Return to Index of Meeting Minutes
MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 24th 2015Voting Members in Attendance: Chris Spitz, Maryam Zar, Jennifer Malaret, Richard Cohen, Barbara Kohn, Cathy Russell, Rick Mills, Janet Anderson, Reza Akef, Sarah Rena Conner, George Wolfberg, Eric Dugdale, Stuart Muller, Gilbert Dembo, Donna Vaccarino, Kelly Comras, Linda Lefkowitz and Nancy Niles. Partial Meeting: Peter Culhane. Voting Alternates: Robin Meyers, Brian Deming, Susan Payne, Diane Bleak, Barbara Marinacci and Lee Trask. Non-voting Advisors and Alternates: Schuyler Dietz, Bruce Schwartz, Ted Mackie, Carol Bruch, Doug McCormick and Kevin Niles and Michael Soneff. Start of Business Meeting 1. Reading of Community Council’s Mission. Reza Akef read the Mission Statement. 2. Call to Order and Introduction of the Board and Audience. Chris Spitz called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm. Introduction of the Board and audience. 3. Certification of Quorum. Chris certified that a quorum was present at 7:04 p.m. 4. Adoption of Minutes/Upcoming Meetings. Chris deemed the September 10, 2015 minutes approved as corrected. Upcoming meetings: 10/8, presentation/discussion regarding the Village Shell Station proposed CUB/CUP (use/hours/beverage). Presentation by the Pacific Palisades Task Force on Homelessness on the launch of its new fundraising drive. 10/22, (tentative) presentation/Q&A with Assemblymember Richard Bloom. 5. Consideration of Agenda. The President considered the agenda. 6. Treasurer’s Report. Richard Cohen reported the financial status as of September 24, 2015. The total account balances equal $32,238.59. There were no significant expenditures. Dues payments have been received and Richard thanked board members and the public who have financially supported PPCC. 7. Reports, Announcements and Concerns. 7.1. Announcements from the President, Chris Spitz. 7.1.1. Meeting Ground Rules. 1) Due to library rules, the meeting must end promptly at 9:00 p.m.; as needed, the President will stay after the meeting to answer questions. 2) The President conducts meeting order and may rearrange order of discussion at her discretion. 3) Board members and audience shall only speak when called upon by the President; there shall be no interruptions except to make a point of order. 4) The President’s role in maintaining meeting order shall be honored. 5) All discussion shall be civil, respectful and courteous. (PPCC Bylaws, http://www.pp90272.org/BYLAWS%20JULY%202015.pdf). 7.1.2. Start of PPCC Fiscal Year Oct. 1. Organizational Members for 2015-2016, beginning on October 1, 2015. See attached list below. Chris thanked the two organizational members who are leaving the Board as of Sept. 30: Amy Kalp, Friends of the Library; Lee Trask, Paul Revere. Chris also stated that she wanted to take this opportunity to note that for the first time in her experience on PPCC — and she believes for the first time ever — all primary and alternate seats, both area and organizational representatives, are now filled. Chris thanked everyone who has stepped up to the plate to volunteer for service on the PPCC board for the benefit of the community. Chris stated that when she first stepped into the office of Chair, building on the efforts of PPCC Chair Emeritus Barbara Kohn, she sought to bring more awareness and participation onto the council. Over and over again, at the Farmers’ Market outreach, in private conversations and even in public discussion at our meetings, Chris heard residents complain that PPCC seemed like a hidebound group of insiders with perpetual seats, little or no engagement with younger members of the community, few opportunities for participation and no vision for the future. Chris stated that she has tried to the best of her ability to change that perception, and slowly but surely that is occurring. Chris said that we will have a debate later this evening on whether changes in PPCC’s organizational structure would be a good thing for the council going forward. Change is difficult to come by, but Chris stated that she welcomed that debate and a full airing of what our members believe would be best for this organization as we look to the future. 7.1.3. Citizen of the Year/Sparkplug Awards Event – December 10, 2015, Gladstone’s. Chris stated that nominations now open for qualified individuals for Citizen of the Year and Sparkplug honors. Deadline for submission of nominations: October 31. For information about nomination requirements, go to: http://www.pp90272.org/sparkplug.htm. Chris reported that nominations should be submitted to info@pacpalicc.org. Chris summarized the requirements for the Citizen award and for the Golden Sparkplug award. 