Loading...
CC RES 2011-050 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011-50 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES OVERTURNING PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-18 WHICH REQUIRED THE REMOVAL OF ONE CITY TREE AND THE TRIMMING OF NINE CITY TREES TO ELIMINATE THE SIGNIFICANT VIEW IMPAIRMENT CAUSED BY THE TREES TO FOUR PROPERTIES AND INSTEAD REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF ALL TEN TREES. WHEREAS, on October 16, 2008, Mr. Joseph Yousefpour and Mr. Larry Marinovich, owners of property located at 7306 and 7315 Berry Hill Drive, respectively, (herein "the Applicants"), in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes ("City"), filed an application requesting approval of a City Tree Review Permit ("Permit") to restore a view from their properties that is significantly impaired by ten (10) City-owned Canary Island Pine Trees, located in the public right-of-way on Via Cambron, adjacent to 30405, 30327 and 30317 Via Cambron and 7313 Via Collado, and in the public right-of-way on Via Collado, adjacent to 7313 Via Collado, and on Berry Hill Drive adjacent to 30303 Via Cambron in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes; and, WHEREAS, On May 28, 2009, pursuant to the Code provisions governing the processing of City Tree Review Permits, the Director made a preliminary determination, finding that the ten (10) Canary Island Pine Trees significantly impair the view from the applicants' viewing areas and approved CTRP2008-00031, requiring the removal of the ten (10) Trees. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes mailed to surrounding residents this preliminary determination of approval and Notice of Decision approving a request to remove the Trees because they significantly impair the ocean and Catalina Island view from the viewing areas of the applicants located at 7306, and 7315 Berry Hill Drive; and, WHEREAS, during the period from May 2009 through August 2009, several residents of Via Cambron and Via Collado who received the Director's preliminary determination of approval and several who did not, submitted correspondence commenting on this preliminary report; and, WHEREAS, on February 12, 2010, the Director determined that the issues raised by these residents did not constitute grounds under the City's ordinance to warrant an administrative denial of the City Tree Review Permit application, and issued a Final Notice of Decision for Tree Nos. 4- 10, with the modifications of eliminating Tree Nos. 1-3 from the application and allowing the potential adoption of Tree Nos. 5, 7 and 10. This Final Notice was mailed to the original 14 residents who received the preliminary staff report, the applicants, and all other residents who submitted comments on the preliminary staff report; and, WHEREAS, on March 2, 2010, Mrs. Nancy Parsons, Ms. Marjorie C. Carter, and Mr. Michael O'Sullivan submitted an appeal to overturn the Director's decision; and, WHEREAS, after notice issued on April 8, 2010 pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on April 27, 2010, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and, WHEREAS, at the Planning Commission hearing on April 27th, 2010, the Planning Commission modified Staff's recommendation, recommending that all seven Trees be trimmed down out of the Catalina Island view (horizon level) as viewed from the Marinovich viewing area at 7315 Berry Hill Drive, with the exception of Tree No. 4, (if the residents directly adjacent to Tree No. 4 continued to object to its adoption). The Planning Commission stated that adoption agreements must be prepared prior to the Trees being trimmed, and that after the Trees are trimmed, Staff should schedule the item to return to the Planning Commission. At this follow-up meeting, the Planning Commission would determine if the trimming eliminated the significant view impairment from the applicant's viewing areas, and if not, could require one or more of the trimmed Trees to be removed. The Planning Commission also stated that if there were additional applicants who withdrew from the initial application process, they should be allowed to have their views assessed after the trimming is completed as well. Staff was to make the revisions to the Resolution and bring it back to the next Planning Commission meeting for formal approval; and, WHEREAS, as a result of the Planning Commission recommendation at the April 27th meeting, Staff realized that there were two issues with the Planning Commission direction that would require additional work by Staff to resolve. Staff drafted a memo to the Planning Commission, requesting that Staff be allowed to delay bringing back the Planning Commission's revised resolution for formal approval. These two issues were 1) how to address views from other potential applicants' properties under this same application, (i.e., review the views prior to after the initial trimming), and 2) that Municipal Code Section 17.76.100.F.1.c.iv requires that the abutting neighbor must agree in writing when the tree directly abutting their property is proposed to be adopted, and Staff only had the written disagreement of one abutting resident. The Planning Commission received and filed this report on May 11, 2010; and, WHEREAS, after noticed issued on November 25, 2010 pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on December 14, 2010, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard at the December 14, 2010 meeting and present evidence; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed the matter, heard public testimony and gave Staff direction regarding Staff's recommendations and requested that the resolution containing the amended recommendation be brought back to the Commission for review and approval at the next Planning Commission meeting; and, WHEREAS, a resolution was presented to the Planning Commission at the meeting of January 11, 2011 for the approval of CTRP2008-00031, as amended, and this Resolution (Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-01) was approved and signed by the Chairman of the Planning