Loading...
VRC MINS 19970320 0 • APPROVED MAY 1, 1997 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MARCH 20, 1997 The meeting was called to order by Chair R. Green at 7:15 P.M. at Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. The Pledge of Allegiance followed, led by Commissioner Black. PRESENT: Commissioners Black, A. Green, Marshall, Karmelich, Chair R. Green ABSENT: Commissioners Boudreau, Goern, Long, Vice Chair Sweetnam (excused), and Gee. Also present were Principal Planner Rojas, Project Coordinator Carter, Project Coordinator Nelson, and Recording Secretary Peterson. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Karmelich moved to accept the agenda as presented, seconded by Commissioner A. Green. Approved, (5-0). COMMUNICATIONS Principal Planner Rojas reported to the Commission that only one of the original six old View Restoration Permit Applications was yet to be scheduled for a new hearing. The sole remaining application (VRP No. 22) would likely be brought before the Commission in June. Principal Planner Rojas also informed the Commission there would be no meeting on Thursday, April 17 since the sole application scheduled for that meeting had been rescheduled to the May 1, 1997 meeting. Principal Planner Rojas informed the Commission that beginning in May there would be three public hearing applications per meeting for the Commission to hear. He wanted to confirm that the Commission wanted no more than three on each agenda. Chair R. Green felt the Commission should try hearing only three cases, however if Staff felt certain applications were very simple then more than three could be added to an agenda. Chair R. Green reported on the Council action related to the appeal of City Tree Review Permit No. 12 and thanked Staff Coordinator Carter for his report to the Council. 0 0 APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR 1. MINUTES OF JANUARY 16, 1997 Commissioner A. Green moved to accept the minutes as presented, seconded by Commissioner Black. Approved, (5-0). 2. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 20, 1997 Commissioner A. Green moved to accept the minutes as presented, seconded by Commissioner Marshall. Approved, (5-0). 3. VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 21 - RESOLUTION Principal Planner Rojas pointed out to the Commission that only Commissioners who participated in the public hearing for this item could vote on the Resolution's adoption. As such, there was a lack of a quorum for this item. Commissioner A. Green moved to continue the item to the April 3, 1997 consent calendar, seconded by Commissioner Black. Approved, (5-0). PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 20: Mr. S.J. Menzelos, 5113 Oconto Drive; Mr. Jang Yi Wang, 5117 Oconto Drive (HC) Chair R. Green polled the five Commissioners present on who had visited the site. Commissioner Black had not visited the site due to back surgery and Commissioner Karmelich had not been able to visit the site. Commissioner A. Green moved to continue the item to April 3, 1997 due to the lack of a quorum, seconded by Commissioner Black. Approved, (5-0). Chair R. Green apologized to members of the audience who were present for this item and explained it would be heard on April 3. 5. VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 24: Mr. Scott Giordano, 109 Rockinghorse Road (HC) Project Coordinator Carter presented the staff report, explaining the application was VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 20, 1997 PAGE 2 originally submitted January 7, 1991, however Staff did not present the report to the Commission because of the suspension of the View Restoration process due to litigation. Mr. Carter explained that since the original application was submitted in 1991 there had been substantial tree growth, fallen trees, and shrub growth. He also passed out a memo clarifying the location of tree cluster "G3", which was not identified on the site plan attached to the Staff Report. Chair R. Green opened the public hearing. Scott and Pat Giordano: 109 Rockinghorse Road, began by making one correction to the Staff Report. Mr. Giordano's home was built in 1954, not 1964 as stated in the report. They agreed with the findings of the Staff Report. Mr. Giordano distributed to the Commission pictures taken in 1966 showing no view obstruction, and stated they would like to have their view returned. Mr. Gilbert Alberio: 2177 Rockinghorse Road moved into his house in 1970. He explained he had no problem with having his trees trimmed. He did want to make one correction to the Staff Report, stating that trees identified as his, "Al" on the site plan, were actually his neighbor's trees. Kimberlee Higa: 2176 Rockinghorse Road, began by stating she had several concerns about having her trees cut. She did not mind having the trees above the driveway cut since keeping them trimmed was a great expense every year. She did, however, feel that removing her trees constituted a taking of her property without any compensation. She felt that removing the trees would take away from her property value since the trees give shade to the house and protect it from the elements. Chair R. Green asked Ms. Higa if she could look at the map in the Staff Report and identify which trees she would not object to having removed and which trees she would like to keep. Ms. Higa responded that the trees she was concerned about were identified as "G1", "G2", and "G3". Trees identified as "F11", "H2", "Dl", and "D2" added privacy to the pool area and if they were removed, people would be able to see them enjoying their pool. She added that they purchased their