PC RES 2008-013 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-13
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING
VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 2006-00007 TO TRIM
OR REMOVE FOLIAGE AT 3067, 3069, AND 3071 CREST
ROAD.
WHEREAS, on September 11, 2007, Mr. and Mrs. Roza, owners of property
located at 3102 Corinna Drive, Mr. and Mrs. Peterson, owners of the property located at
3103 Dainora Drive, Mr. and Mrs. Beazeli, owners of property located at 3109 Dianora
Drive, Mr. and Mrs. Shepherd, owners of property located at 3117 Dianora Drive, Mr.
Hossein Sahabi, property owners at 3125 Dianora Drive, Mr. and Mrs. Hillinger,
property owner at 3131 Dianora Drive & Mr. and Mrs. Hanlon-Keller, owners of the
property located at 3139 Dianora Drive (herein "the Applicants"), in the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes, filed an application requesting a View Restoration Permit ("Permit") to
restore a view from their property that is significantly impaired by foliage owned by Mr.
and Mrs. Liehr at 3067 Crest Road, Dr. and Mrs. Wyman at 3069 Crest Road, and Mr.
and Mrs. O'Melveny at 3071 Crest Road (herein "the foliage owners"), in the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes ("City"); and,
WHEREAS, notice of the Planning Commission ("Commission") hearing was
published in the was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News and was mailed to
the Applicants and the foliage owners originally on September 20, 2007 and again on
November 7, 2007 to include the properties located at 3069 and 3071 Crest Road; and,
WHEREAS, on October 23, 2007, after all eligible voting members of the
Planning Commission had visited the sites, 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 and the item was continued to December
11, 2007 to allow Staff and the City Arborist to provide addition information; and,
WHEREAS, on November 9, 2007, City Staff met with the foliage owners at 3067
Crest Road and verified that they had voluntarily removed a view impairing Canary
Island Pine tree (Tree No. 3) and a view impairing Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 12); and,
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2007, after all eligible voting members of the
Planning Commission had visited the sites, 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 public hearing was closed and item
was continued to February 12, 2008 to allow Staff, City Attorney and the City Arborist to
provide addition information; and,
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2008, Staff informed the Commission that the
procedural rules following the closing of the public hearing on the matter on December
1045172-1 I P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
11, 2007, did not allow for further public comment on the matter or new information
could not be heard without re-noticing the public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, a re-notice of the Planning Commission ("Commission") hearing for
March 25, 2008 was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News on February 16,
2008, so as to allow the Planning Commission to consider for further public comment
and new information; and,
WHEREAS, on March 25, 2008, after all eligible voting members of the Planning
Commission had visited 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; and,
WHEREAS, Commissioners Perestarn and Ruttenberg each recused themselves
from participating in this case due to a conflict of interest,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Applicants at 3102 Corinna Drive & 3103, 3109, 3117, 3125,
3131, and 3139 Dianora Drive have a view, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the
City's Development Code, of the Los Angeles basin, Los Angeles harbor, and Ocean.
Section 2: The Applicant's viewing area at 3109 Dianora Drive, as defined by
Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, is from the dining room. The
Applicant's viewing area at 3117 Dianora Drive, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the
City's Development Code, is from the living room. The Applicants' viewing area at 3125
& 3139 Dianora Drive, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development
Code, is from the dining room and master bedroom. From 3131 Dianora Drive the view
is taken from both the living room and dining room. In addition, each property has an
outdoor patio view. From 3102 Corinna Drive and 3103 Dianora Drive, the view is taken
from the living room.
Section 3: The Applicants at 3102 Corinna Drive & 3103, 3109, 3117, 3125, and
3139 Dianora Drive have a view that is significantly impaired by twenty (20) trees and
one shrub located at 3067 Crest Road, seven (7) trees located at 3069 Crest Road, and
thirteen (13) trees located at 3071 Crest Road.
