Late Correspondence — Rancho Palos Verdes City Council, July 21, 2026

CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: JULY 21, 2026
SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented for tonight's meeting.

Item No. Description of Material
Non-agenda Email from: Domingo Ottolia
Letters from: Jack and Anna Sanguinet; Rosa and Hong-Chen Attachment E- Community Survey
* PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted through Monday, July 21, 2026 **
Respectfully submitted,
Chrusy Jakaoka
Teresa Takaoka
L:LATE CORRESPONDENCE|202612026 Coversheets\20260721 additions revisions to agenda.docx Teresa Takaoka
From: Domingo Ottolia < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2026 12:02 PM
To: CC
Subject: Streamlining Building Permits for Properties Outside Fire Hazard Severity Zones - NON

AGENA ITEM
Attachments: Streamlining Building Permits for Properties Outside Fire Hazard Severity Zones. pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important EXTERNAL EMAIL. Do not click links or open any attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe!!!.

Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am a Rancho Palos Verdes resident and a California licensed architect. I plan to speak during this evening's public comment period on a matter not listed on the agenda and have attached a brief summary for your consideration.

The attached outline describes an opportunity to streamline the residential building permit process for properties located outside designated Fire Hazard Severity Zones by eliminating unnecessary Los Angeles County Fire Department reviews.

Thank you for your time, consideration, and service to our community.

Respectfully,
Domingo Ottolia
5533 Bayridge Road, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Home: (310)791-7027
Office: (310)375-0107

NON-AGENDA
Streamlining Building Permits for Properties Outside Fire Hazard Severity Zones Issue
• The City currently requires Los Angeles County Fire Department review and clearance for many residential building permits, even when the property is outside a designated • For these properties, the County Fire Department routinely determines that no review is required, but only after the application has been submitted and processed.

Why This Matters
Unnecessary Use of Resources
County Fire staff spend time processing applications that ultimately require no action. • Building & Safety staff must track an unnecessary review process. • Architects and permit applicants spend additional time preparing and submitting documentation that provides no public safety benefit.

Unnecessary Delays
• Adds approximately 8-12 weeks to the permit process:
4-6 weeks to obtain a fire flow test.
4-6 weeks for County Fire to issue a determination that no review is required. • Delays construction, increases carrying costs, and slows housing improvements.

Increased Costs to Property Owners
• Approximately $550 for the required fire flow test.
• Additional professional fees to prepare and submit County Fire applications. • Increased project costs resulting from permit delays.

Recommended Solutions
Option 1 - Eliminate Unnecessary County Fire Review
Authorize Building & Safety staff to determine whether a property is within a Fire Hazard Severity Zone.

Require County Fire review only for projects located within designated Fire Hazard Severity Zones.
• Eliminate unnecessary reviews for projects outside those areas. 1 Option 2 - Enhance Local Fire Safety Standards
If the City desires additional wildfire protection, adopt local requirements for wildfire- resistant exterior construction instead of requiring County Fire review.

Standards could apply to:

Roofing
Roof overhangs and eaves
Windows
Decks and under-deck construction
Pergolas and similar exterior features
Benefits
• • Shortens permit processing by 8-12 weeks.

Reduces unnecessary costs to homeowners.

Allows County Fire staff to focus on projects within their jurisdiction.

Improves efficiency without compromising public safety.

Accelerates housing construction, additions, and home improvements. 2 Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local
Responsibility Area, as Recommended
a dando Beach by the State Fire Marshal, 2025
Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Very High
High
Moderate
Riviera
Palos Verdes
*Estates
Harbor City
a Embed by URL or code Lomity
Palos Verdes Rolling Hits Estates Pacific Coast Hur
Estates Shoreline Rolling Hills Hillside
Preserve Palos Verdes Es
Estates
Harbor Park
Rolling hills
Rolling Hills Country Club
Palos Verdes
Peninsul
Rolling Hills
Los Verdes Rancho Palos Verdes
Golf Cour
Rancho Palos
Verdes
Forrestal Nature
•Preserve 121311
* San Padro
Trump National
Golf (Club
e Coastal
San Pedro
Map showing the Fire Hazards Severity Zones in the Palos Verdes Peninsula source: Cal Fire Web Site
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones Jack and Anna Sanguinet
28345 Pontevedra Dr.

Rancho Palos Verdes. CA 90275
To the Rancho Paos Verdes Planning Commission.

We live next door to the Mansours at 28345 Pontevedra Drive. We are writing to express our support for the current design, which places the second-story addition at the rear of the property.

This layout best maintains the scale and character of our neighborhood. We oppose moving the addition forward, as that would create excessive mussing and would not be compatible with the surrounding homes.

The Mansours are good neighbors with three young children who truly need more space. We also recently learned that Sammy lost his father, and his mother-who is facing serious medical issues —has now moved in with them. This expansion is a necessity, not a luxury, for their family.

