Draft  for November 14, 2002

Board Members Present (including Alternates and Advisors)

- George Wolfberg  - Arthur Mortell  - Patti Post  - Maurizio Vecchione  - Harry Sondheim
- Gilbert Dembo  - Larry Jacobs   - Stuart Muller  - Marguerite Perkins Mautner
- Lorraine Oshins  - Norman Kulla  - Jennifer Cron  - Carl Mellinger    - Kurt Toppel
- Bob Jacobson

1.0                Introduction of Board and Audience:

The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with the reading of the purpose of the PPCC as stated in its Bylaws.  Members of the Board and audience introduced themselves. 

2.0                   Adoption of Minutes:

The Minutes of the prior meeting were adopted as corrected.. A correction is noted as received by email from Barbara Kohn. Stuart Muller moved and Marguerite Perkins Mautner seconded. Motion was accepted unanimously.

3.0                Announcements and Concerns:

3.1  Treasurer’s Report

There is $8,309.49 in the PPCC checking account and $4,774.77 in the savings account.  Printing costs for the Newsletter have yet to be paid.

3.2  Selection of Area Representatives Alternates

There continue to be vacancies in areas 6 & 7

3.3   Status of Organizational Representative designations

Alternate vacancies continue for Chamber of Commerce and Education

3.4 Final Call for Community Service Award Nominations

Nominations must be received by this evening to committee: Stuart Muller, Marguerite Perkins Mautner and Peter Partain.

3.5 Cancellation of DOT Pacific Palisades to Downtown Commuter Express (Route 430)

Over a year ago DOT begun discussion about canceling route with the Councilwoman Miscikowski’s office. The current proposal is to abandon service altogether –because the estimated 11 average riders are too low to justify the route. DOT has claimed that ridership did not increase despite advertising programs. Mr. John Redmond, representing the riders challenges that the City ever embarked in any kind of community promotion, and that the low ridership is due to lack of information about the route. He indicates that there are at least 11 Revere students that ride the bus regularly and challenges the estimate of 11 riders on average. Additionally DOT was criticized for having taken a decision without community feedback or riders’ feedback, and without offering any kind of notice period.. A suggestion was also offered as an alternative that DOT consider consolidate the two daily buses into one – leaving at least one daily service to the Palisades.

A question was asked by the Council on the exact route, to which the DOT representative Mr. David Rapinski explained that route starts at Sunset and PCH follows Sunset to Church lane – under freeway, to Sepulveda, UCLA and to the DOT park & ride, then on to the 405 Freeway, the SM Freeway to downtown along Grand, through the financial district to Union Station.. He then added that LADOT buses sit 43 people and that this route has averaged 6-12 people according to DOT surveys. LADOT is canceling this service to reallocate resources to other routes – LADOT operates 350 vehicles across 50 routes. He reminded everyone that the RTD used to run the 430 service – and found it to be an underperformer, and they proposed to cancel the route – city decided to step forward and LADOT took over the route. The 430 route has been a weak performer – Never reached triple digit ridership – in 1994 DOT introduced another park & ride lot and added two more buses to attempt to increase ridership – but route is still not performing. With the Councilwoman it was decided that significant ridership begins at the park & ride route --- and the DOT proposal offers a rerouted 431 to pick up service. This will add 27 minutes to commute time.

The Council asked if LADOT has available any commuter vans that could be used instead of the bus, to which Mr. Rapinski replied that LADOT does not.

Larry Jacobs inquired if the MTA routes to downtown can offer an alternative, to which representatives from the riders indicated that the route take 1:45hrs along surface streets. The Council asked if at least one bus could be kept, as proposed by the rider representatives. LADOT replied that one bus would not be cost effective based on how DOT contracts for driver services.  A question was asked about the 38 school buses that are sitting idle at the high school most of the day – and how feasible could be to use them in support of this route. LADOT indicates that the charter does not allow it.

Harry Sondheim asked why LADOT would make a decision without asking the passenger or try to find ridership?  LADOT indicated that they did survey the passengers.

The audience asked about the load factor of a median route in system, to which the LADOT representative answered that the route is 13% lower than average– based on a system  median of 38-40% seat utilization (with this not being its best performance). It was then pointed out that if all riders where combined on one bus rather than two, we would be average.  LADOT indicated that cost would still be the same due to the way services are contracted. 

