Loading...
VRC MINS 19970904 APPROVED NOVEMBER 6, 1 997 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 The meeting was called to order by Chair R. Green at 7:00 P.M. at Hesse Park Community Building, 29310 Hawthorne Boulevard. The Pledge of Allegiance followed, led by Commissioner Boudreau. PRESENT: Commissioners Black, Boudreau, A. Green, Long, Vice Chair Sweetnam, Chair R. Green ABSENT: Commissioners Goern, Marshall and Karmelich were excused. Also present were Principal Planner Rojas and Recording Secretary Peterson APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner A. Green moved to move Item 1 of the agenda to be heard after the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Black. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to approve the agenda as amended, seconded by Commissioner A. Green. There being no objection, it was so ordered. COMMUNICATIONS Principal Planner Rojas distributed to the Commission a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Boss, one of the foliage owners for VRP No. 42, requesting a continuance of the item due to surgery. He also distributed a modified outline of the issues of discussion for the workshop with the City Council. Finally, he distributed a copy of a Letter to the Editor which appeared in the PV News. Chair R. Green distributed a copy of the Letter to the Editor he had sent to the PV News. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. View Restoration PermitNo._22: Mr. Stefano Finazzo, 2175 Rockinghorse Drive (EU) Principal Planner Rojas explained to the Commission that the applicant had requested 0 • that the View Restoration Commission not hear this item yet, as he was trying to work out a solution with the foliage owner regarding the trimming of trees. Principal Planner Rojas explained that staff was anticipating a formal withdraw) of the application from the applicant in the near future. He stated that staff was recommending a continuance of the item to November 6, 1997 as a precautionary measure in case the applicant decided not to withdraw the application. Commissioner Long moved to adopt staff recommendation to continue the item to November 6, 1997, seconded by Commissioner Black. Approved, (6-0). 2. View Restoration Permit No. 42: Mr. and Mrs. Tom McFadden 30731 Ganado Drive; Mr. and Mrs. Felix Krasovec, 30741 Ganado Drive; Mr. and Mrs. Kena Hamilton, 30747 Ganado Drive. (TN) Principal Planner Rojas explained to the Commission that a letter from the foliage owners had been previously received by staff and forwarded to the Commission requesting a continuance of the item until after the upcoming joint workshop with the City Council. Staff had also received a letter from Mr. Boss, a foliage owner, requesting a continuance because he had back surgery scheduled for the day of the hearing. Mr. Rojas felt that the Commission should address the issue of whether to continue the item or hear it tonight. Commissioner Black stated she had spoken to Mr. Boss and he had informed her of the surgery. He had given her no indication that he was requesting a continuance. Commissioner Long asked if there was anything in the guidelines addressing continuance requests. Chair R. Green answered there was nothing specifically addressing evaluation criteria for continuance requests. Commissioner Long asked staff if they had any reason to doubt the validity of the request. Principal Planner Rojas responded that there was no reason to believe Mr. Boss was not scheduled for surgery. Commissioner Long felt that because of the circumstances of the request, that Mr. Boss's request for continuance should be granted. He felt that the other request for continuance be denied as it was inappropriate because it was asking the Commission VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PAGE 2 • to defer enforcement of the ordinance until after the workshop with the City Council. He did not feel the Commission had the power to do that. He felt the item should be continued to either the October 2 or November 6 meeting. Chair R. Green felt it would be a good idea to check with the applicants to make sure they could attend either the October or November meeting. Therefore, he opened the public hearing to hear testimony only on the continuance request. Felix Krasovec (applicant) 30741 Ganado Drive, began by stating that one of the co- applicants was seriously ill and every delay was very serious to him. He did not feel the back surgery was something that had just popped up. He stated that when Project Coordinator Nelson scheduled the hearing for this evening, Mr. Boss knew there would be a conflict. He further stated that Mr. Boss could have requested someone, such as Mrs. Boss, to come to the meeting and speak on his behalf. Kean Hamilton (applicant) 30747 Ganado Drive felt the problem with granting a continuance was that there were several people involved, three applicants and three foliage owners, as well as the Commissioners and staff. He felt that waiting until October or November to hear the case might be difficult for the others involved, as he may be ill or one of the others involved may have to be out of town on business. He did not want to see this application go on and on. He also stated that Mr. Boss had stated on several occasions what his choice was in regards to his foliage. Mr. Boss' choice was extremely