7.1.4. Citywide Sign Ordinance Update. See attached letter. Chris reported that the CPC hearing was not delayed and was held today in Van Nuys City Hall. Jennifer Malaret reported that the hearing was generally very favorable for the community and no action was taken to pass the draft ordinance to PLUM. On the big picture issues, President Ambroz summarized the policy direction they are going: (1) No on amnesty of illegal and unpermitted signs, and they seem to not want to allow signs whose status is not known to be legal to satisfy takedown requirements. (2) No on grandfathering districts other than the two previously reviewed by the CPC in 2009. (3) Increase takedown (2:1 for static to static, at least 4:1 and maybe 8:1 on static to digital), and no community benefits in lieu of takedown. (4) Lowered brightness consistent with the Broadway Sign District just reviewed. (5) No to freeway facing signs. (6) No CUP process for digital or other off-site signage outside of sign districts. The commissioners universally expressed their shock and dismay that the City is failing to do any sign enforcement. Likely the item will return to CPC perhaps as quickly as October. 7.1.5. PPCC Website, Fundraising, Outreach Update. Submit tax deductible dues/donations (suggested amount: $25 individual/family, $50 business) to PPCC at P.O. Box 1131, Pacific Palisades 90272 or via Pay Pal tab on PPCC website. Like Us on Facebook at pacpalicc. Chris reported that work on the new website is continuing, PPCC is continuing to do outreach, and that she continues to ask board and community members to submit their tax deductible dues or donations. Envelopes are on the counter for your convenience. And don’t forget to Like Us on Facebook. 7.1.6. Congress of Neighborhood Councils, Sat., September 26. http://nccongressla.com. Chris thanked those board members and residents planning to participate. 7.1.7. 909 Greentree/864 Brooktree (Beglari). Status update. Chris reported that PPCC has been advised that the Planning Department has determined that “no changes to material circumstances have been presented in the current application” and thus the Beglaris’ application for an adjustment has been terminated. Sentencing in the misdemeanor action against the Beglaris has been continued to October 9, 2015. 7.1.8. New Announcement. Chris stated, as she has previously advised the board, PPCC learned for the first time on Tuesday this week that the FAA is proposing a new flight path over the Palisades for flights going to Long Beach Airport, as part of a larger proposal for flights within the Los Angeles Metroplex. PPCC is awaiting more details, but for now PPCC has requested that the FAA extend the comment period for the Palisades community because PPCC did not have prior notice. PPCC has also requested that the FAA conduct public meetings or workshops in the Palisades so that we can obtain more information on what is planned. Chris said that PPCC’s letter to the FAA will be attached to the meeting minutes but if anyone wants to see a copy to let her know. Chris stated that the City Council has also requested an extension of the comment period and additional meetings for affected communities. Hopefully Congressman Ted Lieu will be doing the same. Chris said that if representatives are here this evening they can provide an update. See attached letter below. 7.2. Announcements from Governmental Representatives (Note: Contact information at: http://www.pp90272.org/Governmental%20Reps.pdf). 7.2.1. Los Angeles Police Department (“LAPD”). SLO Officer Moore stated that (1) Vehicle burglaries have increased in the Palisades and he reminded residents to “lock it, hide it, keep it.”, (2) Homeless persons in residential areas. To get police response residents have to describe the activity that is taking place, i.e., sidewalks being blocked, trespassing, checking handles or damage to automobiles. Comments: (1) What can be done for drivers ignoring stop signs on busses? SLO Moore stated that drivers need to stop and wait for the bus to load and unload. Drivers can be cited for honking their horns in anger because horn use is for an emergency or to notify other drivers of a hazard. Bus companies should come to LAPD about the issue and SLO Moore will remind his officers to be alert to this concern. (2) Dirt bike riders are riding in Potrero Canyon and those riders come up through adjacent city streets. What is the best way to report this activity other than 911 or requiring residents to physically go to the station to file a report? SLO Moore and his officers are aware of this activity