home because of the trees and the privacy and the setting they provided. She felt by removing the trees, value would be added to the Giordano's home but taken away from hers, and she should be compensated for that. She was concerned if the trees were removed how the area would be re-landscaped. The roots could be holding the hillside together. She felt an engineer should look at the hillside to make a determination on whether the hillside would fail if the trees were removed. VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 20, 1997 PAGE 3 0 0 Commissioner A. Green asked if, irrespective of the findings on whether the roots were holding up the hillside, she had an objection to having the trees removed. Ms. Higa replied she would have to see a landscaping plan to see how the area would be replanted. Commissioner A. Green responded that he was trying to find out if she was totally against the trees being removed or if removal depended on what was going to replace the trees. Ms. Higa responded that it depended on replacement, landscaping and safety. She added that she would not object to the tree identified as "El" on the site plan being removed as long as the area was restablized. Mr. Scott Giordano commented that he did not feel it was his responsibility to worry about what happened to Ms. Higa's property if trees were trimmed or removed. He further stated he did not feel it was his responsibility to re-landscape her property, especially since her property was developed after his property was developed. Commissioner Karmelich asked if he was requesting that all of the trees be removed. Mr. Giordano responded that there are a total of 35 trees impacting their view and they are asking for the removal or lacing of 20 of these trees. Mr. Gilbert Alberio suggested that lacing, rather than removing some of the trees on the Higa property, might be a compromise to consider. He felt there might be a safety problem if some of the trees were removed. Chair R. Green closed the public hearing. Staff Coordinator Carter explained that the cost of all initial foliage trimming and removal would have to be paid by the applicant, as well as the cost of any replacement foliage, if the Commission felt there would be considerable erosion to the slopes once the trees were removed. He also stated that in regards to the root systems of the trees, he was not able to observe what type of soil the trees were planted in or if there might be slope failure if the trees were removed. Commissioner A. Green felt that additional information was necessary regarding the slopes and trees before a decision could be made. Chair R. Green suggested an option in which the Commission could recommend the VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 20, 1997 PAGE 4 trees be laced extensively rather than removed, as the cost of having several of the trees removed may be prohibitive to the applicant. Principal Planner Rojas explained to the Commission that if they had questions whether removal of the trees would create any adverse effect on either erosion or stability of the slope, they could direct Staff to have the City's geotechnical consultant visit the site and make his determinations. The City, in this case, would have to pay for the geotechnical consultant's time, since this was an old application which was being processed without a fee or trust deposit. Commissioner A. Green reminded the Commission that there was still the question of who owned the trees designated "Al" in the staff report. Principal Planner Rojas suggested they ask Mr. Alberio if he had a survey of the property. Mr. Alberio confirmed there was a survey of the property and it would show the trees were not on his property. However, he also stated that a copy of the survey would have to be obtained from his adjacent neighbor. Commissioner A. Green made a motion to direct Staff to schedule a site visit by the City's geotechnical consultant; research additional information as to 1) whether the applicant's view could be restored with heavy lacing instead of removal, 2) the cost estimate for removing subject trees and, 3) the ownership of tree cluster "Al"; and continue the item to April 3, 1997, seconded by Commissioner Marshall. Approved (5-0). NEW BUSINESS 6. PRESENTATION TO HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS Principal Planner Rojas explained that Staff and/or Commissioners may in the future receive requests from Homeowners Associations for presentations on the view restoration process. He was requesting clarification from the Commission on how to handle these requests. Should they be forwarded directly to the Chairman or should they be forwarded directly to Vice Chair Sweetnam, who had volunteered to handle such presentations. Chair R. Green responded that other Commissioners may want to speak at the Homeowners Association meetings, so therefore the best approach would be to put such requests on the agenda of the next View Restoration Commission meeting after VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 20, 1997 PAGE 5 0 • the request is received. 7. APPOINTMENT OF THE VICE CHAIR Commissioner A. Green nominated Vice Chair Sweetnam to be reappointed Vice Chair. Commissioner Marshall made a motion to reappoint Vice Chair Sweetnam as Vice Chair, seconded by Commissioner A. Green. Approved, (5-0). ADJOURNMENT Commissioner A. Green moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Commissioner Karmelich. The meeting was duly adjourned at 8:30 P.M. to Thursday, April 3, 1997 at Hesse Park, 7:00 P.M. N:\GROUP\PLANNING\VRC\97MIN03.20 VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 20, 1997 PAGE 6