Commission; and, WHEREAS, P.C. Resolution 2011-01 was not appealed within the 15-day appeal period and so was made final at 5:30pm on January 26, 2011; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 17.80.120 of the Municipal Code, and P.0 Resolution 2011-01, the appellants and other contributors to the appeal fee had the full cost of the appeal ($2,255.00) refunded to them within 30 days of the January 11, 2010 meeting; and, WHEREAS, per Condition No. 6 of P.C. Resolution 2011-01, signed and notarized adoption covenants for Tree Nos. 1-10 were submitted to Staff by 12:00pm on February 15, 2011; and, WHEREAS, per Condition No. 9 of P.C. Resolution 2011-01, on February 14, 2011 and February 23, 2011, the City had a biologist inspect Tree Nos. 1-10 to determine whether there was an active nest(s) in any of the trees. The biologist identified one nest in Tree No. 8, but this nest was not active; and, WHEREAS, as no active nests were found in Tree Nos. 1-10, per the requirements of Condition No. 9 of P.C. Resolution 2011-01, the City's contracted tree trimming company, West Coast Arborists, Inc., completed the trimming of Tree Nos. 1-10 on February 17, 18 and 24, 2011; and, Resolution No. 2011-50 Page 2 of 4 WHEREAS, in February 2011, Staff observed the views and took photographs of the trimmed trees from the applicants' viewing areas; and, WHEREAS, per Condition No. 8 of P.C. Resolution No. 2011-01, Staff scheduled a duly noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission for the sole purpose of determining if the tree trimming as described above has eliminated the significant view impairment for the four applicants; and, WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was issued on March 24, 2011 pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, a draft Resolution was presented to the Planning Commission for approval and signature at the Planning Commission meeting of April 12, 2011; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved Planning Commission Resolution 2011-18 on April 12, 2011, which stated, among other things, that the trimming of the ten trees had eliminated the significant view impairment from the applicants' properties; and, WHEREAS, an appeal of P.C. Resolution 2011-18 was submitted on April 27, 2011 by Mr. Larry Marinovich, property owner at 7315 Berry Hill Drive, Mr. Joseph Yousefpour, property owner at 7306 Berry Hill Drive, Mr. James Morrison, 7284 Berry Hill Drive; and, WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was issued on June 16, 2011 pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, and a draft Resolution was presented to the City Council for approval and signature at the City Council meeting of July 5, 2011. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: As defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, the Applicants at 7306 Berry Hill Drive, 7315 Berry Hill Drive, 7284 Berry Hill Drive and 7333 Berry Hill Drive have a view of the Ocean and Catalina Island. Section 2: The Applicant's viewing area at 7306 Berry Hill Drive, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, is from the living room/dining room. The Applicant's viewing area at 7315 Berry Hill Drive, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, is from the living room. The Applicant's viewing area at 7284 Berry Hill Drive, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, is from the dining area next to the kitchen. The Applicant's viewing area at 7333 Berry Hill Drive, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, is from the living room. Section 3: The completion of the initial trimming by the City of the ten (10) City-owned, and privately-adopted Canary Island Pine Trees located on Via Cambron, Via Collado & Berry Hill Drive has eliminated the significant view impairment from the four applicant's properties located at 7306, 7315, 7284 and 7333 Berry Hill Drive. Section 4: Based on new information obtained from the Public Works Department that the trees are indeed damaging the public right-of-way including streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, the City council determines that Tree Nos. 1-10 are indeed damaging the public right-of-way and thus per Municipal Code Section 17.76.100.F.1.c.iii, cannot be adopted and trimmed and thus must be removed and replaced. Section 5: Pursuant to Section 15304 of the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project is categorically exempt under Class 4 of that section because the work required Resolution No. 2011-50 Page 3 of 4 to restore the Applicants' view does not include the removal of scenic and mature Trees as identified by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan (Visual Aspects; Figure 41). This finding, demonstrates that the decision complies with the provisions of CEQA because the decision does not cause any significant adverse environmental impacts. Since the subject Trees are not considered to be scenic or mature Trees as identified in the City's General Plan, the environmental impacts due to removal are insignificant. Section 6: For the foregoing reasons and based upon the information presented at the public hearing, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves the appeal, thereby overturning the Planning Commission's approval of P.C. Resolution 2011-18, thereby finding that Tree Nos. 1-10 be removed and replaced with 24-inch box size trees, the variety and number of which shall be determined by the Public Works Department. Section 7: The time within which judicial review of the decision reflected in this Resolution, if available, must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure and other applicable short periods of limitation. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July 2011. J 1 Mayor Attest: &AL__ / , // `r City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )ss CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ) I, Carla Morreale, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2011-50 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on July 5, 2011 &i 6-,t. r , i City Clerk Resolution No. 2011-50 Page 4 of 4