20201006 Late Correspondence1
From:Teresa Takaoka
Sent:Wednesday, October 7, 2020 9:56 AM
To:Nathan Zweizig
Subject:FW: Please vote YES for the traffic signal at the intersection of Hawthorne and Via
Rivera
For late corr
From: Deb Kagei <dskagei@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 4:55 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Alegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Elias Sassoon <esassoon@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com; Cc: A. Deb Kagei
<dskagei@gmail.com>
Subject: Please vote YES for the traffic signal at the intersection of Hawthorne and Via Rivera
Dear RPV City Mayor, Mayor Pro Temp, Council members, City Manager, Public Works Director, Finance Director,
Finance Advisory Committee members, and Traffic Safety Committee members:
We have lived in this area since 1991. While our children attended Point Vicente Elementary school, we lived on Calle La
Resolana, and then moved to Via Rivera in 2002. Therefore, I have a good perspective of the traffic situation from the
viewpoint of a resident of the immediate Pt. Vicente school area, as well as from the viewpoint of a parent bringing
children to and from the school from a location north on Hawthorne Blvd.
It is clear to me that a Smart Signal is necessary. One main reason is that an elementary school is located in this
neighborhood. We are one of the few, if not the only, school in RPV where leaving the school involves a dangerous
traffic exit route. If your destination is northbound on Hawthorne, there are only 2 possible exits, and both exits involve
making a left turn with no traffic signal onto a busy street during school hours. And in both those cases, there is
increased traffic on Hawthorne, and in both directions of PV Drive West, due to people on their way to and from PVIS
and PVHS.
Across these past years, there has been a significant increase in traffic in both directions on Hawthorne and PV drive
west.
It has been so much harder to make a left turn northbound onto Hawthorne because of the Montessori school, Trader
Joe’s, Starbucks, and all the other regularly frequented establishments at Golden Cove shopping center.
Cars come down the hill at very high speeds and begin to brake for the PVD West traffic signal after they’ve already
passed Via Rivera. Even the drastic improvements in the auto manufacturing business has exasperated the problem.
Now every car, no matter whether it’s the least expensive, has amazing pick‐up to gain speed quickly up the hill from PV
drive west.
The alternative suggestion of a “Right Turn only” is a dangerous alternative:
During school drop‐off/pick‐up times (for both Pt. Vicente and Montessori), the traffic going downhill on
Hawthorne will back up in the left lane of Hawthorne Blvd. between Via Rivera and PV Drive West. It will make
it difficult for the multitude of “right‐turners” to get into the left lane in an effort to make the U‐turn at PV Drive
West.
The location of the left turn lane into Golden Cove confounds the issue. The patrons of Golden Cove, and
particularly the Montessori families, will have a difficult time making the left turn from southbound Hawthorne
2
Blvd. into the parking lot because there will be a non‐stop steady stream of cars going uphill (north‐bound) on
Hawthorne. There already cars making the “right turn on red” from PV Drive West to Hawthorne. There will be
few breaks in the traffic due to the many “u‐turners” filling in the one gap that currently exists. Only 4 to 5
vehicles can fit in the left turn lane entering Golden Cove parking lot. Therefore, cars attempting to turn left into
Golden Cove will spill over beyond the left‐turn only lane, into the left lane of Hawthorne boulevard.
The cars backing up in the left lane of south‐bound Hawthorne is made more dangerous due to cars traveling
downhill at high speeds on a curving road.
The cars backing up in the left lane of south‐bound Hawthorne will funnel the cars going downhill to the right
lane of Hawthorne, making it that more difficult for the the cars trying to make a right turn from Via Rivera to
Hawthorne.
Also, people will continue to make the illegal U‐turn from northbound Hawthorne at the Via Rivera intersection.
The above issues could possibly be somewhat alleviated if “right‐turns on red” were prohibited on PV Drive West in
front of the 7‐11. If people followed the law, that might provide a break in the traffic sufficient for people to make the
left turn from Via Rivera to Hawthorne during school hours. The reason I highlight “if people follow the law,” is because
people very frequently make the illegal U‐turn from north‐bound Hawthorne Blvd. at the Via Rivera intersection.
In the past, I appreciated the measures taken by the City Council to alleviate the danger of the intersection (such as
when it reconfigured the Hawthorne meridian making it possible to make the left turn from Via Rivera into the left lane
of north‐bound Hawthorne Blvd., and the installation of the “No U‐Turn” sign at that meridian strip). However, RPV
acknowledges that increased traffic makes further steps necessary— but “right turn only” is not the answer.
Thank you so much for your time and effort regarding this traffic problem.
Respectfully,
Deb Kagei
30339 Via Rivera
Sent from my iPhone
1
From:Teresa Takaoka
Sent:Wednesday, October 7, 2020 9:53 AM
To:Nathan Zweizig
Subject:FW: Agenda Item M - Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal
Late corr
From: Sy Rubin <srubin@ieee.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 6:08 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Alegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: Agenda Item M ‐ Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal
Agree with staff recommendations. Have personally seen several pretty bad accidents at that corner.
The signal would not on average delay the traffic on Hawthorne but would allow Via Rivera traffic safe access
to Hawthorne Blvd. North.
So please approve the signal at the subject location.
Thanks.
Sy Rubin
213‐503‐3680 cell
424‐400‐1057 office
srubin@ieee.org
1
From:Teresa Takaoka
Sent:Wednesday, October 7, 2020 9:53 AM
To:Nathan Zweizig
Subject:FW: Please vote YES for the traffic signal at the intersection of Hawthorne and Via
Rivera
For late late corr
Tx
t
From: Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 5:14 PM
To: Deb Kagei <dskagei@gmail.com>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC
<FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Please vote YES for the traffic signal at the intersection of Hawthorne and Via Rivera
Hello Deb,
Thank you for reaching out to us on this important matter. As you know the staff report requesting an award of a
construction contract for the traffic signal project is on the October 6, 2020 City Council agenda. Here is a link to the
Staff Report (Item M on the 10‐6‐2020 agenda) for you to view. In an effort to expedite the installation of this traffic
signal, you may not know that the City Council at their July 7, 2020 meeting authorized staff to proceed with purchasing
the poles and mast arms associated with the installation of the Traffic Signal at Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd. Here is a
link to that staff report (Item I on the 7‐7‐2020 Agenda).
Best regards,
Ron Dragoo, PE
Principal Engineer
City Hall is open to the public during regular business hours. To help prevent the spread of COVID‐19, visitors
are required to wear face coverings and adhere to physical distancing guidelines. Some employees are working
on rotation and may be working remotely. If you need to visit City Hall, please schedule an appointment in
advance by calling the appropriate department and follow all posted directions during your visit. Walk‐ups are
limited to one person at a time. Please note that our response to your inquiry could be delayed. For a list of
department phone numbers, visit the Staff Directory on the City website.
From: Deb Kagei <dskagei@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 4:55 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Alegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Elias Sassoon <esassoon@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com; Cc: A. Deb Kagei
2
<dskagei@gmail.com>
Subject: Please vote YES for the traffic signal at the intersection of Hawthorne and Via Rivera
Dear RPV City Mayor, Mayor Pro Temp, Council members, City Manager, Public Works Director, Finance Director,
Finance Advisory Committee members, and Traffic Safety Committee members:
We have lived in this area since 1991. While our children attended Point Vicente Elementary school, we lived on Calle La
Resolana, and then moved to Via Rivera in 2002. Therefore, I have a good perspective of the traffic situation from the
viewpoint of a resident of the immediate Pt. Vicente school area, as well as from the viewpoint of a parent bringing
children to and from the school from a location north on Hawthorne Blvd.
It is clear to me that a Smart Signal is necessary. One main reason is that an elementary school is located in this
neighborhood. We are one of the few, if not the only, school in RPV where leaving the school involves a dangerous
traffic exit route. If your destination is northbound on Hawthorne, there are only 2 possible exits, and both exits involve
making a left turn with no traffic signal onto a busy street during school hours. And in both those cases, there is
increased traffic on Hawthorne, and in both directions of PV Drive West, due to people on their way to and from PVIS
and PVHS.
Across these past years, there has been a significant increase in traffic in both directions on Hawthorne and PV drive
west.
It has been so much harder to make a left turn northbound onto Hawthorne because of the Montessori school, Trader
Joe’s, Starbucks, and all the other regularly frequented establishments at Golden Cove shopping center.
Cars come down the hill at very high speeds and begin to brake for the PVD West traffic signal after they’ve already
passed Via Rivera. Even the drastic improvements in the auto manufacturing business has exasperated the problem.
Now every car, no matter whether it’s the least expensive, has amazing pick‐up to gain speed quickly up the hill from PV
drive west.
The alternative suggestion of a “Right Turn only” is a dangerous alternative:
During school drop‐off/pick‐up times (for both Pt. Vicente and Montessori), the traffic going downhill on
Hawthorne will back up in the left lane of Hawthorne Blvd. between Via Rivera and PV Drive West. It will make
it difficult for the multitude of “right‐turners” to get into the left lane in an effort to make the U‐turn at PV Drive
West.
The location of the left turn lane into Golden Cove confounds the issue. The patrons of Golden Cove, and
particularly the Montessori families, will have a difficult time making the left turn from southbound Hawthorne
Blvd. into the parking lot because there will be a non‐stop steady stream of cars going uphill (north‐bound) on
Hawthorne. There already cars making the “right turn on red” from PV Drive West to Hawthorne. There will be
few breaks in the traffic due to the many “u‐turners” filling in the one gap that currently exists. Only 4 to 5
vehicles can fit in the left turn lane entering Golden Cove parking lot. Therefore, cars attempting to turn left into
Golden Cove will spill over beyond the left‐turn only lane, into the left lane of Hawthorne boulevard.
The cars backing up in the left lane of south‐bound Hawthorne is made more dangerous due to cars traveling
downhill at high speeds on a curving road.
The cars backing up in the left lane of south‐bound Hawthorne will funnel the cars going downhill to the right
lane of Hawthorne, making it that more difficult for the the cars trying to make a right turn from Via Rivera to
Hawthorne.
Also, people will continue to make the illegal U‐turn from northbound Hawthorne at the Via Rivera intersection.
The above issues could possibly be somewhat alleviated if “right‐turns on red” were prohibited on PV Drive West in
front of the 7‐11. If people followed the law, that might provide a break in the traffic sufficient for people to make the
left turn from Via Rivera to Hawthorne during school hours. The reason I highlight “if people follow the law,” is because
people very frequently make the illegal U‐turn from north‐bound Hawthorne Blvd. at the Via Rivera intersection.
3
In the past, I appreciated the measures taken by the City Council to alleviate the danger of the intersection (such as
when it reconfigured the Hawthorne meridian making it possible to make the left turn from Via Rivera into the left lane
of north‐bound Hawthorne Blvd., and the installation of the “No U‐Turn” sign at that meridian strip). However, RPV
acknowledges that increased traffic makes further steps necessary— but “right turn only” is not the answer.
Thank you so much for your time and effort regarding this traffic problem.
Respectfully,
Deb Kagei
30339 Via Rivera
Sent from my iPhone
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY CLERK
OCTOBER 6, 2020
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented
for tonight's meeting.
Item No.
Public
Comment
M
1
2
Description of Material
Email from: Ashley Owen; Emily Mason; Gary Yeung
Email exchange between Principal Engineer Dragoo and Judy
Dabinett; Emails from: Bonnie Oseas
Emails from: Dale Hanks
Emails from: llya Lie-Nielsen; Mickey Radich; Jack Flemming
**PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted
through Monday, October 5, 2020**.
Respectfully submitted,
L:\LA TE CORRESPONDENCE\2020 Cover Sheets\20201 006 additions revisions to agenda.docx
From: Teresa Takaoka
Sent:
To:
Tuesday, October 6, 2020 12:51 PM
CityCierk
Subject: FW: Public Comment
Late carr
From: Ashley Owen <ashleyowen017@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 12:45 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment
Dear City Council,
I'm a concerned resident. My name is Ashley Owen.
I am concerned about a proposition coming out in November. That is State Measure 16. State Measure 16 permits the
government to discriminate based on race or gender. This is clearly illegal and we request our elected officials to take a
position against it. Oddly, supporters of State Measure 16 state that State Measure 16 benefits people of color in
education and government contracting. But where is the language in the proposition that says that? Instead the
proposition merely eliminates the California constitution that says you cannot based on race or gender. That is the
reason why the residents of the city are against State Measure 16. We must stand against racism in all forms.
Please read out my comments in the city council meeting.
Thank you!
Ashley Owen
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
LC
Public comments
Teresa Takaoka
Tuesday, October 6, 2020 12:39 PM
CityCierk
FW: Public Comment
From: Emily Mason <EmilyMason7S@outlook.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 12:37 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment
Dear Council member,
Please stand with the people of this city to defend equality under our constitution and reject State Measure
16. State Measure 16 would amend our constitution and allow the state government to discriminate between
Californians based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin.
Californians overwhelmingly reject State Measure 16. A poll of 1,704 California residents released on
September 16 by the Public Policy Institute of California showed voters opposed to State Measure 16 by huge
margins. Eighty percent of voters have decided how to vote, and 60% of voters who have decided are opposed
to State Measure 16.
Californians in every area of the state reject State Measure 16. In Los Angeles 53% of voters who have decided
how to vote are opposed to State Measure 16.
Please join us in defending California's unity and equality. Don't divide us. Don't amend our constitution to
allow the state government to discriminate between Californians based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or
national origin.
