Loading...
VRC MINS 20010920 , . • • • ' VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING September 20, 2001 Chairman Alberio called the meeting to order at 6:59 pm at Fred Hesse Community Center, 29031 Hawthorne Boulevard. The Pledge of Allegiance followed, led by Commissioner Dyda. Present: Chairman Alberio, Vice-Chairman Slayden, Commissioner Drages, Commissioner Franklin, Commissioner Monks, Commissioner De Moraes, and Commissioners Dyda, Commissioner Ginise, and Commissioner Weber, Project Coordinator Steven D. Jones and Recording Secretary William H. Butler Jr. Absent: Commissioner Iseda. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner moved Dyda to approve the Agenda as presented, seconded by Commissioner Franklin. There being no objection, the Agenda was approved. COMMUNICATIONS Staff: Project Coordinator Steven D. Jones communicated that VRP #114 and Commissioner Dyda's memo be continued to the November 15, 2001 VRC meeting. Commission: Commissioner Franklin made a motion not to continue Commissioner Dyda's memo November 15, 2001 VRC meeting, seconded by Commissioner Dyda. Motion carried (7-0). CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. MINUTES OF Septem,2001 Vice-Chair Slayden moved to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by Commissioner Monks. CONTINUED BUSINESS: NONE View Restoration Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 Page 1 of 7 0 0 PUBLIC HEARING: VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 76: Mr. and Mrs., LaBarbera, 6050 Ocean Terrace Drive. (TN) A roll call was taken to see which Commissioners had visited the sites. Vice-Chairman Slayden, Commissioners Drages, Commissioner Franklin, Commissioner Monks, Commissioners De Moraes, and Commissioner Dyda, were present and had visited both sites. Senior Project Coordinator Trayci Nelson presented a brief summary of the staff report. She acknowledged the following correction. She said exhibit A, as being the preliminary agreement dated August 18, should have read exhibit B and A. She also referenced that exhibit B should be changed to C, and in the table on page three, the recommendation for the Coral tree should have reflected the language in the resolution. Staff recommendation for the coral tree was to remove and replace it with other ground cover. The recommendation for the fan palms and the queen palms was to remove them and relocate them outside of the applicant's viewing area. Nelson stated that Dave Hayes, the city arborist from Willdan, indicated that this was a viable option. The recommendation for the eucalyptus tree was to remove and replace with other plant material. Commissioner Dyda indicated that the number of trees on Dr. Goradia's property differed from what was actually in the report, and asked if the foliage could be bunched together and dealt with as a group. Nelson stated they could be bunched together and dealt with as a group. Vice-Chairman Slayden moved to open public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Dyda. View Restoration Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 Page 2 of 7 • Peter LaBarbera (applicant): 6050 Ocean Terrace Drive. Mr. LaBarbera stated that it had been about 2.5 years since the filing of his VRP application. He further stated that when they purchased their home in 1986, they had an unobstructed ocean and Catalina view. Mr. LaBarbera said he had asked Mr. Goradia what his plans for landscaping his yard were going to be and that he asked him not to block his view during his landscaping endeavors. Mr. LaBarbera stated that in 1988 he noticed a row of palm trees planted directly in his view frame and, over the next couple of years he noticed that the palms were growing past the 3'- 6' that Mr. Goradia assured they wouldn't exceed. Mr. LaBarbera also said that he and Mr. Goradia had several private meetings, and one agreement that produced nothing. He pointed out that in June of 2001, Trayci Nelson got them to agree to meet once more, to no avail. Yogesh Goradia: (foliage owner) Mr. Goradia passed out a personal, typed document concerning VRP # 76, and photographs. Mr. Goradia stated that he would like to define the guidelines with reference to significant impairment of view, privacy, integrity, and aesthetics. Mr. Goradia insisted that his fan palms did not significantly impair the Catalina view, that the queen palms provided privacy to the pool deck area, but that the coral tree could be trimmed down to 16'. Mr. Goradia disagreed with the wording throughout the resolution. Mr. Goradia stated that he would trim at his expense. He further stated that he believed that a licensed contractor should do the installation of all new foliage, and that the applicant can pay for and maintain the new foliage. Mr. Goradia stated that he was in favor of submitting three bids, and taking the average. Bruce Ross: (neighbor) 32026 Searidge Circle. Mr. Ross stated that his property adjoins both the applicants and foliage owner property. He continued on saying that his view existed only from the deck and that he had no view from the inside of his home. He acknowledged additionally that from the deck he could see Catalina Island, and that his view would be increased dramatically if the palms were removed. Peter LaBarbera: (rebuttal) Mr. LaBarbera stated in rebuttal that Mr. Goradia always seemed to trim the trees when someone was coming to view the trees in relation to the view. He continued by affirming that on the day that some of the commission members came to view the site, he was trimming. Yogesh Goradia: (rebuttal) Mr. Goradia said he bought the lot in 1980 or 1981 and at that time the CC & R's were in place. He also said it was their understanding that they were good for thirty years. He continued with the statement that there was not a single mention of landscaping and that they only mentioned restrictions of the structures. He believed that none of the trees obstructed the view. View Restoration Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 Page 3 of 7 . 