Section 4: Since May 12, 2006, the foliage owners attended meetings with the
City's View Restoration Mediator and City Staff. After more than a year of negotiation,
the Applicants informed the City that a private agreement could not be reached with the
foliage owner at 3067 Crest Road. Since a private agreement was not finalized with the
property owners at 3069 and 3071 Crest Road, the Applicants decided to include the
property owners at 3069 and 3071 Crest Road as part of the application request. Since
the Applicants and the foliage owners did not resolve the matter privately, the
1045172-1 2 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
Applicants were released to formally file the View Restoration application request.
Therefore, in accordance with Section V (A) of the View Restoration Guidelines, the
Applicants complied with the early neighbor consultation process.
Section : Based on evidence presented to the Commission, the Commission
hereby finds that the subject trees located at 3067, 3069 and 3071 Crest Road
significantly impair the Applicants' view. All of the aforementioned foliage recommended
by Staff to be trimmed or removed exceeds 16 feet in height or exceeds the ridgeline
height level of each of the foliage owners' residences located on their respective parcels
and significantly impairs the view from the Applicants' viewing areas.
Section a The foliage owners' properties at 3067, 3069 and 3071 Crest Road
are located within 1000 feet of the Applicants' properties at 3102 Corinna Drive and
3103, 3109, 3117, 3125, 3131, & 3139 Dianora Drive.
Section 7: The Applicants' lots, within Tract No. 25839 were created in May
1961, when the final subdivision map was recorded. The foliage owner's property at
3067 Crest Road (Liehr) was created in its current lot configuration when a deed was
recorded in August 1962. At the time the Applicants' lots were created in 1961, the
foliage owner's lot at 3067 Crest Road (Liehr) was part of a larger undeveloped lot. The
foliage owners' lots at 3069 and 3071 Crest Road (Wyman and O'Melveny,
respectively) were created in the mid-1960s from the aforementioned larger lot.
As shown in the 1962 oblique aerial photo (Exhibit G, of the October 23, 2007 Staff
Report), there are trees of medium-size growth along the westerly and northerly
property lines of the property at 3067 Crest Road, which are the three Eucalyptus trees
identified in the Staff Report as Tree nos. 19, 20, and 21, and these Eucalyptus trees
were at heights of 33 to 44 feet, which would have impaired the Applicants' viewing
areas to varying degrees in 1961 when their lots were created. Also, the 1962 oblique
aerial photo indicates that at the approximate time the Applicants' lots were created (in
1961), no trees existed on the northerly and westerly portions of the then larger lot,
which are now the properties located at 3069 and 3071 Crest Road (Wyman and
O' elveny, respectively).
Based on a careful examination of aerial photographs taken from 1945 to 1962, the
Planning Commission finds that other than trees 19, 20 and 21, the other trees that are
subject to this application (Trees 1-18 and 22-49) were not mature, view-impairing trees
in 1961 when the applicants' lots were created and, therefore, are subject to the
provisions of the View Restoration Ordinance.
The Planning Commission hereby finds that no action is ordered with respect to Trees
Nos. 31-34 and Tree No. 46, because they are not currently significantly impairing a
view from the applicants' properties.
Section A The recommended trimming or removal of the subject trees will not
cause an unreasonable infringement of the privacy of the occupants of the property
1045172-1 3 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
upon which the foliage is located because the portion of the foliage that impairs the view
is at a higher elevation than the foliage owners' rooflines. Therefore, trimming or
removal of the subject foliage will not cause an unreasonable infringement of the
privacy of the occupants of the property upon which the foliage is located.
Section 9: For properties located within the boundaries of the Miraleste
Recreation & Park district, the Committee shall also find that removal or trimming of the
foliage strikes a reasonable balance between meeting the purposes of section
17.02.040 set forth in Section 1 of the Ordinance approved by the voters on November
7, 1989, and preserving the historical development of the Miraleste Recreation & Park
District area with large numbers of trees. The subject properties are not located within
the Miraleste Recreation and Park District.
