Loading...
VRC MINS 19900906 110 411 pop+, %O MINUTES VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES SEPTEMBER 6, 1990 The meeting was called to order at 7 :05 p.m. by Chairman Clark at Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard . PRESENT Committeemembers Cartwright , Eastwood , Lorenzen, Murphy , Quatrochi, Sweetnam, Weisz , Chairman Clark ABSENT Committeemembers Boudreau , Burrage Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert Benard, Planning Administrator Curtis Williams, Senior Planner Carolynn Petru, Associate Planner Laurie Jester , Assistant City Attorney Deborah Hakman, Assistant to City Manager Pamela Weaver, and Recording Secretary Lucile Rogers. Chairman Clark welcomed the audience to the first public hearing of the View Restoration Committee , which was chartered by the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council in January 1990 in response to the ballot initiative Proposition M. The Committee has been meeting since February to develop guidelines and rules under which it will operate. The final set of procedures was presented to the City Council in June and subsequently adopted. In his introductory remarks , Director of Environmental Services Bob Benard requested that the Committee defer any action on replacement trees, as the staff needs to prepare guidelines on this issue to be presented to the Committee and the City Council . Mr. Benard explained the new sound system and then introduced Pamela Weaver , Assistant to the City Manager . Ms. Weaver said that the View Restoration Committee meeting of September 20 will be videotaped for publicity purposes, and gave some tips on what to wear (no white, pink or red ! ) and proper use of the sound equipment . COMMUNICATIONS Assistant City Attorney Deborah Hakman summarized her legal opinion on liability for damage caused by foliage ordered removed or trimmed by the Committee, stating that there is only a remote possibility of liability if any , and if such a claim were made it would likely fail . —1— 111 111 RPV VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE - 9/6/90 Senior Planner Carolynn Petru announced that minor modifications have been made to the Draft Rules of Procedure and they have been adopted as Final Rules of Procedure. CONSENT CALENDAR Committeemember Weisz moved the minutes of the View Restoration Committee meeting of August 2, 1990 be accepted as submitted. The motion was seconded by Committeemember Quatrochi and carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Clark outlined the order of presentation for the public hearings, as contained in the Rules of Procedure. He noted that decisions made by the Committee are final and not appealable to any other body of the City. Each decision rendered will be turned into a Resolution which will be presented at the next meeting of the Committee. VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 1: Renin Rehm, 5925 Clint Place Planning Administrator Curtis Williams presented the staff findings and recommendations on Permit Application No. 1 , as summarized in the staff report dated August 3 , 1990. Requested Action: Remove or trim 10 trees at 5920 Mossbank to restore the applicant 's view. Recommendation: Remove 8 pine trees and trim ash and myoporum trees. In the applicant ' s presentation, Mr. Kevin Rehm stated he agreed with the staff recommendations except that instead of lowering the ash by 10 feet and the myoporum by 5 feet , he would prefer a recommendation of measuring the trees a distance from the ground up . In addition, he would agree to replacing the pines with one for every three trees. The foliage owners , Mr. and Mrs. Chuan-Yi Hsu of 5920 Mossbank Drive, were represented by Mr. Paul A. Larsen of the Law Offices of Ku and Fong . Mr . Larsen stated for Mr . and Mrs. Hsu that the landscaping is an integral part of their enjoyment of the property and important to their privacy. There had been an agreement with the previous owners of the Rehm property to trim some trees and the Hsus claim the trimming of the trees resulted in their death. Mr . Larsen also disagreed with the opinion of the City Attorney that no liability would be incurred to the City by the removal of the pine trees , stating that his -2- 111 RPV VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE - 9/6/90 research indicates the City could be liable for a substantial amount of money as a result of the taking of the Hsu property. Committeemembers mentioned that two of the pine trees are dead , and perhaps whatever is killing them is also damaging the remaining trees. The question of topping the trees was discussed and it was felt that since the trees are