The Council asked what initiatives were taken by LADOT to increase ridership. LADOT indicated that they did destination marketing, advertising the route in downtown circulars and billboards, as well as with downtown-based employers. Mitchell Lorenzo the PM for LADOT – pointed out again that 50% of riders are boarding at the Park & Ride stop – the reroute will still offer those passengers their service. The audience pointed out that a 27 minutes addition to the commute time is not an alternative.  Phil Ackers– also of DOT explained that LADOT’s mission is to reduce long-distance commuting, and therefore they do not consider short-distance riders, such as the Revere students. He added that DOT would discourage short-distance riding of its bus, as there are MTA alternatives for short distance.. The Council took objection to the statements, and encouraged DOT to listen to the wishes of its riders, and that their attitude does not seem to foster good will with the Community and the DOT’s own customers.

A member of the audience, who is also a rider criticized the marketing effort of LADOT, and indicated that the City provided no notice to allow any kind of community grassroots effort to attempt increasing ridership. He asked that the City delays implementing the cancellation for a period of at least six months to allow him and his fellow riders to help increase ridership.  The Council asked the representative of the Councilwoman when was this matter first considered – to which Craig Bullock replied that the matter was under review for a year. The Council expressed its dissatisfaction that the Community was not involved in providing either feedback or assistance to resolve this vital issue.

Arthur Mortell moved that the Council adopt  the following resolution:

The PPCC requests that the City of Los Angeles fund line 430 through June 2003. We ask that the City of Los Angeles fund a community-based marketing plan, developed with input from riders of line 430, with the purpose of increasing ridership. We request that both the LADOT and the ridership of the 430 deliver a progress report  to the PPCC by April of 2003.

Motion was seconded by Gilbert  Dembo. Motion was adopted unanimously.

3.6 Pot Luck Dinner

A sign up sheet is being circulated.

3.7 City of Los Angeles Street Furniture Project

A package was received from Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski describing various bus shelters, kiosks, and other street furniture to be installed by Viacom Decaux at bus stops at various intersections on Temescal, PCH and Sunset from the beach to Capri.

3.8 Coastal Commission de novo hearing re: 17633 Castellamare Drive

Tthe West LA Planning Commission decision approving Ben Leeds’ project was thrown out by the Coastal Commission which will hold a new hearing starting from scratch in the future.

3.9 Getty

Mr. Murdoch, Attorney. for plaintiffs confirmed that they have excluded the PPCC from the appeal filing.

4. Old Business

                4.1 Adoption of new Articles of Incorporation

This completes the merger of the PPC Foundation into PPCC as new Federal law allows a small amount of lobbying by tax exempt organizations without harming our tax exempt status. Arthur Mortell moved that the articles be accepted, Barry Kurtz seconded and the motion was accepted unanimously.

4.2 Alternatives for sidewalk repair

The Board of Public Works was requested to send experts to discuss sidewalk trees and the City’s strategies for sidewalk maintenance. City representatives in attendance included Thomas Thomas, Acting Assistant. Director, Dennis Weber, Superintendent for Special Projects, (tel. 213-485-6632, email: dweber@bss.lacity.org), and Greg Monfette from Special Projects.  The City provided a presentation relating to the City’s sidewalk policies. They discussed the creation of a new City wide program for sidewalk repair, in effect since the 2000-2001 budget. Current buidget allows repair to approx. 46 miles of the city’s worst sidewalks. In the 2001-2002 budget an additional 98 miles was approved.. In 2002-2003 the total was brought to 118 miles. This should be compared with the City having 6,000 miles of sidewalks. The program has pioneered a number of cutting edge repair techniques, including Grind Sidewalks, Meander Sidewalks, Enlarge Tree Well, Reduce Sidewalk Width, Rubberized pavers, Sidewalk Ramping and Rubberized Sidewalk.

Stuart Muller asked why, in light of the program, sidewalks are in still in such state of disrepair. City Representatives indicate that despite effort, overall budget is still minimal given the total citywide sidewalk network.

The Council inquired about the City’s policy for tree trimming – City indicated that there is a cycle based on the type of tree that is generally a 7-year cycle – again budget is an issue. Member of the audience commented on trees in the Palisades not having been trimmed for 20 years. 

