Loading...
VRC MINS 19960718 • • APPROVED 2720/97 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JULY 18, 1996 The meeting was called to order by Chair R. Green at 7:06 P.M. at Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. The Pledge of Allegiance followed, led by Commissioner A. Green PRESENT: View Restoration Commissioners Black, Boudreau, Goern, A. Green, Long, Marshall, Vice Chair Sweetnam, Chair R. Green ABSENT: Commissioners Gee and Karmelich were excused Also present were Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Petru, Senior Planner Rojas, and Recording Secretary Atuatasi APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair R. Green moved to accept the agenda as presented, seconded by Commissioner A. Green. Approved, (8-0). COMMUNICATIONS Chair R. Green reported on the Mayor's Breakfast to the Commission. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Subcommittee Minutes of April 18, 1996 The Commission requested several minor corrections and clarifications to the draft minutes. Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by Commissioner Boudreau. Approved (5-0), with only the subcommittee and members present at the meeting voting. View Restoration Commission Minutes July 18, 1996 Page 1 • 2. Minutes of May 2, 1996 Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to approve the minutes as presented, seconded by Commissioner Boudreau. Approved (7-0-1) with Commissioner Black abstaining, as she was not present at the meeting. FOLLOW-UP TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S POSITION PAPER TO CITY COUNCIL ON JULY 2, 1996. Commissioner A. Green began the discussion by proposing that when the City Council discussed business relating to the View Restoration Commission, the Commission should then review the video tape at it's next meeting. Commissioners Long, A. Green, and Chair R. Green proceeded to discuss the July 2, 1996 City Council decision on the Position Paper. Commissioner A. Green summarized the disclosure made by the City Attorney that if significant changes are made to Proposition M it could open the door for a new challenge of the Ordinance. After discussion of the City Attorney's statement, it was agreed to view excerpts of the video tape of the July 2, 1996 City Council meeting. The tape was then viewed. After viewing the tape, Chair R. Green noted that it was his understanding that the City Attorney would draft new guidelines simultaneously for the Planning Commission and View Restoration Commission that would be consistent with each other, as well as Proposition M. He discussed the procedure for coordinating the review of the draft guidelines between the City Attorney, View Restoration Commission, Planning Commission and City Council. Director Petru explained that the guidelines would be initially prepared by the City Attorney. The guidelines would then be presented to the Planning Commission and View Restoration Commission, after which recommendations would be forwarded to the City Council for approval. Senior Planner Rojas explained that staff and the City Attorney had met and reviewed every change being proposed to the Proposition M portion of Chapter 17.02 (Section 17.02.040). The version that was sent to the Commissioners was the same version sent to the City Council where the significant changes to the Ordinance had been eliminated and only the minor clarifications were left in. Commissioner A. Green asked Senior Planner Rojas to clarify the definition of the determination of view and viewing area as defined in the revisions of Section View Restoration Commission Minutes July 18, 1996 Page 2 r • • 17.02.040. Commissioner A. Green felt the proposed definition of view was not consistent with the definition in the existing code. Vice Chair Sweetnam pointed out that there are two paragraphs in the proposed code one regarding the determination of view and the other regarding viewing area that are basically saying the same thing. He suggested the two paragraphs be combined. Senior Planner Rojas acknowledged the suggestions and indicated he would meet with the City Attorney and suggest different language regarding the definition of view and combining into one paragraph the procedure for determining view and viewing area. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS Staff Director Petru indicated that a City Tree Permit appeal was still a potential item that would be placed on a future agenda. Commission: Commissioner A. Green proposed that a future agenda include a discussion of the viewing of all City Council video tapes where view restoration matters are discussed. Commissioner A. Green also suggested the Commission review the revisions to the View Restoration Permit Guidelines. Vice Chair Sweetnam requested that the Commission receive a clean copy of Section 17.02.040 that incorporates any revisions discussed. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda items) Miro Stalich, 4125 Lorraine Road, distributed pictures and discussed the loss of his view due to trees. Teng-Le Ann Lee, 55 Oceanaire Drive, discussed cutting City street trees and the need for a permit to do so. .ADJOURNMENT Commissioner A. Green moved to adjourn the meeting, which was seconded by Commissioner Boudreau. The meeting was duly adjourned at 9:12 P.M. View Restoration Commission Minutes July 18, 1996 Page 3 M 4 40 • The next regular meeting will be held Thursday, August 1, 1996 at Hesse Park, 7:00 P.M. N:\G ROU P\PLAN N I NG\VRC\96M I N07.18 View Restoration Commission Minutes July 18, 1996 Page 4