consistent with what the applicants' were asking for. Consequently, Mr. Hamilton did not feel there was a real need for Mr. Boss to even be at the hearing. He also felt that Mr. Boss could have sent someone to the meeting to represent him, or sent a letter to the Commission stating his views. Tom McFadden (applicant) 30731 Ganado Drive agreed with the comments from Mr. Krasovec and Mr. Hamilton, especially regarding the health of Mr. Hamilton. He stated Mr. Hamilton was an original owner and had been in poor health for several years. He felt Mr. Hamilton had been waiting for over 20 years for some mechanism to allow him to regain his view. He also commented that Mr. Boss had commented to staff and a Commissioner that he preferred the trees be removed rather than trimmed. He therefore did not feel that it was necessary for Mr. Boss to attend this meeting. Commissioner Long felt it was appropriate to question the applicants as to whether they would be available to attend the November 6 View Restoration Commission meeting. Mr. Long felt that November 6 was appropriate, rather than October 2, as many of the Commissioners have already commented they would be absent from that meeting as well as the fact that continuing to October 2 would provide a little less time than the one month continuance requested by Mr. Boss. He was also concerned that if the VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PAGE 3 0 0 Commission was going to order the trees removed based on consent, which was the only way the Commission could direct removal, that discussions with staff alone, as opposed to open discussions at a public hearing, probably would not constitute adequate evidence of consent to remove. Along with that was the letter requesting continuance, which on its face, appears to indicate a lot of disagreement with staff recommendations. He felt it was in the best interest of the applicants to continue the meeting so Mr. Boss or his representative could be present and there would be a clear record if there was going to be consent for tree removal. Chair R. Green added that there should be a stipulation that there will not be any further continuances granted to Mr. Boss, and that if he could not attend a future meeting he would have to have some type of written submission or have someone attend the meeting on his behalf. Commissioner A. Green asked staff for clarification as to whether Mr. Boss was aware of this hearing date prior to scheduling his surgery, which Mr. Green stated was elective surgery. Principal Planner Rojas stated that the hearing date was noticed thirty days in advance and he understood that shortly thereafter Mr. Boss mentioned to Project Coordinator Nelson the possibility of a conflict. However, at that time Mr. Boss stated that he would send someone to the meeting to represent his position or send a letter. Apparently, last week Mr. Boss opted to request a continuance. Commissioner A. Green wondered if the continuance should go all the way to November, rather than to October. Since this surgery was elective, and since the applicant did have a 30 day notice as to the hearing date he felt that the continuance should only be granted to October as long as the Commission could fulfill the quorum. Commissioner Long agreed and added that if the Commission could not fulfill the quorum they were no worse off and should continue the item to November. Mr. Krasovec noted that all the foliage owners would have to do, given the discussion tonight, was simply not show up to the future meeting. By not showing up there would not be the consent to remove the trees, so what were they gaining by continuing the item. Chair R. Green agreed. However he stated without foliage owner consent, a decision could be made to trim a tree to a height of 16 feet or the ridgeline, whichever is lower. The foliage owner could still opt for removal in the future. VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PAGE 4 Commissioner Long added that non-appearance at a meeting does not lead to an automatic continuance. Mr. Hamilton wanted the Commission to make sure that if a motion is made to continue the meeting and not grant further continuances, that the motion be worded in such a way so as not to exclude any of the other applicants or foliage owners from requesting a continuance due to health reasons. The Commissioners agreed with Mr. Hamilton. Commissioner Long moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Boudreau. There being no objection, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Black asked if there was a reason, in light of the fact that the rest of the foliage owners and applicants were present, to not go ahead and hear the item. Commissioner Long responded that, as stated earlier, he would like to have in the record Mr. Boss' comments regarding removal of his trees. He was also uncomfortable denying a continuance based on a very compelling medical reason. He did feel that the motion should be stated to say that no further continuances would be granted to Mr. Boss and the Commission would look very critically at any other reason for a continuance requested by any other party to the application. Chair R. Green agreed with Mr. Long's comments. Commissioner A. Green disagreed and felt that the public hearing should be opened tonight, testimony taken by everyone present, and then continued