and enforcement measures are being worked on. (3) Administrative Citation Enforcement Program (“ACE”), has it been rolled out citywide. SLO Moore was not ready to comment, but officer training programs have begun. (4) Saturday and Sunday motorcycle and automobile racing is taking place along Sunset Boulevard and Palisades Drive. SLO Moore stated that speeding on Sunset is an on-going problem for LAPD. (5) What are the latest trends to address residential burglaries? There is a doorbell replacement called ring.com that allows residents to respond to their doorbell via their smartphone and with the cloud upgrade that service will take a video of who is at the door. 7.2.2. Los Angeles City Council, District 11; Councilmember Mike Bonin’s Office. Sharon Shapiro, Field Deputy — Not in attendance. 7.2.3. Office of Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. Daniel Tamm, Westside Area Representative, Mayor’s Interfaith Liaison — Not in attendance. 7.2.4. California State Assembly, Office of Assemblymember Richard Bloom. Stephanie Cohen, Field Representative — Not in attendance. 7.2.5. California State Senate, Office of State Senator Ben Allen. Lila Kalaf, District Representative — Not in attendance. 7.2.6. United States Congress, Office of Congressman Ted Lieu. Janet Turner, District Representative. Janet reported that (1) FAA flight changes – the Congressman has sent a letter asking about changes for the Palisades, if a briefing could take place or the deadline for comment could be extended. The plan is going through an environmental assessment. While the office has been aware of the plan since the beginning of the year it has been difficult to ascertain what actual flight plans are proposed and which areas could be notably affected. Discussion: All airlines flying over or near the Palisades should be evaluated. Altitude is an issue. (2) The WLA Master Plan is moving along. On October 16, 2015 the first draft will be released with a 45-day public comment period to follow. (3) Postmaster Update. Janet said that in response to her poll, 80% of the residents responded that they were getting their mail satisfactorily by 6 p.m. at night. Residents have complained that they are not getting all of their mail and that there may be a problem with forwarded mail. Congressman Lieu’s office has asked for extra training with new hires. (4) Thank you to Congressman Lieu for appearing at synagogue this past week in the Palisades. 7.3. Announcements from Board Members and Advisors. 7.3.1. Officers/Area Representatives – None. 7.3.2. Organizational Representatives. (1) Susan Payne reported that the Will Rogers Polo Event is October 4, 2015 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. and is free to the public with the exception of the parking charge. (2) Bruce Schwartz reported that Kurt Toppel is the new President of PRIDE. 7.3.3. PPCC Advisors. 7.3.4. Board Members, Other Reports. (1) Donna Vaccarino said that the Save the Drop event went very well. There was a rain barrel raffle and 75-80 persons attended. (2) Barbara Kohn reported that: she is organizing a Shred-It Event hoped to take place for four hours and open to the public. HOAs and residents are asked to financially contribute towards the $1,000 cost needed to have this shred-it event in the Palisades. Sign Enforcement – the DRB is continuing efforts for enforcement. Residents Against Noise had previously been formed to provide comment to FAA Flight patterns. Barbara Kohn was re-appointed by Mike Bonin to the regional committee involved in overseeing allocation and disbursements of Prop K funds; she is the only CD-11 representative for the area north of the 10 Freeway. 8. Reports from Committees. 8.1. VPLUC (David Kaplan, Chair). Village Project Public Committee Meeting to discuss Caruso Affiliated’s application. October 29, 2015, 6pm in the old U.S. Bank Building. The application may be viewed at: http://www.palisadesvillageca.com/. Contact dkaplan6@aol.com with any questions. All interested board and community members are welcome. 