Loading...
20190903 Late CorrespondenceCITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: September 3, 2019 SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, September 3, 2019 City Council meeting: Item No. Description of Material 2 Email exchange between Engineer Assistant James O'Neill and Robert Nelson; Email from William Patton Respectfully submitted, Emily Co orn LALATE CORRESPONDENCE\2019 Cover Sheets\20190903 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.docx From: James O'Neill Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2019 11:53 AM To: Teresa Takaoka; Enyssa Momoli Subject: FW: Council Fuel Modification Item; Vanderlip Meeting From: Robert Nelson <robert.nelson@rpvca.gov> Sent: Monday, September 2, 2019 3:13 PM To: James O'Neill <joneill@rpvca.gov> Subject: Re: Council Fuel Modification Item; Vanderlip Meeting James, My contact numbers: top priority. You are one busy guy and contacting me is not a My involvement in this item is only because we received an email at 9:38 about the 10 meeting and are only 10 minutes away so I came ASAP and Judy Foote soon after. For your info, Judy Foote is the on- site representative for the Jack Downhill Estate, owner of 20 Vanderlip Drive. Lisa Downhill, Trustee, lives in Mesa, AZ, working for Boeing. Judy and Lisa talk almost daily re 20 Vanderlip items. Thank you for hosting the Vanderlip Drive owners / PVPLC, RPV meeting last week. That everyone could get together on short notice was surprising and provided many important comments - such as the proposed Vanderlip Drive acacia removal is less than 1/2 of the actual requirement as the drive bordering PVPLC with acacias goes much further up the drive. Stopping at the gate is a great start however. My surprise was the 'city map' showing parcels id'd by our Los Angeles Dept of Agriculture and Weights (LADOAC) for fuel mod (2 locations - total 1,238 acres) our PVPLC folks said was wrong. How? I note the current staff report does not have a corrected LADOAC map. That PVPLC proposes 38 acres for $200,000 (fyi: $5,263 per acre I!) means LADOAC has some 1,200 acres remaining for RPV fuel mod; something we all admit will not be done at that cost ($6,315,780 total). My hope is both parties agree on a priority ranking for any future work to be done - with an explanation why that parcel has that ranking. (Close to homes, infrastructure, etc) Second, I was surprised our city is giving PVPLC $200,000 for their contracts; contracts which you indicated we have not reviewed for form, fit, function to our city's contractual standards, including standard paragraphs protecting our city liabilities for work such as this. This is important because, as was pointed out, cutting the acacia bushes / trees will involve the potential (distant I believe) for sparks and a grass fire. I also think we should have the right to see the 3 contracts PVPLC chose from - to be sure we are paying /getting the best value for our dollar. Again, its our money! But you are the guy in charge and these are simply my thoughts. See you tomorrow night! a From: James O'Neill Sent: Friday, August 30, 2019 4:45 PM To: Robert Nelson Subject: Fuel Modification It was nice meeting you this morning. I would like to follow up on our conversation this morning and be certain that you are clear on which map(s) are being used. I was told that you may be referring to the map from the June City Council meeting and want to explain that. Please let me know if you are available to speak on Tuesday and the best phone number to reach you at. Alternatively, I can be reached at 310-544-5247, or my cell at L Thank you and have a great weekend. James S. O'Neill, MPM Engineering Assistant, Department of Public Works (310) 544-5247 (Office) gn i1W VCa.ov L,('ilv of'Rancho Palos P"er es 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 From: William Patton <billpatton21 @icloud.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 7:44 AM To: CC Cc: Ken DeLong; Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>; Robert Nelson <nelsongang@aol.com>; Kit Ruona; Dave Koch; Ara Mihranian Subject: NCCP & Brush Clearance Grant Just a couple of fairly important suggestions as to upcoming potential council actions. First the NCCP. The recent Supreme Court decision and the subsequent new Interior Regulations must be seriously considered and the proposed NCCP substantially modified or canceled. Specifically Homeowner rights are now more clearly defined with the ability to "take" by local government dramatically diminished. Also if a mitigation "take" is contemplated the homeowner must receive FMV. I also suggest, if not canceled in its entirety, inclusion in the NCCP of 7 entities to be considered "Endangered", as none of the 7 are defined as endangered by Federal or State statues, is folly and frankly would be unwise. Explaining to residents that private property having any of such non -endangered entities could subject them to mitigation and loss of property would be very difficult! Specifically no one who expects to run again for Council again should want to defend their support of inclusion of items on private property that are not not deemed endangered by Federal or State statues! And the term "repopulate" in anticipation of the return of endangered species not presently known in RPV should also be removed as it does not seem justified to burden private property homeowners with such an unnecessary regulation. BRUSH