Loophole Undermines City’s View Rules
My name is Joseph Risi and I am the owner of 1283 Skyline. A very unfortunate incident has occurred which shines a light on the disparity that exists with the city ordinances regarding view protection. The DRB is involved, as well as neighbors, in determining what can be built in town. The primary concern that most neighbors have is view preservation. Story poles are erected, neighborhood meetings are held, and then there is a public meeting, which allows input from council and neighbors alike.
There is also a view corridor ordinance relative to plants and landscape where views must be protected as well. One cannot grow a plant or tree that would interrupt an existing view. Then why is there no ordinance which prevents a property owner from erecting a 6 foot tall sideyard fence, which can destroy an ocean and Catalina Island view? This is particularly relevant on the steeper streets like Skyline, Nyes Place, Park and Bluebird. Lots are stair-stepped as they continue up the grade and lot lines are typically at the point where the step occurs.
In my case, my home is about 10-feet higher than the neighbor below at 1275 Skyline. They proceeded to pull an over the counter permit to erect a 6-foot tall wooden fence at the top of their ridge line which is at my floor level. This fence is higher than the roof of their house yet they were able to build this fence, which obliterated my ocean and island views. Yesterday, planning commissioner Sue Kempf was at my home and was in my back yard at the fence. The next-door neighbor charged towards her asking why she was looking around the fence. She told him that she wanted to see what kind of view was around the fence. He proceeded to tell her that he had planned to continue the 6-foot fence down the hill along our mutual properly line to block all ocean views. This is his explicit intent; to block our views. The fence does not enclose his yard for any type of containment; he just wants to block my views! And the city is okay with this!
If view preservation is a primary intent in these other governing ordinances and DRB procedures, there needs to be an ordinance to prohibit tall fences which interrupt the same. My neighborhood has special setback requirements than typical because of the conditions on our street. These same conditions should be used to create a new fence ordinance.
All who see this fence are astounded and all say this cannot be true that this is allowed. When it was being erected, I called the city and Dennis Bogle and Vickie came up and red tagged the fence, thinking that it could not be right. My neighbor got his attorney to prove to the city that he was within his rights to build it and the work continued. My attorney, Larry Noakes, realtors Tim Smith and Frank Hufnagel, planning Commissioner Sue Kempf, and numerous other people are astounded that someone could destroy their neighbors views, enjoyment, and property value so easily, particularly when such action is inconsistent with other city rules and practices.
I call upon the city for an emergency moratorium prohibiting construction of fences as described in my letter. This man will continue the fence down the slope, which also is a scar on the hillside as one looks up from the canyon road (Highway 133). It would be the only such fence on any of the canyons in town. It serves no purpose but to block my view further.
I appeal to your good senses to put an end to this nonsense and to be consistent with our ordinances, thus being fair to all.
Joseph Risi, the father of five sons, spent some of the past 14 years building a village in Rwanda.
The hypocrisy here is staggering. Mr Risi is currently fighting with residents of my Tempe, Arizona neighborhood to allow him to build a large, high-density condo complex in our quiet, single-family subdivision. Neighborhood residents are very vocal in opposing Risi’s plan, but he trying to bully us into accepting his plan or building something worse within the current guidelines just to spite us. His project will increase traffic, raise rents and will be an eyesore to the surrounding residents, yet he insists that he should be able to bend the rules to his favor so he can profit from the land he purchased but does not intend to inhabit. He’s trying to convince us that he’s “one of us” and that he cares about our neighborhood, while he obviously has no intention of living here.