8.2. Bylaws Committee (Richard Cohen and Jennifer Malaret, Co-Chairs). MOTION TO AMEND BYLAWS ARTICLE VIII(1)(A), APPENDIX A AND RELATED PROVISIONS; http://www.pp90272.org/BYLAWS%20JULY%202015.pdf. SECOND (ORAL AND WRITTEN) READING of the motion and proposed bylaws changes (see Sec. B below). Introduction: Chris stated that before Committee Co-Chair Richard Cohen begins the second oral reading and we have formal introduction of the motion she wished to make a few prefatory remarks. Chris stated: “As the board is aware, on March 12, for the first time that I know of, a PPCC bylaws committee actually asked for direction from the board before beginning work on bylaws amendments. The board gave direction as indicated by an informal vote of its members, and as indicated, there was no discussion at the time. However, as reflected in the minutes, I stated that if anyone wished to agendize these issues for further discussion pursuant to the bylaws, this would be done. No one asked me to agendize these issues. I also clearly stated that we would have full discussion of all proposed bylaws amendments before any vote. That is exactly what we will now be doing. I hope and expect that this will be a robust discussion, without rancor, on the merits of the proposals.” Reading: Richard Cohen read the motion. Richard stated that Donna Vaccarino had asked for a reading of the redlined changes and the words deleted. Richard proceeded to read both. Action/Motion: Richard brought the motion unanimously recommended by the bylaws committee. Reza Akef seconded the motion. Motion: Maryam Zar moved that any vote on the motion be by a written and confidential ballot. Cathy Russell seconded the motion. Chris Spitz read the following statement: “Our governing rules provide that we follow Roberts Rules of Order unless otherwise provided in our bylaws. Roberts Rules permits voting by written confidential ballot per a majority vote of board members. The authorities state that it can be used for sensitive, controversial or divisive motions. Our own bylaws call for written ballots in the case of officer elections and Code of Conduct hearings; per our legal advisor nothing in the bylaws prohibits voting by written ballot in other circumstances.” Second. Chris stated that there is no debate on motion for a written confidential ballot. A vote was taken and the motion passed. Discussion on Proposed Bylaws Amendments/Motion: (1) Donna Vaccarino opposed the motion on grounds of process (the direction of the board vote), insufficient outreach by the bylaws committee, and opposition to faith-based groups joining the board due to separation of church and state and lack of inclusion (other races such as Native Americans, atheists, etc.). Donna stated that the motion should be withdrawn and the bylaws committee should do more outreach to existing organizational board members. (2) Reza Akef supported the motion and PPCC’s process on the following grounds: (i) the current structure marginalizes the voice of elected representatives and residents by organizations and groups that don’t have transparency and have a host of other negative issues (for example, one person being the face of three organizations epitomizes the problem in making complaints that there is not enough outreach, etc.), (ii) the standing seats with the same perpetual does not make the PPCC a true community council; (iii) the other groups suggested do not exist in the Palisades, nor does an organized Muslim group; Reza supported the inclusion of faith based groups on the grounds of trying to include, not exclude. (3) Sarah Conner stated that she supports the addition of faith based groups but opposes the motion because she wants more analysis of what groups should participate, i.e., her group “Save the Bluffs” has 800 members on Face Book. Sarah also opposed having PPRA share a category with TCA because (i) PPRA has different issues then TCA, noting that PPRA has been active in the community since the 1970’s and (ii) PPRA feels like its voice and seat are being excluded for not a fair or stated reason. (4) Maryam Zar supported the motion and process, with further comment that voting by written ballot has nothing to do with the process of the proposed amendments. Maryam supported the bylaws motion by clarifying that PPRA’s voice is not being eliminated because it is in a two-group category that gives it a de-facto standing seat on the board. Maryam supported the process behind the motion by noting that the direction of the board vote was very clear and the bylaws committee (a very diverse and educated group) worked hard to achieve broader representation and rotation of organizations such that more people could participate on PPCC. (5) Randy Young opposed the motion because standing seats should be maintained because they are the ones with a memory, are fine people and PPCC is lucky to have them permanently on the board. Action: Gil Dembo called the question. There was a second. Susan Payne moved to postpone the vote to the next meeting because the Chamber of Commerce did not have the ability to consult with their organization. Chris stated that the Chamber’s motion for a postponement must be automatically granted pursuant to the terms of the bylaws. (6) Board members