Please read out my comments aloud in the city council meeting general comments session.
Sincerely,
Emily Mason
Pv\?ftc
1 Co vvt (Y\Q!V\ 1-s
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Late carr Public Comment
-----Original Message-----
Teresa Takaoka
Tuesday, October 6, 2020 10:46 AM
CityCierk
FW: Public Comment
From: Gary Yeung <garyyeung95@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 8:13AM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment
Dear Councilmember,
I am a Democrat. And I am a concerned resident.
The reason why both of these are important is because as a Democrat, I am being told that I must support proposition
16 because proposition 16 will prevent discrimination. That is a lie. Proposition 16 is one of the most racist propositions I
have ever seen. It allows for one or two groups of people to be elevated above all other races. Weill may benefit, I
cannot except my party telling me that I must vote a certain way merely because the party says so. Especially, when it is
racist. Therefore, please vote against proposition 16. Thank you. (Please read out my comments in the meeting.)
Gary Yeung
1
Pv \0\1'c
C0 VV\ YY\£41\f j'
From: Ron Dragoo
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 1:56:48 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: Judy Dabinett
Cc: CC; Ara Mihranian; DIR pwc100; Trang Nguyen; Ramzi Awwad; FAC; Traffic
Subject: RE: Signal for Via Rivera
iCAUTION: [External Email]
This email originated from outside of our DIR organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and kr
,content is expected and is safe. If in doubt reach out and check with the sender by phone.
·•·····························•·····•··•••••·····························································•·•••·•·••·•·····•
Hello Judy,
Thank you for reaching out to us on this important matter. As you know a staff report requesting an award of a
construction contract for this project is on the October 6, 2020 City Council agenda. Here is a link to the Staff Report
O.t~}JlJY.l_QDJ.be 1J)-E?-2Q.f.QJ!g_E:.!J.Q.Q.) for you to view. In an effort to expedite the installation of this traffic signal, you may
not know that the City Council at their July 7, 2020 meeting authorized staff to proceed with purchasing the poles and
mast arms associated with the installation of the Traffic Signal at Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd. Here is a link to that
staff report UtQffil_Q!l.~.bg__ 7-7-7._Q£QAgefl~:l§.).
Best regards,
Ron Dragoo, PE
Principal Engineer
City Hall is open to the public during regular business hours. To help prevent the spread of COVID-19, visitors
are required to wear face coverings and adhere to physical distancing guidelines. Some employees are working
on rotation and may be working remotely. If you need to visit City Hall, please schedule an appointment in
advance by calling the appropriate department and follow all posted directions during your visit. Walk-ups are
limited to one person at a time. Please note that our response to your inquiry could be delayed. For a list of
department phone numbers, visit the Staff Directory on the City website.
From: Judy Dabinett <dabinett@cox.net>
Date: October 2, 2020 at 1:48:55 PM PDT
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>, John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>, Eric Alegria
<Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>, Ken Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>, Barbara Ferraro
<barbqLqJerraro~<l,gov>, David Bradley <gavid.bradley@rpvca.gov>, Ara Mihranian
<AraM_@.rpvca.gov>, PublicWorks <PublicWorl~pvca.gov>, Trang Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>, FAC
<.E~~@mvc<l,_gov>, Traffic <Traffic@my~Q..,gov>, "lmq;:!v@ctecomputer.com" <lmrpv@ctecomQuter.com>
Subject: Signal for Via Rivera
Thank you for keeping this project on track. I am a 42 year resident living on Via Rivera. The heavy, and
dangerous traffic is an on going problem especially with the elementary school here. My husband, Russ
Urban spent a lot of time working on getting the speed humps we have now. They have not slowed
1
people down. He would be so satisfied if he knew that we were getting a signal at Hawthorne.
Unfortunately he was killed in a plane crash and won't see the end result.
Please approve a bid for installation. It is a high priority for Public Safety. When life returns to "normal"
it will be so appreciated. This is Agenda M. Thank you
Judy Dabinett
Sent from my iPad
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Late carr
Teresa Takaoka
Tuesday, October 6, 2020 2:55 PM
CityCierk
FW: PLEASE PROCEED WITH TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT VIA RIVERA AND HAWTHORNE BLVD-
THANK YOU!
From: Bonnie Oseas <camposeas@cox.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 2:46 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: PLEASE PROCEED WITH TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT VIA RIVERA AND HAWTHORNE BLVD-THANK YOU!
Hi-
I have attended a few meetings about the traffic signal at Hawthorne Blvd and Via Rivera as I am
very passionate about the need for it and I still feel the
same way. I appreciate the work you have been doing over the past several months to make the
signal happen. I agree strongly with the staff
recommendation for the new Signal bid to be approved and for the project to proceed on
schedule. This signal is a very high priority as far as public safety
issues go and not an unimportant elective expense. Please continue moving forward with this
important safety issue.
Thank you so much for all of your hard work!
Bonnie Oseas
Point Vicente Neighborhood
1
Attachments: Draft4.pdf
From: dalehanks <dalehanks@pvstk.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 4:01 PM
To: Jaehee Yoon <jyoon@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Noncommercial Antenna_Draft Ord._City Council Meeting
Jaehee:
It's almost cetiainly too late, but here is my latest revision.
Dale Hanks
1 I
Suggestions to clarify the Draft Antenna ordinance.
C 2 e. A noncommercial amateur radio antenna assembly shall not
include oil derrick style structures and no structures with guy wires shall be
used or constructed, except as provided for in this Section.
Problem: The only "except"s are in D 3 e, which applies only to Planning Commission
approval.
Solution: Move D 3 e to subsection C 2.
C 2 i. All antennas capable of being retracted and extended shall be
retracted to its minimum size and height when not in use or retracted as
required in any conditions of approval issued by the City.
Problem: "When not in use" needs definition. Is it when not in use for one hour, or when on
vacation? Note that when the antenna is retracted it advertises that no one is home.
Solution: Delete C 2 i.
c 2 k. Upon the sale or transfer of the subject property any permit issued
under this section shall not be transferable to any other person including a
new property owner.
Problem: "Transfer" is open to misinterpretation. It could be changing title from dual
ownership to a single survivor, to a trust, to a child survivor, or even a re-finance with a bank.
Solution: Delete C 2 k.
C 4 b ii. A typed mailing list of all property owners within a five
hundred-foot radius to the subject property, using the last equalized
tax roll of the county assessor and any affected homeowners
associations, and a vicinity map identifying all properties included on
the mailing list.
Problem 1: Wouldn't an electronic mailing list be more suitable?
Problem 2 : (Late discovery: D 1 has a clause "including submittal requirements
for the antenna Site Plan Review application in subsection (4)(b)".
This eliminates the need to fix Problem 2 and C 4 b vi.)
Problem 2: Compare to D 2 (the Director shall provide \VFitten notice).
It appears that responsibility for obtaining the mailing list is shifted to the Director.
Solution: Rewrite C 4 b ii and D 2.
C 4 b v. The applicant shall certify that the proposed antennas and
installation, comply with FCC regulations related to interference
and in the event the interference occurs, the applicant will take all
steps necessary to resolve the same.
Problem: FCC requirements are different.
Solution: Add "as required by FCC regulations" after "necessary".
C 4 b vi. The applicant shall, as part of the application, construct at
the applicant's expense, a mock up of the proposed antenna at
the proposed location. Said mock up shall be the same size and
dimensions as the proposed antenna. The mocl< up shall be
coordinated under the direction of the Director or his/her
designee. Once constructed, the silhouette shall be certified by a
licensed engineer on a form provided by the City. In the
alternative, the applicant may submit a photo simulation depicting
the proposed antenna in size, height and dimensions, as required
by the City to depict the proposed antenna as it vvould appear
from the surrounding area.
Problem: A photo simulation should also be allovved in Subsection D, Planning Commission
approval.
Solution: Move to General regulations
End. (Draft4.odt)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
lc
-----Original Message-----
Teresa Takaoka
Tuesday, October 6, 2020 12:52 PM
CityCierk
FW: To be read at City Council Meeting 10-6-20 re: Cox issues (I'm having internet and
Zoom issues)
From: llya Lie-Nielsen <stickerburr@mac.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 12:41 PM
To: CityCierk <CityCierk@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>
Subject: To be read at City Council Meeting 10-6-20 re: Cox issues (I'm having internet and Zoom issues)
We have been having technical issues with Cox for a couple of years, with many technician visits including visits by the
executive level tech team. Initially, the techs could not find the source of our problems with internet and cable outages
and replaced our interior lines, to no avail. The higher level techs became involved and worked on the lines from our
house to the "drop" on the street and at the "drop" itself. Our service improved but was never consistent nor was our
service ever provided at the level for which we paid. Earlier this year, when our main cable box failed, a tech switched it
out and we began paying a higher fee. We tried to block one channel, which we had done previously with no issues, and,
suddenly, we had to input a PIN to record or watch anything on any other channel. We also were getting cable signals
with music and sound effects tracks but lacking the dialogue track. The executive tech team visited again, several times,
trying different fixes, none of which were successful. We were asked to try various remedies, record our efforts and
send the video to one executive team member. We were finally told that both issues had been reproduced by the
engineers in the "back office" and were then to be handled by the Comcast level engineers to be fixed as they are the
manufacturers of the box. As the pandemic hit, I heard nothing more about the resolution of those issues and was
hopeful that, with the cessation of the pandemic, that the engineers would again work on the glitches, In the meantime,
we have lived with the problems.
In August, we began having complete outages of digital phone, internet and cable, occurring several times a day. As I
have a senior living with us, my mom, it is especially concerning to lose a land line. We called Cox tech support and their
in-office reboots were unsuccessful. Three technicians visited, to no avail, though we were told by one that work was
being done in Lunada Bay which might be the source of the issues. When I reached out to the executive level technician
with whom we had worked on the previous issues, I was directed to Brian, with the Executive Escalations team. I was
informed that I would be getting future service "as is" and not to call Cox tech support. He stated that he would be my
only contact and would make any determination about our ongoing service and any tech support he deemed worthy. I
was also told that we could take our business elsewhere if we didn't agree, despite the fact that I told him there were
very limited options, particularly in our area. I have been a loyal Cox customer for many years and have always paid our
bills on time and yet I was made to feel as if we had done something wrong, despite the fact the the initial issues
admitted by the company as the fault of Cox and the latest were widespread in PV. The statement that our service is "as
is" was shocking as we are expected to pay in full and Cox would have no responsibility to ensure service. I received a
nasty follow up letter reiterating that I would have to go through the executive office for any future issues or lose our
service. Again, service disruptions or lack of service could be calamitous given my mom's advanced age.
I hope that this information is helpful in your ongoing discussions with the company. I sent City Manager Ara Mihranian
my NextDoor post regarding the issue and the numerous responses which are representative of the wide dissatisfaction
1
with not only Cox's technical problems, but worse, the lack of concern and the untenable behavior of its reps to their
customers. Thanks so much for your time and effort on behalf of all RPV citizens.
llya Lie-Nielsen
Sent from my iPad
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
LC
Teresa Takaoka
Tuesday, October 6, 2020 12:30 PM
CityCierk
FW: Cox Internet Service
From: Mickey Radich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 12:26 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Cox Internet Service
I am writing this email to complain about my Cox internet service as well as the high cost for their services.
Even before the pandemic I experienced difficulty with Cox's internet service and complained to them on
numerous occasions because of their poor service quality. On occasion when I called they sent out service
personnel and they would check on their external wiring and they usually changed the cable wire connections.
The reception would improve for a while but would then get bad again.
During the pandemic things got much worse. On most days there are many times I cannot download from
the internet to read my emails and downloads. I don't know how long these outages last but when I would try
again later it sometimes worked and sometimes it did not work. A few times I called Cox to complain and each
time I was told that there was an outage "in your area" so they could not diagnose the problem and would I
please call later after the outage. I got disgusted and quit calling them because they could not provide any
solutions.
I am also complaining about the high cost for our Cox services. We pay approximately $225.00 a month for
our total service: a basic TV package (does not include Showtime, but with a DVR} $146.00, high speed
internet $75.00 because their regular internet speed was inadequate and they were able to charge us more
for high speed internet, which we did not need. We do not use the Cox phone service. I feel that these prices
are a total rip-off and to make matters worse, they continue to raise their prices at will.
I think that if there were competition in the marketplace, we would experience much lower pricing, but
having a monopoly gives Cox the opportunity to do whatever they wish and that will not benefit us, the users.
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Teresa Takaoka
Tuesday, October 6, 2020 7:55 AM
CityCierk
FW: Cox Problems
From: jack fleming <jjfleming2000@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 11:18 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Cox Problems
Hello,
Recently I've encountered a problem with bounced emails sent to friends, neighbors and business associates
with Cox email extensions, this wasn't a problem three months ago. A few weeks ago I sent out several group
emails only to have all of the Cox users bounced, I tried several times to res end them a few got through and the
majority bounced as undeliverable. It's impossible to communicate this way.
Thank you,
Jack Fleming
310-377-5608
1 d.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY CLERK
OCTOBER 6, 2020
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received through
Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, October 6, 2020 City Council meeting:
Item No.