For these reasons, we respectfully ask the Commission to deny the appeal and allow the project to proceed as approved by the Planning Director.

Sincerely:

Anna M. Denguerit
jara

1. Planning Commission
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA May 5, 2026
Dear Sir,
HC and I became Samuel and Marianne Mansour's next door neighbors when we moved into the Rolling Hills Riviera neighborhood in June 2023. They have three growing boys who apparently need more living spaces as well as have some level of privacy as they continue to mature. The project of adding a second floor to their current one story house is definitely not a luxury but a necessity!
As a matter of fact, when Marianne first spoke with us about the renovation, we were apprehensive because our privacy would be directly impacted by it. However, both Samuel and Marianne were receptive to our suggestion of putting high windows in the room facing our back yard, and, in turn, their architect has designed it to our satisfaction. Lately we learned that the architect redesigned it with a height reduction over a foot to ensure that the cost of the renovation remains economically feasible and the added structure does not harm the overall integrity and appearance of the community.

As good neighbors, we want to support Mansour's renovation plan.

Best regards,
Rosa and Hong-Chen
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Budget Priority Follow-up Survey

OPINION
FM3

RESEARCH

RESEARCH & STRATEGY
220-8009
Survey Methodology
Dates June 18-28, 2026
Research Population Likely November 2026 Voters in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Total Interviews 401
Margin of Sampling Error (Full Sample) +4.9% at the 95% Confidence Level (Half Sample) ‡6.9% at the 95% Confidence Level
Telephone Email Text
Contact Methods
Calls Invitations Invitations
Telephone Online
Data Collection Modes
Interviews Interviews
Survey Tracking February 2026
Languages English, Chinese, and Korean
FM3 (Note: Not All Results Will Sum to 100% Due to Rounding)

RESEARCH
Mood and Perceptions of the Community
Half of voters now feel that things in the City are headed in the right direction, up from just a few months ago.

First, please indicate whether you would say things in the city of Rancho Palos Verdes are headed in the right direction, or feel they are off on the wrong track.

June 2026
Right Right
Direction
Direction Wrong
50%
36% Track
13%
Wrong
Don't Don't Track
Know Know 14%
51% 36%
FM3

RESEARCH
City Government overall is viewed favorably by 7-in-10 voters, while city council is viewed favorably by 6-in-10 voters.
(Ranked by Total Favorable)
i Very Favorable • Somewhat Favorable • Somewhat Unfavorable • Very Unfavorable • Never Heard of = Heard of/No Opinion Total Total Favorable Unfavorable
Local small business owners 41% 31% 10% 15% 72% 3%
^City of Rancho Palos Verdes government overall 27% 43% 9% 4% 14% 70% 13% Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District 64% 16%
Board of Education 17% 46% 11% 5% 5% 15%
RPV neighborhood watch 33% 27% 12% 15% 11% 60% 14%
^ The Rancho Palos Verdes City Council 19% 42% 12% 21% 60% 16% Q: Next, here are some names of (SPLIT A: organizations and groups) (SPLIT B: organizations, groups, and people) active in public life. For each one, please indicate whether you have a favorable or unfavorable FM3 opinion of them. "Not Part of Split Sample
LO

RESEARCH
Attitudes on Potential Local
Funding Opportunity:

Transient Occupancy Tax
Hypothetical TOT Ballot Measure Tested in Survey
(As Approved by Legal Counsel)
Rancho Palos Verdes Public Safety/City Services Measure: To prepare for/respond to wildfires/other natural disasters; reduce wildfire risk by managing brush/other fuels; maintain roads and storm drains; help prevent sinkholes; address landslides and land movement; for general city services; shall the transient occupancy tax paid only by hotel/motel guests be adjusted from •10% to 13%,
providing approximately $2,200,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring audits, spending disclosures; all funds used locally, be adopted?
F M 3 Q.: If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure?

RESEARCH
Sixty-five percent initially support the simple majority measure, with almost four-in-ten willing to definitely vote yes. (MOE +4.9%)
Definitely yes 39%
Total
Probably yes 23% 62% Yes
65%
Undecided, lean yes 3%
Undecided, lean no 2%
Total
Probably no 7% No
28%
Definitely no 19%
Undecided 7%
F M 3 a. the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure

RESEARCH
Accountability provisions in the measure; only overnight hotel/motel guests will pay for the TOT; and funds needed to address landslides are among the top themes of the measure. (Ranked by Total More Inclined to Vote Yes)
• Much More Inclined • Somewhat More Inclined
(ACCOUNTABILITY) This measure requires public disclosure of all spending and strict accountability requirements to ensure transparency. Independent annual financial and performance audits are required to track funds and ensure they are used efficiently and 45% 32% 77% effectively. The measure also prohibits LA County and Sacramento from taking the funds and (TOT) TOT, or Transient Occupancy Tax, is paid only by overnight hotel or motel guests.