stated that more discussion should take place on the proposed bylaws amendments/motion and additional discussion ensued. (7) Barbara Kohn opposed the motion on grounds of process and stated that discussion had been insufficient. (8) Jennifer Malaret supported the motion and the process of bylaws revisions particularly because under prior Chairs the process to amend the bylaws had been done wholly behind closed doors and readings were far more informal. PPCC is trying something new, that being presenting bylaws revisions part-by-part and in order of temporal importance, and is looking at what is best for the organization’s future. Fundamental to the process is a acknowledgement by everyone that displeasure has been expressed by sitting board members and residents about the organizational membership of the PPCC where all are appointed and almost a majority enjoy standing or “solo” seats. PPCC accepted the criticism and the bylaws committee took the ideas to heart. Chris also decided to incorporate ideas from those who previously were not part of the process to answer the question of what is the best course for PPCC going forward. A. Background. On March 12, 2015, PPCC’s Board directed the Bylaws Committee to explore modifications to the Bylaws relative to Article VIII(1)(A) “Selection and Election of Representatives, Organization Representatives and Alternates” with reference to organizations eligible to send representatives as set forth on Appendix A. http://www.pp90272.org/minutes2015.htm#12MAR15. The Board directed three possible areas of amendment: 1. The four categories which currently have one organization (“standing seat”) should be reconstituted such that those categories have multiple organizations and rotate appointment as presently do the other five multiple organization categories. 2. Faith based organizations should be eligible to send representatives and have the opportunity for inclusion. 3. A process should be established whereby any organization not listed and that believes it is not adequately represented by an eligible organization, may submit an application for inclusion. B. Motion. The Bylaws Committee unanimously agrees that modifications to the existing Bylaws as directed by the Board should be made to facilitate all three areas of amendments. Such modifications would be approved now and become effective for the organizational term beginning on October 1, 2016. Adoption of these modifications does not prevent further modification to the effected provisions as may be approved by the Board during the interim period, i.e., the 2015 date upon which this motion is approved and the 2016 effective date. The Bylaws Committee unanimously recommends that the Board vote to adopt the modifications as set forth in the draft revised bylaws (redlined) document distributed concurrently with this agenda (linked as “ProposedRevisedBylawsSept.2015” in PPCC email messages of September 21, 2015, September 7, 2015 and August 24, 2015) and further, to authorize the Bylaws Committee to correct any typos or informalities that may be discovered during conversion of the final draft. 9. Old Business. 9.1. Discussion of Councilmember Mike Bonin Motion Regarding Short Term Residential Vacation Rentals (http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2014/14-1635-S2_mot_06-02-2015.pdf). Prior PPCC discussion 5/14/15 (http://www.pp90272.org/minutes2015.htm#14MAY15; no position taken). Discussion Topics: Should short-term vacation rentals (“STVR”s) be allowed under any circumstances in R1 zones? Is there a distinction between occasional home-sharing and using a unit or dwelling to effectively operate as a hotel or business? Should STVRs be allowed only when the unit or dwelling is the “primary residence” of the property owner? If so, how should “primary residence” be defined? Should the property owner be required to provide proof that they physically inhabit the residence? Should there be time/duration limits, geographic concentration limits, restrictions on the number of rooms that can be rented out, or any other restrictions on STVRs? Should STVRs be allowed only in or immediately adjacent to higher-density zones (e.g., R-3, R-4, C or A)? Should the presence of the property owner or an “on-site manager” be required at all times? Are there special concerns about allowing STVRs in hillside areas, very high fire hazard severity zones, areas with limited parking and/or narrow streets, or in any other locations? Is it reasonable to be concerned about property values if STVRs are allowed? If allowed, should prior notice to adjacent property owners and the right to object be required and/or provided for? Should Transient Occupancy Taxes be imposed on property owners who host STVRs? Do those taxes go into the General Fund or are they in any way returned to benefit the communities in which STVRs become legalized? Should taxes and fees related to STVRs be used to fund a dedicated oversight entity or compliance unit? Should there be identifying information of STVRs for emergency responders (LAFD, LAPD?)