Section 10: Trimming and/or removing the subject trees, as identified in the
attached Conditions of Approval (Exhibit "A"), which are attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, is necessary in order to restore the applicants'
view.
Section 11: Pursuant to Section 15700 of the California Environmental Quality
Act, the proposed project is categorically exempt under Class 4 of that section because
the work required 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).
Section 12: The Planning Commission hereby rejects the legal arguments
advanced by the foliage owners that this application is barred by the statutes of
limitations set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure because statutes of
limitation apply to the filing of lawsuits in court, not to the City's administrative view
restoration process. The Planning Commission also rejects the arguments that this
application is barred by the equitable doctrines of laches, estoppel, unclean hands or by
the doctrine of implied agreement, which are defenses that typically are asserted in
lawsuits. The City's View Restoration Ordinance, which was adopted by the City's
voters, implements an important public policy of preserving views in the City, which
should not be undermined by the doctrine of estoppel. The doctrine of laches also
should not be applied to bar this administrative proceeding because the status quo has
not been altered during the time prior to the filing of this application to the detriment of
the foliage owners, whose foliage has remained on their properties and continued to
grow. Thus, the status quo has not been altered by the fact that the applicants did not
previously file an application with the City. The Ordinance allows a property owner to
file an application to restore his or her view in accordance with the City's procedures at
any time following the adoption of the Ordinance and does not establish a time limit for
a property owner to do so. Accordingly, the fact that a property owner did not previously
file an application with the City to restore a view does not imply that: (1) the property
owner has agreed that his or her view never should be restored; (2) the property owner
cannot avail himself or herself of the City's administrative process, or (3) the property
1045172-1 4 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
owner has acted in bad faith. For all of these reasons, the Planning Commission finds
that the legal arguments advanced by the foliage owners are unavailing.
Section 13: used on the foregoing information, and on the information and
findings included in the Staff report and evidence presented at the public hearing, the
Planning Commission hereby orders the trimming and/or removal of foliage at 3067
Crest Road in order to restore the view at 3102 Corinna Drive and 3103, 3109, 3117,
3125, 3131, & 3139 Dianora Drive, as provided in, and subject to, the conditions
outlined in the attached Exhibit "A".
USK= 14: Any interested person aggrieved of this decision or by any portion of
this decision may appeal to the City Council. Pursuant to Section 17.02.040 (C)(2)(g) of
the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, any such appeal must be filed with the City,
in writing and with the appropriate appeal fee, no later than fifteen (15) days following
the date of the Planning Commission's final action.
jection 16; For the foregoing reasons and based on information and findings
contained in the Staff Reports, minutes, and records of the proceedings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves View Restoration Permit No. 2006-00007 subject to the
Conditions of Approval contained in the attached Exhibit "A", which are necessary to
protect the public health, safety and welfare.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED on the 8th day of April 2008.
AYES: Commissioners Lewis, Knight, and Gerstner
NOES: commissioner Tetreault
ABSTENTIONS: Commissioner Tomblin
ABSENT:
RECUSALS: Chairman Perestam and Commissi, er ttenberg
Stephen Perestarn
Chairman
Joel,(,Roj s
Dire or f Planni
B j
uildin 8& Code Enforcement
1045172-1 5 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 2006-00007
1. Olive tree (labeled Tree No. 1):
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Roza site visit photo dated February 6, 2008 (Attached to February 12,
2008 Staff Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the tree. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting to
existing grade.
2. Pine tree (labeled Tree No. 2):
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Roza site visit photo dated February 6, 2008 (Attached to February 12,
2008 Staff Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis during
the cooler months of the year, November-March.
Or
Option: Remove the tree. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting to
existing grade.
3. Brachyton (labeled Tree No.4):
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Roza site visit photo (Attached to February 12, 2008 Staff Report).
Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the trees. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting
to existing grade.
4. Myaporurn (labeled Tree No. 5):
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Roza site visit photo dated February 6, 2008 (Attached to February 12,
2008 Staff Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
1045172-1 6 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
Option: Remove the tree. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting to
existing grade.
