20250401 Late CorrespondenceTO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY CLERK
APRIL 1, 2025
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented
for tonight's meeting.
Item No.
1
2
Description of Material
Email from Sharon Yarber
Email from Jim Knight
** PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted
through Monday, March 31, 2025**.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~
Tera Takaoka
L:ILATE CORRESPONDENCE\202512025 Coversheets\20250401 additions revisions to agenda.docx
4/1/25, 11:13AM
Outlook
PVHS Museum aty PVIC (Agenda Item 1)
From Sharon Yarber <sharon@sharonyarber.com>
Date Tue 4/1/2025 11 :09 AM
To CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Mail -Fatima Alcantara -Outlook
Cc CityClerk <CityClerk@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>
Some people who received this message don't often get email from sharon@sharonyarber.com. Learn why this is
imr2ortant
I EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open any attachments unless you recognize the se~der and know the content is
safe!!!.
Dear Mayor Bradley and Council Members:
I am opposed to construction of this museum annex on the Pt. Vicente site. I agree with Mr. Siegenthaler
that the purposes of the proposed project do not coincide with the POU that governs the use of the site.
I personally find the design of the proposed building to be quite unattractive architecturally. It looks like a
large storage container to me.
Before any decision is made about whether and where to locate a proposed museum, I think it is
important for any presentation to include a comprehensive photographic catalogue of the items to be
housed there. It may very well be that may of the exhibits are duplicative of what is already at PVIC (a
concern expressed by the docents) and therefore unnecessary. If it appears to the community that there
are sufficient items that are not duplicative, then an assessment of how much space is actually needed
should be completed, and then an alternate appropriate location should be selected. Perhaps Ladera
Linda could house the items; perhaps the Civic Center, if and when ever constructed, could be utilized.
Further, a financial analysis of the PVHS should be conducted to assess the likelihood of PVHS actually
ever being able to raise sufficient funds required to support, at least in part, the costs of operating any
museum. PVHS should fully fund the construction and maintenance of any museum and leave the City
out of it, other than to potentially provide the physical space.
In any event, the proposed annual cost of maintenance and staffing now approaching $450,000 seems
excessive and a cost we simply cannot afford. The initial estimate for maintaining the Preserve was
about $500,000 and now what is it? Well over $1 mil if memory serves me correctly. The annual cost will
continue to increase and I do not support the city's expenditure of these additional funds.
Sincerely,
Sharon Yarber
I.
https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAMkAGFmYWZiOWU0LWJjNDctNGE3Yy04Y2OxLTY4NjdjZmFkMjJiYgBGAAAAAABT8N%2BdlcZiTLmQhSS... 1/1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
LC
Teresa Takaoka
Tuesday, April 1, 2025 1 :42 PM
CityClerk
FW: Agenda item 2 EV chargers
From: Jim Knight <knightjim33@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2025 1:41 PM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Agenda item 2 EV chargers
TO: The RPV City Council
FROM: Jim Knight
RE: Agenda item 2 EV Charging stations
4-1-25
Mayor and Council Members,
I am glad to see these EV charging stations finally being considered to be installed. I have been
encouraging the City to provide this service to our residents for years. I have also been
encouraging the City to install photovoltaic solar energy on the municipal building through several
low capital cost programs to round out the City's sustainability goals. The solar power will greatly
reduce the operational costs of the level 2 charges outlined in the staff report.
Some comments on the staff report:
-Please ask staff for more clarification on the "indirect costs" that are beyond regular maintenance.
-Maybe in Canada they call the fees for an EV remaining in its spot after finishing their charge
"loitering fees" but here in the US it is referred to as "idling fee" usually with a 10-15 rnin. grace
period. Loitering sounds more like a violation of municipal code.
-It is not clear as to what cost/kWh is being used in the report. SCE will be charging a Time of
Use (TOU) rate based upon what time of the day chargers are used. Is the $0.27 /kWh in the
Matrix report an average of SCE's variable TOU rates? The park is open 6am-9pm so the lower
late night rates are not available. There needs to be greater clarification here.
-The report states that the chargers have a life cycle of 5 years "because of rapid changes in
technology". I am not sure what "changes in technology" is being referenced here. A 40 amp
(9.6kW) charger will have the same output ands~ be drawing its current from SCE in 5 years an~•
any software associated with the charger can be updated over the air. I am sure there is data from
other municipalities that support a greater than 5 year life cycle.
-The recovery charge of $0.52/kWh is higher than many DC fast chargers and more than
comparable municipal Level 2 chargers. Charging this rate may create a public perception of
gouging and greatly reduce the use of these chargers.
-SWITCH has the software capabilities to adjust charging rates. I recommend that the City offer
its residents a 20% discount from the $0.52 /kWh (if that is the rate chosen by Council). RPV
residents can verify the registration of their EVs with the City and translate it to the charger rate
when they plug in their EV. This would lower their per kWh charge to $0.42 /kWh. The grant is
for $76,370 and the estimated costs per the report is $52,193. That leaves a balance of
$24,171. The 20% discount would approximately equal this amount for the first year under this
scenario. After one year, the Council would have data to ascertain what real costs are associated
with the charging stations and determine whether or not to continue the program.
When Council chooses one of the several models of SWITCH chargers (ABB TerraAC or Autel
Maxi Charge) it is important to know the kW output of each charger and if paried units will be
sharing an energy source. Earlier charger proposals entertained by the City were woefully under
powered by this energy sharing limitation. 40 amps ( 9.6 kW) is a good Level 2 charger but two
EV s plugged into shared units will cut the output to each vehicle by half.
Thank you for your service to the community and forwarding a sustainable policy,
Jim Knight
2
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY CLERK
MARCH 31, 2025
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received
through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, April 1, 2025, City Council meeting:
Item No.
1
Description of Material
Email from Noel Park
Respectfully submitted,
~~ Tereaiakaoka
L:\LATE CORRESPONDENCE\2025\2025 Coversheets\20250401 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.docx
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Late corr
From: Teresa Takaoka
Teresa Takaoka
Monday, March 31, 2025 2:12 PM
CityClerk
FW: Council Meeting of 4/1/25 Agenda Item #1 -Proposed PVIC Museum Annex
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2025 9:48 AM
To: CityClerk <CityClerk@rpvca.gov>
Subject: FW: Council Meeting of 4/1/25 Agenda Item #1 -Proposed PVIC Museum Annex
Late corr
From: Noel Park <noelparkone@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2025 9:09 AM
To: CC <CC@rpvca.gQ~>
Subject: Council Meeting of 4/1/25 Agenda Item #1 -Proposed PVIC Museum Annex
I am opposed to the proposed project for the following reasons:
It seems inappropriate to take on a $378,000 per year expenditure in the face of the financial
challenges facing the City.
The financing for the construction seems to have disappeared.
The project footprint seems to conflict with the previously approved Los Serrano project.
Los Serranos have declined to provide docent support.
I have contributed to the PVHS for several years years in the past, but I don't believe that the City has any
obligation to provide it with facility support, let alone at a level of $378,000 per year. I have suggested in
the past that there must be existing buildings on the Peninsula which could display the collection. The
many empty store facilities at the Promenade On The Peninsula mall spring to mind. Possibly the mall
management might be amenable to a friendly lease with the PVHS.
Noel Park
6715 El Rodeo Rd, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
562-413-5147
1 (,