so tall now, topping them to 16 feet would kill them. Committeemember Lorenzen suggested the existing row of oleanders be extended along the back of the property where the pine trees are now, to provide total privacy without view impairment to the applicant . Mr. Paul M. Sprencz, resident of 5917 Clint Place, then spoke in favor of the staff recommendations , stating that his view is also being impaired by the pine trees at 5920 Mossbank Drive and that he had requested the foliage owner to remove the dead trees but no action has been taken. Rebuttal comments by the applicant and foliage owner ' s representative were followed by Planning Administrator Williams ' comment that trees could be planted that exceed 16 feet or the ridgeline as long as they do not interfere with the view. Committeemember Weisz moved the public hearing be closed. The motion was seconded by Committeemember Quatrochi and passed unanimously. Committeemember Sweetnam noted that any questions or comments regarding the legality of the ordinance have no bearing in these proceedings, as the Committee is charged solely with administering the ordinance. Committeemember Murphy stated his belief that any reported arrangements made with a prior owner of the property in question are not germane to these hearings. Further comments from Committeemembers indicated that although landscaping providing privacy is an important part of a property , so also is the view, and the job of the Committee is to provide a balance between the two. It was felt that the privacy afforded by the pine trees in question could be provided by alternative foliage such as extending the row of oleanders, which would not impact the view of the applicant . In addition, Committeemember Cartwright noted the safety hazard associated with the dead pine trees , and recommended that any removal of trees be done even with or below ground level for safety reasons. Committeemember Sweetnam suggested the Fire Department could issue a citation to have the dead trees removed. Further discussion included clarification by staff that a recommendation of removal of a tree includes removing it to 18 inches below the surface of the ground. -3- 111 111 RPV VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE - 9/6/90 It was moved by Committeemember Sweetnam, seconded by Committeemember Quatrochi and passed unanimously that the following action be taken on View Restoration Permit No. 1: A. Remove all 8 pine trees. B. Trim ash tree to a specified height above the ground to restore views. C. Trim myoporum to a specified height above the ground to restore views. D. Replace pine trees with one 15-gallon tree for each three trees removed; trees to be selected from a list provided by the City. VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 2: William and Joy Carter, 3930 Admirable Drive Senior Planner Carolynn Petru reported that the City has received a request from the foliage owners , Vincent and Wendy Yen, to continue this hearing for two months, to November 8 , 1990. She said the practice of the Department of Environmental Services has been to grant a delay of two weeks ; therefore staff recommends continuing this case for two weeks to September 20, 1990. Committeemember Weisz moved that the hearing on View Restoration Permit No. 2 be continued for two weeks to September 20, 1990. The motion was seconded by Committeemember Cartwright and carried unanimously. At 8:30 p .m. , Chairman Clark called for a ten minute break before hearing the next case. The meeting was reconvened at 8:45 p .m. VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 3: Chris & Edith Brines, 4113 Lorraine Road Associate Planner Laurie Jester presented the staff findings and recommendations on Permit Application No. 3 , as summarized in the staff report dated August 3, 1990. Requested Action: Prune several trees on each property to restore the applicant 's view. Recommendation: Remove one tree, prune the remaining trees and maintain the recently pruned pines. -4- 111 111 RPV VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE - 9/6/90 Ms. Jester reported that there are three foliage owners involved in this application: (1) John Carroll, 4112 Lorraine Road; (2) William Sulentor, 4116 Lorraine Road; (3) Robert Jacobs, 4124 Lorraine Road. All property is located within the boundaries of the Miraleste Recreation and Parks District ; therefore, staff has attempted to balance the applicant ' s right to his view with preservation of the foliage in this area. Staff has recommended that many of the trees be pruned rather than removed, and also that any trees removed should be replaced with smaller, lower growing species which