5. Yucca tree (labeled Tree No. 6):
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Roza site visit photo dated February 6, 2008 (Attached to February 12,
2008 Staff Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the tree. Tree removal shall include stump flush cuffing to
existing grade.
6. Rubber trees (labeled Tree No. 7 and 8):
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Roza site visit photo dated February 6, 2008 (Attached to February 12,
2008 Staff Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the trees. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting
to existing grade.
7. Bird of Paradise (labeled Tree No. 9)
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Peterson site visit photo (Attachment 3 of the December 11, 2007 Staff
Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the tree. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting to
existing grade.
8. Cedar tree (labeled Tree No. 10)
Remove the dying tree without a replacement tree.
9. Aleppo Pine trees (labeled Tree Nos. 11 &13)
Remove two (2) Aleppo Pine trees and replace with two (2) 24-inch box
size trees. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting to existing
grade.
1045172-1 7 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
10.Canary Island Pine trees (labeled 'free Nos. 14-15)
Raise crown and heavily lace remaining portion of trees during the cooler
months of the year, November-March. The crown raising height level shall
be based on the height level shown on site visit photo taken from the
Peterson view (Attachment 3 of the December 11, 2007 Staff Report).
Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove trees and replace with two (2) 24-inch box size trees.
Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting to existing grade.
11.Eucalyptus trees (labeled Tree Nos. 1 -17)
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Peterson site visit photo (Attachment 3 of the December 11, 2007 Staff
Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the trees. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting
to existing grade.
12.locust trees (labeled tree No. 1 )
Reduce trees so as not to exceed 6 feet in height. Said trimming shall
occur on a semi-annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the trees. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting
to existing grade.
13.Eucalyptus tree (labeled Tree No. )
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Roza site visit photo dated February 6, 2008 (Attached to February 12,
2008 Staff Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the tree. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting to
existing grade.
14.Eucalyptus tree (labeled Tree No. 3)
1045172-1 8 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Roza site visit photo dated February 6, 2008 (Attached to February 12,
2008 Staff Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the tree. Tree removal shall include stump flush cutting to
existing grade.
15.Pine tree (labeled Tree No. 24)
Reduce 1/3 of the tree crown and shape during the cooler months of the
year, November-February. Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
Or
Option: Remove the tree and replace with one 24-inch box size tree. Tree
removal shall include stump flush cutting to existing grade.
16.Fine tree (labeled Tree Nos. 5)
Heavily thin and selectively remove branches pursuant to the City
Arborist's recommendation to remove lateral branches that are '/ to 2/3
the size of the parent branch or all the way back to the stem. Said
trimming shall occur during the cooler months (November to February) of
the year and on an annual basis.
17.Pine trees (labeled Tree Nos. 26 and 7)
For the purposes of beetle eradication, defer trimming up to one year after
the initial trimming or removal occurs for Tree Nos. 24 and 25. Upon the
anniversary of said trimming, Tree Nos. 26 and 27 shall be heavily thinned
and selective branches shall be remove pursuant to the City Arborist's
recommendation to remove lateral branches that are Y2 to 2/3 the size of
the parent branch or all the way back to the stem. Said trimming shall
occur during the cooler months of the year (November to February) and
on an annual basis.
18.Eucalyptus trees (labeled Tree Nos. 28-30)
Remove trees and replace with three (3) 24-inch box size trees. Tree
removal shall include stump flush cutting to existing grade.
19.Eucalyptus tree (labeled Tree No. )
1045172-1 9 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
Remove tree and replace with one 24-inch box size tree. Tree removal
shall include stump flush cutting to existing grade.
20.Ash tree (labeled Tree No. 37)
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Peterson site visit photo (Attachment 3 of the December 11, 2007 Staff
Report), which is approximately 10-15 feet. Said trimming shall occur on
an annual basis.