Members of the audience asked about tree removal. The City indicates reluctance to remove trees unless special circumstances exist. Overall the City will try to preserve trees and sidewalks. Tree removal is only one element of a program that includes lots of other options. Additionally the City is encouraging homeowners to perform maintenance by issuing no-fee “A” permits.

Members of the audience flagged that Galloway has a severe problem.

Harry Sondehim asked how to report problems to the City and Dennis Webber suggested that people use the hotline number, 800-966 CITY to request service.

Larry Jacobs inquired on the effectiveness of the asphalt ramps, expressing the opinion that they had limited usefulness. City representatives indicated that for some types of damage these can be effective. They are also using grinding as an alternative.

A representative from Palisades Beautiful indicated that their organization planted 1,500 trees – but the City has lack of budget for pruning – a question was asked about pruning being performed on a more timely schedule. City representatives suggested that there is a request for budget for structural pruning – which would involve species-specific cycle – but budget and staffing are significant issues – he asks that the Community be an advocate to the Councilwoman for funding.

Stuart Muller asked what is budget for all sidewalks and what is the liability costs. City indicates that 118 miles at $21M is annual budget.

Alex Man a resident, commented that there is never any estimate from the City on replacement value for taking out a tree – should consider value to property. Should look at environmental and energy factors as well. It has been estimated that 10,000 trees will be removed – this is a huge value. And other benefits should be considered because there is a 20-year catch up time for new trees, as they represent a very important resource on which our own survival is important. He expressed the opinion that trees are a public resource and should be treated as such.

Carl Mellinger moved that the PPCC should send a letter to the Councilwoman to support increased funding for tree trimming and repair and decry lack funding to date and express concern.  Norm Kulla seconded. Motion was passed unanimously.

4.3 Planned construction at 216 Amalfi Drive

The homeowner and Mr. Mo Blorfroshan representing the DOT were present. DOT reports that they are responding to letters sent out – as well as concern from Coastal Commission. The homeowner is present and pledged support to any DOT traffic mitigation requests.  Representative of DOT has investigated site and has required a flagman – and the homeowner has agreed to the requirement. Marguerite Perkins Mautner expressed concern that, with parking, Amalfi is a one-lane street. Flagman would cause cars to backedup on three curves.  In response, the homeowner suggested that she can use walkie-talkie – will have signage – and blockage will be minimized and coordinated with LAUSD. The Council asked if parking could be restricted during work? DOT expressed the opinion that this would take away parking from residents. Arthur Mortell asks that a heavy equipment stationing point should be established to avoid a build-up with trucks waiting. He asks if the owner is willing to commit to establish a staging area. Arthur Mortell recommended that the Council recommend establishing a requirement for the homeowner to implement traffic mitigation measures including requiring a staging area.

5. New Business

Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.  The next meeting of the PPCC Board will be held at Temescal Canyon Park Dining Hall on December 12, 2002 at 7:00 P.M.

Return to Top

Board Minutes of October 24, 2002

Board Members Present (including Alternates and Advisors):

1.0            Introduction of Board and Audience:

The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. with the reading of the purpose of the PPCC as stated in its Bylaws.  Members of the Board and audience introduced themselves. 

2.0            Adoption of Minutes:

The Minutes of the prior meeting (October 10, 2002) and of the meeting of September 26, 2002 were adopted.

3.0            Announcements and Concerns:

3.1    Treasurer’s Report

There is $7,934.23 in the PPCC checking account and $4,773.25 in savings.  All bills have been paid.  Receipts deposited since the News-letter was mailed exceed costs of the Newsletter by approximately $600.

3.2    Selection of Area Representative Alternates [Areas 6, 7 & 8

Barbara Richman was unanimously approved as Area 8 Alternate Representative.   Selection of alternates for Areas 6 & 7 was deferred.

3.3    Appointment of Community Service Award Nominating Committee

The Chair appointed Stuart Muller, Marguerite Perkins Mautner, and Peter Partain as the Community Service Award Nominating Committee.  Nominations are to be received by November 14, 2002.

3.4    Alternatives for sidewalk repair

Stuart Muller handed out Palisades Beautiful brochures, displayed photographs of some notable sidewalk damage due to tree root problems, and led a discussion regarding alternatives for sidewalk repair.  Stuart stated that homeowners are responsible for maintenance of sidewalks.  The Palisades Beautiful brochure provides a list of street tree designations; permit information and contact information for tree 

care maintenance.  Larry Jacobs agreed that the general rule is that homeowners are responsible for maintenance of sidewalks.  However, Larry stated there is an exception for street trees.  The city is responsible to cut roots, fix the sidewalk and do other necessary repairs when a street tree damages a sidewalk.  No one appeared for Palisades Beautiful.