will not impact views in the future. Ms. Jester noted that although staff recommended lacing the silk oak tree at 4124 Lorraine, the foliage owner requested that the tree be pruned to 20 feet . Staff feels this much trimming might not be healthy for the tree but if a certified arborist reviews the situation and says it could safely be trimmed to that height , staff would not object. An additional point was raised with regard to the cypress trees at 4116 Lorraine, which form a solid hedge. The foliage owner requested they be trimmed to 16 feet. Staff recommended they be trimmed to 6 feet in height because the City development code specifies a maximum hedge height of 6 feet ; however , staff would agree to trimming them to the eaves if the Committee so desired . Applicant Mr. Chris Brines stated he agreed with the findings and recommendations of the staff report with some minor exceptions. He said the jacaranda at 4112 Lorraine has been topped before and should be topped again and held to the ridgeline specification. Also he felt the silk oak at 4124 Lorraine should be topped to approximately 20 feet. He had no objection to the cypress trees at 4116 Lorraine being maintained at the eave line. The foliage owner at 4112 Lorraine Road , Mr. John Carroll, was represented by Mr. Anthony J. Vulin, Attorney at Law. He raised a question as to the constitutionality of the statute , although his client believes the purpose of the statute is a good one. He said there is some question as to whether the jacaranda tree is actually on his client ' s property or on a parcel next door which is undergoing construction, but if it is on Mr. Carroll 's property he will comply with the Committee ' s decision. Also, he said Mr. Carroll will comply with the Committee 's decision regarding the avocado tree after the construction next door is completed. With regard to the coral tree, he was willing to reduce the height somewhat and have the tree laced , but he felt that pruning it to the ridgeline would leave only an 8 foot stump which was not acceptable. -5- 411 RPV VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE - 9/6/90 Assistant City Attorney Hakman advised that Subsection D of the ordinance provides that the foliage owner has 90 days to have the foliage removed as ordered by the Committee, so the trimming of the avocado tree cannot be held off until completion of the construction next door to the Carroll property . Associate Planner Jester summarized a letter from foliage owner Mr. William Sulentor of 4116 Lorraine Road in which he raised no objection to pruning the jacaranda to the ridgeline but wished the cypress trees to be trimmed to 16 feet rather than 6 feet because of privacy concerns. He said the olive tree appears to have been poisoned but his gardener says it will recover and he does not wish it removed. Foliage owner Mr. Robert Jacobs of 4124 Lorraine was not present. No written communication has been received from Mr. Jacobs but Ms. Jester reported that in a telephone conversation he stated he would like the silk oak tree pruned to 20 feet and the pittosporum pruned to the ridgeline and laced . He said the Canary Island pines have been laced every year and a half or so and will be maintained in this manner. Assistant City Attorney Hakman advised that the Committee could consider the foliage owner 's communications with staff . Additional testimony was given by Mr. Daniel Koine of 4109 Lorraine Road (north of the Brines property) . He stated that he has talked to Mr. Carroll about trimming some foliage and has received very little cooperation. He also reported that in a recent survey the jacaranda tree in question was found to be on the Gregario property next door to Mr. Carroll . In rebuttal , Attorney Vulin asserted that Mr. Carroll had never been approached by his neighbors in regard to his foliage and that not only had Mr. Carroll ' s coral tree been poisoned but a neighbor 's tree as well . He said Mr . Carroll had never received the Brines letter of November 1 . Associate Planner Jester advised that although staff is recommending that the cypress trees at 4116 Lorraine be trimmed to 6 feet, if the Committee wants to trim them to the ridgeline then staff recommends removing every other tree so they would no longer form a hedge and would not violate the code. Mr . Benard and Attorney Hakman agreed this recommendation would avoid placing the City in an awkward position by authorizing a violation of a City code. Regarding the coral tree at 4112 Lorraine, Ms. Jester said that although arborists do not recommend stub pruning of most trees, coral trees can be pruned very severely without affecting the health of