Nearby cities, such as Santa Monica, Manhattan Beach, Laguna Beach, and Los Angeles, have already raised their TOT rates to 14% or more. Raising our rate to 13% will preserve a 35% 38% 73% competitive edge for Rancho Palos Verdes hotels and resorts, and allow our city to provide better services for its residents.
(LANDSLIDE) Given the acceleration of the landslides and limited financial assistance from outside agencies, the City has had to fund most of the landslide repairs and has spent over $60,000,000 of its own funds over the last three years. That is why it is necessary that all funds 40% 27% 67% from this measure be required to remain in the City.
2: Next, please consider the following statements from supporters of the Rancho Palos Verdes Public Safety/City Services Measure. For each statement, please indicate if it makes you much more inclined or FM3 somewhat more inclined to vote Yes on this measure.

RESEARCH
Continued
(Ranked by Total More Inclined to Vote Yes)
• Much More Inclined • Somewhat More Inclined
(PROPERTY CRIME) Last year in Rancho Palos Verdes, there were more than 300 reported burglaries, robberies and thefts, including more than 70 residential burglaries. This measure could help maintain 911 emergency response times and public safety patrols to keep residents, 39% 28% 67% local businesses, and their property safe.
(FIRE MITIGATION) Rancho Palos Verdes has terrain similar to Pacific Palisades, which recently experienced a devastating wildfire. This measure could maintain 33% 34% 67% funding for the removal of overgrown and dry vegetation and other fuels. (PREVENT CUTS) Repairing aging infrastructure and damage to major roads from land movement have led to increasing costs for the City. If this measure does not pass, the City will be forced to make more cuts to street, sewer, and storm drain maintenance 35% 30% 65%
programs and efforts to improve neighborhood public safety and help ensure our parks, trails and recreational facilities are kept in good condition. This measure is intended to help maintain Rancho Palos Verdes residents' quality of life.

Q: Next, please consider the following statements from supporters of the Rancho Palos Verdes Public Safety/City Services Measure. For each statement, please indicate if it makes you much more inclined or FM3 somewhat more inclined to vote Yes on this measure.

RESEARCH
Overall support rises nine percentage points after simulating community educational outreach.
(MOE +4.9%)
Initial Vote After Education
Definitely yes 39% 53% Total
Total
23% 62% Yes 19% 72% Yes
Probably yes
65% 74%
Undecided, lean yes 3% 3%
Undecided, lean no 2% Total 1% Total
Probably no 7% No 3% No
28% 20%
Definitely no 19% 15%
Undecided 7%
F IM 3 a. the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure?

RESEARCH
Attitudes on Potential Local
Funding Opportunity:

Golf Tax
Hypothetical Golf Tax Ballot Measure Tested in Survey
(As Approved by Legal Counsel)
Rancho Palos Verdes City Services, Golf Tax Measure: To prevent property crimes, home invasion break-ins, vehicle thefts; keep public areas/ parks safe/clean, including safe places for children to play; attract/retain local businesses; for general city services; shall the City golf tax paid by users of private golf courses be adjusted from 10% to up to 15% providing approximately $400,000 annually until ended by voters; requiring audits, spending disclosure, all funds used locally, be adopted? F M 3 O. 1f the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure? 13 RESEARCH
Sixty-three percent support the measure,
with 46% reporting they would definitely vote yes.
(MOE +4.9%)
Definitely yes 46%
Total
Probably yes 12% 58% Yes
63%
Undecided, lean yes 6%
Undecided, lean no 3%
Total
Probably no 9% No
28%
Definitely no 16%
Undecided 9%
FM3 Q: If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on this measure?

RESEARCH
Conclusions
Conclusions
General Views of the City:
• Half of voters now perceive the City to be headed in the right direction, an improvement since February when half were unsure of the City's direction. • High percentages view both city government and city council favorably (70% total favorable and 60% total favorable, respectively).

Revenue Measures:
• At this time, both a transient occupancy tax measure and a golf tax measure are viable for further planning, with initial support well above the majority vote threshold needed for passage.

FM3
RESEARCH 16
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Budget Priority Follow-up Survey

OPINION
FM3

RESEARCH

RESEARCH & STRATEGY
220-8009

Item No. Description of Material
1 Letters received from: Rick & Kris Pielago and Bernard Kissinger Respectfully submitted,
Chriss Jakarka
Teresa Takaoka
LILATE CORRESPONDENCE1202612026 Coversheets\20260707 additions revisions to agenda through Monday.docx !
October 20, 2025
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
c/o Associate Planner-Jeffrey Kim
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275-5391
RE: Case #PLHV2025-0002
Location: 28337 Pontevedra Dr.

