CC MINS 19930927 JNTCITY �ITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
JOINT WORKSHOP
SEPTEMBER 27, 1993
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. on Monday,
September 27, 1993, in the Fred Hesse Community Center, 29301
Hawthorne Boulevard. The Pledge of Allegiance followed,
PRESENT: Council members Bacharach, Kuykendall,
McTaggart and Mayor Brooks.
Planning Commissioners Alberio, Hayes,
Mowlds and Chairman Katherman,
ABSENT: Planning Commissioners Byrd, Clark and
Lorenzen,
ALSO PRESENT.* Assistant City Manager Antil, Director of
Planning, Building and Code Enforcement
Bernard, Planning Administrator Petru and
City Attorney Lynch,
41
City Attorney Lynch advised that, prior to this meeting, the City
Council met in a closed session to discuss pending litigation
involving the Sierra Club vs. the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and
Yen vs. the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
JOINT WORKSHOP WITH PLANNING COMMISSION
view Covenants vs. Site Vegetation Inspections
Planning Administrator Petru presented the staff report.
With the aid of photographs and charts, Commissioner Mowlds
provided an overview of the Planning Commission's position on
View Covenants and Site Vegetation Inspections. Topics discussed
included administrative costs, revisitation costs/time frames,
responsibility for foliage trimming/removal costs, determinations
involving houses having a hill behind them, from where to measure
the sixteen foot foliage height/residence ridgeline, tree lacing
and whether decisions should be appealable to the City Council,
Council commended the Planning Commission's efforts,
JOINT WORKSHOP
SEPTEMBER 27, 1993
1
Public input began with Mr. Warren Sweetnam, View Restoration
Committee member, 7 Top Rail Lane, who supplied background infor-
mation on the sixteen foot foliage height limitation; stressed
that the View Preservation and Restoration Ordinance only applies
to foliage blocking views; and voiced his opposition to View
Covenants.
City Attorney Lynch offered information on the enforcement of
View Covenants and the possibility of including a provision in
the View Preservation and Restoration Ordinance for appealing a
decision to the City Council.
Planning Administrator Petru provided input about the status of
view restoration procedures pertaining to City trees which block
views.
Mr. Ken Dyda, 5715 Capeswood Drive, supported View Covenants
between private properties rather than the City, provided
clarification on the sixteen foot foliage height limitation; and
stated his feeling about administrative costs.
Mr. Angus Lorenzen, 15 Diamonte Lane, mentioned his view
obstruction resulting from foliage on a nearby property.
City Attorney Lynch advised against discussion of any pending
litigation.
Mr. Lorenzen expressed his opinion that, where the View Restora-
tion Ordinance provides for views which were lost some years ago,
the Planning Commission should not be allowed to make arbitrary
decisions. He disagreed with objecting property owners paying
for foliage removal/trimming.
Council discussed the idea of placing a limitation on the time
involved in administrating View Restoration Permit applications
and questioned whether View Covenants could be required between
private parties, with the City providing the venue to enforce
them. City Attorney Lynch indicated that Staff will further
examine such an option. In answer to a question from the City
Council, she provided information on the process for preserving
views obstructed by City park trees.
There was discussion about the sixteen foot foliage height
limitation and staff's interpretation of measurement procedures
for it, as well as modified View Covenants for periodic lacing
and trimming of mature trees,
JOINT WORKSHOP
SEPTEMBER 27, 1993
6
Returning to the podium, Mr. Ken Dyda explained the intent of
Proposition M and the related Ordinance with regard to measuring
the sixteen foot foliage height limitation. He noted
difficulties associated with tree lacing.
0
MOTION, Council member Bacharach moved for the approval of the
Planning Commission's recommendation as follows.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Council
modify the "Height Variation" Guidelines to
eliminate the Site Vegetation Inspection option
and require landowners to submit Covenants to
protect views for both ministerial and discretionary
permit approvals. However, the landowner would be
allowed to choose between a standard Covenant
(Covenant "A") which limits all foliage which. would
impair a view to 16 feet or the ridgeline of the
residence, and a modified Covenant (Covenant "B")
which is specifically designed for properties with
existing trees.
The motion was seconded by Council member McTaggart and it was so
ordered without objection.
During discussion of administrative fees, Planning Administrator
Petru explained that, in conjunction with the City Council's
approval of the Planning Commission's recommendation, an
amendment to the adopted Height Variation Guidelines to eliminate
Site Vegetation Inspections and add View Covenant fees would be
presented, at which time an analysis of administrative costs
could be provided. She related Staff's suggestion that Covenant
"B" only apply to discretionary permits.
City Attorney Lynch entertained the idea that Code Enforcement
fees could begin at the time when a property owner does not
comply with the need to reduce foliage.
Commissioner Mowlds suggested a visitation review fee for
Covenant "B." Planning Administrator Petru emphasized the addi-
tional Staff time involved in visiting sites to identify if there
is a condition of concern.
Council requested fee recommendations based on past fee studies,
further information regarding the idea of volunteers assisting in
view restoration/preservation matters and additional input on the
feasibility of covenants between private parties rather than the
City*
JOINT WORKSHOP
SEPTEMBER 27, 1993
3
ADJOURNMENT
At 80*45 P.M. the meeting was
Councilman Kuykendall,
4
duly adjourned on motion of
JOINT WORKSHOP
SEPTEMBER 27, 1993