M
1
2
3
4
Description of Material
Email exchange between City Manager Mihranian: Katherine Williams;
Doug Hall
Email exchange between Principal Engineer Dragoo: Carolyn and
Bruce Donaldson; Robert Gulcher; Judy Dabinett; Janette Crisfield;
Kathrine Anderson; Nancy Bruce
Email from: Richard Guinto; Robert McKinney; Richard Hook; Ann
Shaw; Judy Maizlish
Email from: Mark and Mei Martin; Lynda and Paul Heran; Kirk Hyde ;
Geoff Wainwright; Shannon and Ryan Kilcullen; Kathy Edgerton; Mark
and Joyce Schoettler; John Maniatakis; Jeanne Lacombe; Kathy
Edgerton; Jeff Richards; Anthony Todora; Don Douthwright;David
Jankowski; Romas Jarasunas; Joan Olenick; Glenn Cornell; Craig
Whited; Kevin and Teri McNab; Rick and Lori Daniels
Email from: Elise Klein
Email from: William Patton
Email exchange between Project Manager O'Neill and Sandy Hooper
Emails from: Margoth Maertens; Corinne Gerrard; Ken and Sylvia
Schaff; Patricia and Christine Maertens
Re~mitted
Emily Colborn
L:\LATE CORRESPONDENCE\2020 Cover Sheets\20201005 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.docx
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Teresa Takaoka
Thursday, October 1, 2020 8 :28AM
CityCierk
FW: PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT VIA RIVERA
Attachments: RPVC(_ 1 0_6_2020_ SR Award Traffic Signal Installation Hawthorne Blvd . at Via Rivera -
Copy .pdf
Late carr
From: Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 7:37 PM
To: Katherine Williams <isabellapaloma2@gmail.com>; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank
<John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken Dyda <Ken .Dyda@rpvca .gov>; Barbara
Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley <david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks
<PublicWorks@rpvca .gov>; Trang Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>;
lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: RE : PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT VIA RIVERA
Mrs. Williams,
Thank you for taking the time to write the City Council regarding the proposed traffic signal at
Hawthorne Blvd. and Via Rivera .
I am not sure where you heard that this Council-approved project was being placed on the
backburner.
In fact, it's just the opposite.
The City Council is being asked to consider approving the construction contract for this project at its
meeting on Tuesday, October 6.
Once approved, this project should begin construction by late November.
I've attached the October 6 Staff Report for your review.
Ara
Ara Michael Mihranian
City Manager
C ITV OF f~CHO PALOS \!tROES
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310 -544 -5202 (telephone)
31 0-544 -5293 (fax)
\V\.
aram@rpvca .gov
www.rpvca .gov
Jl Do you rea ll y need to print th is e-mai l?
This e-mail message contains information belongmg to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be privileged, confidential and/or protected from
disclosure. The Information is intended only for use of the individual or entity named. Unauthonzed dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly proh ibited. If
you received this email in error, or are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender Immediately. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation.
From: Katherine Williams <isabellapaloma2@gmail.com >
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 7:25 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov >; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov >; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov >; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov >; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov >; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca .gov >; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca .gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov >; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov >; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT VIA RIVERA
Dear Sir /Madam,
I am concerned that our promised traffic signal at the Hawthorne end of Via Rivera in the Point Vicente
neighborhood is possibly being put on the back burner. I understood that it was approved by the council
members, for which I thank you all. Now, I am hearing that proposed cuts may include our traffic signal.
Please do not cut our signal. This is still a very dangerous intersection. Even as a long time and confident
driver, it scares me every day to make a left turn onto Hawthorne from Via Rivera. Even making a right turn
can be difficult, especially if there is a car waiting to turn left. Only a day or two ago, there was a car waiting at
the top of the steep driveway coming from Golden Cove center -across from the end of Via Rivera - I had no
idea where that driver intended to go: straight across? Right up Hawthorne? Left across the
intersection? Cars come down Hawthorne and move into the right turn lane to turn onto Via Rivera and then
change their mind and move back into teh lane to continue down Hawthorne. So many near misses
here! There are still far too many cars speeding down Hawthorne! And far too many people doing illegal u-
turns. It's chaos, as usual.
In conclusion, please approve the traffic signal for the safety of our community, those who visit our community
and those who shop in our community. And for the safety of my family and my children, who are
inexperienced drivers.
Thank you for listening,
Katherine Williams
Rue Valois
2
From: Teresa Takaoka
Sent:
To:
Friday, October 2, 2020 9:27 AM
CityCierk
Subject: Re: Traffic light at Hawthorne Bl and Via Rivera
From: Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 1:05 PM
To: doug hall <dougghall@yahoo.com>; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric
Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>;
David Bradley <david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
<lmrpv@ctecomputer.com>
Subject: RE: Traffic light at Hawthorne Bland Via Rivera
Mr. Hall,
Thank you for taking the time to express your support for the installation of the traffic signal at Hawthorne Blvd. and Via
Rivera.
Your email is part of the public record and will be provided to the City Council on October 6 as late correspondence.
Ara
Ara Michael Mihranian
City Manager
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310-544-5202 (telephone)
310-544-5293 (fax)
aram@rpvca.gov
www. rpvca .gov
I1 Do you really need to print this e-mail?
This e-mail message contains information belonging to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be privileged,
confidential and/or protected from disclosure. The information is intended only for use of the individual or entity
named. Unauthorized dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, or
are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation.
-----Original Message-----
From: doug hall <dougghall@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 11:51 AM
1
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: Traffic light at Hawthorne Bland Via Rivera
I look forward to the approval and the eventual completion of the installation of the traffic light at Hawthorne and Via
Rivera.
Doug
424-634-0983
2
From: Teresa Takaoka
Sent:
To:
Friday, October 2, 2020 9:21 AM
CityCierk
Subject: Re: agenda item M via rivera and hawthorne traffic signal
From: Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 8:57AM
To: Carolyn Donaldson <carolynd2@verizon.net>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John .Cruikshank@rpvca .gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC
<FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca .gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Ramzi Awwad
<rawwad@ rpvca .gov>
Subject: RE : agenda item M via rivera and hawthorne traffic signal
Hello Carolyn,
Thank you for reaching out to us on this important matter. As you know a staff report requesting an award of a
construction contract for this project is on the October 6, 2020 City Council agenda . Here is a link to the Staff Report
(Item M on the 10-6-2020 agenda ) for you to view. In an effort to expedite the installation of this traffic signal, you may
not know that the City Council at their July 7, 2020 meeting authorized staff to proceed with purchasing the poles and
mast arms associated with the installation of the Traffic Signal at Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd . Here is a link to that
staff report (Item I on the 7-7-2020 Agenda ).
Best regards,
Ron Dragoo, PE
Principal Engineer
City Hall is open to the public during regular business hours. To help prevent the spread of COVID -19, visitors
are required to wear face coverings and adhere to physical distancing guidelines. Some employees are working
on rotation and may be working remotely. If you need to visit City Hall, please schedule an appointment in
advance by calling the appropriate department and follow all posted directions during your visit. Walk-ups are
limited to one person at a time. Please note that our response to your inquiry could be delayed . For a list of
department phone numbers, visit the Staff Directory on the City website.
From: Carolyn Donaldson <carolynd2@verizon.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 1:19 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov >; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca .gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric .Aiegria@rpvca.gov >; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca .gov >; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david .bradley@rpvca.gov >; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov >; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov >; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov >; FAC <FAC@rpvca .gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca .gov >; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: agenda item M via rivera and hawthorne traffic signal
1
To whom it may concern:
We need this public safety project completed as soon as possible ... it's necessary that the new signal bid is approved and
the project can proceed on schedule .... it is a public safety concern and has been for years ..... it's time to do something
about it. Thank you for all the work you have done to make this project possible ...
Carolyn and Bruce Donaldson
Rue de Ia pierre
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 8:40 AM
CityCierk
Subject: FW : Traffic signal
From: Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 1:54 PM
To: Robert Gulcher <rgulcher@aol.com>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca .gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca .gov>
Subject: RE: Traffic signal
Hello Robert,
Thank you for reaching out to us on this important matter. As you know a staff report requesting an award of a
construction contract for this project is on the October 6, 2020 City Council agenda . Here is a link to the Staff Report
(Item M on the 10-6-2020 agenda ) for you to view. In an effort to expedite the installation of this traffic signal, you may
not know that the City Council at their July 7, 2020 meeting authorized staff to proceed with purchasing the poles and
mast arms associated with the installation of the Traffic Signal at Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd. Here is a link to that
staff report (Item I on the 7-7 -2020 Agenda ).
Ron Dragoo, PE
Principal Engineer
City Hall is open to the public during regular business hours. To help prevent the spread of COVID -19, visitors
are required to wear face coverings and adhere to physical distancing guidelines. Some employees are working
on rotation and may be working remotely. If you need to visit City Hall, please schedule an appointment in
advance by calling the appropriate department and follow all posted directions during your visit. Walk-ups are
limited to one person at a time . Please note that our response to your inquiry could be delayed . For a list of
department phone numbers, visit the Staff Directory on the City website.
From: Robert Gulcher <rgulcher@aol.com >
Date: October 2, 2020 at 12 :31:18 PM PDT
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov >, John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca .gov >, Eric Alegria
<Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov >, Ken Dyda <Ken .Dyda@rpvca.gov >, Barbara Ferraro
<barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov >, David Bradley <david .bradley@rpvca.gov >, Ara Mihranian
<AraM@rpvca.gov >, PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca .gov >, Trang Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca.gov >, FAC
<FAC@rpvca .gov >, Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov >, "lmrpv@ctecomputer.com " <lmrpv@ctecomputer.com >
Subject: Traffic signal
1
Dear City Council Members,
Thank you for your service and thank you for moving forward with the traffic signal at the corner of
Hawthorne Blvd and Via Rivera. In the 42 years I've lived here, I've seen so many accidents, including
one which I was involved. I will improve the quality of life for our neighbor, especially when traffic is
back to normal.
Sent from my iPad
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 8:40 AM
CityCierk
FW: Signal for Via Rivera
From: Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 1:57 PM
To: Judy Dabinett <dabinett@cox.net>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; pwclOO@dir .ca.gov; Trang Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>;
Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Signal for Via Rivera
Hello Judy,
Thank you for reaching out to us on this important matter. As you know a staff report requesting an award of a
construction contract for this project is on the October 6, 2020 City Council agenda . Here is a link to the Staff Report
{Item M on the 10-6-2020 agenda ) for you to view. In an effort to expedite the installation of this traffic signal, you may
not know that the City Council at their July 7, 2020 meeting authorized staff to proceed with purchasing the poles and
mast arms associated with the installation of the Traffic Signal at Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd. Here is a link to that
staff report {Item I on the 7-7-2020 Agenda ).
Best regards,
Ron Dragoo, PE
Principal Engineer
City Hall is open to the public during regular business hours. To help prevent the spread of COVID-19, visitors
are required to wear face coverings and adhere to physical distancing guidelines . Some employees are working
on rotation and may be working remotely. If you need to visit City Hall, please schedule an appointment in
advance by calling the appropriate department and follow all posted directions during your visit. Walk-ups are
limited to one person at a time. Please note that our response to your inquiry could be delayed. For a list of
department phone numbers, visit the Staff Directory on the City website.
From: Judy Dabinett <dabinett@cox.net>
Date: October 2, 2020 at 1:48:55 PM PDT
To: CC <CC@rpvca .gov >, John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov >, Eric Alegria
<Eric.Aiegria@rpvca .gov >, Ken Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov >, Barbara Ferraro
<barbara.ferraro@rpvca .gov >, David Bradley <david .bradley@rpvca .gov >, Ara Mihranian
<AraM@rpvca .gov >, PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca .gov >, Trang Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca .gov >, FAC
<FAC@rpvca .gov>, Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov >, "lmrpv@ctecomputer.com " <lmrpv@ctecomputer.com >
Subject: Signal for Via Rivera
1 V\.
Thank you for keeping this project on track. I am a 42 year resident living on Via Rivera. The heavy, and
dangerous traffic is an on going problem especially with the elementary school here. My husband, Russ
Urban spent a lot of time working on getting the speed humps we have now. They have not slowed
people down. He would be so satisfied if he knew that we were getting a signal at Hawthorne.
Unfortunately he was killed in a plane crash and won't see the end result.
Please approve a bid for installation. It is a high priority for Public Safety. When life returns to "normal"
it will be so appreciated. This is Agenda M. Thank you
Judy Dabinett
Sent from my iPad
2
From: Teresa Takaoka
Sent:
To:
Monday, October 5, 2020 8:20 AM
CityCierk
Subject: FW: Agenda Item M -Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal
Late carr
From: Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Sunday, October 4, 2020 12:03 PM
To: 'Janette Crisfield' <janettecrisfield@gmail.com>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca .gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Agenda Item M -Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal
He ll o Janette,
Thank you for reaching out to us on this important matter. A s you know the staff report requesting an award of
a construction contract for this project is on the October 6 , 2020 City Council agenda. Here is a link to the Staff
Report (It em M on the 10 -6-2 02 0 age nda) for you to view. In an effort to expedite the installation of this traffic
signal , you may not know that the City Council at their July 7 , 2020 meeting authorized staff to proceed with
purchasing the poles and mast arms associated with the installation of the Traffic Signal at Via Rivera and
Hawthorne Blvd. Here is a link to that staff report (It em I on the 7-7-2 02 0 Agenda).