? Should fire and public health inspections be required for STVRs? Should STVR owners be required to pay legal wages to their helpers? Should best practices of other major cities be researched and adapted to develop the most effective controls/enforcement processes and to protect quality of life in our residential neighborhoods? See position statements/motions on file regarding this matter from Eagle Rock NC (http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2014/14-1635_cis_5-25-15.pdf) and from three Westside NCs: Bel Air-Beverly Crest NC (http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2014/14-1635-S2_cis_8-21-15.pdf), Venice NC (http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2014/14-1635_cis_1-28-15.pdf) and West Los Angeles NC (http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2014/14-1635_cis_8-17-15.pdf). (Note: no other Westside councils have submitted position statements). Meeting/Notice: The first community “listening session” will be held on Tuesday, September 29, 2015, Mar Vista Park Auditorium, 11430 Woodbine St. Los Angeles CA, 90066, 6:30pm – 8:30pm. PPCC strongly encourages board and community members to attend and provide feedback to the Planning Department as they are working to prepare draft regulations regarding short-term rentals. Interested individuals should also submit letters/comments directly to Council File No. 14-1635 (contact Chris Spitz for more information). Introduction: Chris stated that she would like to take a moment and set the table for this discussion. PPCC previously discussed the issue of Short Term Residential Rentals – or STVRs – on May 14, 2015 before Councilmember Bonin’s current motion was introduced. PPCC did not take a position but learned, among other things, that residential rentals for less than 30 days are currently not allowed; that enforcement is difficult or even non-existent because the STVR media platforms don’t have identifying information about the properties, such as street addresses; that safety is a concern without required fire and public health inspections; that Councilmember Bonin was concerned about loss of affordable housing stock but that the concern in the Palisades is first with impacts on our quality of life; that STVRs are a business but that taxes aren’t imposed nor is there any requirement that the operators pay legal wages to workers as legitimate businesses do; that the Councilmember favors imposition of Transient Occupancy or hotel taxes; and that here in the Palisades there are STVRs, including an example given of a home in the Highlands being rented out for proms and weddings. There are now dozens of STVR platforms, including the familiar ones such as Airbnb, HomeAway and VRBO. It is difficult to know how many currently operate in the Palisades at any given time but just looking at these three platforms in a snapshot in time this week, there appeared to be at least 145 STVRs listed for rent in residential areas where they are not permitted (there may be some duplication but this gives everyone a baseline idea; Chris noted that there are two such rentals on her street alone, including one entire home that has been rented out for some time as an STVR for $5,300 per week and continues to be listed). Mike Bonin’s current motion that was linked in our agenda calls for allowing STVRs in residential areas if the property is the principal residence of the owner. The term is not defined. The motion also calls for Transient Occupancy taxes to be imposed, with no proposed details as to enforcement, assessment, how the funds would be used, etc. The motion is currently pending in City Council committee but the Planning Dept. is holding “listening sessions” to get input on the proposal to allow STVRs. The Westside session will be on Sept. 29 as indicated in our meeting agenda. Board members Barbara Kohn and Linda Lefkowitz also attended a locally organized Westside community meeting about this issue last Saturday and Chris stated that if they had information they would be appreciated. Chris opened the matter for discussion and stated that if during discussion anyone would like to make a motion that the board take a position on the matter, they were free to do so. Discussion: (1) Brian