VRC MINS 19960201 APPROVED/3
3/7/96
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 1, 1996
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Green at 7:07 P.M. at Hesse Park
Community Building,, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. The Pledge of Allegiance followed,
led by Commissioner Sweetnam.
SWEARING OF NEW COMMISSION
Deputy City Clerk Sara Ferdman swore in the new Commission.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commissioners Black, Boudreau, Gee, Goern, A. Green, Karmelich,
Long, Marshall, Sweetnam, and Chairman R. Green.
ABSENT: NONE
Also present were Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement/Secretary to
the View Restoration Commission Bernard, Planning Administrator Petru, Senior
Planner Rojas, and Recording Secretary Atuatasi.
SELECTION OF VICE CHAIRMAN
Chairman R. Green opened nominations to elect a Vice Chairman.
Commissioner Boudreau nominated Commissioner Sweetnam as Vice Chairman,
seconded by Commissioner Black. (Approved 10-0).
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Approved as presented, (10-0).
COMMUNICATIONS
taff: NONE
Commission: NONE
0 0
VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION ORIENTATION
Director/Secretary Bernard introduced Staff members present at the meeting from the
Planning Division to the Commission and briefly explained their job duties. He
indicated on the organization chart the other divisions which made up the Planning,
Building, and Code Enforcement Department. He also announced the names of
remaining Staff members and explained their job duties.
Planning Administrator Petru discussed an outline provided to the Commission
regarding procedures to reactivate the View Restoration Permit process. She also
g g
included a copy of the Development Code 17.02.040 which explained the criteria for
evaluating applications. Ms. Petru stated that, last year, the Commission reviewed the
Code and modified the language to amplify and clarify the intent of the View
Preservation and Restoration Ordinance. Planning Administrator Petru reported that
the City Council was currently reviewing the entire Development Code and that this
particular Section of the Code was scheduled to be considered on February 20, 1996.
Planning Administrator Petru discussed the Rules of Procedure adopted by the
Commission and the Guidelines for View Restoration Permits. After the Development
Code was adopted, the draft Guidelines would be presented to the City Council for
adoption. Planning Administrator Petru also discussed that packets would be delivered
to each Commissioner on the Thursday before the next regularly scheduled meeting.
The contents would consist of Staff Reports regarding items for discussion (i.e. ,
Continued Business, Public Hearings, New Business) and Minutes from previous
meetings. She emphasized that, if the Commissioners had questions, they should
contact Staff before the next meeting.
Commissioner Marshall stated that Staff might be unavailable at times, but inquired if it
would be possible to fax information to the office.
Director Secretary Bernard replied that the Department had a fax machine and also
mentioned that Staff could be reached by leaving voice mail messages.
Vice Chairman Sweetnam inquired about the status of hiring a contract person to
process View Restoration Permit applications.
Planning Administrator Petru replied that a Request for Proposal was being prepared
and would be placed on the City Council's agenda on February 6, 1996.
Planning Administrator Petru presented an overview of the Ralph M. Brown Act and
stated that the Planning Commission wished to hold a Joint Workshop with the View
Restoration Commission and the City Attorney to discuss issues in detail regarding this
State law.
VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 1,1996
PAGE 2
• 0
Director/Secretary Bernard discussed Eligibility to Vote and Conflicts of Interest.
Commissioner Long inquired if the contents of the packets would identify the property
owner in each case.
Planning Administrator Petru replied that the Staff Report would include this information
and would also identify the persons requesting the View Restoration Permits.
Director/Secretary Bernard discussed V.R.C. Resolution No. 94-1, Rules of Procedures
and suggested that the Commission review and consider whether or not to operate
under those rules that the previous Commission had adopted or to amend them. He
also stated that there was an Appeal Process, through which decisions of this
Commission could be appealed to the City Council, and suggested that the Chairman
and Vice Chairman be present when appeals were presented to the City Council.
Director/Secretary Bernard stated that each Commissioner would be receiving a copy
of the Department's Weekly Status Report. He advised the Commission of the
Planning Commission's request to meet on a Thursday when the City Attorney was
available for a Joint Workshop. He suggested that the Commission decide on a date
and have Staff make the arrangements.
The Commission decided to hold the Joint Workshop with the Planning
Commission on Thursday, February 15, 1996.
Commissioner Marshall asked Staff if photographs would be provided for each View
Restoration Permit case.
Planning Administrator Petru replied that Staff prepared a photo board that contained
panoramic photos for the affected properties, along with an oral Staff Report.
Planning Administrator Petru then discussed the status of the 27 applications which
had been submitted to the City at the time litigation was filed in 1991. She stated that
two or three cases had reached the point of compliance with the Commission's
decision; there were about a dozen more for which decisions had been rendered, but
the actual trimming had not been completed; and that the remainder were pending a
decision by the Commission. She also stated that Staff and the Commission had made
an effort to inform the public that the Preservation aspect of the Ordinance protected
only views that still existed in November of 1989.
Planning Administrator Petru stated Staff would also be forwarding the Commission's
recommendations regarding the View Restoration Permit fees to the City Council. She
explained that currently it was a flat fee schedule, but the Commission was
VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 1,1996
PAGE 3
0 411
recommending a modified flat fee/trust deposit system, whereby the fee was based on
the size and complexity of the application.
Director/Secretary Bernard stated that the existing Code language and a Strike-Out/
Underline version of the proposed changes were included in the Commission's packets
and suggested that the Commission may wish to review and discuss this matter in more
detail at the next meeting.
Planning Administrator Petru stated that the City Tree Review Permit Ordinance which
governs trees that are in the public right-of-way or on city parks, and are blocking the
view, would be heard by the City Council on February 6, 1996.
Commissioner Marshall inquired if it would be possible to have a discussion off the
record, without the use of the tape recorder.
Director/Secretary replied that any discussion with a quorum of the Commission
present was required to be on the record.
Vice Chairman Sweetnam clarified that, once the minutes were transcribed from the
tape and approved by the Commission, the tape was then destroyed and the minutes
became the official document of record.
Director/Secretary Bernard stated that Staff was required, by law, to keep the tapes for
a minimum of 30 days. Once the minutes were adopted and the 30-day period had
elapsed, the Department then re-used the tapes.
Chairman R. Green inquired if a City Arborist would be able to give a presentation to
the Commission on the terminology and techniques of tree trimming.
Planning Administrator Petru replied that Staff would follow up on this request. She
mentioned that the representative from South Coast Botanical Gardens might be able
to provide this type of lecture and that Staff would also check in-house.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR: NONE
CONTINUED BUSINESS: NONE
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE
NEW BUSINESS: NONE
VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 1,1996
PAGE 4
0 0
ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS:
taff:
Director/Secretary Bernard suggested that the Commission review the Proposed
Development Code Revisions and the Proposed Fee Schedule for View Restoration
Permits at the next regular meeting on February 15, 1996.
Commission:
The Commission agreed to hold a Joint Workshop with the Planning Commission and
the City Attorney to discuss the Ralph M. Brown Act on February 15, 1996.
COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE: NONE
ADJOURNMENT:
Vice Chairman Sweetnam moved to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner
Boudreau. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting was duly adjourned
at 8:16 p.m.
The next regular meeting of the View Restoration Commission would be Thursday,
February 15, 1996.
N:IGROUP\PLANNING\VRC\96VRCMN2.1
VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 1,1996
PAGE 5