0 0 r . . Commissioner Drages: Commissioner Drages stated that she understood that the queen palms provide privacy, but also that her understanding was that they can grow to a height of 50', at which time they would provide no privacy at all. Her question was did they grow to fifty feet? Mr. Goradia: (rebuttal) He stated that the fan palms might grow to a height of 30', but the queens don't grow that high. Vice-Chairman Slayden: Commissioner Slayden conjectured if the commission should close the public hearing. Commissioner Dyda moved to close Public Hearing, seconded by Commissioner Monks. With there being no objections, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Franklin: Commissioner Franklin stated the commission had an issue that needed to be addressed in two phases. He said the commission needed to decide whether or not there was view impairment that warranted immediate action or not, and suggested that the commission take each group of trees independent of the other to make that determination. Commissioner Franklin made a motion that they initially address only the question of whether there is significant view impairment and that they defer the question of the remedy until after they had voted on that issue. Seconded by Commissioner Dyda. Commissioner Slayden: Commissioner Slayden led the discussion. He went on at length saying that he thought the coral tree was not a problem and that he didn't agree with removing it. He stated that topping the tree would be sufficient to restore the view. He went on about the eucalyptus trees and stated that they are not a problem and could be removed or not. He continued by saying the queen palms are not a problem as of this date and that he thought that they should go back to the seven palms. Commissioner Dyda: Commissioner Dyda's contention was that the motion on the floor, that he seconded, was to talk about each of the issues and whether or not each of those issues met the criteria for view obstruction or impairment. He said he felt the commission should vote on that. He suggested that there is a difference between impairment and obstruction. He stated that impairment hinders view, while obstruction blocks view. A roll call was taken to see which commissioners were in favor of the above-mentioned motion. View Restoration Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 Page 4 of 7 110 Motion carried (7- 0). The Commission discussed at length whether or not the coral tree significantly impaired the view. Commissioner Dyda led the discussion and all agreed that there was either significant impairment or obstruction. The Commission discussed the fan palms and whether or not they significantly impaired the view. All agreed the fan palms were significant. Commissioner Dyda: Commissioner Dyda led the discussion on the eucalyptus trees. He stated that they obstructed the view. All commission members agreed with this statement. The Commission discussed the queen palms and all agreed that they were impairing the view. Commissioner Dyda moved that all five categories fall into an obstruction and/or impairment of the view, seconded by Commissioner Franklin. A roll call was taken of the Commissioners. Motion carried (7 - 0). The Commissioners went on at length concerning a remedy for the coral tree. The consensus was that the tree should be trimmed down and maintained at 16 feet. Commissioner Dyda: Commissioner Dyda started the discussion of the remedy for the palm trees. He agreed with staffs recommendation to remove and relocate the trees. Commissioner Drages: Commissioner Drages agreed but wanted to know if the palms are relocated, would they be relocated in someone else's view? She asked Project Coordinator Nelson would they be relocated in someone else's view? Project Coordinator Nelson: Nelson stated that staff would monitor the placement of the trees and that they could do an analysis from another property. Chairman Alberio: Commissioner Alberio considered a solution for the trees and Commissioner Slayden added that two palms were not being considered that the foliage owners would be able to keep. The Commission went on at length about whether or not they had the authority to order relocation of foliage. They consulted the project View Restoration Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 Page 5 of 7 0 0 coordinator and contemplated viable options for the palms with respect to the applicant's view. The Commission decided that three options should be given concerning the palm trees. The first option was to remove fan palm trees 1 - 7 with the consent of the owner and replace with other foliage. The second option was that the trees should be relocated outside of the applicant's viewing area and replant them in an area that will not significantly impair the view. The third option was that they should be trimmed to 16 feet in height. Commissioner Franklin moved that the Commission adopt the wording of Project Coordinator Nelson with respect to the Palm trees, seconded by Commissioner Dyda. Motion carried (7 - 0). Commissioner Slayden: Commissioner Slayden suggested that the language used concerning the eucalyptus trees be adopted. Commissioner Franklin: Commissioner Franklin felt that the commission could not require a height specification under 16'. He thought the language concerning height and future trimming should be taken out. Project Coordinator Nelson: Nelson added that she would include the language right out of the guidelines. Commissioner Slayden: Commissioner Slayden visited the issue of the queen palms. Commissioner Dyda: Commissioner Dyda offered that the same language used for the fan palms should be used for these palms. Vice-Chair Commissioner Slayden moved that the language of paragraphs 4 and 5 be adopted as indicated, seconded by Commissioner Monks. Motion carried (7 - 0) Commissioner Dyda made a motion that the language in the standard conditions of approval that dealt with the city's ability to reimburse the applicant, should reflect the 90 day time period given the foliage owner to complete the work in accordance with the resolution, seconded by Chair Alberio. Motion carried (7 - 0). The commission decided to approve the request for the permit, pursuant to the changes that were read into the record and to bring the resolution back on the consent calendar for the next meeting. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS: View Restoration Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 Page 6 of 7 0 0 t r Staff: Memo submitted by Commissioner Dyda regarding Clarification/Revision to February 17, 1998 guidelines. Staff will place this item for discussion by the VRC on the November 1, 2001 agenda. Commission: NONE COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda items): NONE ADJOURNMENT: 9:08 PM View Restoration Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 Page 7 of 7