to the October 2 meeting. This would allow Mr. Boss the opportunity to speak on his behalf, as well as allow the applicants and foliage owners that are present an opportunity to speak. Vice Chair Sweetnam agreed adding that the Commission should be able to formulate a resolution based on the testimony presented this evening, adding that Mr. Boss could be given the option to trim his trees, or remove and replace them, if necessary. Chair R. Green pointed out that some of the Commissioners participating tonight would not be able to attend the October 2 meeting and therefore there was a possibility that there may not be the required quorum at that meeting. Commissioner Boudreau commented that all of the Commissioners would like to hear the testimony tonight, but in light of the discussions she thought it best to continue the VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PAGE 5 0 0 item to the October 2 meeting. Vice Chair Sweetnam wondered if the Commission could hear the portion of the application tonight that dealt only with the foliage owners who were present this evening, then continue Mr. Boss' portion of the application to the October 2 meeting. Principal Planner Rojas stated that the Commission had the ability to split the testimony but reminded the Commission that there may not be the same Commissioners present at the next meeting to hear the continued public hearing and therefore it would probably be best not to split the testimony to two meetings. Chair R. Green wondered if, since he didn't visit the site, could he vote on the issue of whether or not to continue the item. Vice Chair Sweetnam felt that the reason you could not participate if you had not visited the site was because you would not have a clear understanding regarding the facts of the case. This would not prevent you from voting on whether or not to continue an item. Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to continue the item to October 2, 1997. Commissioner Long requested Vice Chair Sweetnam amend the motion to specify that the Commission found Mr. Boss delayed in bringing the basis for the continuance to the attention of the Commission and therefore the Commission will not consider further continuance requests from Mr. Boss. The Commission would also look critically at any future continuance requests by any other applicant or foliage owner in light of this matter. Commissioner A. Green had an objection to the proposed motion, as the Commission had not polled any of the applicants as to whether they could attend the October 2 meeting. Chair R. Green re-opened the public hearing to hear testimony on this issue. Chair R. Green polled the applicants as to whether they would be available to attend the October 2 meeting. All applicants agreed they could attend the October 2 meeting except Mr. Hamilton, who could not guarantee he could be there because of his ongoing health problems. Commissioner Long moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Vice Chair VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PAGE 6 * 0 Sweetnam. There being no objection, the public hearing was closed. Vice Chair Sweetnam moved to continue the item to October 2, 1997 with the added amendments suggested by Commissioner Long. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Long. Approved, (4-2) with Commissioners Black and A. Green dissenting. CONTINUED BUSINESS 3. City Council and View Restoration Commission Proposition 'M' Workshop (JR) Vice Chair Sweetnam requested if there were any extra copies of the draft outline of issues of discussion they be distributed to anyone in the audience that would like to look at it. Principal Planner Rojas explained that staffs approach to the workshop was to present, in order of priority, a brief explanation of the different issues that have been brought up by the City Council and residents. Staff would explain each issue and ask City Council for direction. The outline distributed this evening showed the topics and the order they would be presented in the staff report. Commissioner Long suggested that an item be added to the agenda to discuss some type of mediation process that could take place between the foliage owner and applicant involving a Commission member or member of staff. The Commission then asked questions and discussed how the joint workshop would work and procedures that might be used. Commissioner A. Green suggested that there be photographs available at the meeting showing both the before and after versions of properties that had already gone through the view restoration process. He also suggested having foliage owners speak who had already gone through the process, to explain how the process worked from their side of it. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE_AGENDAS Vice Chair Sweetnam requested the results of the workshop be placed on the October 2 agenda. VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PAGE 7 ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Boudreau moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Commissioner Black. The meeting was duly adjourned at 8:55 P.M. to an adjourned meeting with City Council on Tuesday, September 16, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. and, there being no objection it was so ordered, (6-0). VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PAGE 8