Loading...
CC MINS 19950121M I N U T E S REGULAR MEETING RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 21, 1995 The meeting was called to order at 9:00 A.M. by Mayor Lee Byrd at the Hesse Park Community Center, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. Following the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag, roll call was answered as follows: PRESENT: LYON, McTAGGART & MAYOR BYRD LATE ARRIVAL: BROOKS @ 9:09 a.m. ABSENT: NONE Committee and Commission members present were as follows: PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE Tom Hollingsworth Christina Bothamley Andrew Bonacich Carol Hildreth Edward Kennedy Alan Weissman PLANNING COMMISSION Nick Mowlds, Chairman Sonja Pedersen -Hayes Gil Alberio Barbara Ferraro (At 12:41 P.M.) VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION Jon Cartwright, Chairman Carole Black Jennifer Boudreau Larry Clark Warren Sweetnam Raymond Green Alan Green Paul Weisz Also present were City Manager Paul Bussey, Planning Director Bret Bernard, Parks & Recreation Administrator Ron Rosenfeld, City Clerk Jo Purcell, City Attorney Carol Lynch and Planning Administrator Carolynn Petru. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Lyon moved, seconded by Councilman McTaggart, to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried. 9:00 A.M. - 11:00 A.M. JOINT MEETING WITH RECREATION & PARKS COMMITTEE DISCUSSION OF PRIORITIZATION OF USE OF MEASURE "A" FUNDS (1201) Senior Citizen Use of Hesse Park & Pt. Vicente Interpretive Center Responding to the Mayor's call for public comment on this item was Edith Mayerson, 28815 Trailriders Drive, who spoke in favor of having a Senior Center and said that the City would soon be receiving petitions evidencing support for such a senior center. Patricia Shull, 30507 Via La Cresta, stated her awareness of the need for a senior center, but was concerned about the expense for a new building, staffing and maintenance. With all the vacant real estate on the Peninsula, she felt that something appropriate could be found to serve as a senior center. Parks & Recreation Administrator Rosenfeld presented the staff report of January 21 and the recommendation that Council and the Committee discuss prioritization of the remaining measure "A" park funds,, Discussion between the Council and the Committee covered a range of ideas relative to the expansion of the Pt. Vicente Interpretive Center and development of the Upper Pt. Vicente (Civic Center) site: the impact of the City taking over operation of the tennis courts; the effects of moving the Council Chambers to the present Parks & Recreation Building; and, how the development of Long Point will impact the Civic Center. Concern was expressed whether there would be adequate funding to do everything and it was noted that when the application was initially made for expanding the Interpretive Center that the plans provided for a much larger project compared to the current scaled -down plans. Discussion then turned to the matter of contracting for an architect to draw the plans for the addition to the Interpretive Center and especially how the cost of such a contract could be kept at a minimum. The suggestion was made that perhaps a committee should be formed to review such architectural proposals. Additional discussion centered on the use of Hesse Park as a Senior Center since it was accessible to public transportation, however, it was noted that presently it lacked an adequate amount of office space which the seniors would need. With regard to senior use of Ladera Linda, it was clarified that only discretionary funds could be used for that location. City Council Minutes January 21, 19 9 5 Page 2 Concerning the expansion of the Interpretive Center it was stressed how important it was to know precisely what functions would be planned for that addition, keeping in mind the Federal Government restrictions on the use of that property. With regard to the property's present lease, the suggestion was made that perhaps we should start discussions with the County about extending the lease or turning the property over the City. .Councilman McTaggart moved to limit expenditures on the Interpretive Center to one -half million dollars. Discussion of the motion clarified that the addition to the site would probably run close to $750,000 considering that storage space, meeting rooms and a kitchen would be needed. It was the general feeling that a budget of $500,000 would not be practical. The motion died for lack of a second. Discussion again turned to the matter of an architect and how the scope of the contract should be well defined, that project references be sought and that the choice should be based on background and qualifications. With regard to the matter of additional parking spaces at the Interpretive Center, the suggestion was made that possibly we could use the Coast Guard Station's parking lot. Continuing with discussion of the lower Pt. Vicente site comments were as follows: the importance of knowing precisely what functions the site would be used for, the necessity of moving ahead on the selection of the architect, that the architect be familiar with soil conditions, that the R &P Committee work with the docents in deciding the functions and necessary square footage of the facility, and if some of the proposed uses were indeed allowable considering the aforementioned Federal restrictions. After the latter determinations were made, it was felt that the costs and facility size could then be estimated. Use of P &R Building for Council Chambers ( 12 01 x 3 07 ) The Council and Committee next discussed the cost of renovating the Rec. & Parks Building to a council chambers and questions arose about the number of people the building could accommodate, if the outside could be enhanced with a new facade, and if the current ceiling height and acoustics were adequate to accommodate such usage. Mayor Byrd moved, seconded by Councilwoman Lyon that staff prepare a preliminary plan of the construction problems associated with renovating the P &R building to use as a Council chambers and community meeting room. Motion carried. City Council Minutes January 21, 1995 Page 3 Ensuing discussion then included the direction that staff work with the R &P Committee to look at the possibility of providing senior office space at Hesse Park and it was stressed that the cost for security, maint enance and staffing should be included. It was the general consensus to set a target date of July 1997 to submit applications for the use of Measure "A" funds. Additionally, it was the consensus to meet in 90 days to review progress made on the matter. 