We strongly support Mayor Kelly Boyd’s desire for and leadership position in acquiring revisions to the city’s View Ordinance.
We find it unconscionable anyone would insinuate that Mayor Boyd was acting irresponsibly by selecting and appointing individuals as a committee to draft a revision of the city’s view ordinance dealing with trees and vegetation. In fact, the selection and appointment of the committee solely at the mayor’s discretion received unanimous council approval.
The marching orders for the committee were to “work toward the goal we’ve heard tonight (1/15/2013) and that is putting teeth in an ordinance that’s going to work.” We presume the “goal” is a view restoration and preservation ordinance administered by the city. The city, not the Superior Court, will be the arbiter when property owners cannot agree on a solution to the view obstruction.
Several citizens have expressed concern over real estate speculators sitting on their checkbook until an ordinance with teeth are passed so they can rush in and buy a view obstructed property, restore the view and flip it for a huge profit. Restoration via the ordinance’s mandate is available to the property owner prior to selling. He or she can execute the restoration or sell as a potential view property using the view ordinance to restore the view.
Views are an important natural resource of Laguna Beach and deserve protection. Anyone who has attended the view committee meetings knows that the committee members have widely differing opinions regarding key provisions of the view ordinance.
Where is the beauty in overgrown vegetation and trees that have not been maintained? While trees that are well maintained and unobtrusive are beautiful and provide value to a community, the same can be said for a peaceful, unobstructed view of the beautiful ocean, beaches, and other land marks in Laguna Beach. It’s ironic there is so much angst and concern about a view ordinance since the only reason it exists at all is because someone believes their vegetation is more important than another’s ability to see clearly through or past it. To be fair and honest, we acknowledge that in some cases, the vegetation is more important than another’s view. However, in all the cases we have heard of or seen ourselves, no reasonable person would side with the vegetation owner.
Why is there no concern about the significant diminution in value of the many property owners living with obstructed views?
Steve & Catherine Caporaso, Laguna Beach