CC RES 1999-017 RESOLUTION NO. 99 - 17
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES ORDERING THE TRIMMING OF
FOLIAGE NOT SUBJECT TO VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT
NO. 17 IN ORDER TO RESTORE THE VIEW FROM 5715
CAPESWOOD DRIVE.
WHEREAS, on February 25, 1998, Mr. Ken Dyda, owner of property located at
5715 Capeswood Drive (herein "the appellant"), in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, filed
an application for a View Preservation Request ("Permit") to restore the view from his
property that he believed was significantly impaired by foliage on property owned by Mr.
Padam Singh (herein "the foliage owner) located at 5714 Wildbriar Drive, in the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes ("City"); and
WHEREAS, on February 26, 1998, Staff issued a Preliminary Determination Notice
which indicated that the VRP No. 17 permit specified foliage was in compliance with the
conditions of approval, and that the foliage not subject to VRP No. 17, did not, at the time
that the request was made, create a significant view impairment; and
WHEREAS, on March 25, 1998, at the applicant's request, the applicant, foliage
owner, City Staff, and View Restoration Commissioner Alan Green attended a meeting to
discuss the City's preliminary determination at which time both parties agreed to try and
reach an agreement on their own; and
WHEREAS, On June 8, 1998, the appellant notified Staff that the parties were
unable to finalize an agreement and requested that Staff proceed to the next step in the
process; and
WHEREAS, on June 23, 1998, Staff issued a Final Determination Notice which
indicated that the VRP No. 17 foliage as it existed on February 19, 1998, and the foliage
not subject to VRP No. 17, did not create a significant view impairment; and
WHEREAS, on July 6, 1998, the applicant filed an appeal of the Director's
decision; and
WHEREAS, notice of the View Restoration Commission ("Commission") hearing to
consider the appeal was mailed to the applicant, and foliage owner on August 12, 1998,
at least 30 days in advance of the hearing; and
WHEREAS, on September 17, 1998, after all voting members of the View
Restoration Commission had visited the site, the Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the request, at which time, all interested 9
were arties given an
p
opportunity to be heard and present evidence and the VRC approved VPR No. 1; and
WHEREAS, on October 1, 1998, within the fifteen day appeal period, Mr. Ken Dyda
appealed the Commission's decision to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Municipal
Code, the City Council held a public hearing on November 4, 1998 at which time all
interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence on the
notice of appeal; and
WHEREAS, after hearing all public testimony, and discussing the issues, the City
Council remanded VPR No. 1 back to the View Restoration Commission with direction to
reexamine the view preservation determination so that a uniform height for all foliage
(permit specified and non permit specified) could be achieved; and
WHEREAS, on January 7, 1999 after all voting members of the View Restoration
Commission had revisited the site, the Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to
consider the request, at which time, all interested parties were given an opportunity to be
heard and present evidence, the View Restoration Commission made all necessary
findings, and upheld its original determination made on September 17, 1998; and
WHEREAS, on January 20, 1999, within the fifteen day appeal period, Mr. Kenneth
Dyda, the applicant, appealed the Commission's decision to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Municipal
Code, the City Council held a public hearing on March 2, 1999, at which time all interested
parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence on the notice of
appeal, the City Council modified the January 7, 1999 decision of the View Restoration
Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The applicant at 5715 Capeswood Drive has a view, as defined by
Section 17.02.0 of the City's Development Code, of the Santa Monica Bay, the South Bay
Y
strand (coastline) and the Los Angeles basin.
Section 2: The applicant's viewing area, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's
Development Code, is shared from the kitchen, family room, dinin g room, livin g room and
deck.
Section 3: The applicant has a view that was not, at the time that the view
preservation request was made, significantly impaired by VRP No. 17 foliage, and was not
significantly impaired by foliage not subject to VRP No 17. g row Subsequently, the foliage did
Y g
into the applicant's view, constituting a significant view impairment. However, on or about
January 12, 1999, the foliage owner trimmed the foliage to eliminate the significant view
City Council Resolution 99-17
Page 2 of 4
impairment.
Section 4: The trees and/or foliage located on the rear slope and near the rear
property line, exceed the ridgeline of the foliage owners residence.
Section 5: The trees and/or foliage did not exist as view impairing vegetation when the
applicant's and foliage owner's lots were created. The lots were created in 1960. Statements
and photographs provided by the applicant show the tract as it was being graded after lot
creation in 1961. At that time, the lot was denuded of all vegetation. Additionally, based on
the photographic evidence, the foliage not subject to VRP No. 17 did not exist as view
impairing foliage in November, 1989.
Section 6: For the purposes of establishing significant view impairment, and to
eliminate potential conflicts between these parties, the applicant, Mr. Kenneth Dyda, has
agreed and acknowledged that a significant view impairment does not occur until the foliage
reaches the third rail up from the bottom of the deck. As part of the revision to the view frame,
and to allow some room and time for growth before the foliage will need to be trimmed again,
Mr. Dyda has requested that if the foliage owner allows the foliage to grow to the third rail,
then the foliage owner will be required to trim the foliage, at his expense, to the level of the
applicant's rear yard deck.
Section 7: The time within which the 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.
Section 8: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings
included in the Staff Report, Minutes and other records of proceedings, which are attached
hereto by reference, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby affirms the
View Restoration Commission's decision that a significant view impairment occurs when the
foliage reaches the third rail from the bottom of the deck and modifies the VRC's January 7,
1999 decision so that the foliage located on the rear slope of the property located at 5714
Wildbriar Drive, will be trimmed to the deck when it reaches the third rail from the bottom of
the applicant's rear yard deck.
City Council Resolution 99-17
Page 3 of 4
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED on the 16th day of March 1999.
1/ h 11 Jiikr.itor or
ayor 7 7
ATTEST:
c. l
'-,.id i - / /
—� -
City f lerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES )
I, Jo Purcell, City Clerk for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above
Resolution No. 99-17 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at
a regular meeting held on March 16th, 1999.
(11) / /
City lerk ,
City Council Resolution 99-17
Page 4 of 4