0 ABALONE COVE BEACH/SACRED COVE Committee Chairwoman Christina Bothamley presented the January 21 report on this matter which included a summary of the Committee's recommendations resulting from their visit to the Abalone Cove Beach: a thorough clean -up of the area with removal of old fencing and cement /asphalt; patching or paving the access road; adding more sand and new picnic tables to the beach picnic area and new tables adjacent to the parking lot; adjusting parking rates to attract local residents; reinstating lifeguard services; adding self - guided tour signs, advertising docent guided tidepool tours and tide schedules and, lastly, revegetating the area with native plants. Council and the Committee then discussed the desirability of making Sacred Cove more accessible because of its beauty and that perhaps an access road could be installed to provide a drop off area down near the beach. Concern was expressed, however, that because of the inaccessibility of Sacred Cove that it made more sense to initially focus on Abalone Cove Beach. Apropos the improvement of Abalone Cove Beach concern was voiced about the environmental and coastal permit process necessary in making this improved public access. Additionally, it was stated that with increased access came the need for increased policing of the area. Nonetheless, it was the general consensus that staff should get an estimate on the cost of improving this beach area, including maintenance, staffing and summer weekend lifeguard service. Council suggested that consideration be given to a policy of free beach access to the Council, committee and commission members. Also suggested was the use of a subscription program for parking passes. RECESS & RECONVENE: At 10:45 A.M. the meeting with recessed and reconvened at 11:00 A.M. for a joint meeting with the View Restoration and Planning Commissions. JOINT MEETING - VIEW RESTORATION & PLANNING COMMISSIONS City Council Minutes January 21, 1995 Page 4 Proposed Amendments - View Preservation & Restoration ordinance: Single vs. Multiple Viewing Areas (1806 x 1203) Planning Administrator Carolynn Petru presented the staff report of January 21 which contained a detailed Background of the on -going review of the revisions to the Development Code, particularly the section covering View Preservation & Restoration. During the course of that review basic differences between the two Commissions surfaced relative to the interpretation of the ordinance, most notably the definition of "viewing area." City Attorney Lynch opined that the current Code supported the notion of a single viewing area and that if the City Council didn't concur that this interpretation advances the purposes of Proposition M, then it would be appropriate to amend the Code and clarify that there are multiple viewing areas. The Planning Commissioners then spoke to cases considered by them and how they determined what was a major panoramic view versus a minor view, the location from which such views are determined, how the view from a second story is determined and, finally, how they consider the primary view to be the main consideration. However, members of the View Restoration Commission (VRC) argued that there was room for more than one definition of view and perhaps even a multiple view concept should be considered. Moreover, the VRC argued that they felt that the definition of viewing area for purposes of foliage differed from that used by the Planning Commission for construction purposes. This opinion was based upon the VRC 's interpretation that the lot was a viewing plane and the view should not be restricted to just one point within a structure. Discussion then concentrated on the necessity for consistency in interpreting "viewing area" especially since it was the original intent that property owners would pick the primary view out of a 360 degree arc. Further discussion emphasized the necessity of the applicant determining a home's viewing area and the fact that the City must agree to that determination. Disagreement existed, however, over whether the ordinance meant "structure" or "lot" and whether the two Commissions could indeed use two definitions of "view" and "viewing area" inasmuch as the VRC dealt with foliage that had grown out of control and the Planning Commission dealt with requests to build new structures or to add onto existing ones. Council discussion emphasized the necessity of having both Commissions use one interpretation and it was the consensus of Council that the term "lot" in the Ordinance related to a vacant piece of land and not the yard area around the structure on a developed property. (At 12:41 Commissioner Ferraro arrived.) City Council Minutes January 21, 1995 Page 5 Focusing again on the definition of viewing area and significant impairment of view, it was the consensus of Council that a viewing area can be a room or group of rooms and adjacent outdoor living areas that take the same vista. Council briefly discussed the status of view restoration lawsuit against the City and it was the consensus that the City Attorney should prepare an update on the matter. City Tree Permits, Unofficial Street Trees & View Covenants Ms. Petru summarized the present policy on these matters as detailed in the staff report. It was the consensus that the Covenant protecting views should explain the issue of "significant" view impairment; however, no action was taken on the issues of City tree permits or unofficial trees. ADJOURNMENT: At 1:15 P.M. the meeting adjourned on motion of Councilman McTaggart. ATTEST: MAY City Council Minutes January 21, 1995 Page 6