Loading...
VRC MINS 19971120 APPROVED 0 e DECEMBER 18, 1997 4) CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 20, 1997 The meeting was called to order by Chair R. Green at 7:03 P.M. at Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. The Pledge of Allegiance followed, led by Commissioner Long. PRESENT: Commissioners Boudreau, Goern, Long, Marshall, Vice Chair Sweetnam, and Chair R. Green ABSENT: Commissioners Black and A. Green were excused Also present were Principal Planner Rojas and Recording Secretary Peterson APPROVAL OF AGENDA Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to approve the agenda as presented, seconded by Commissioner Boudreau. Approved without objection, (6-0). COMMUNICATIONS Principal Planner Rojas explained that on Tuesday, November 18, the City Council adopted the Urgency Ordinance (329U). He distributed a copy of the Ordinance to the Commission. He further explained that the City Council wanted to adopt a non-urgency version of the same Ordinance as soon as possible and suggested the View Restoration Commission schedule a meeting on December 18 in order to review the non-urgency Ordinance. Secondly, he explained that the packets for the December 4 meeting would be delivered on November 25 with the Agendas, and discussed the public hearing schedule for the December 4 meeting. Vice Chair Sweetnam reported he had spoken to Commissioner A. Green earlier in the day and would be passing on some of his comments later in the meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 6, 1997 Vice Chair Sweetnam pointed out a typo on page 7 and relayed a change from Commissioner A. Green on page 9. 0 0 Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to accept the minutes, as amended, seconded by Commissioner Goern. Approved, (6-0). Principal Planner Rojas informed the Commission that there were two requests to speak regarding Item 2 on the Consent Calendar. He recommended removing this item from the Consent Calendar and approving the Consent Calendar. Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to remove Item No. 2 from the Consent Calendar and to approve the Consent Calendar, seconded by Commissioner Goern. Approved, (6-0). CONTINUED BUSINESS 2. VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 42 - RESOLUTION Chair R. Green reminded the Commission and speakers that the discussion regarding the Resolution had to focus on language of the Ordinance, and not readdress any issues covered in the application. Chair R. Green began by stating he had reviewed the tapes of the November 6 View Restoration Commission meeting and felt that the direction to grind out the stumps only applied to two of the three Canary Island Pines mentioned on the property at 3503 Ganado Drive. Vice Chair Sweetnam commented that he reviewed the minutes with Commissioner A Green earlier in the day, and that there was a mention of grinding stumps at 3503 Ganado Drive but there was no other conversation of grinding stumps on the other two properties. Based on that, he did not feel that grinding the stumps on the other two properties should be included in the Resolution. Kean Hamilton (applicant) 30747 Ganado Drive, asked Chair R. Green if, in reviewing the tape, he had heard mention of replacement foliage for the Yang property. He felt the tape reflected replacement foliage for pines 7 - 12 only. Vice Chair Sweetnam commented that his recollection was to replace only pines 7 - 12. Chair R. Green agreed, adding that the Commission did not feel there was a privacy issue involved when replacing only the six pine trees. Felix Krasovec (applicant) 30741 Ganado Drive, stated that the Commission had VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 20, 1997 PAGE 2 0 • discussed trimming the Oleanders on the Boss property rather than ordering their removal. After a brief discussion, the Commission agreed. Vice Chair Sweetnam wondered if some of the trees on the Boss property were to be turned over to the Code Enforcement Division, rather than remain a view restoration issue. Mr. Krasovec responded that the Commission had originally left those trees in the Resolution, but the applicants did have the option of turning the matter over to Code Enforcement. He did not feel that the way the Code Enforcement Division determined a view was as favorable to the applicants as the view restoration process. He felt is was more advantageous to leave the subject trees with the view restoration process. Mr. Hamilton thanked the Commission for taking the time to recheck the tapes and taking the time to thoroughly review his application. He distributed to the Commission a letter containing some observations he had made during the resolution drafting process that may help to simplify the process in the future. Mr. Krasovec also thanked the Commission for their help in solving the view problems at his property and the views of his neighbors. Finally he requested that some language be added to the Resolution to clearly state the view plane identified in the Resolution will also define the maximum height of any foliage's future growth. Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to amend the Resolution as discussed and have the amended version on the Consent Calendar of the December 4 meeting for adoption, seconded by Commissioner Goern. There being no objection, it was so ordered. NEW BUSINESS 3. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE VRC GUIDELINES Principal Planner Rojas began by stating the proposed amendments represented the directives from the joint workshop with the City Council. However, in going through and making the changes, staff came across two or three instances where the guidelines needed to be further amended to reflect a practice the Commission had already implemented. He stated he would note those instances at the appropriate time. VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 20, 1997 PAGE 3 0 0 The Commission preceded to review the guidelines page by page. Vice Chair Sweetnam pointed out that in the Table of Contents there was no reference in the attachments to the paperwork and forms for pre-application procedure. Principal Planner Rojas noted that and commented it would be added. Vice Chair Sweetnam pointed out at the bottom of page 5, it was not a good idea to have a View Restoration Commissioner involved in the pre-application procedure, as that Commissioner would have to recuse himself from the application. He was concerned there was a possible problem as far as being able to meet a quorum. A lengthy discussion followed regarding the amended early neighbor consultation process and whether a more structured mediation process was needed. Principal Planner Rojas summarized the direction of the Commission by stating the early consultation should be structured to give the foliage owner a specified time period to respond to a written request to attend a pre-application meeting sent out by staff. If the foliage owner does respond, they get the ability to forestall the application process. However, if they do not respond to the city letter the applicant has the ability to file a formal application immediately. The letter sent to the foliage owner by the City will suffice as proof of notification if there is no response. Principal Planner Rojas then pointed out on page 7 of the proposed amendments that this section regarding hedge heights was amended by staff to bring the Guidelines consistent with the adopted Development Code, and was not mentioned in the workshop. Commissioner Long felt that on page 8, the section dealing with prominent landmarks, distant mountains should be included as a prominent landmark. Vice Chair Sweetnam pointed out a few word changes on page 10. Regarding replacement foliage discussed on page 11, Chair R. Green did not feel it was fair for the applicant to bear the full cost of replacing a tree that is at the end of it's life expectancy and dies within one year of it's trimming. He suggested some type of pro-rating of the cost. Principal Planner Rojas stated that from City Council discussion and the City Attorney's opinion, there may be these type of situations. However, the City Attorney felt that it was not advantageous to get into discussions of how old the tree was or did the VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 20, 1997 PAGE 4 4 0 trimming really kill the tree, etc. For simplicity, if a tree dies within one year of trimming it should be replaced. Vice Chair Sweetnam suggested that language be included that states that replacement foliage for the dead tree be offered, unless the foliage owner was previously offered a replacement tree in exchange for removal and refused it. Commissioner Goern wondered what occurs if, within the one year period, the applicant moves. She wondered if the new property owner would be responsible for paying for the replacement tree. Principal Planner Rojas answered that he would discuss the question with the City Attorney. Principal Planner Rojas then discussed the size of replacement foliage. He commented that staff had visited a nursery and stated that trees were normally supplied in 5 and 15 gallon size trees and a 24 inch box size. He also discussed the price range of the trees. Given that information, staff was recommending that wording should be included to state that replacement foliage should be of a 15 gallon size. In no case should the replacement foliage be smaller than 5 gallons or larger than a 24 inch box. Vice Chair Sweetnam liked the additional language, but suggested there not be a minimum size indicated. The Commission agreed with this. RECESS AND RECONVENE At 9:20 P.M. the Commission took a short recess until 9:28 P.M. at which time they reconvened. The Commission pointed out grammatical errors and slight wording changes on several pages. A discussion followed as to how best to expedite the changes for the Commission's review. Principal Planner Rojas suggested writing up the changes and FAXing a finalized copy to one or more Commissioners for their review on Monday morning and then any changes could be made before the City Council packets are sent out on Tuesday. Chair R. Green and Commissioner Long volunteered to receive the FAX and review the changes. VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 20, 1997 PAGE 5 41 • Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to forward the recommendations, as amended, to the City Council for consideration, seconded by Commissioner Marshall. Approved, (5-1) with Commissioner Boudreau dissenting. ADJOURNMENT Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Commissioner Long. The meeting was duly adjourned at 10:05 P.M. to Thursday, December 4, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 20, 1997 PAGE 6