CC MINS 19980317 ADJMINUTES
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 17, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 5:36 P.M. by Mayor Ferraro at the Hesse Park
Fireside Room, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. Roll call was answered as follows:
PRESENT: McTaggart, Byrd, Lyon, Hollingsworth, and Mayor Ferraro
ABSENT: None.
Also present were City Manager Paul Bussey; City Attorney Carol Lynch; Assistant City
Manager Carolynn Petru; Interim Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Director
Joel Rojas; Project Coordinator Trayci Nelson; Administrative Services Director /City
Clerk Jo Purcell; and Recording Secretary Susan Schaeffer.
PUBLIC HEARING
View Restoration Permit No. 29 - 2nd Appeal (Applicants: Mr. Norbert Keilbach,
3632 Greve Drive; Foliage Owner: Mr. Jon Echevarrieta, 30327 Ganado Drive.)
Director Joel Rojas presented the staff report of March 17, 1998 and the
recommendation to Adopt the proposed resolution affirming the decision of the View
Restoration Commission and approving View Restoration Permit No. 29 upon finding
that all applicable findings have been correctly made and all provisions of Section
17.02.040(C)(2) have been complied with.
Mr. Rojas reviewed Mr. Echevarrieta 's concerns about loss of privacy because the
Keilbach's deck, and the legality of that deck. Mr. Echevarrieta raised the issue of the
view being taken from only one location; however, Mr. Keilbach enjoys a view from
multiple rooms in his residence and that is consistent with current guidelines. Mr.
Rojas also stated that the VRC had amended the resolution to add replacement foliage
and instructed that pine trees 1, 2, and 3 to be topped to the level of the applicant's
pad.
Council inquired if the privacy of Mr. Echevarrieta's neighbors had been reviewed.
Ms. Nelson responded that the properties on either side of Mr. Echevarrieta had been
examined and that pursuant to the ordinance unless these neighbors are parties to the
application, no analysis of privacy issues of these other properties were made.
Director Rojas affirmed that the Planning Department had approved the Site Plan
Review for the deck but the building plan check had expired. Subsequently, Mr.
Keilbach resolved the matter with the City's Building and Safety Department and a final
building permit was issued.
Council inquired if the VRC considered if any of the subject trees are trimmed and then
subsequently die, whether they will be replaced at the expense of the applicant. Mr.
Rojas stated that staff is recommending to add that requirement as one of the
alternatives.
Jon Echevarrieta, 30327 Ganado Drive, read from a prepared statement highlighting
the following points: (1) that total elimination of foliage at the applicant's pad line is
unacceptable; (2) the decision to plant bushes halfway down his property will cut his hill
in half; (3) the VRC's lack of investigation into views of a non - applicant foliage owner's
property; (4) the visits by the Department of Agriculture, the Sheriffs Department, and
an arborist; (5) Mr. Keilbach's second -story deck not being permitted at the inception of
this view restoration permit, and (6) the view applicant building a wall that intrudes on
his property at least five feet. Mr. Echevarrieta also stated that he circulated a petition
throughout his neighborhood, and that the City's power should not be used for the
benefit of one resident to the detriment of another. Mr. Echevarrieta urged the Council
not to reject his appeal.
Walter Barrows, 7406 Stanley Park Road, Carpinteria, CA, appeared in support of Mr.
Echevarrieta, and presented to the Council a 13 -page report from the Department of
Forestry. Mr. Barrows also cited previous cases he felt were pertinent to Mr.
Echevarrieta's appeal. Mr. Barrows stated that he is a Certified Arborist.
In response to Council's inquiry, Mr. Barrows stated that cutting a tree more than 25
percent of its bulk density is detrimental, and a better alternative is to trim two or three
limbs and create a "window" for the view owner.
City Attorney Lynch spoke to the legislation cited by Mr. Barrows, and stated that the
particular issues raised in these previous cases were not relevant to this View
Restoration Permit application.
Donald Kunkle, 2565 Colt Road, spoke in favor of Mr. Echevarrieta. Mr. Kunkle, a
Licensed Professional Electrical Engineer, addressed the risks of cutting down pine
trees and exposing high tension wires, transformers, and apparatuses on power poles,
and the potential health risks to residents living around said poles. He also stated that
with the removal of pine trees, the view owner gains an increase in property value,
while the foliage owner suffers the loss of the cost of mature pine trees.
City Council Minutes
Adjourned Meeting - March 17, 1998
Page 2
Council discussion focused on the validity of Mr. Kunkle's claims in regards to exposed
tension wires and the potential health risks. Council encouraged Mr. Kunkle to submit
any data on this issue to Staff.
Norbert Keilbach, 3632 Greve Drive, spoke to the issues raised by Mr. Barrows, and
stated the cases highlighted are not applicable to this matter. He reiterated the fact that
his deck is permitted, and that the lack of a permit was a misunderstanding between he
and the deck contractor. Continuing, he stated that they bought their property
specifically for the view and the school district, and paid more for this view. In
conclusion, he said that this issue has been going on for a year, and twice the VRC and
Staff have recommended that his view be restored.
Council discussion ensued and focused on privacy issues for the non - applicant foliage
owners.
There being no additional public testimony, Mayor Ferraro ordered the hearing closed.
With the use of a photo board of the properties involved, the Council deliberated and
discussed privacy issues and the benefits of topping versus complete removal of the
pine trees.
Councilman Byrd moved, seconded by Councilman McTaggart to deny the appeal and
affirm the View Restoration Commission's decision.
Following the motion, Council discussion ensued regarding the topping versus
complete removal versus lacing of the pine trees, the planting of an additional hedge
for the foliage owner, and the effect of decks on neighbor privacy.
Mayor Ferraro restated that the motion is to deny the appeal with alternative number 'l
(A) and (B). Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Byrd, Lyon, McTaggart, Hollingsworth, and Mayor Ferraro.
NOES: None.
ADJOURNMENT:
At 6:40 P.M., the hearing was formally adjourned on motion of Mayor Ferraro.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
03 98CC.ADJ
City Council Minutes
Adjourned Meeting - March 17, 1998
Page 3