Deming reported that in Area 3 residents in a multi-family building revolted against a unit owner who was operating a STVR. Residents banned the activity because of the wear and tear on the building, pool area, lobby and impact on quiet enjoyment for permanent residents. (2) Carol Bruch reported problems with that activity in Edgewater Towers that created security issues. (3) Peter Culhane reported that there is a property in the Highlands who rents her home for weddings and other events along with converting her garage into three bedrooms. The activity is a problem in the Highlands. (4) Barbara Kohn stated that PPCC is interested in protecting R zones it needs to take a strong position against the Bonin motion. It is up to residents to express opinions and take a position. Barbara said that efforts to legalize this activity is happening fast, some are seeking to compromise but this activity impacts on all R zones. (5) Linda Lefkowitz said that the ordinance provides for a tax and the City’s budget being what it is invites legalization of the activity although it is not clear who collects the tax or where it goes. The trend is towards mixed-use neighborhoods. Interested persons can go on line to see the locations where there are extra cars, people who are not interested in the community, etc. (6) Gil Dembo said this is a problem across the country and we should object not only to Bonin but all the councilmembers and the Mayor. It affects the life of residents throughout the City, i.e., the Venice Canals. (7) Lachman Lane – there is a house being rented for more then $10,000 per week to three families and it brings cars and noise. Action/Motion: Barbara Kohn sponsored the following motion: PPCC is opposed to the motion sponsored by Gil Cedillo Mike Bonin, with the concerns set forth in this agenda.” Gil Dembo seconded the motion. Discussion: Sarah Conner said residents have contacted her concerned with this activity and she supports the motion. Micheal Soneff said that the activity is positive for young people who cannot afford hotels and find safe and clean housing. It also gives landlords the ability to try out prospective tenants. These rentals are a valuable service and perhaps from the Chamber’s prospective transient users bring money into commercial services. Richard Cohen commented that this is illegal in the City and there is no enforcement. When you move to relax that ordinance the problems are likely to become worse and not better. The situation in the Palisades with houses renting for $10,000 per week has nothing to do with helping people. Stuart Muller said that this activity is not a unique or new thing, it happens all over Europe; however Stuart stated he was against the activity. Rick Mills said that it comes down to the details and how the laws are enforced. Because there is no enforcement the activity is happening without control and funding for enforcement would have some value. Schyler Dietz supports the activity. Diane Bleak stated that people invested in their homes and did so to raise their children in a communal neighborhood and transient residents splinter the neighborhoods and cause anxiety with added strangers and nuisances. Carol Bruch stated that the term “primary residence” does not mean that the property owner needs to be present. A resident commented that it helps elderly people who want to stay in their homes and is a good activity. Reza Akef commented that rentals for party houses have caused traffic and trash in the Riviera and R1 and R2 zones are really designed for permanent residents and families. If there is an emergency there are no additional safety precautions for landlords or information that goes to emergency responders. Barbara Kohn stated that this is a commercial activity akin to a hotel taking place to next-door residential property owners but for the four specific commercial areas in Pacific Palisades. Action/Motion: the vote was called and the motion passed. 10. New Business – None. 11. General Public Comment. 11.1. Palisades Turkey Trot. Now in its third year, the race will take place again in 2015. The run is a 5K starting at Palisades Charter High School and the route is around the El Medio Bluffs. Proceeds benefit Hearts with Hope, a UCLA medical charity. There will also be a food drive for the Los Angeles Food Bank. For more information see paliturkeytrot.com or contact (310) 251-3505. Comments: in the early morning people are sensitive to sound, however the high school does not plug in their speakers. Also consideration is underway to expand the route through Temescal Canyon to add miles to the course. LA’s Department of Recreation and Parks would need to be contacted. 