Best regards ,
Ron Dragoo, PE
City Engineer
In light of COVID -19 response measures from the Governor of the State of California and the Los Angeles County Public Health
Department, commencing Tuesday, March 17 through at least May 15, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes will on ly be provid ing Essent ial
City Services that are necessary to protect the health, safety, and we lfare of our community and City Employees. To fac ilitate these
measures, all non -essential staff will be working remotely . Inquiries w i ll be reviewed daily and will be responded to o n a case-by-case
basis. Please note: our response to your inquiry could be delayed. Thank you for your understanding.
From: Janette Crisfield [mailto:janettecrisfield@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 2:54 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca .gov >; John Cruikshank <John .Cruikshank@ r pvca.gov >; Eric Alegria <Eric .Aiegria@rpvca .gov >; Ken
Dyda <Ken .Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca .gov>; David Bradley
<david .bradley@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca .gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWo r ks@rpvca.gov >; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FA C@rpvca .gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: Agenda Item M-Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal
1. I appreciate all the work the city council has been doing the past several months to make
this signal happen.
2. I agree with the Staff recommendation and I want the new Signal bid to be approved and the
project to proceed on schedule.
3. The Signal is a high priority public safety issue, not an unimportant elective expense.
4 . Public Safety is the #1 issue, traffic safety is Public Safety.
1
Thank you for your time.
Janette Crisfield
30617 Rue De La Pierre
Rancho Palos Verdes, Ca 90275
2
From: Teresa Takaoka
Sent:
To:
Monday, October 5, 2020 8:20 AM
CityCierk
Subject: FW: Agenda Item M -Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal
Late carr
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Sunday, October 4, 2020 12:07 PM
To: 'KATHERINE ANDERSON' <jander67@msn.com>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Agenda Item M -Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal
Hello Katherine,
Thank you for reaching out to us on this important matter. As you know the staff report requesting an award of a
construction contract for this project is on the October 6, 2020 City Council agenda. Here is a link to the Staff Report
(Item M on the 10-6-2020 agenda) for you to view. In an effort to expedite the installation of this traffic signal, you may
not know that the City Council at their July 7, 2020 meeting authorized staffto proceed with purchasing the poles and
mast arms associated with the installation of the Traffic Signal at Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd. Here is a link to that
staff report (Item I on the 7-7-2020 Agenda).
Best regards,
Ron Dragoo, PE
Principal Engineer
In light of COVID-19 response measures from the Governor of the State of California and the Los Angeles County Public
Health Department, commencing Tuesday, March 17 through at least May 15, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes will only
be providing Essential City Services that are necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of our community and
City Employees. To facilitate these measures, all non-essential staff will be working remotely. Inquiries will be reviewed
daily and will be responded to on a case-by-case basis. Please note: our response to your inquiry could be
delayed. Thank you for your understanding.
-----Original Message-----
From: KATHERINE ANDERSON [mailto:jander67@msn.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 10:50 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: Agenda Item M-Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal
Hello,
I agree with the hard working staff's recommendation (thanks) to have our council members approve the new traffic
signal bid and have the project proceed on schedule. We have lived on Via Rivera since 1975. Since then our RPV
1
\J\.
population has significantly grown. RPV is no longer a bucolic city. Traffic continues to increase in number of vehicles &
excessive speed. We need this light for our residents safety and for Pt Vicente School children when it opens God willing.
I would have preferred our tax money being spent on this traffic light for our citizens' safety vs beautification of
Hawthorne median project with many boulders & some trees causing traffic disruption for months plus now other
construction at Hawthorne/PVDr. W. intersection. We have had to also deal with Crenshaw water pipe constructions
and months of traffic disruption there. Enough already!) Please vote yes for a signal light at Via Rivera/ Hawthorne Blvd.
so this long needed citizen safety project is completed. We would welcome that safety project.
Thank you & Stay Well,
Katherine L. Anderson
30219 Via Rivera
Sent from my iPad
2
From: Teresa Takaoka
Sent:
To:
Monday, October 5, 2020 8:20 AM
CityCierk
Subject: FW: Agenda Item M -Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal.
Late corr
From: Ron Dragoo <RonD@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Sunday, October 4, 2020 12:08 PM
To: 'Nancy Bruce' <njbl@cox.net>; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria
<Eric .Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken Dyda <Ken .Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David
Bradley <david.bradley@rpvca .gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang
Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: RE : Agenda Item M -Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal.
Hello Nancy ,
Thank you for reaching out to us on this important matter. As you know the staff report requesting an award of
a construction contract for this project is on the October 6, 2020 City Council agenda. Here is a link to the Staff
Report (Item M on the 10-6-2020 agenda) for you to view. In an effort to expedite the installation ofthis traffic
signal , you may not know that the City Council at their July 7 , 2020 meeting authorized staffto proceed with
purchasing the poles and mast arms associated with the installation of the Traffic Signal at Via Rivera and
Hawthorne Blvd. Here is a link to that staffreport (Item I on the 7-7-2020 Agenda).
Best regards ,
Ron Dragoo, PE
Principal Engineer
In li ght of COVID-19 response measures from the Governor of the State of California and the Los Ange les County Pub li c Hea lth
Department, commenc in g Tuesday, March 17 t hrough at least May 15, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes will only be providing Esse nti al
City Services that are necessary to protect the hea lth, safety, and we lfare of our commun ity and City Employees. To facilitate these
measures, all non-essentia l staff wi ll be work ing remotely. Inquiries wi ll be rev iewed dai ly and will be responded to on a case-by-case
basis. Please note: ou r response to your inquiry cou ld be de layed. Thank you for your understanding .
From: Nancy Bruce [mailto:njbl@cox.net]
Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 3:33 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov >; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov >; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov >; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov >; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov >; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: Agenda Item M-Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal.
Dear City Council Members and Staff,
1
I have attended all the meetings regarding the traffic signal at Via Rivera and Hawthorne, since I have to use
that route every day to exit my neighborhood. I appreciate the work you have been doing the past several
months to make the signal happen.
I agree with the Staff recommendations and I would like the new signal bid to be approved and to proceed as
quickly as possible. In the next few months traffic will increase as things return to normal. (hopefully) I was
hopeful that this project would be done by that time.
As has been discussed at the past meetings with Point Vicente neighbors attending, our main concern is
SAFETY. This is something that has been needed for years. Please approve the signal bid and get the ball
rolling.
Thank you.
Nancy Bruce
30835 Rue de Ia Pierre
Rancho, Palos Verdes
2
From: Teresa Takaoka
Sent:
To:
Monday, October 5, 2020 9:33 AM
CityCierk
Subject: FW: Consent Calendar Item M
From: Ann Shaw <anndshaw@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 12:15 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Consent Calendar Item M
Dear Mayor Cruikshank and Council Members,
I urge you to accept the staff recommendation and award a Public Works construction contract
agreement for the Hawthorne Boulevard and Via Rivera Traffic Signal Installation
Project. Currently, as the staff report correctly pointed out, traffic on Hawthorne and exiting Via
Rivera has decreased due to COVID-19. However, every day brings us closer to a resolution of
this pandemic and our traffic volume at this intersection will return to normal. This long awaited
traffic signal will make this intersection immensely safer for the 400 plus residents that live in our
neighborhood and the parents whose children attend Pt. Vicente School.
Thank you for all your hard work.
Ann Shaw
30036 Via Borica
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
From: Judy <uclafan@aol.com>
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 8:22 AM
CityCierk
FW: Via Rivera Traffic Signal
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 8:02 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC
<FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: Via Rivera Traffic Signal
Dear Council Members and City Staff,
Thank you in advance for approving the staff recommendation that includes funds for our much needed traffic signal at
Via Rivera and Hawthorne As traffic continues to return to normal, my neighbors and I are pleased to see this important
safety feature moving toward completion ..
My neighbors and I look forward to having this much-needed signal installed in the next few months.
judy maizlish
30202 via rivera
rancho pv 90275
UCLAFan@aol.com
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Late corr
Teresa Takaoka
Thursday, October 1, 2020 8:27 AM
CityCierk
FW: "Agenda Item M -Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal"
From: Ricky Guinto <rickyguinto@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 8:50 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Cc: rpvenews@gmail.com
Subject: "Agenda Item M -Via Rivera and Hawthorne Blvd Traffic Signal"
Dear RPV council,
My name is Richard Guinto, I have been a resident of Rancho Palos Verdes and have lived on Via
Rivera since I moved here back in 1976. Thank you for taking the time to make this traffic light signal
on Hawthorne and Via Rivera happen. I agree with the staff recommendation that the new signal
should be approved and hopefully the project will proceed.
Sometimes when leaving my neighborhood I will purposely turn right onto Hawthorne, then make a U-
turn in order to head North on Hawthorne, rather than trying to cross Hawthorne and turn left because
I'm afraid I will get into an accident. If I do try to turn left heading North on Hawthorne, there will be
times I wait a long time before I can turn. Meanwhile, cars race down Hawthorne around the bend to
the point it is dangerous.
This is a high priority public safety issue, as throughout the years I have seen the traffic significantly
increase, especially since many establishments such as Terranea Resort, Trump golf course, and the
Golden Cove businesses thriving. Public safety is a huge issue and traffic safety is an integral part of
public safety. Thank you for listening,
Richard Guinto
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
I think this is late carr for item M
Teresa Takaoka
Thursday, October 1, 2020 8:26AM
CityCierk
FW: Traffic Light
From: Robert McKinney <bobmckin@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 9:00 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley
<david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen
<Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC <FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: Traffic Light
Please install this!
Robert McKinney
30338 Via Borica
90275
1
Y\.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Late corr
Teresa Takaoka
Thursday, October 1, 2020 8:26AM
CityCierk
FW: AGENDA ITEM M VIA RIVERA TRAFFIC LIGHT
From: Richard & Shirley Hook <hook774@verizon.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 9:55PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Aiegria@rpvca.gov>; Ken
Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; davidbradley@rpvca.gov; Ara Mihranian
<AraM@rpvca.gov>; PublicWorks <PublicWorks@rpvca.gov>; Trang Nguyen <Tnguyen@rpvca.gov>; FAC
<FAC@rpvca.gov>; Traffic <Traffic@rpvca.gov>; lmrpv@ctecomputer.com
Subject: AGENDA ITEM M VIA RIVERA TRAFFIC LIGHT
I am pleased to hear that the preparations for the light have proceeded to the point that the City council is scheduled to
provide final dollar approval on October 6. This light continues to be a major safety concern particularly with the
It mothers" likely to soon add significantly more traffic to the intersection.
I realize money is tight but this safety issue is certainly more important than the tree garden on Hawthorne Blvd. If
necessary
switch the funds to the traffic light. Keep your priorities straight.
Richard Hook
30915 Via Rivera
3103775458
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 10:55 AM
CityCierk
FW: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1 -Noncommercial Amateur Radio
Antenna Code Amendment
Draft Letter to City Council for Residents to Submit[9638] -Copy.docx
From: Lynda Heran <lyndaheran@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 10:48 AM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna Code Amendment
Please see attached letter from a concerned Del Cerro Homeowner
Thank you
Lynda and Paul Heran
16 Oceanaire Drive
RPV
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
1
To: RPV City Council (cc@rpvca.gov)
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1 -Noncommercial Amateur Radio
Antenna Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
Del Cerro residents strongly support the direction the City is moving in modifying the municipal
code regarding noncommercial amateur radio antennas. The changes provide a more
reasonable balance between the rights of amateur radio operators and the desires of RPV
residents to minimize the visual impacts of antennas in residential neighborhoods in
accordance with RPV's General Plan.
We appreciate the value of ham radio operators in our neighborhood. We recognize their
importance in helping our neighborhood communicate with the City's emergency operations
center and local first responders in the event of a major disaster such as an earthquake that
causes normal communication systems to be rendered inoperable.
However, we also believe it is important to maintain the ambience and character of our
community and the rest oft he City by minimizing the visual impact of the antennas on our daily
lives. The majority of homes in Del Cerro are single-story ranch homes of approximately 16ft. in
height when viewed from street level. Tall antennas that greatly exceed the height of
surrounding homes but are not screened by landscaping or other means will appear
prominently in view from nearby homes as well as public rights-of-way and detract from the
overall semi-rural character of the neighborhood.
A key goal of the City's general plan is to maintain neighborhood compatibility as new
development or land use is proposed and assessed-that is, balancing new development with
the preservation of the rural or semi-rural character of the City. The code changes included in
the draft ordinance are essential to accomplishing that goal.
We support lowering the thresholds for antenna permit application reviews to 12ft. for review
by the Director of Community Development and to 28ft. for review by the RPV Planning
Commission. We also request that the City require periodic reviews of compliance with any
conditions included in an applicant's permit.
Thank you for your consideration ofthese comments.
Sincerely,
Paul and Lynda Heran
Del Cerro homeowner (16 Oceanaire Dr)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 11:04 AM
CityCierk
FW: Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1 -Noncommercial
Amateur Radio Antenna Code Amendment
Letter to RPV re Antennas MMartin 2020_10_05.docx
From: Mark Martin <purplezebra796@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 11:00 AM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna Code
Amendment
Hello-letter attached regarding the Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna Code Amendment.
Thank you!
-Mark & Mei
1
To: RPV City Council (cc@rpvca.gov)
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1 -Noncommercial Amateur Radio
Antenna Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
My wife and I house-hunted for years before buying in Del Cerro. Views without power lines,
and pastoral ambience were very important to us.
We strongly support the direction of the city in updating the municipal code regarding
noncommercial amateur radio antennas. The existing code largely ignores the visual impacts of
antennas in residential neighborhoods.