Bob Benjamin of 1161 Galloway stated he is at war with a tree that continually breaks his pipes.  He stated he spoke with Dorothy Bissell of Palisades Beautiful.  He received an estimate for $3600 from a recommended vendor to trim the subject tree roots and repair the sidewalk. 

Alex Man pointed out the benefits of trees to air quality and suggested someone get in contact with LA Conservation Corps. whose mission is to preserve trees.

Stuart agreed to speak to Dorothy Bissell of Palisades Beautiful and urge that they expand their mission from the planting of trees to include maintenance of trees.

The Chair will invite the City Bureau of Street Services and conservation corps to discus policy and alternatives at the Board meeting of November 14.

3.5    Planned construction at 216 Amalfi Drive

Chair Wolfberg indicated he had written a letter to Councilwoman Miscikowski on behalf of the Santa Monica Civic Association requesting assurance of a safe construction site and with minimal disruption to the neighborhood and Bob Cavage of PPRA had also written seeking mitigation.  Councilwoman Miscikowski’s planning deputy was invited but was unable to appear before the PPCC Board tonight due to scheduling conflict, but has referred referenced letters to DOT.  A discussion ensued with concern expressed by various parties about the traffic impact during construction with large construction vehicles on essentially a one-lane road, dust control, and ingress-egress for emergency vehicles. 

Lisa Bittan, whose property is immediately above the project, circulated a newspaper article showing extensive damage to the hillside and her property from a landslide circa 1998.  She expressed serious concern about impact of drilling for 15 required caissons on this unstable hillside.

Patti Post moved, Norman Kulla seconded, and a motion unanimously carried to invite Ms. Miscikowski and all appropriate city department representatives to attend next PPCC Board meeting to explain how con-struction will be managed to assure safety of children from nearby Canyon Elementary, and address traffic issues and geology concerns.

3.6    Notice of intent to adopt MNG re Palisades Skate Park

Chair Wolfberg noted recent New York Times article regarding a study that showed that if protective gear is worn, skate boarding is safer in a Park environment.

3.7    Letter from Upper Riviera Homeowners Association re. Bulldozed deep cut in public access road at 1541 Casale Road [Winston Salser]

Letter circulated from Nina Rosenfield, President, Upper Riviera Homeowners Association expressing concern regarding bulldozing on public access road.  Chair advised the City has been requested to explain action.

3.8    Coastal Commission Appeal – 17633 Castellammare

Jour representative, ack Allen will monitor the hearing before Coastal Commission at San Diego Doubletree on November 5, 2002 regarding proposed development at 17633 Castellammare Drive, Ben Leeds applicant.

3.9    Will Rogers State Beach Debris

Barbara Kohn reported that the PPRA has requested an investigation by the California Attorney General into suspected criminal activity involving this sand replenishment project.  Barbara noted that the beach is currently partially fenced off.  She also noted that despite the passage by the Board of Supervisors of Supervisor's Yaroslavsky motion to remove the material dumped on the site, the objectionable material had not be removed.  Instead, this potentially hazardous material has been spread south on the beach.   Barbara further noted that the requested test results have not been released to the public.

Barbara moved, Stuart Muller seconded, and a motion was unanimously carried that:  The PPCC Board expresses its concern that the Dept. of Beaches & Harbor representatives were not forthcoming about the quality of materials placed on Will Rogers beach in their presentation to the PPCC Board (October 10 meeting).  Their statements were in conflict with video evidence presented by community observers (also on October 10).  The PPCC Board notes that on following day, on motion of Supervisor Yaroslavsky, the Board of Supervisors passed a resolution to remove the material.  This followed the October 9 letter to the Supervisor from Pacific Palisades Residents Association requesting the removal of the debris

The PPCC urges that an investigation be conducted concerning the Dept. of Beaches & Harbor sand replenishment practices: what occurred at Will Rogers should not be repeated in Pacific Palisades or in any other beach community in Los Angeles.

Chair to write letter to Supervisor Yaroslavsky expressing the community's concern, requesting an investigation and report back to PPCC.