CLEARANCE Second item 2 on the Council agenda; a $200, 000 grant to the Land Conservatory for brush removal, should be much more specifically defined to justify such expenditures and definitely spent only under the supervision and direction of the RPV staff. I also question why the Land Conservatory is even needed for such projects? Thank you for your consideration. Bill a CITY OF!RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 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 2 Email from Jim York 6 Email from Sunshine Respectfully submitted, Emily Co orn LALATE CORRESPONDENCE\2019 Cover Sheets\20190903 additions revisions to agenda.doex From: Teresa Takaoka Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 8:09 AM To: Nathan Zweizig; Enyssa Momoli Subject: FW: Fuel Load Reduction Grant to PVPLC 9/3/19 Regular Business Item 2 Late corr -----Original Message ----- From: Jim York <theyorkproperties@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 5:57 PM To: Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>; CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Cc: Adrienne Mohan <amohan@pvplc.org>; Sunshine <sunshinerpv@aol.com> Subject: Fuel Load Reduction Grant to PVPLC 9/3/19 Regular Business Item 2 We strongly support the grant request by the PVPLC. The Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve has a history of devastation fires of over 250 acres. Acacias are a major problem This grant is a good start. We have been making contributions to the PVPLC for acacias removal and will continue to do so. They may have access through our 94 acre property to access the Preserve for acacias removal when necessary Jim York Managing Member York Point View Properties, LLC From: Emily Colborn Sent: Friday, August 30, 2019 3:40 PM To: CityClerk Subject: FW: RPV City Council Meeting, September 3, 2019 Regular Business Item 6 LC Emily Colborn, MMC, City Clerk rs IN= I`�� City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. o"e, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 (310) 544-5208 direct (310) 544-5217 office Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail From: SUNSHINE <sunshinerpv@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2019 6:20 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Cc: PC <PC@rpvca.gov>; imac <imac@rpvca.gov>; MrsRPV@aol.com; ken.delong@verizon.net; EPC <EPC@rpvca.gov>; mbacon@rpvca.gov; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Elias Sassoon <esassoon@rpvca.gov>; Cory Linder <CoryL@rpvca.gov>; Gabriella Yap <gyap@rpvca.gov> Subject: RPV City Council Meeting, September 3, 2019 Regular Business Item 6 1�S DATE: August 29, 2019 FROM: SUNSHINE 310-377-8761 TO: RPV City Council, Staff and interested parties RE: Statement of purpose for City acquisition of property If the City's purpose for spending tax payer dollars to purchase this Crownview parcel is to develop a new trail then, Staff's Recommendation is in error. The Agenda Report for this (and another) parcel does not disclose that there is an existing trail on a recorded utility easement which is maintained by SoCal Water, the Edison Co and private parties. The trail on the easement across this parcel is not on the Palos Verdes Loop Trail "ideal route" however, there is a trail which goes off of the easement to the east which is a functional link between the PV Loop Trail and the trailhead amenities at Miraleste Plaza. �O0 If Staff wants to acquire this now designated HILLSIDE parcel as a potential addition to the PV Preserve, they should say so. And, they should complete modifying the Development Code and updating the Trails Network Plan so that the existing trail will be preserved as a TYPE 3 fire road in perpetuity. Here is a perfect example of why not maintaining the RPV Trails Network Plan as a "living document" has caused the residents of the Palos Verdes Peninsula to lose miles of recreational trail connections, other public amenities and emergency preparedness infrastructure. The following excerpt from the Agenda Report is true when taken out of context. Chapter 8 Agreement No. Statement of Public Purpose and/or Intended Use of the Parcel September 3, 2019 The subject property (APN 7566-015-026) is a .63 -acre vacant lot in the 3100 block of Crownview Drive in the Miraleste Canyon Area abutting the City of Rolling Hills to the north, vacant land to the east and west, and jutting south into a residential neighborhood. Acquiring this parcel could help the City work toward completing a trail segment in the Conceptual Trails P1an.The purpose of the Conceptual Trails Plan is to identify trail opportunities within the community, so that the acquisition and development of new public trails, through new development proposals, public works projects, and voluntary efforts, can be integrated into the City's existing public trails network. Whatever happened to the RPV General Plan Goal of preserving and enhancing the network of roadways, trails and pathways? Staff has no access to when a trail's Status: is changed from whatever to Category I. Staff isn't aware that something like 90 percent of the trails with "narratives" in the Conceptual Trails Plan are existing trails in use. This means that there is nothing in the Budget for Public Works to use to maintain them nor to design enhancements. Against my advice, the City acquired the lot which is shown on the same map. All the City has done with it is pay to pick up the trash. So sad.