As a resident I appreciate the ability of Hams to help our neighborhood communicate with first
responders and the city's emergency operations center in the event of a major disaster that
disrupts normal communications. As an engineer I appreciate the appeal of Ham radio, as well
as the structural and electrical safety issues of large antennas.
However, we also believe it is important to maintain the ambience and character of our
immediate neighborhood and the rest of the City by minimizing the visual impact of the
antennas on our daily lives. The majority of homes in Del Cerro are single-story ranch homes of
approximately 16ft. in height when viewed from street level. Tall antennas that greatly exceed
the height of surrounding homes but are not screened by landscaping or other means will
appear prominently in view from nearby homes as well as public rights-of-way and detract from
the overall semi-rural character of the neighborhood.
A key goal of the City's general plan is to maintain neighborhood compatibility as new
development or land use is proposed and assessed -that is, balancing new development with
the preservation of the rural or semi-rural character of the City. The code changes included in
the draft ordinance are essential to accomplishing that goal.
We support lowering the thresholds for antenna permit application reviews to 12ft. for review
by the Director of Community Development and to 28ft. for review by the RPV Planning
Commission. We also request that the City require periodic reviews of compliance with any
conditions included in an applicant's permit.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Mark Martin
Del Cerro resident
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 11:42 AM
CityCierk
FW: Antena Ordinance
Draft Letter to City Council for Residents to Submit.docx
From: Kirk Hyde <kirkhyde@me.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 11:33 AM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Antena Ordinance
1
To: RPV City Council (cc@rpvca.gov)
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1 -Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna
Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
The Del Cerro residents and I, a 30 plus year resident of RPV, strongly support the direction the City is
moving in modifying the municipal code regarding noncommercial amateur radio antennas. The changes
provide a more reasonable balance between the rights of amateur radio operators and the desires of
RPV residents to minimize the visual impacts of antennas in residential neighborhoods in accordance
with RPV's General Plan.
We appreciate the value of ham radio operators in our neighborhood. We recognize their importance in
helping our neighborhood communicate with the City's emergency operations center and local first
responders in the event of a major disaster such as an earthquake that causes normal communication
systems to be rendered inoperable.
However, we also believe it is important to maintain the ambience and character of our community and
the rest of the City by minimizing the visual impact of the antennas on our daily lives. The majority of
homes in Del Cerro are single-story ranch homes of approximately 16ft. in height when viewed from
street level. Tall antennas that greatly exceed the height of surrounding homes but are not screened by
landscaping or other means will appear prominently in view from nearby homes as well as public rights-
of-way and detract from the overall semi-rural character of the neighborhood.
A key goal of the City's general plan is to maintain neighborhood compatibility as new development or
land use is proposed and assessed-that is, balancing new development with the preservation of the
rural or semi-rural character of the City. The code changes included in the draft ordinance are essential
to accomplishing that goal.
We support lowering the thresholds for antenna permit application reviews to 12ft. for review by the
Director of Community Development and to 28ft. for review by the RPV Planning Commission. We also
request that the City require periodic reviews of compliance with any conditions included in an
applicant's permit.
There needs to be reason restrictions what residents can do to impact views and property values.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Kirk R. Hyde
15 Coveview Drive.
From: Teresa Takaoka
Sent:
To:
Monday, October 5, 2020 12:11 PM
CityCierk
Subject: FW: noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna
From: Geoff Wainwright <pvgeoff@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 12:06 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna
To: RPV City Council (cc@rpvca.gov)
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
Del Cerro residents strongly support the direction the City is moving in modifying the municipal code regarding
noncommercial amateur radio antennas. The changes provide a more reasonable balance between the rights of
amateur radio operators and the desires of RPV residents to minimize the visual impacts of antennas in residential
neighborhoods in
accordance with RPV's General Plan.
We appreciate the value of ham radio operators in our neighborhood. We recognize their
importance in helping our neighborhood communicate with the City's emergency operations center and local first
responders in the event of a major disaster such as an earthquake that causes normal communication systems to be
rendered inoperable.
However, we also believe it is important to maintain the ambience and character of our
community and the rest of the City by minimizing the visual impact of the antennas on our daily lives. The majority of
homes in Del Cerro are single-story ranch homes of approximately 16ft. in height when viewed from street level. Tall
antennas that greatly exceed the height of surrounding homes but are not screened by landscaping or other means will
appear prominently in view from nearby homes as well as public rights-of-way and detract from the overall semi-rural
character of the neighborhood.
A key goal of the City's general plan is to maintain neighborhood compatibility as new
development or land use is proposed and assessed-that is, balancing new development with the preservation of the
rural or semi-rural character of the City. The code changes included in the draft ordinance are essential to accomplishing
that goal.
We support lowering the thresholds for antenna permit application reviews to 12ft. for review by the Director of
Community Development and to 28ft. for review by the RPV Planning Commission. We also request that the City
require periodic reviews of compliance with any conditions included in an applicant's permit.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Geoff Wainwright
1
\ .
Del Cerro resident
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
-----Original Message-----
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 12:16 PM
CityCierk
FW: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio
Antenna Code Amendment
Letter to City Council-Antenna-.docx
From: Shannon Kilcullen <shannon.kilcullen@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 12:14 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna Code Amendment
Please see my attached letter in response to pending amendments to the City's antenna codes.
Thank you in advance,
Shannon and Ryan Kilcullen
9 Crestwind Drive, Del Cerro Neighborhood
1
October 5, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
Del Cerro residents, including my husband and I, strongly support the direction the City is
moving in modifying the municipal code regarding noncommercial amateur radio antennas. The
changes provide a more reasonable balance between the rights of amateur radio operators and
the desires of RPV residents to minimize the visual impacts of antennas in residential
neighborhoods in accordance with RPV's General Plan.
We appreciate the value of ham radio operators in our neighborhood. We recognize their
importance in helping our neighborhood communicate with the City's emergency operations
center and local first responders in the event of a major disaster such as an earthquake that
causes normal communication systems to be rendered inoperable.
However, we also believe it is important to maintain the ambience and character of our
community and the rest of the City by minimizing the visual impact of the antennas on our daily
lives. The majority of homes in Del Cerro are single-story ranch homes of approximately 16ft. in
height when viewed from street level. Tall antennas that greatly exceed the height of
surrounding homes but are not screened by landscaping or other means will appear
prominently in view from nearby homes as well as public rights-of-way and detract from the
overall semi-rural character of the neighborhood.
A key goal of the City's general plan is to maintain neighborhood compatibility as new
development or land use is proposed and assessed -that is, balancing new development with
the preservation of the rural or semi-rural character of the City. The code changes included in
the draft ordinance are essential to accomplishing that goal.
We support lowering the thresholds for antenna permit application reviews to 12ft. for review
by the Director of Community Development and to 28ft. for review by the RPV Planning
Commission. We also request that the City require periodic reviews of compliance with any
conditions included in an applicant's permit.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Shannon and Ryan Kilcullen
9 Crestwind Drive
Del Cerro resident
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 12:32 PM
CityCierk
FW: Subject 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1 -Noncommercial
Amateur Radio Antenna Code Amendment
Letter to City Council ReCurrent Antenna Ordinance Shortfalls with Neighborhood
Antenna Photos.pdf; Letter from HOA Board to City Council Re Antenna Ordinance with
Antenna Warranty & Warnings.pdf; Cover Letter for RPV RHE and PVE Antenna Photos
with Photos.pdf
From: Del Cerro HOA <DeiCerro_HOA@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 12:30 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Ken Rukavina <krukavina@rpvca.gov>; Jaehee Yoon
<jyoon@rpvca.gov>; Octavia Silva <OctavioS@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna Code
Amendment
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members,
Attached please find 3 letters from the Del Cerro HOA Board regarding the subject topic for your
consideration.
Thank you,
Kathy Edgerton
President
Del Cerro HOA
1
\.
10/5/2020
To: RPV City Council
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio
Antenna Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
You undoubtedly recall the urgency ordinance hearing last March that initiated the review and
update of the municipal code that addresses the processing of noncommercial amateur radio
antenna applications. Below is a discussion of the significant shortfalls found in the current
code following the installation of an unpermitted ham radio antenna in Del Cerro and City
Staff's subsequent notification to the HOA of an application for a larger ham radio antenna
assembly at the same location-and the resident's concerns regarding the visual impacts.
• The current code does not require an assessment of the visual impact of antennas up to
41ft. in height on the character of a residential neighborhood. In contrast, a proposed
home remodel over 16ft. in height is subject to an assessment of neighborhood
compatibility.
• The current code does not require a silhouette or any visual representation of the
impact of a proposed antenna assembly. For recent applications, the City Staff has
requested an applicant to put up a "mock-up" consisting of a single balloon on a string
to indicate the height and location of a proposed antenna, but the applicant is not
required to agree to do that. Assuming applicants agree to cooperate (and recent ones
have cooperated), such a "mock-up" does not reflect the visual impact of an antenna
assembly that has significant height, width and depth. In fact, in the case of the
proposed antenna in Del Cerro, the "mock-up" was deceptive, as a few residents
initially thought the balloon and string represented the full size and extent of the
antenna until the board clarified the size for them. Furthermore, the balloon was only
up for a week and didn't provide sufficient opportunity for people who live in the higher
sections of Del Cerro but were out of town that week to assess any impacts that the
antenna might have on their protected views.
• The current code does not expressly require an applicant to provide the City sufficient
documentation to establish that the antenna will meet the required Federal safety and
radio frequency interference standards or that the applicant will take all steps necessary
to resolve any interference that may occur.
• The current section of the code does not restrict antennas from encroaching into side or
rear yard setbacks.
1
10/5/2020
• The current code does not require that antennas be retracted when not in use.
• For antennas up to 41ft. in height, the current code only requires notification of
adjacent neighbors even though visual impacts often extend far beyond those few
residents. However, the code does require that HOAs be notified, too, which might
suffice in areas that have active HOAs and where the Staff has the HOA's current contact
information, but would be inadequate in areas of the City where active HOAs do not
exist or where City Staff does not have current HOA contact information.
• The current code does not require periodic reviews of antennas for compliance with
safety requirements and conditions of approval.
Del Cerro's experience with an unpermitted amateur radio antenna and a subsequent
application for a larger antenna highlights the potential impact of the code's shortfalls. The
application of concern to Del Cerro residents requested approval of a ground-mounted 54-ft.
antenna assembly, but Staff indicated that the resident intended to amend the application to
reduce the height of the proposed antenna assembly from 54 ft. to 41ft. to avoid Planning
Commission review. The proposed antenna assembly consisted of (1) a tower capable of being
raised to 53.5 ft. but the applicant planned to put a limit switch on the tower to limit the
tower's height to approximately 36ft., plus (2) two antennas on a mast above the tower,
reaching a total of 41ft. in height, the upper limit for antennas requiring only a review by the
Director of Community Development (and no assessment of neighborhood compatibility). One
antenna array was proposed to have 4 horizontal elements up to 24ft. long on an 18-ft. boom
at a height of 41ft. The other antenna array was proposed to have 10 horizontal elements up to
18ft. long on a 12-ft. boom at a height of 37ft. We were unable to establish whether the
proposed limit switch would be a permanent and irreversible height limit or if it could be later
adjusted to a different height.
In response to both the height of the unpermitted antenna (estimated by neighbors to be
approximately 30ft. in height from street level) and the "mock-up" of the larger and taller
antenna assembly, residents expressed very serious concerns regarding the potential impact of
the large structure on the character of the neighborhood. Several residents who live near the
proposed antenna location felt that the antenna tower and array would be intrusive and
diminish the quiet enjoyment of their homes and yards. Residents throughout the
neighborhood were concerned that the antenna would be so prominent that it would be highly
visible to all residents and visitors as they enter Del Cerro via Seacrest, the only entrance into
the community. The proposed antenna was to be located near the center of the applicant's
backyard (rather than where the unpermitted existing antenna is located near the adjacent
2
10/5/2020
neighbor's property) to reduce the impact on the adjacent neighbor. However, the more
central backyard location would make it more prominent when viewed from the Del Cerro
neighborhood entrance and less screened by landscaping. Many residents felt that it would
diminish the neighborhood character and the semi-rural ambience of the area. Further,
neighbors expressed concern that the elevation of the Del Cerro community would continue to
attract additional requests for antennas, potentially leaving the neighborhood resembling an
antenna farm.
Residents from Phase 1 of the Del Cerro development (which consists of Crestwind, Amber Sky
and Lower Oceanaire) were especially concerned because that area was originally built with
above-ground power lines. The residents in that section had invested $25,000-$30,000 per
household to underground the lines and thereby improve the ambience of the neighborhood
and their own property values. They felt that the beneficial impact of their investment would
be severely diminished by the visual impact of such a large antenna assembly.
Even though the City did not require the applicant to provide a photo simulation or even an
integrated, scaled picture of what the full antenna assembly would look like, a Del Cerro
resident created a photo simulation of the antenna at its proposed location from Seacrest, the
entrance into the Del Cerro neighborhood, which we believe accurately portrays the height,
size and visual impact of the proposed antenna (based on a photo of the height of the balloon-
on-a-string "mock-up," the height of which was not certified). The photo simulation and actual
photo of the "mock-up" are attached. In addition, photos of the existing unpermitted antenna
from neighboring yards are attached.
Taken together, the actual photos and the photo simulations illustrate the visual impact that
tall antennas can have on the aesthetics of a neighborhood that consists primarily of single-
story homes of approximately 16ft. in height-and dramatically highlight the need for
strengthening the City's regulations regarding amateur radio antennas in a manner that
furthers the goals of the General Plan. The shortfalls in the code meant that City Staff did not
have the authority to adequately address these concerns. The City Staff would have been
required to approve an application that would have been permanently and irreversibly
detrimental to the visual character of the neighborhood.