3.10    Getty Decision

The Chair noted that the PPCC had withdrawn as a party litigant to the Getty matter.  A recent article by the Palisadian-Post referenced the PPCC as a party litigant.  Bill Bruns, editor of the Palisadian-Post, pointed out that the recently released Appellate Court opinion lists the PPCC as a party litigant.  The Chair will contact Chair Emeritus Sondheim to inquire and cause appropriate steps to be taken to remove the PPCC as a party. 

3.11    Temescal Canyon Storm Drain Diversion Project Signage

The Chair reported that he is working with City Engineerproject coordinator Andy Flores to address traffic signage problems relating to ongoing Temescal Canyon construction.

3.12    Planning for Pot Luck Dinner

Chair Wolfberg reported that Stewart Hall was unavailable on December 12, 2002 for the annual PPCC Potluck dinner.  Discussion ensued regarding changing the date of the dinner to either December 5 or December 19 in order to continue using the traditional Stewart hall location.  Alternately, members of the council could personally contribute monies and cater the event at Mort's.  Barbara Kohn and Jeannie Gold Friedman will comprise the Dinner Committee and will consult with Bobbie Farberow regarding pricing and availability and report back regarding this alternative.  The Chair will contact the Temescal Canyon Park Management to investigate alternatives.

3.13    Pending Installation of “edge lines” on Entrada Drive

The Chair reported that "edge lines" are to be added on Entrada Drive from Canyon School to Adelaide.  These white lines will make the roadway appear smaller and are intended to slow traffic for safety purposes.

3.14    West L.A. Area Planning Commission Agenda for October 30, 2002

The Chair announced the West L.A. Planning Commission Agenda for October 30, 2002.

3.15    Appointment of Board Representative to serve on P.R.I.D.E. Board

The chair announced that Kurt Toppel had agreed to serve as our representative on the P.R.I.D.E. Board.

4.0       Old Business

None.

5.0       New Business

5.1       Report on Entertainment Industry Development Corporation Activities by Larry Jacobs

Larry Jacobs read his four page "Report on the EIDC (An essay entitled 'The Cookie Jar')", dated October 24, 2002, a copy of which is attached to these minutes and is posted on the PPCC website. 

The EIDC is the Entertainment Industry Development Corporation.  Larry was a member of a community committee to work with the EIDC to make rule changes responsive to community concerns.  After two years of effort, all recommended changes were rejected by the EIDC in order to "maintain flexibility."  Larry pointed out and objected to serious conflicts of interests of the elected representatives who sit on EIDC's board of directors.  He noted that despite the lack of progress with rule changes that the EIDC had not committed any flagrant violation during the two-year period of review.

Lorraine Oshins reported that there have been continuous problems in the Bel-Air Bay tract.  She indicated letters of protest have been sent to EIDC and Councilwoman Miscikowski, but these protests have been ignored.  Larry apologized for not knowing of these problems.

5.2       Coastal Commission Agenda Item re Seaview Restaurants dba Gladstones Restaurant.

The Chair announced that on November 5, the Coastal Commission will consider a partially after-the-fact request from Seaview Restaurants dba Gladstones Restaurant, for continued use for restaurant purposes of existing public parking lot and beach front public viewing deck.  Also a request for approval of “Gladstones 4 Fish” monument sign between public parking lot and public viewing deck.

A discussion led by Barbara Kohn addressed traffic safety concerns caused by left turns from the southerly exit to the Gladstone's parking lot.  Barbara Kohn noted a recent traffic accident that may have resulted in a fatality was caused by an unsafe left turn.  The viewpoint was also expressed that because of the nearby signal there are traffic breaks that allow a safe left turn and by closing the left turn lane drivers desiring to turn left would turn right and then attempt a more dangerous u-turn on PCH.  The Chair noted that Barry Kurtz is discussing alternatives with the County and with Cal Trans, including moving the exit to where the entrance is, at the traffic light.  Barbara Kohn moved, and Art Mortell seconded, a motion to close the left turn lane out of the southerly exit of the Gladstone's parking lot.   The motion was defeated, five in favor, seven against.

Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 9:08p.m.  The next meeting of the PPCC Board will be held at Mort’s Oak Room on November 14, 2002 at 7:00 P.M.

Minutes taken by Norman Kulla, sitting in for the Secretary.

Return to Top