the tree. -6- !II 411 RPV VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE - 9/6/90 There was extensive discussion regarding how to determine the ownership of the jacaranda tree located at or next door to 4112 Lorraine. Attorney Hakman suggested that items where ownership of foliage in in question should be continued to a later meeting. Attorney Vulin said Mr. Carroll would make the ownership determination if directed to do so by the Committee. Committeemember Quatrochi moved the public hearing be closed. The motion was seconded by Committeemember Cartwright and passed unanimously. At Chairman Clark' s suggestion, Committeemembers discussed the staff recommendations on each property separately. Input was received from each member as well as staff and counsel , and agreement was reached on the property at 4112 Lorraine: It was moved by Committeemember Weisz, seconded by Committeemember Quatrochi and passed unanimously that the following action be taken on View Restoration Permit No. 3, foliage located at 4112 Lorraine Road: A. Prune the coral tree to the ridgeline. B. Defer action on the jacaranda until the October 4 meeting of the View Restoration Committee. C. Prune the avocado tree to the ridgeline. The property at 4116 Lorraine was discussed and several modifications to the staff recommendations were suggested. After several amendments the Committee reached agreement on the property at 4116 Lorraine: It was moved by Committeemember Quatrochi and seconded by Committeemember Weisz that the following action be taken on View Restoration Permit No. 3, foliage located at 4116 Lorraine Road: A. Continue the disposition of item (a) until the ownership of the olive tree is determined. B. Prune the jacaranda tree to the ridgeline. C. Prune the cypress trees to 6 feet in height since they form a solid hedge and the maximum hedge height is 6 feet. The motion passed 5-2 with Committeemembers Lorenzen and Sweetnam dissenting. -7- 111 111 RPV VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE - 9/6/90 Finally , amendments were made to the staff recommendations regarding the property at 4124 Lorraine: It was moved by Committeemember Sweetnam and seconded by Committeemember Cartwright that the following action be taken on View Restoration Permit No. 3, foliage located at 4124 Lorraine Road: A. Lace the silk oak tree and reduce the height to 20 feet. B. The foliage owner must maintain lacing of the Canary Island pines every 11 to 2 years as previously done in the past. The trees should be laced beginning this winter. C. Prune the pittosporums to the ridgeline. Committeemember Quatrochi moved an amendment to stipulate that the Canary Island pines be laced again and relaced every 12 to 18 months. The motion was seconded by Committeemember Weisz but failed to carry on the following roll call vote : Yes : Committeemembers Murphy , Quatrochi , Weisz No: Committeemembers Cartwright , Lorenzen, Sweetnam, Chairman Clark The original motion of Committeemember Sweetnam was passed unanimously. CONTINUED BUSINESS, NEW BUSINESS There was no continued or new business. QUESTIONS FROM AUDIENCE There were no questions from the audience. STAFF REPORTS Senior Planner Petru reported that Permit Applications No. 15 and No. 16 have been received and are in the process of being reviewed for completeness . Director of Environmental Services Benard advised that the issue of replacement trees needs to be addressed and procedures need to be prepared quickly. He proposed that staff draw up draft procedures, obtain informal input and comments from Committeemembers , and present the procedures to the City Council at their September 18 meeting. Comments and suggestions from -8- 111 RPV VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE - 9/6/90 Council would be incorporated and presented to the Committee at their September 20 meeting. Final procedures would then be presented to Council on October 2 and to the Committee on October 4. Chairman Clark objected to staff taking a proposed policy to the City Council before discussing it fully with the View Restoration Committee. Several members expressed agreement with this stand , and it was decided that the draft procedures will be presented to the Committee on September 20 before going to the City Council. Chairman Clark reported on a meeting with the City Manager where various means of publicizing the work of the Committee were discussed. A press release is being prepared , plans are under way to videotape the September 20 meeting , and an interview spot on Cable TV is being discussed. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11 :06 p.m. to September 20, 1990 at 7 :00 p .m. # # # -9-