Recognizing the shortfalls in the existing code, the City Council adopted an urgency ordinance
to correct the problems, finding that:
• The current provisions of the municipal code governing the use and permitting of
noncommercial amateur radio antennas are outdated and inconsistent with six General
Plan Goals and Policies, including preserving the rural and open character of the City;
maintaining the architecture, aesthetics and character of the neighborhood and City;
3
10/5/2020
and using neighborhood compatibility design concepts to balance new residential
development with the preservation of the rural and semi-rural character of the City.
• The provisions of the municipal code allow noncommercial amateur radio antennas of
41ft. in height, which are not compatible with residential neighborhoods throughout
most of the city, as antennas of that height would greatly exceed the height of all
residential buildings and accessory structures in residential neighborhoods throughout
the City, and would create an adverse visual impact on those neighborhoods.
• The City has received an application for a freestanding nonexempt noncommercial
amateur radio antenna that would be 41ft. tall, and the structure would be as tall as a
4-5 story building and would be severely detrimental to the visual character of the
neighborhood.
The code amendment under review is a significant step forward in improving the City's
regulation of amateur radio antennas. Specific comments on the draft code amendment are
provided in a separate letter from the Del Cerro HOA board.
Respectfully submitted,
The Del Cerro HOA Board
Kathy & AI Edgerton
Gregory MacDonald
Miriam & Pete Varend
Dian Hatch
Mark Kernen
Bharathi Singh
Amy & Jeff Wang
4
10/5/2020
5
10/5/2020
6
/
Photo Simulation of Integrated
Antenna Assembly Based on
Info from Antenna Application
10/5/20 20
7
10/5/2020
8
10/5/20 20
Actual Photo of "Balloon -on -a-String Mock-up"
9
10/5/2020
10
10/5/2020
To: RPV City Council
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna
Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
The Del Cerro community offers the following comments regarding the draft noncommercial
antenna radio code amendment included in the staff report for the subject agenda item. In general,
we strongly believe that the City is moving in the correct direction to provide a reasonable balance
between the rights of amateur radio operators and the desires of RPV residents to minimize the
visual impacts of antennas in residential neighborhoods in accordance with RPV's General Plan.
First, we want to emphasize that we appreciate the value of ham radio operators in our
neighborhoods. We recognize their importance in helping our neighborhood communicate with the
City's emergency operations center and local first responders in the event of a major disaster such
as an earthquake that causes normal communication systems to be rendered inoperable. We firmly
believe that the current code will not prevent or discourage ham radio operators from supporting
emergency communications when needed during a major emergency.
However, we also believe it is important to maintain the ambience and character of our
neighborhood and the rest of the City by minimizing the visual impact of amateur radio antennas in
our daily lives. Many of the communities in RPV consist of single-story ranch homes of
approximately 16ft. in height when viewed from street level. The current municipal code allows
antennas up to 41ft. in height to be installed without a review of neighborhood compatibility. In
contrast, the current code requires an assessment of neighborhood compatibility for home
remodels that exceed 16ft. in height. Tall antennas that greatly exceed the height of surrounding
homes will appear prominently in view from nearby homes as well as public rights-of-way and
detract from the overall ambience and semi-rural character of the neighborhood.
A key goal of the City's General Plan is to maintain neighborhood compatibility as new
development or land use is proposed and assessed-that is, balancing new development with the
preservation of the rural or semi-rural character of the City.
The following code changes included in the draft ordinance under review are essential to
accomplishing that goal:
• Expanding the application notification process for all nonexempt antennas to include all
property owners within a 500ft. radius to the applicant's property and to all affected
homeowners associations;
1
10/5/2020
• Building a mock-up or photo simulation of proposed antenna assemblies to facilitate
assessment of visual impacts from other homes and public rights-of-way. (Please see below an
additional recommended code change regarding certification of photo simulations.};
• Retracting antenna assemblies to minimum size and height when not in use;
• Reducing reflectivity of antennas and support structures;
• Requiring demonstration that an antenna assembly complies with Federal standards related to
radio frequency emissions;
• Requiring certification that proposed antennas and their installation comply with Federal
regulations related to interference and in the event that interference occurs, the applicant will
take all necessary steps to resolve the interference;
• Assuring that antenna assemblies are designed to minimize the visual impact to the greatest
extent feasible by means of placement, screening, camouflaging, painting, and texturing and to
be compatible with existing architectural elements, building materials and other site
ch a ra cte ristics;
• Assuring that applicants use the smallest and least visible antenna assemblies possible to
accomplish their communication objectives; and
• Establishing that antenna permits are nontransferable to subsequent property owners. If a new
owner wants to install a ham radio at the same location, this provision will allow the City to
apply different conditions of approval to the new owner/applicant as Federal laws and
regulations change and new technologies are developed over time.
We also recommend that the following additional changes be included in the municipal code or
applicable regulations:
• The "by right" antenna height exempting antennas from the permitting process should be
reduced from the proposed height of 16ft. to 12ft. All applications for antennas exceeding 12
ft. in height should require visual impact assessments and mitigation of the impacts. The initial
draft ordinance recommended by the Planning Staff and Planning Commission sub-committee
reduced the "by right" height from 16ft. in the current code to 12ft. Then during the Planning
Commission hearings, the recommendation was changed back to the height of 16ft. per the
current code due to concern that a 12-ft. antenna may not be functional in some cases, making
the "by right" height meaningless. We continue to believe that the 12-ft. height is more
reasonable. Neither "by right" height (12ft. or 16ft.} would cause an antenna to be denied and
we recognize that for adequate functionality, a 16-ft. height (or higher} may be necessary in
many cases. However, exempting from the permitting process all antennas to the taller height
increases the burden of screening the antenna for the additional height on the neighbors who
bear the visual impacts rather than on the antenna owner who causes the visual impacts and
the need for the screening. Lowering the height to 12ft. effectively and appropriately shifts
that burden back to the antenna owner, yet does not prohibit an antenna of any greater height.
2
10/5/2020
The impacted neighbor must still bear the burden of providing his/her own screening of
antennas up to 12-ft. in height, if doing so is deemed necessary.
• The height above which Planning Commission review is required should be reduced from 41ft.
to 28ft. The initial draft ordinance recommended by the Planning Staff and Planning
Commission sub-committee reduced the height requiring Planning Commission review from 41
ft. in the current code to 28ft. (Staff indicated that the 28-ft. threshold was derived from
Malibu's municipal code which is often consulted due to similarities in the issues that Malibu
and RPV address.) Then during the Planning Commission hearings, the recommendation was
changed back to the height of 41ft. per the current code due to concern that the fees for
antenna applications that require Planning Commission review are significantly higher and
potentially prohibitive for applicants who want to install inexpensive ham radio antennas. We
continue to believe that the 28-ft. height threshold is more reasonable-especially when one
considers that proposed home construction exceeding 16ft. in height is directly referred to the
Planning Commission for review. Planning Commission review provides a better forum for a full
consideration of all the factors that must be evaluated in approving an application for a large
antenna. Any antenna height above 28ft. will likely require screening or other means of
mitigating visual impacts-particularly in residential areas where most homes are single-story
ranch homes of approximately 16ft. in height. To alleviate the concern for the high fees,
perhaps the City Council might consider lowering applicable fees-especially for antennas that
are intended primarily for supporting neighborhood emergency response.
It should be emphasized that the ordinance appropriately does not preclude approval of an
antenna of any height. The various height thresholds only determine the level of review (i.e.,
Director or Planning Commission) of an antenna application.
• Photo simulations should be certified by a licensed engineer (similar to the antenna mock-up
requirement) and the City should assure that the as-built antenna assembly has the same
height, width, depth and location that are depicted in the mock-ups or photos simulations.
• Following installation of an antenna, the City should require periodic reviews of compliance
with the code and conditions of approval included in an applicant's permit. Given the
maintenance challenges inherent in coastal locations with frequently alternating periods of
extreme humidity and dryness and thermal cycling that can degrade metal structures, the
proximity of antennas to nearby homes, and the limited 1-year warranties typically provided by
antenna manufacturers, an exception to the City's standard policy of reactive, rather than
proactive, enforcement should be considered for the safety of all residents. The City's policy of
responding to resident complaints or concerns when raised has limited effectiveness in the case
of antennas in that nearby residents have no way to tell whether the safety of an antenna is
3
10/5/2020
degrading until an accident occurs, with possible injury to nearby residents and/or damage to
their homes. This outcome can be a particular risk when one considers that the code does not
prohibit antennas that are taller than the distance between their base and surrounding
property lines, and therefore could fall on a nearby property. A copy of the warranty and
warnings regarding a ham radio antenna manufactured by JK Antennas is attached for your
information.
The ordinance as proposed, in conjunction with the recommended changes listed above, provides a
reasonable balance between the rights of amateur radio operators and the desires of RPV residents
to assure the safety of ham radio operations and to minimize the visual impacts of antennas in
residential neighborhoods in accordance with RPV's General Plan.
Importantly, the recommended ordinance will provide adequate means to assure that the above
requirements can be adjusted, to the extent needed, to assure that any conditions do not
effectively prohibit the ability of a ham radio operator to achieve his or her communication
objectives.
A final comment on the significance of this code amendment: The City is currently promoting the
many benefits of undergrounding utility lines in residential neighborhoods. The benefits include the
aesthetic improvement to the semi-rural look of RPV communities and potential property value
increases. Such undergrounding requires substantial personal investments by residents to obtain
the benefits. Unless significant improvements are made in the municipal code to better regulate
the visual impacts of antennas, the installation of tall, prominent antennas in neighborhoods will
undermine the aesthetic benefits that can be obtained by undergrounding utility lines, provide a
disincentive for undergrounding and diminish the ambience of the surrounding areas.
We sincerely thank the City Staff for all their work on this code update-especially Jaehee Yoon
and Octavia Silva from the Planning Staff and Christy Lopez from the City Attorney's office.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Respectfully submitted,
The Del Cerro HOA Board
Kathy & AI Edgerton
Gregory MacDonald
Miriam & Pete Varend
Dion Hatch
Mark Kernen
Bharathi Singh
Amy & Jeff Wang
4
~-+ RECEIVEO
JUL 2 3 2013
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMl=t~T
DEPARTMENT
JK-3040
Two Element 40M & 30M Vagi -18ft Boom
2019 Edition
72 Crays Bndge RL>,Kl, L:nil D .. P,n,.,kflf'id, CT 06RO-I
1"45.211>.1\700 \TEL} • &45.279.5526 (fAX) • jnfo(fi•jbntl'tuld>.<.<>m
5
10/5/2020
10/5/2020
Jl< Antennas Limited Warranty and Uabillty
Jl< ,'\ntennas ("Manu!achm::r'') warr<iPh to the orig!flal purchaser that thi;; product 'Nil! be free from defect'; in
materia!, and workmans.hip for a period of one {1) year from the d<.lte of pun:.ha:,c. The dt!termin<11ion uf
whether anv part or parb wi!l be covered by thi~ tirnited warrantv and whether anv part or part; will b~::
repaired, replaced or refunded will be solely determmed bv JK .llntennos. Such determmation wdF be made
fof!owing evaluanon of claim of iilleged defect and subwct to evaluatron of pussrble rn1suse, abu<.e ..
unauthorized modificatrons, extreme weather conditrons or impropH m:;t;;lllatron Hns 1Narranfy dnfs
covt'r deliven,t, ttan~portatH)n, installiltiOn or ;my other costs that mav be incurred from anv defect
The purchaser. final customer, mstaller and user of these products ind;viduaUv and collecttvelv ildmow!edgr~
that these products can cause injurv or death and indhi.'dtMIIy and collectively .3ccept full re:,ponsibility <Jnd
liabi!itv for any and all personal and property damage (direct, indirect and plltlllive} caused dunn£ li'Sia ia~;cn
<lnd subsequent usc.
This publication is Cop)•right c:• 2019 bv JK 1\ntennas. /Ill nghts reserved
No pwt of this publication or oddendum or attachments moy be reproduced, stored m o re!rievcr•' .1y.1iern u.r
transmitted in anv forrn or IJ)' any m~'am, electronic, mechanical, p/wtocopving, recording or orherwisei
wlthout prior permission of !K Antennos.
WARNINGS
" Installation of this antenna near power lines is dangerous. Contact with any high volt<>ge powt:;r iines
could result in electric shock or· loss of life. Do not install this antenna where there is anv possibility
that the antenna or any part of the supporting structure could come in contact with power !ine~.
• Also ensure that no persons or pets c.an come in any contact with the ante11na after it is imtalfe-d.
Dangerous voltages can exist on the antenna when it is in operation and no part of the system is
insulated to prevent shock.
• Consult with FCC OET Bulletin 65 to properly evaluate whether the chosen installation sllte for this
antenna will comply with the FCC guidelines for human exposure limits to radio frequency electro·
magnetic fields.
• This antenna structure is not designed to be used as a support structure. No persons or objects
should be supported by or suspended from the antenna structure tlt any time.
" Because most antenna systems are Installed at high heights, the installed location must take into
account that falling debris may pose a hazard to humans:, animals and property on the ground bektw.
• Be aware of and follow all local codes and ordinances when installing this antenna.