21.Pine tree (labeled Tree No. 38)
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Peterson site visit photo (Attachment 3 of the December 11, 2007 Staff
Report). Said trimming shall occur during the cooler months of the year
(November to February) and on an annual basis.
22.Sweet Shade tree (labeled Tree No. 39)
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Peterson site visit photo (Attachment 3 of the December 11, 2007 Staff
Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
23.Jacaranda tree (labeled Tree No® 4 )
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Peterson site visit photo (Attachment 3 of the December 11, 2007 Staff
Report). Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
24.Pine tree (labeled Tree o® 41)
Reduce crown and shape to restore the view based on the height level
indicated in the Peterson site visit photo (Attachment 3 of the December
11, 2007 Staff Report). Said trimming shall occur during the cooler months
of the year, November-February. Said trimming shall occur on an annual
basis.
25.Cedar tree (labeled Tree No. 42)
Heavily thin tree. Said trimming shall occur during the cooler months of the
year, November-February. Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
26.Causuarina tree (labeled Tree Nos. 44)
Reduce crown to restore the view based on the height level indicated in
the Peterson site visit photo (Attachment 3 of the December 11, 2007 Staff
1045172-1 10 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
Report). Said trimming shall occur during the cooler months of the year,
November-February. Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
27.Causuarina trees (labeled Tree Nos. 43 & 45)
If found to impair the Peterson view, reduce crowns to restore the view no
lower than the height level indicated in the Peterson site visit photo
(Attachment 3 of the December 11, 2007 Staff Report). Said trimming
shall occur during the cooler months of the year, November-February.
Said trimming shall occur on an annual basis.
28.Redwood trees (labeled Tree Nos. 47& 48)
Heavily thin tree Nos. 47 and 48. The initial trimming shall occur during the
cooler months of the year, November-February. Should additional pruning
be needed in order to preserve the view after the initial thinning is
preformed, said pruning shall occur every 3 years.
29.Pine tree (labeled Tree No. 49)
Reduce crown and shape to restore the view based on the height level
indicated in the Peterson site visit photo (Attachment 3 of the December
11, 2007 Staff Report). Said trimming shall occur during the cooler months
of the year, November- February. Said trimming shall occur on an annual
basis.
Or
Remove tree and replace with one 24-inch box size tree. Tree removal
shall include stump flush cutting to existing grade.
30.Upon completion of said tree trimming and removal, if additional trees (trees
other than Tree Nos. 1-49) on the subject properties are found to be impairing
the view, than the view impairing foliage shall be trimmed to a height as not to
impair the view from the applicants' properties and the applicants shall be
responsible for the additional trimming costs.
31.The foliage owner shall be responsible to maintain the foliage in such a manner
as to not significantly impair the applicant's view by trimming the foliage specified
in this permit on an annual basis, or as specified above, if different, beginning
one year after the initial trimming of the foliage is completed and verified by Staff.
32.If any tree or shrub that is ordered to be culled, laced, or trimmed dies within one
year of the initial work being performed due to the performance of the work, the
applicants or any subsequent owner of the applicant's property shall be
responsible for providing a replacement tree or shrub to the foliage owner and for
1045172-1 11 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
the removal of the dead tree or shrub, which shall include stump flush cutting, if
feasible, to or as close to existing grade as possible. This time period may be
extended by the Commission if evidence is provided by a certified arborist that a
longer monitoring period is necessary for a specific type of tree or shrub.
However, if the city arborist determines that culling, lacing, or trimming said tree
or shrub will in all probability cause the tree or shrub to die, and the foliage owner
chooses not to accept removal and replacement as an option, either in writing or
in public testimony during the public hearing, then the applicants will not be
responsible for providing a replacement tree or shrub to the foliage owner. The
replacement foliage shall be provided in accordance with the specifications
described in section WE (Commission Action) of these Guidelines. If the work is
performed by the foliage owner himself or herself (instead of a licensed
landscape or licensed tree service), said foliage owner shall forfeit the right to
replacement foliage if the trimmed tree dies. If a tree or shrub dies it is subject to
removal pursuant to Section 8.24.060 (property maintenance) of the RPV
Municipal.
