Loading...
VRC MINS 19940616 APPROVEja) 4 110 41 7/22/94 1 • ti MINUTES VIEW RESTORATION COMMITTEE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES JUNE 16, 1994 The meeting was called to order at 7: 00 p.m. by Chairman Clark at Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT Committee Members Black, Boudreau, Cartwright, Clark, Eastwood, Green, Scala, Sweetnam, Weisz ABSENT Goern (excused) Also present were Planning Administrator Carolynn Petru and Recording Secretary Lucile Rogers. The flag salute was led by Committee Member Black. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of June 2, 1994 Committee Member Sweetnam moved, seconded by Committee Member Cartwright, to approve the Minutes of June 2, 1994. There being no objection, Chairman Clark so ordered. ADOPTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES Planning Administrator Petru reported on the new language related to speaker time limits in the revised V.R.C. Administrative Procedures, which the City Attorney has reviewed and approved. All reference to time limits has been eliminated from Section 2 .2 (Order of Presentation) , and Section 2 .5 (Oral Evidence, Time Limits and Number of Speakers) has been expanded to address a large number of speakers. Ms. Petru added that the City Council and Planning Commission procedures may be changed to follow these procedures. Noting that copies of the V.R.C. Resolution adopting the procedures were missing Page 6, Ms. Petru indicated she would provide copies of Page 6 to all Committee Members. Other changes, such as limitations on the distance Committee Members need to livefrom an applicant or foliage owner, and the number of votes required to affirm a motion, which had been added to Section 1. 2 (Quorum) , were described by Ms. Petru. 410 Committee Member Black moved, seconded by Committee Member Cartwright, to adopt V.R.C. Resolution No. 94-1. The motion passed unanimously. KEY ISSUES LIST Planning Administrator Petru distributed copies of material prepared by some of the Committee Members relative to some of the • items on the Key Issues List. Chairman Clark commented that no input has been received from the City Council regarding additional issues, and Ms. Petru stated that any additional items will be placed on the agenda for the workshop scheduled for June 30, 1994 . 1. Definition of Terms Chairman Clark reviewed the recommendations of the Joint Subcommittee Workshop held with the Planning Commission on June 9, 1994, for the benefit of those who were not in attendance: • In the definition of "View, " "distant mountain areas not normally visible" should be included as a protected view. • • Under "Viewing Area, " bathrooms should be included as a protected viewing area. • The "View Restoration Committee" will be changed to "View Restoration Commission. " • The word "significantly" will be added in Sections B. 3, B.4, and any other applicable sentences before the words "impair(s) a view. " In addition, staff will work on a definition of "significant view impairment" to be added to the list of definitions. 2 . Existing Cases and Previous Decisions Chairman Clark reported that 27 view restoration cases were begun between July 1990 and April 1991, when the process was suspended. Decisions were made on 24 cases, but in only 3 cases was action completed before the April 1991 suspension. Ms. Petru added that of the 27 cases, 3 were withdrawn. Of the remaining 24, 3 were decided and action taken, leaving 21 cases incomplete. There were 13 cases where a decision had been made but the recommended action had not been implemented, and 8 were still pending a decision at the time of the suspension, so no action was taken. The issue of how to handle these 21 cases was discussed. Chairman Clark asked Members whether they felt the View Restoration V.R.C. Minutes June 16, 1994 Page 2 110 410 Committee should review these cases or turn to staff for code enforcement. Ms. Petru suggested that staff first visit the 13 properties and attempt to deal with them through code enforcement. Agreement was reached that this would be done. In view of the City Council's recent Code amendment to allow V.R.C. decisions to be appealed to the Council, Committee Member Sweetnam asked if earlier decisions could be appealed on the basis of a procedural error. Ms. Petru said she did not think that prior decisions could be appealed, but would check into it. The question of whether or not applicants should be billed for the additional costs incurred by staff investigation of the first 13 properties was raised by Committee Member Weisz. Ms. Petru cited staff's opinion that these are Code Enforcement cases now and, therefore, the costs of implementation (with the exception of the actual cost to trim the foliage) will be borne out of the General Fund. Committee Member Cartwright pointed out that any additional charges would unfairly penalize the applicant rather than the foliage owner. A consensus was reached that these cases should be handled through the City's Code Enforcement procedures. The next topic was whether applicants in the 8 cases still pending should be charged more money. After discussion it was agreed that the V.R.C. will not recommend an increase in fees for the 8 cases which were in process as of April 1991. Staff pointed out that this is consistent with the City's current practice when permit application fees are increased. 3 . New Cases Chairman Clark stated that the subject of new cases will be discussed with the City Council at the June 30 workshop, and the V.R.C. needs to decide whether to recommend starting the process again after changes to the Ordinance and Guidelines are approved, or waiting until the question of constitutionality has been decided by the courts, which may not be settled in the current litigation. After discussion, it was decided to recommend that the City Council deal with the issue of restarting the process by the conclusion of the Code revision process (including public hearings) , which is expected to be by the end of September 1994. RECESS AND RECONVENE At 8:55 p.m. the Chairman called for a recess. The meeting was reconvened at 9: 10 p.m. V.R.C. Minutes June 16, 1994 Page 3 410 411 KEY ISSUES (Continued) It was agreed that this meeting would end at 10: 00 p.m. and any unfinished items would be discussed at an adjourned meeting to be convened at 7: 00 p.m. on June 23 , 1994. 5. Application Fees Committee Member Weisz reviewed his memorandum dated June 16, 1994 and asked if the proposed change in fee structure (based on case size) seemed reasonable. Planning Administrator Petru suggested a combination of flat fees . and trust deposits be used, because of the extreme variation between applications. Committee Member Sweetnam felt that a flat fee covering the first staff visit, with additional costs based on which category the property fell into (i.e. , small, medium or large) , might stimulate the parties concerned to work with each other to solve the problem instead of going on with the process. Asking the basis on which the City came up with the $2 , 200 V.R.C. application fee which is proposed to cover staff and attorney costs, Committee Member Weisz contended that there should be an upper limit to what an applicant will be charged. Chairman Clark stated that a consultant will be hired to do much of the staff work on future applications. Committee Member Green suggested establishing a larger base fee and having a trust fund that gets depleted, with portions returned on individual cases. Ms. Petru clarified that when an application with a flat fee is withdrawn before final action is taken, the City makes a partial refund of costs paid by the applicant. 8. Requirement to Maintain Foliage at 11/07/89 Height and Exempting Foliage that Existed When the View Lot Was Created Committee Member Sweetnam stated his belief that Section 17 . 02 . 040 B.3 is written clearly. Ms. Petru said the City Attorney felt the intent is clear, but it could be worded better. Committee Member Green offered to try to rewrite the language to be clearer. Chairman Clark asked Ms. Petru to give this item to the City Attorney to review, and return the new version to the next V.R.C. meeting. ADJOURNMENT Committee Member Black indicated that she will be out of town and, therefore, will be unable to attend the June 23 and July 7, 1994 V.R.C. Minutes June 16, 1994 Page 4 410 411 meetings. Chairman Clark indicated that these would be considered excused absences. The meeting was adjourned at 10:01 p.m. to June 23, 1994 at 7 : 00 p.m. , in order to complete the discussion of the Key Issues List prior to the Joint Workshop with the City Council on June 30, 1994. V.R.C. Minutes June 16, 1994 Page 5