,
L
6
10/5/2020
To: RPV City Council
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1 -Noncommercial Amateur Radio
Antenna Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members,
Attached for your information are several photos of existing amateur radio antennas on the
peninsula. Most are located in RPV, but a few are from RHE and PV Estates. Each photo
indicates the address where the antenna is located.
Our research and testimony by ham radio operators at the Planning Commission hearings
indicate that there are 275-300 ham radio operators in RPV. We looked for antennas at almost
half of the homes of RPV ham radio operators using a database on the website
https://haminfo.tetranz.com/map/z/90275. Interestingly, only a small fraction (approximately
15%-20%) of the licensed ham radio operators had antennas that could be seen from the street.
Of those, slightly over half were relatively small, vertical antennas, and less than half were the
larger antenna arrays. That is consistent with testimony provided during the Planning
Commission hearings during which some ham operators indicated that they put their antennas
in the garage, the attic, or some other part of the house. Others who had visible but
unobtrusive antennas indicated that they had not received any complaints from their
neighbors. And most of the ham operators who spoke indicated they were part of PVAN, the
organization that provides neighborhood emergency response support. So apparently the
neighborhood emergency response support does not necessarily require overly large antennas.
The photos attached to this email illustrate the wide variety of antennas that must be
addressed. Some of the antennas are very prominent and have significant impacts well beyond
the surrounding homes. Others are much less impactful.
The last two photos are of an antenna in the Lunada Bay area. They have been included to
show how effectively they can be screened with a little bit of creativity.
Respectfully submitted,
The Del Cerro HOA Board
Kathy & AI Edgerton
Gregory MacDonald
Miriam & Pete Varend
Dion Hatch
Mark Kernen
Bharathi Singh
1
10/5/2020
2
10/5/2020
3
Whitley Collins Antenna Viewed from
3 Houses Away on Whitley Collins
10/5/2020
4
10/5/2020
5
Whitley Collins Antenna Viewed from Oceana ire
Home in Del Cerro (over Half Mile Away)
10/5/2020
6
10/5/2020
7
10/5/2020
8
10/5/2020
9
10/5/2020
10
10/5/2020
11
10/5/2020
12
10/5/2020
13
10/5/2020
14
10/5/2020
15
10/5/2020
16
10/5/2020
17
10/5/2020
18
10/5/2020
19
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 1:35 PM
CityCierk
FW: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1 -Noncommercial Amateur Radio
Antenna Code Amendment
From: Mark Schoettler <mwscho@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 1:32 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna Code Amendment
To: RPV City Council
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna
Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
As Del Cerro residents for over 20 years, our family strongly supports the direction the City is moving
in modifying the municipal code regarding noncommercial amateur radio antennas. The changes
provide a balance between the rights of amateur radio operators and the desires of RPV residents to
minimize the negative visual impacts of antennas in residential neighborhoods in accordance with
RPV's General Plan.
We appreciate the value of ham radio operators in our neighborhood. We recognize their importance
in helping our neighborhood communicate with the City's emergency operations center and local first
responders in the event of a major disaster such as an earthquake that causes normal
communication systems to be rendered inoperable.
That said, we also believe it is important to maintain the ambience and character of our community
and the rest of the City by minimizing the visual impact of the antennas on our daily lives. The
majority of homes in Del Cerro are single-story ranch homes of approximately 16 ft. in height when
viewed from street level. Tall antennas that greatly exceed the height of surrounding homes but are
not screened by landscaping or other means will appear prominently in view from nearby homes as
well as public rights-of-way and detract from the overall semi-rural character of the neighborhood.
A key goal of the City's general plan is to maintain neighborhood compatibility as new development or
land use is proposed and assessed -that is, balancing new development with the preservation of the
rural or semi-rural character of the City. The code changes included in the draft ordinance are
essential to accomplishing that goal.
We support lowering the thresholds for antenna permit application reviews to 12ft. for review by the
Director of Community Development and to 28 ft. for review by the RPV Planning Commission. We
also request that the City require periodic reviews of compliance with any conditions included in an
applicant's permit.
Thank you for your consideration.
1
\ .
Sincerely,
Mark and Joyce Schoettler
1 Coveview Dr
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 1:37 PM
CityCierk
FW: Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1 -Noncommercial
Amateur Radio Antenna Code Amendment
Letter from CHOA and Various HOA Reps & Residents to CC Re Antenna Ordinance.pdf
From: Del Cerro HOA <DeiCerro_HOA@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 1:37 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Ken Rukavina <krukavina@rpvca.gov>; Jaehee Yoon <jyoon@rpvca.gov>; Octavia
Silva <OctavioS@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna Code
Amendment
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members,
Please consider the comments in the attached letter regarding the noncommercial radio antenna code
amendment submitted by the following RPV residents, speaking as individuals:
John Maniatakis
President, Mira Catalina HOA
President, CHOA
Jeanne Lacombe
Former President, Rolling Hills Riviera HOA
CHOA Board Member
Kathy Edgerton
President, Del Cerro HOA
CHOA Board Member
Jeff Richards
President, Colt Rd. HOA
CHOA Board Member
Anthony Todora
Miraleste Hills Resident
CHOA Board Member
Don Douthwright
President, Island View HOA
1
\.
David Jankowski
President, Monaco HOA
Romas Jarasunas
President, PV Park Place HOA
Joan Olenick
Rancho Crest HOA Secretary
Glenn Cornell
Rolling Hills Riviera Resident
Craig Whited
Mediterranea HOA Member
Kevin & Teri McNab
Mesa Palos Verdes HOA Member
2
To: RPV City Council
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur
Radio Antenna Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
10/5/2020
The RPV residents listed below, speaking as individuals, offer the following comments
regarding the draft noncommercial antenna radio code amendment included in the staff
report for the subject agenda item. In general, we strongly believe that the City is
moving in the correct direction to provide a reasonable balance between the rights of
amateur radio operators and the desires of RPV residents to minimize the visual impacts
of antennas in residential neighborhoods in accordance with RPV's General Plan.
First, we want to emphasize that we appreciate the value of ham radio operators in our
neighborhoods. We recognize their importance in helping our neighborhood
communicate with the City's emergency operations center and local first responders in
the event of a major disaster such as an earthquake that causes normal communication
systems to be rendered inoperable. We firmly believe that the current code will not
prevent or discourage ham radio operators from supporting emergency
communications when needed during a major emergency.
However, we also believe it is important to maintain the ambience and character of our
communities and the rest of the City by minimizing the visual impact of amateur radio
antennas in our daily lives. Many of the communities in RPV consist of single-story ranch
homes of approximately 16ft. in height when viewed from street level. The current
municipal code allows antennas up to 41ft. in height to be installed without a review of
neighborhood compatibility. In contrast, the current code requires an assessment of
neighborhood compatibility for home remodels that exceed 16ft. in height. Tall
antennas that greatly exceed the height of surrounding homes will appear prominently
in view from nearby homes as well as public rights-of-way and detract from the overall
ambience and semi-rural character of the neighborhood.
A key goal of the City's General Plan is to maintain neighborhood compatibility as new
development or land use is proposed and assessed -that is, balancing new
development with the preservation of the rural or semi-rural character of the City.
The following code changes included in the draft ordinance are essential to
accomplishing that goal:
1
• Expanding the application notification process for all nonexempt antennas to
include all property owners within a 500ft. radius to the applicant's property
and to any affected homeowners associations;
10/5/2020
• Building a mock-up or photo simulation of proposed antenna assemblies to
facilitate assessment of visual impacts from other homes and public rights-of-
way. (Please see below the recommended code change regarding certification of
photo simulations);
• Retracting antenna assemblies to minimum size and height when not in use;
• Reducing reflectivity of antennas and support structures;
• Requiring demonstration that an antenna assembly complies with Federal
standards related to radio frequency emissions;
• Requiring certification that proposed antennas and their installation comply with
Federal regulations related to interference and in the event that interference
occurs, the applicant will take all necessary steps to resolve the interference;
• Assuring that antenna assemblies are designed to minimize the visual impact to
the greatest extent feasible by means of placement, screening, camouflaging,
painting, and texturing and to be compatible with existing architectural
elements, building materials and other site characteristics;
• Assuring that applicants use the smallest and least visible antenna assemblies
possible to accomplish their communication objectives; and
• Establishing that antenna permits are nontransferable to subsequent property
owners. If a new owner wants to install a ham radio at the same location, this
provision will allow the City to apply different conditions of approval to the new
owner/applicant as Federal laws and regulations change and new technologies
are developed over time.
We recommend that the following changes be included in the municipal code or
applicable regulations:
• The "by right" antenna height exempting antennas from the permitting process
should be reduced from the proposed height of 16ft. to 12ft. All applications for
antennas exceeding 12ft. in height should require visual impact assessments
and mitigation of the impacts. The initial draft ordinance recommended by the
Planning Staff and Planning Commission sub-committee reduced the "by right"
height from 16ft. in the current code to 12ft. Then the full Planning Commission
changed the recommendation back to the height of 16ft. per the current code
due to concern that a 12-ft. antenna may not be functional in some cases,
2
10/5/2020
making such a "by right" height meaningless. We continue to believe that the 12
ft. height is more reasonable. Neither "by right" height (12ft. or 16ft.) would
cause an antenna to be denied and we recognize that for adequate functionality,
a 16-ft. height (or higher) may be necessary in many cases. However, exempting
from the permitting process all antennas to the taller height increases the
burden of screening the antenna for the additional height on the neighbors who
bear the visual impacts rather than on the antenna owner who causes the need
for the screening. Lowering the height to 12ft. effectively and appropriately
shifts that burden back to the antenna owner, yet does not prohibit an antenna
of any greater height. Impacted neighbors must still provide screening in their
yards up to the 12-ft. height, if doing so is deemed necessary.
• The height above which Planning Commission review is required should be
reduced from 41ft. to 28ft. The initial draft ordinance recommended by the
Planning Staff and Planning Commission sub-committee reduced the height
requiring Planning Commission review from 41ft. in the current code to 28ft.
Then the full Planning Commission changed the recommendation back to the
height of 41ft. per the current code due to concern that the fees for antenna
applications that require Planning Commission review are significantly higher
and potentially prohibitive for applicants who want to install inexpensive ham
radio equipment. We continue to believe that the 28ft. height threshold is more
reasonable-especially when one considers that proposed home construction
exceeding 16ft. in height is directly referred to the Planning Commission for
review. Planning Commission review provides a better forum for a full
consideration of all the factors that must be evaluated in approving a large
antenna application. Any antenna height above 28ft. will likely require screening
or other means of mitigating visual impacts-particularly in residential areas
where most homes are single-story ranch homes of approximately 16ft. in
height. To alleviate the concern for the high fees, perhaps the City Council might
consider lowering applicable fees-especially for antennas that are intended
primarily for supporting neighborhood emergency response.
It should be emphasized that the ordinance appropriately does not preclude
approval of an antenna of any height. The various height thresholds only
determine the level of review (i.e., Director or Planning Commission) of an
antenna application.
3
10/5/2020
• Photo simulations should be certified by a licensed engineer (similar to the
mock-up requirement) and the City should assure that the as-built antenna
assembly has the same height, width, depth and location that are depicted in the
mock-ups or photos simulations.
• Following installation of an antenna, the City should require periodic reviews of
compliance with the code and conditions of approval included in an applicant's
permit. Given the maintenance challenges inherent in coastal locations with
frequently alternating periods of extreme humidity and dryness and thermal
cycling that can degrade metal structures, the proximity of antennas to nearby
homes, and the limited 1-year warranties typically provided by antenna
manufacturers, an exception to the City's standard policy of reactive, rather than
proactive, enforcement should be considered for the safety of all residents. The
City's policy of responding to resident complaints or concerns when raised has
limited effectiveness in the case of antennas in that nearby residents have no
way to tell whether the safety of an antenna is degrading until an accident
occurs, with possible injury to nearby residents and/or damage to their property.
This outcome can be a particular risk when one considers that the code does not
prohibit antennas that are taller than the distance between their base and
surrounding property lines, and therefore could fall on a nearby property.
The ordinance as proposed, in conjunction with the recommended changes listed
above, provides a reasonable balance between the rights of amateur radio operators
and the desires of RPV residents to assure the safety of ham radio operations and to
minimize the visual impacts of antennas in residential neighborhoods in accordance
with RPV's General Plan.
Importantly, the recommended ordinance will provide adequate means to assure that
the above requirements can be adjusted, to the extent needed, to assure that any
conditions do not effectively prohibit the ability of a ham radio operator to achieve his
or her communication objectives.
A final comment on the significance of this code amendment: The City is currently
promoting the many benefits of undergrounding utility lines in residential
neighborhoods. The benefits include the aesthetic improvement to the semi-rural look
of RPV communities and potential property value increases. Such undergrounding
requires substantial personal investments by residents to obtain the benefits. Unless
4
significant improvements are made in the municipal code to better regulate the visual
impacts of antennas, the installation of tall, prominent antennas in neighborhoods will
undermine the aesthetic benefits that can be obtained by undergrounding utility lines,
provide a disincentive for undergrounding and diminish the ambience of the
surrounding areas.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Respectfully submitted,
John Maniatakis
President, Mira Catalina HOA
President, CHOA
Jeanne Lacombe
David Jankowski
President, Monaco HOA
Romas Jarasunas
10/5/2020
Former President, Rolling Hills Riviera HOA
CHOA Board Member
President, PV Park Place HOA
Kathy Edgerton
President, Del Cerro HOA
CHOA Board Member
Jeff Richards
President, Colt Rd. HOA
CHOA Board Member
Anthony Todora
Miraleste Hills Resident
CHOA Board Member
Don Douthwright
President, Island View HOA
5
Joan Olenick
Rancho Crest HOA Secretary
Craig Whited
Mediterranea HOA Member
Glenn Cornell
Rolling Hills Riviera Resident
Kevin & Teri McNab
Mesa Palos Verdes HOA Member
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
-----Original Message-----
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, October 5, 2020 4:21 PM
CityCierk
FW: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio
Antenna Code Amendment
From: Rick Daniels <rickdaniels314@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 4:19 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: 10-6-2020 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #1-Noncommercial Amateur Radio Antenna Code Amendment
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
My wife and I strongly support modifying the municipal code regarding antennas in residential neighborhoods. We want
to minimize the impact that antennas have on the ambience and character of our neighborhood.