Land Owner: Marianne & Sameh Mansour
Dear Jeffrey,
We are writing to you in response to the City's letter of the Height Variation Permit with Foliage Analysis (case #PLHV2025-0002). We are located at 1921 Galerita Dr. We have owned our home since 1996. We purchased in this neighborhood for many reasons, and the biggest one was the fact that no homes were built up and looking into other's homes or backyards. In our section there are almost no two-story homes. The horizon is clear and open. We STRONGLY oppose this second story addition.

We did a remodel in 2007, replacing and refurbishing our older home and bringing it up to code. We considered adding a second story but knew that would really impact our neighbors behind and around us and we chose not to do that to them and threaten their privacy and property value. We pushed out as much as we could to gain a small amount of square footage maintaining a one-story home.

If the home at 28337 Pontevedra is granted this permit, it will greatly impact our neighborhood and the privacy of the neighbors, especially the ones directly behind and to the sides of them. These neighbors enjoy their privacy in their pools and backyards. They purchased their homes with a sense of privacy. If this home is allowed to add a second story, these other neighbors will lose their privacy, and their property value will go down. It also opens a gateway to others wanting to add a second story and this very quiet, private neighborhood becomes houses amongst tall boxes. This is not why we bought in this particular section of RPV.

This proposed second story will intrude on the privacy of ALL the surrounding homes and make us very uncomfortable. If you exceed the size and comfort of your current home and can't increase the size of it by staying within your original footprint of a one-story home, then you should look to purchase another home that suits your needs and not impose your needs on an entire neighborhood for your own benefit.

We, Rick & Kris Pielago, owners of 1921 Galerita Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes, 90275, Tract#18968 Lot #80, STRONGLY OPPOSE the second story addition, "Height Variation Permit with Foliage Analysis" for 28337 Pontevedra Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes, 90275.

Rick & Kris Pielago
310-721-3308
July 13, 2026
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
c/o Associate Planner-Jeffrey Kim
30940 Hawthorne Blva.

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275-5391
RE: Case #PLHV2025-0002
Location: 28337 Pontevedra Dr.

Land Owner: Marianne & Sameh Mansour
Dear Jeffrey,
We are writing to you in response to the City's letter of the Height Variation Permit with Foliage Analysis (case #PLHV2025-0002) on July 2, 2026. We were out of town and just returned. I realize we missed the date of July 10, 2026 and I am hoping that this letter can still be reviewed before the hearing. I am also sending our original letter from Oct., 2025 as to not be redundant but have all information available to the decision makers.

I was completely crushed when I received the email that approved this project in June 2026. Allowing a second story on this home is a complete backyard violation of 1928 Galerita Drive, surrounding homes and parts of Velez Drive. It directly looks into their yard and others. It sets a precedence of putting on two stories to a track of homes that is primarily one story. I believe this was done by the original planners because almost all of us have pools. The approval of Pontevedra residents has no bearing on this decision process as they are not affected.

Please do not vote to allow this one home to add a second story that will change our entire neighborhood and open the gates to future second stories that will invade the privacy of their neighbors.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Rick & Kris Pielago
310-721-3308

KE KENTERINE

ENGINEERING
July 20, 2026
To: RPV City Council
Re: 28337 Pontevedra Drive
We are the property owners of 1922 Galerita Drive. We feel the proposed addition and height variance for 28337 Pontevedra Drive should not be approved.

The proposed addition would have a negative impact on both our property and the Galerita neighborhood in several ways.

First, the proposed addition would not fit the neighborhood and will look like an out of place eyesore from Galerita Drive. We also feel it would set a precedence and lead to other eyesore buildings ruining the character of our neighborhood.

Second, the invasion of privacy for properties in the neighborhood should seriously be considered. The view of the backyard at 1928 Galerita Drive would be a serious infringement on their privacy.

This will also lead to a new invasion of our privacy since there would now be a view of our house and backyard from the second story that never existed before. One of the main reasons we bought this property almost 20 years ago was the private back yard that none of the other neighbors could see. This invasion of our privacy has not existed before and we should not be subjected to it all of the sudden.

The proposed project may not have much impact on the Pontevedra side. However, it would have a negative impact on the Galerita side.

Lastly, Jeffrey Kim from the City of RPV visited our property and took several pictures of the silhouette from different areas of our yard and also while looking out of our kitchen window. He agreed that the proposed construction would look out of place and invade our property.

If the project needs to be approved, the second story should be moved to the front of the house. Otherwise, a reduction in the proposed height and the use of frosted windows may help reduce the impact.

Bernard Kissinger, P. E.
1922 Galerita Drive, RPV

Rancho Palos Verdes City CouncilJuly 21, 2026

Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
July 21, 2026