolution pursuant to the
authority provided by California Vehicle Code Section 22507; and
.... P. i.::£, Y'~EREAS, Del Cerro Park and the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve is located J~~~ ,,,.,,
f-1:r·ffe v .. (t-~tfle-Oel-Gerffl neighborhood, and patrons (non-visitors) ofJti~ ~rk anp,,.Preserve have
been observed parking their vehicles for long periods of time on~'stree1&~thin the..9eH3ern:r
.aFea. These parked vehicles are precluding residents who liv~a from being able to
park vehicles in front of their homes, which is causing a deterioration of their residential quality
of life; and ./o ,_1 ·s'i,:1. F-k.
?Aj'.'.;µ:: ')71--4<.t::..
WHEREAS, the residents along.~ve,Gi:estwin~ve,Ambe!'"S~9rtve,Govelliew
.~(;)nve;...Meenmtst"'9rive-and .SeaeresUJFiue, have requested the City to regulate the parking in
this neighborhood to address the parking problems associated non-residents parking cars on
~~ts; and
'?J.V~ K )71 ... f>.;c;,..'i:;~
WHEREAS, the establishment of per. ·~ · ~-days a week, 24-hours a day, is
intended to reduce parking impacts alon & r"'created by nonresident vehicular
parking, and is necessary to provide reasonably available and convenient parking for the benefit
of residents who live on..th~ts snd their guests. '%~i'°j'71./J,4~
WHEREAS, the City Council determines that establishing permit parking would
not result in significant environmental effects because the result of the program will not
significantly alter existing conditions. Therefore, in accordance to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the City Council finds that establishment of the permit parking program is
considered a Categorical Exemption from CEQA based on Section 15301(c) of Article 19, which
states that operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing or minor alteration of
existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment. or topographic features
involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's
determination.
NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Reguir~lf f~~~~[> ... ~~6f~/1c:uncil finds that the establishment of a
permit parking area f~~~e.,...Amber~-Grive,~'Jtew-Srive,
.~cLSeaci:est-Orfve 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, is necessary to provide
parking on th~ streetJ for the residents who live there that is caused by long term parking of
nonresident vehicles on thes, street,. These adv!l2iip:wpft~J1ave resulted in det~rioratlon .of
the residential quality and character of the ~o 11Eriglf6orhood to the detriment of its
residents and their property values. For these reasons, the City Council finds that the
establishment of a permit parking area for the streets listed in Section 2 of this Resolution is
necessary to avoid the adverse impacts .~!J_t~l'.3-~~ja~~~.r~~q~n~!=!~.~~e..f! indicate? above and
to provide reasonably available and convenient parking for the benefit of the residents along
th~a, stree~ throughout the day and evening.
f>Wf't:'
t~\·t>f'.';
Section 2. Designation of Permit Parking Area. Based upon the findings in Section
1, the following areas are desig11ated for permit parking: .
'f'AJ2J.t) I . (lo 5f7i-ILC.S 01<l '!:.:;o u"j"'r\ '?,Pt:: ,,J \bi <;,)J:>,Lt·'' 1.J(/iW8'lr5~
0 naire Dri e (b h sides from n rth e~;-0f street t sou!h 7rrd of street)
Cres ind (botfl ide from Oc n · e Drive to en oµtreet)
Amber (both s1 s from Ocea ire Drive to enc} street)
Cove · Drive (boi!:h s· s from Oce n ire Drive~o d of s eet) ~mis Drive (bot side~om Co evie Drive to nd of stre t
/e<:lvrest ive (b sides ~ eanair Drive o Crenshaw Blvd)
Section 3. Designation of Parking Restrictions. Pursuant to Section 22507 of the
Vehicle Code, the permit parking restrictions on the portions of the streetf listed in Section 2
above in the~ neighborhood shall be as follows:
·~ ~ JC: (1.-4-h-:Ji, ii.:>4
No parking except by permit only.
Section 4. Posting of Signs. The parking prohibitions contained in Section 3 of this
Resolution shall not become effective until signs have been posted giving adequate notice of
the parking restrictions imposed by this resolution. The Director of Public Works is hereby
authorized to erect such signs. Vehicles that are parked without displaying the required permit
may be towed pursuant Vehicle Code Section 22651 (n).
Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
z ::;;
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this.' !1 day of!_!t 201~ .
I I
... /'~~r
ATTEST: ,. ··
' ILi y-:.
City Cler~~
State of California )
County of Los Angeles ) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )
I, ~r'!!laie, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify
that the above Resolution No. 20~~. was duly and regularly pp_sed and adopted by the said
City Council at a regular meeting tliereof held on-~~. 2~9· .
¥ ,
' ,
City Clerk
Resolution No. 201'1!,..:...
Page 2 of2
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Angela Jarasunas <angelaromasj@gmail.com>
Monday, January 14, 2019 1:51 PM
cc
Re: 1/15/2019 City Council Meeting
Dear Mayor Duhovic and Council Members,
Thank you for your continued efforts to support our neighborhood in
addressing the large number of visitors to the nature preserve and Del Cerro
Park.
Given our home backs up to Del Cerro Park, we continue to be concerned
about nighttime use and gatherings in the park and would support either
closing the park after hours with a gate or increased enforcement to deter
nighttime use.
Further, regarding Item #4 on tomorrow's agenda -Modification of Access and
Parking Restrictions on Park Place -we are AGAINST moving the existing
parking spaces on Park Place into Del Cerro Park itself. Any reconfiguration of
the parking spaces would likely decrease the amount of green space in the
park. A parking lot at the top of Del Cerro Park would take away from the
pastoral beauty of the park. Additionally, we purchased our home several
years ago with no expectation of having a parking lot next to our back yard.
For all residents of the Del Cerro and Palos Verdes Park Place HOAs, we
support maintaining the semi-rural ambience of the area.
Thank you for your time.
Romas and Angela Jarasunas
3 Burrell Lane
Rancho Palos Verdes
1