Given that most of the homes in Del Cerro are single story, any antennas that exceed the roof height of those homes will
result in significant negative visual impacts.
Because our neighborhood is at or near the top ofthe Palos Verdes Peninsula, there seems to be an increased desire by
some residents to install large antennas. Our concern is that more residents will look to make money with such
antennas. The city is no doubt already familiar with at least one home in Del Cerro that has extremely tall antennas for
commercial use.
We support lowering the thresholds for antenna permit application reviews to 12ft. for review by the Director of
Community Development and to 28ft. for review by the RPV Planning Commission. We also request that the City
require periodic reviews of compliance with any conditions included in an applicant's permit.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Rick & Lori Daniels
Del Cerro residents
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
noreply@civicplus.com
Thursday, October 1, 2020 4:33 AM
CityManager
Online Form Submittal: City Service Requests
City Service Requests
Customer Service Requests
Use this form to electronically communicate with the City for just about anything! An
email will automatically be sent to the appropriate person to handle your request.
For emergency service please contact the appropriate public service agency.
Public Works Service
Request
To which department
should we address this?
First Name
Last Name
Street Number
Street Name
Street Type
Apartment Number
City
State
ZIP
Home Phone
Office or Other Phone
Email
Best place to reach you
should questions arise:
Should we inform you of
the action taken?
Public Works Service Request
City Manager
Elise
Klein
4933
Golden Arrow
Dr
Field not completed.
Rancho Palos Verdes
CA
90275
310-339-4214
213-680-5153
eliseklein@yahoo.com
Office I Other
Yes, contact me through email.
Service Request, Inquiry or Comment
Provide us with information regarding your request, inquiry or comment. Please be
as specific as possible.
Location or Address of
Service Request, Inquiry or
Comment
Description
4933 Golden Arrow Dr
We are stuck with Cox. We have it for our internet and our
phone. They have had two "planned outages" in the last two
weeks and haven't given notice of either. So I try to use my
internet, it doesn't work, and I try to use my land line to call Cox
to report the outage and it doesn't work either. This horrible
company provides unreliable service in the first instance as I'm
sure you're aware and it adds insult to injury to have them plan
outages and not bother to notify customers.
Are there any reliable options?
Any basis to fine them (or better yet boot them) for their service
quality and in particular their failure to provide ANY notification
of planned service interruptions?
Thanks
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
2
From: Teresa Takaoka
Sent:
To:
Monday, October 5, 2020 12:24 PM
CityCierk
Subject: FW: Great Letter from a home owner in PVE explaining Prop 15 -the attempt to start
repealing Prop 13
From: Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 12:22 PM
Subject: FW: Great Letter from a home owner in PVE explaining Prop 15-the attempt to start repealing Prop 13
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers,
Staff received the email below as late correspondence for tomorrow evening 's meeting on Agenda
Item No. 3 (Prop. 15).
The information will be incorporated in Staff's presentation .
Ara
Ara Michael Mihranian
City Manager
C ITY OF
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310-544-5202 (telephone)
31 0-544-5293 (fax)
aram@rpvca.gov
www.rpvca .gov
Jl Do you really need to print this e-mail?
This e-mail message contains information belonging to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be privileged, confidential and/or protected from
disclosure. The information is intended only for use of the individual or entity named. Unauthorized dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If
you received this email in error, or are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation.
1
3.
From: William Patton <billpatton21@icloud.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 9:35 PM
Subject: Great Letter from a home owner in PVE explaining Prop 15-the attempt to start repealing Prop 13
We have been informed that certain community groups may have approached the city council to solicit your support for California
Proposition 15 on behalf of the City of PVE and other cities!
If this is the case, we would like to express our ardent opposition to this course of action.
Proposition 15 would FIRST AND SPECIFICALLY REPEAL THE PART OF PROP 13 PERTAINING TO COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES THUS raise
property taxes on virtually all commercial properties in California, given the Proposition's paltry exemption for exceptionally small
properties. These increased taxes would almost certainly be passed along to the small businesses that rent space in these
commercial buildings. They cannot afford such increases in property tax.
These small businesses have already been severely impacted by operating restrictions and fall-off in customer volume due to the
COVID-19 pandemic, and many would likely be forced to either raise prices to non-competitive levels, or to go out of business
entirely as a result of such rent increases. At a time when the City is so desperately in need of revenue, it is difficult to understand
why the City would advocate actions which would eliminate the sales tax revenue that these businesses generate.
Furthermore, to the degree that this Proposition would make it more profitable for commercial property owners in the City to sell
their properties than continue to lease space in them, the recent zoning actions by the City would effectively guarantee that these
properties would be converted to ultra-high-density residential development, forever changing the character of the City, and placing
even more strain on the outdated City infrastructure that is barely adequate to handle the current population density.
GUESS WHAT WOULD BE NEXT-IT WOULD BE THE REPEAL OF PROP 13 PERTINENT TO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WITH PROPERTY
TAXES RISING TO WHAT THEY CALL "MARKET VALUE" CAUSING MANY HOMEOWNERS TO BE FORCED TO SELL THEIR HOMES!
For all of these effects on the City that this Proposition would engender (not to mention the statewide effects), we urge you to
refrain from taking any action in support of Proposition 15!
PROP 15 IS DANGEROUS-GET THE WORD OUT
VOTE NO!!!
2
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
James O'Neill
Tuesday, September 29, 2020 5:32 PM
CityCierk
Ron Dragoo
FW : Portugese Bend Sewer Service charges/ 30 Narcissa Dr., RPV , CA 90275
Late correspondence for the AbCove Sewer item
James
City Hall is open to the public during regular business hours. To he l p prevent the spread of COVID-19, visitors
are required to wear face coverings and adhere to physical distancing guidelines. Some employees are
working on rotation and may be working remotely. If you need to visit City Hall, please schedule an
appointment in advance by calling the appropriate department and follow all posted directions during your
visit . Walk-ups are limited to one person at a time. Please note that our response to your inquiry could be
delayed. For a list of department phone numbers, visit the Staff Directory on the City website .
From: snirvee@aol.com <snirvee@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 5:27 PM
To: James O'Neill <joneil l @rpvca.gov>
Cc: corinne .pbca@gmail.com; christiane.maertens@gmail.com; patricia@ladybugmusic .com
Subject: Portugese Bend Sewer Service charges/ 30 Narcissa Dr., RPV, CA 90275
Hello Mr. O 'Ne ill ,
I am writing to you in order to oppose the proposition of increasing the Abalon e Cove Sewer Syste m charges.
am the hom e owner of 30 Narci ssa Dr. lo cated in Portugese Bend. Thank y ou for your time.
Best,
Margoth Maertens
Y.
From: James O'Neill
Sent:
To:
Tuesday, September 29, 2020 5:32 PM
CityCierk
Cc: Ron Dragoo
Subject: FW: Portuguese Bend Sewer charge increase/ 19 Narcissa Dr., RPV, CA 90275
Late correspondence for t he AbCove Sewer item
James
City Hall is open to the public during regular business hours. To help prevent the spread of COVID -19, visitors
are required to wear face coverings and adhere to physical distancing guidelines. Some employees are
working on rotation and may be working remotely . If you need to visit City Hall, please schedule an
appointment in advance by calling the appropriate department and follow all posted directions during your
visit. Walk-ups are limited to one person at a time. Please note that our response to your inquiry could be
delayed . For a list of department phone numbers, visit the Staff Directory on the City website.
From: corinne gerrard <corinne.pbca@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 5:28 PM
To: Ken Schaff <kschaff67@aol.com>
Cc: Christiane Maertens <christiane.maertens@gmail.com>; Patricia Margarita Maertens <patricia@ladybugmusic.com>;
James O'Neill <joneill@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Re: Portuguese Bend Sewer charge increase/ 19 Narcissa Dr., RPV, CA 90275
Good evening Kenneth ,
There will be NO rate increase recommendation on Oct. 06 City Council meeting. The City has put this in
writing to me. The City has also assured me in writing that they will follow notification of Prop 218 giving 45
day notice if and when any sewer rate increase comes up in the future
Thank you for your follow through
I will make sure that the Secretary for PBCA has your email address in order to keep you informed
Corinne Gerrard , President, PBCA
310-403-7777
On Tue , Sep 29 , 2020 at 5:19PM Ken Schaff <k sc ha ff67 @aol.co m> wrote:
Hi Mr. O 'Neill ,
My mother Margoth Maertens, my wife Sylvia Schaff and myself, Kenneth Schaff own 19 Narcissa Dr.,
Rancho Palos Verdes , CA.
We oppose the increase of the Abalone Cove Sewer System charges.
Best,
Margoth Maertens
Ken and Sylvia Schaff
Sent from iPad
Ken Schaff
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
James O'Neill
Thursday, October 1, 2020 8:20AM
CityCierk
Ron Dragoo
FW: Portuguese Bend Sewer charge increase/ 19 Narcissa Dr., RPV, CA 90275
Late correspondence for agenda item regarding AbCove Sewer System
From: Ken Schaff <kschaff67@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 5:20 PM
To: James O'Neill <joneill@rpvca.gov>
Cc: corinne.pbca@gmail.com; Patricia Margarita Maertens <patricia@ladybugmusic.com>; Christiane Maertens
<christiane.maertens@gmail.com>
Subject: Portuguese Bend Sewer charge increase/ 19 Narcissa Dr., RPV, CA 90275
Hi Mr. O'Neill,
My mother Margoth Maertens, my wife Sylvia Schaff and myself, Kenneth Schaff own 19 Narcissa Dr.,
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA.
We oppose the increase of the Abalone Cove Sewer System charges.
Best,
Margoth Maertens
Ken and Sylvia Schaff
Sent from iPad
Ken Schaff
From: James O'Neill
Sent:
To:
Thursday, October 1, 2020 8:20AM
CityCierk
Cc: Ron Dragoo
Subject: FW: Portugese Bend Sewer charge increase I 5 FruitTree Rd. RPV, CA 99275
Late correspondence for agenda item regarding AbCove Sewer System
From: snirvee@aol.com <snirvee@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 5:24 PM
To: James O'Neill <joneill@rpvca.gov>
Cc: patricia@ladybugmusic.com; christiane.maertens@gmail.com; corinne.pbca@gmail.com
Subject: Portugese Bend Sewer charge increase I 5 FruitTree Rd. RPV, CA 99275
Hello,
We are the trustees in charge of 5 FruitTree Rd. Located in Portugese Bend. We oppose any increase to the
Abalone Cove Sewer System charges. Thank you for your time.
Best,
Sylvia Schaff (Trustee of 5 Fruit Tree)
Patricia Maertens (Trustee)
Christiane Maertens (Trustee)
1
From: James O'Neill
Sent:
To:
Monday, October 5, 2020 9:30 AM
Sandra Hooper
Cc: CityCierk; Ron Dragoo
Subject: RE: Staff report on "Amending City council-Adopted Resolutio No. 2010-77
Ms. Hooper,
Thank you for your email.
Consideration and possible action to establish a sewer connection fee and amend Section 13.06.030 of the Municipal
Code relating to sewer service charges for the Abalone Cove Sewer System is item 4 (under Regular Business) on the
agenda for tomorrow night's meeting.
Below is a link to the staff report, per your request:
https:/ I rpv .gran icus.co m/Meta Viewer. ph p ?view _id=5&event_id= 167 4& meta _id=86702
Respectfully,
James S. O'Neill, MPM
Project Manager, Department of Public Works
{310) 544-5247 (Office)
jo ne ill@ rpvca .gov
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
City Hall is open to the public during regular business hours. To help prevent the spread of COVID-19, visitors are
required to wear face coverings and adhere to physical distancing guidelines. Some employees are working on rotation
and may be working remotely. If you need to visit City Hall, please schedule an appointment in advance by calling the
appropriate department and follow all posted directions during your visit. Walk-ups are limited to one person at a time.
Please note that our response to your inquiry could be delayed. For a list of department phone numbers, visit the Staff
Directory on the City website.
-----Original Message-----
From: Sandra Hooper <sandyphooper@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 8:45 AM
To: James O'Neill <joneill@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Sandy Hooper <Sandyphooper@gmail.com>
Subject: Staff report on "Amending City council-Adopted Resolutio No. 2010-77
Hello James,
I've looked on the City of RPV site under "City Council meeting agenda" for October 6, and can not see the staff report
for the new connection fee in Abalone Cove Sanitary Sewer System.
1
Are you able to email this to me please. I would really appreciate this as we have a lot in Portuguese Bend which we
intend to build on very soon.
Thank you.
Sandy Hooper
2