Court overturns RPV landslide ruling

yes this is good that the landslide can continue. this way when the new houses are made on it the landslide will move everything and the Trump golf course to wilmington next to Banning park. The lady who is sueing the city for the house that will most likely not block her ocean view on the hill should buy the empty lot next to banning park before this happens. think of the money she can make in this investment now. park view with front door just steps from the 1 tee.

by a judge who probably lives in san francisco.

I guess with this logic, the ranch owners in the hills above La Conchita can retain their property too and it disavows the wrongful death payout to the surviving family members living down below?

This will be overturned in short order, too wide reaching and too many ramifications.
League of California Cities should be all over this one...if a city now has the burden of proof to show that land is unstable, the costs of development will surely rise for all to offset the costs to city coffers to handle just the few who require special processing or to challenge the stability of the land which could endanger other's properties.
Watch it all just get swept to a civil action between property owners wanting to build and the ones who will be endangered if the land falls towards their properties, especially in hillsides

Great Decision. The city of RPV is so controlling and money hungry when it comes to trying to build or add on to your home it becomes an extremely unnecessarily stressful experience. When I added to my house, they told me my foundation was cracked and they tried to have me conduct soil reports and pay them 1500 to turn in those reports. I was able to prove to them that the foundation had no cracks. the cracks they saw where in the stucco. When i tried to let the city know that the geological inspectors did not know what they were looking at, I was told it didn't matter what I had to say, what ever they say is how its gonna be. Pretty sad to have to deal with people like that.

Fine Fine.....if somebody wants to build and leave the city liabilty free, let them build. They can live with the fish when thier home slides off the cliff in another 5 years. The Wayfarer's chapel in that area has been migrating to the cliff for years.

Geo wrote:

Great Decision. The city of RPV is so controlling and money hungry when it comes to trying to build or add on to your home it becomes an extremely unnecessarily stressful experience. When I added to my house, they told me my foundation was cracked and they tried to have me conduct soil reports and pay them 1500 to turn in those reports. I was able to prove to them that the foundation had no cracks. the cracks they saw where in the stucco. When i tried to let the city know that the geological inspectors did not know what they were looking at, I was told it didn't matter what I had to say, what ever they say is how its gonna be. Pretty sad to have to deal with people like that.

I can hardly see how the City of Rancho Palos Verdes is being money hungry and controlling by trying to prevent new development on unstable land. Our city has far more homes destroyed and damaged by land movement than by fire. Yet I doubt the court would so cavalierly dispose of fire protections. I encourage you to read the decision. By the court's logic a city faces two choices when conditions unsuitable for building are discovered.(1) Do nothing and continue to allow building or (2) Prevent all new development and comdemn all existing development in the unsuitable area. The city should have more choices. Let the court sit in our seats and try to make better decisions. The opinion doesn't even give any guidance as to how to do things "right" in the court's view. It simply rules that we were wrong. The court's decision reflects a complete failure to understand the practicalities of the situation.

Tom Long
Councilmember, Rancho Palos Verdes

what a stupid decision wrote:

by a judge who probably lives in san francisco.

The judge who wrote the decision lives in Rolling Hills Estates.

Tom Long
Councilmember, Rancho Palos Verdes

Thank you Tom Long, your comments are appreciated and I hope that a better resolution with more options can be found in the near future.
Good luck and stay strong in this, there are a lot of us watching and weighing the impacts to all concerned parties involved.
As far as the judge who wrote the decision living in RHE, I think I'll have to stop typing so I can shut my gaping mouth after reading that...must be a "newbie" or just an odd fellow with much more odd views.

I too am amazed at this idiotic decision. The judge must a newbie to the Hill. I have seem the hills on the Hill move many times in the last 45 years. Above Tracy Austin's parents home, the hillside up by Rocketship Park by Calle Mayor, and many others. I have seen PV Drive South moving on a daily basis. Has this judge ever taken a walk in Portuguese Bend and seen the insanely jumbled terrain? Guess not!

Narrow Minded Judgement wrote:

Thank you Tom Long, your comments are appreciated and I hope that a better resolution with more options can be found in the near future.
Good luck and stay strong in this, there are a lot of us watching and weighing the impacts to all concerned parties involved.
As far as the judge who wrote the decision living in RHE, I think I'll have to stop typing so I can shut my gaping mouth after reading that...must be a "newbie" or just an odd fellow with much more odd views.

The California League of Cities might be a good place to start. How can a city protect its citizens from their own stupidity (building on a landslide) or from others stupidity (suing the city when your property slides and then having the rest of the citizens pick up the tab)? Stay strong RPV. Don't let a few homes that will fail bankrupt everyone else.

If these guys are stupid enough to build on a landslide prone hillside there should be some caveat that states that if anything happens that they are solely responsible for all damages and liabilities.

That could stop the idiocy.

I think this is wonderful News. Thank you Judge Robert Mallano. You saw through the B.S. and made the right decision. RPV City contines and tries to control everything in the Portugese Bend. I am so happy the City lost this fight. This is a huge victory for the lot owners. If the slide was that bad as they say then explain why exisiting home owners in the same area are allowed to remodel? I totally see why the judge overturned the ruling, the City is pathetic. People have been paying taxes on these lots for 30 years now and nobody cared less about that.I think the lot owners deserve this and I wish them in achieving their ultimate goal which is to build. I commend the Judge, we need more of them around. Too many grumpy people in RPV not willing to change with the times. We need better energy.

This is a STUPID ruling. The judge who lives in PV needs to go for a walk along PV Drive and in the Hill. And take a look at the houses that are now on the West side of PV Drive.....that USED to be on the East side of PV Drive. The original road is way down the cliff/hill now.
I also think the city should have sole responsibility for ANY damage and liability caused by this idiotic decision. And the 'poor little lot owners' have known for 30 YEARS that they couldn't build..... morons shouldn't have held onto it. There are plenty of owners in Portuguese Bend that would have been more than happy to buy those lots off them to help preserve their own homes! I hope this gets overturned by a more 'sane' judge.

Not sure how I got listed as being in Norwalk? I grew up in RPV and still live nearby.

Queen wrote:

I think this is wonderful News. Thank you Judge Robert Mallano. You saw through the B.S. and made the right decision. RPV City contines and tries to control everything in the Portugese Bend. I am so happy the City lost this fight. This is a huge victory for the lot owners. If the slide was that bad as they say then explain why exisiting home owners in the same area are allowed to remodel? I totally see why the judge overturned the ruling, the City is pathetic. People have been paying taxes on these lots for 30 years now and nobody cared less about that.I think the lot owners deserve this and I wish them in achieving their ultimate goal which is to build. I commend the Judge, we need more of them around. Too many grumpy people in RPV not willing to change with the times. We need better energy.

So by this logic, once we decide on a new level of safety we must immediately impose it on everyone or it is unconstitutional. For example, if we outlaw building directly on eathquake faults (as California law now does) we must condemn all existing buildings on faults or the path we have chosen is unconstitutional. If we require airbags in new cars we must require them in old cars--no improvements without imposing them on everyone. It's an odd approach that interprets the constitution quite strangely and yields bizarre limitations that will make improvements in safety standards overall much more difficult.

Perhaps Judge Mallano would like to appoint himself Prince Of Palos Verdes. That way he could simply make all decisions to the liking of Queen and other like her and neither of them would have to be troubled by something like democracy and elected officials making decisions with which they royally disagree.

Tom Long
Councilmember, Rancho Palos Verdes