12. Adjournment. Chris Spitz adjourned the meeting at 9:04 p.m. ATTACHMENTS ITEM 7.1.2 — PPCC ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBERS 2015/2016 Business and Commerce: Cultural/Ethics/Aesthetics: Education: Historian: Civic Organizations: Recreation: Environment: Service Clubs: Residents Association: ITEM 7.1.4 – CITYWIDE SIGN ORDINANCE September 14, 2015 Hon. Councilmember Mike Bonin, mike.bonin@lacity.org Via Email Re: CF 11-1705, 08-2020, 08-3386-S1; CITYWIDE Sign Ordinance; PPCC Seeks Delay in CPC Hearing Date to Allow for Public Participation Hon. Councilmembers and City Planning Department Officials: Pacific Palisades Community Council (PPCC) is the most broadly based community organization and the voice of the Palisades since 1973. At its regular meeting on September 10, 2015 PPCC’s board discussed the expected release of the staff report on the above referenced matter (on or about September 17, 2015) and the scheduling of the related CPC hearing only one week later. The board of PPCC passed the following motion: “A. Background. The CPC’s standing rules with respect to responses to a staff report substantially limit responses to no more than ten pages, twenty copies of which must be delivered to the Commission no later than 48 hours prior to the meeting (see “City Planning Commission Policy for Submittal of Written Materials on Agendized Items” paragraph (b)). Under the currently proposed schedule, if the community is fortunate enough to have the staff report by September 17, community members will have only two working days to file their written responses, or will be limited to two-page letters. There is simply insufficient time for community members to review and address the many complexities contained within the ordinance and express those views to the CPC under the CPC’s rules and the net result will undoubtedly be that community input on the ordinance will be substantially burdened. PPCC remains concerned with the substance of the yet-to-be-released staff report relative to: (1) advertising in city parks and recreational facilities, (2) negative impacts on private and public school campuses, (3) spillover effects, traffic safety, energy use, and aggregate impacts of new digital displays, (4) negative impacts on scenic ridgelines and open space, (5) negative impacts on county beaches and the California coastline, (6) exceptions from regulation in specific plan areas, (7) allowances for adjustments permitted without a public hearing and appeals process, (8) exemption of signs in public rights of way (PROW), (9) the ability of property owners to retain their right of private action. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Christina Spitz cc: ITEM 7.1.8 – DRAFT EA/SO CAL METROPLEXNEXTGEN/REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF COMMENT PERIOD AND ADDITIONAL PUBLIC MEETINGS/ OUTREACH September 22, 2015 SoCal Metroplex EA FAA Via Email: 9-ANM-SoCalOAPM@faa.gov Re: Draft Environmental Assessment (EA)/Southern California Metroplex Next Generation Air Dear Federal Aviation Administration: Pacific Palisades Community Council (PPCC) is the most broadly-based community organization and the voice of the Palisades community since 1973. PPCC learned today, for the first time, that as part of the Southern California NextGen system the FAA is proposing a new approach procedure for flights going to Long Beach Airport which will include a flight path over Pacific Palisades before heading south to Long Beach. This new proposal may result in significant negative impacts and is a matter of great concern to the Palisades community, which had no prior notice of this new proposal and insufficient time to study the matter and submit comments on the draft EA prior to the current deadline of October 8. PPCC supports the resolution sponsored by Councilmember Mike Bonin, passed unanimously by the Los Angeles City Council on September 15, 2015, with the concurrence of Mayor Eric Garcetti (Council File 15-0002-s99), calling for additional time for impacted community stakeholders to “study the full slate of Metroplex documents” and for the FAA to perform “additional, comprehensive public outreach to all potentially affected areas.” We accordingly request that the FAA hold additional public meetings/workshops and conduct outreach in Pacific Palisades, and that the draft EA comment period be further extended to allow sufficient time for the Palisades community to fully study the proposal for a new flight path over Pacific Palisades and submit comment before any final determination is made. Thank you. Sincerely, Christina Spitz cc: |