33.The applicants shall present to the City, at least one itemized estimate to carry
out the aforementioned work. Such estimate is to be supplied by a licensed
landscape or licensed tree service contractor, acceptable to the City, which
provides insurance certificates in a form acceptable to the City, and shall include
all costs of cleanup and removal of debris and the cost to have an ISA certified
tree trimmer or accredited arborist on site to perform or supervise the work being
done. In addition, the applicants shall pay to the City an amount equal to the City
accepted estimate and such funds shall be maintained in a City trust account
until completion of work as verified by City Staff.
34.The foliage owner shall select a contractor from the estimate(s) provided by the
applicant or another licensed firm of their choice subject to approval by the City,
to perform the required work. However, the foliage owner shall only be
reimbursed for the amount of the lowest bid submitted by the applicant. If the
foliage owner chooses to do the required work himself or herself (instead of a
licensed landscape or licensed tree service), then the foliage owner shall not be
compensated from the trust account and the amount in the trust account shall be
refunded to the applicants.
35.The applicants may reduce the scope of the trimming required by this Permit by
giving the City and the foliage owner written notice of such decision within 3
days of this approval. The applicant shall deposit funds to the City in a trust
account in an amount sufficient to cover the remaining work. However, trimming
or removal of the vegetation that the applicant has chosen to eliminate would
then require an entirely new View Restoration application and fee.
36.The applicants may withdraw the view restoration request and the trust account
funds if the applicant does so within five ( ) days after the applicants send the
estimate required herein. In the event that the applicants withdraw the request in
1045172-1 12 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
a timely manner, the foliage owner is not required to perform the work specified
by this Permit and this Permit is of no further force and effect.
37.The foliage owner shall, no later than 90 days after the Notice of Approval (First
Notice by the City that applicants have satisfactory complied with all
requirements of Condition of Approval No. 33) is mailed, complete the work to
the extent required by this Permit and shall maintain the vegetation to a height
that will not impair the view from the applicant's property in the future as specified
in these Conditions of Approval. If any foliage owner herein does not complete
the required work as specified within 90 days of the issuance of the Notice of
Approval, then the City of Rancho Palos Verdes will authorize a bonded tree
service to perform the work at the subject property and at the foliage owner's
expense. In the event that the City is required to perform the work at the foliage
owner's expense, the City shall reimburse the applicant from the City trust
account not later than 30 days after the expiration of the time period stipulated
above.
38.Upon completion of the work, the foliage owner shall notify the City and shall
submit a copy of a paid invoice showing that the work was performed. Upon
submittal of the invoice and verification by City Staff of compliance, the City shall
transmit the funds from the City trust account to the foliage owner not later than
30 days after receipt of the appropriate billing as verified by City Staff. If the paid
invoice submitted by the foliage owner is for an amount less than the funds in the
City's trust account, the foliage owner shall only be transmitted an amount equal
to the actual cost of the trimming. In such situations, the balance of the trust
account shall be refunded back to the applicant (within 30 days of receipt of the
appropriate billing) or applied to the applicant's permit processing account, if that
account contains a negative balance. If the paid invoice submitted by the foliage
owner is for an amount that exceeds the funds in the City's trust account, the
foliage owner shall only receive the funds from the City trust account and the
foliage owner shall be responsible for paying the difference
39.If the required work as specified herein is not completed within the stipulated time
periods, then the City of Rancho Palos Verdes will utilize the City's code
enforcement process to authorize a bonded tree service to perform the work at
the subject property at the foliage owner's expense, and the applicant's deposit
will be refunded. In the event that the City is required to perform the work, the
foliage owner will be billed for all City expenses incurred in enforcing the View
Restoration order and a lien or assessment may be recorded against the foliage
owner's property if the invoice is not paid.
40.Subsequent to the trimming or removal of the foliage, the restored view from
each applicant's property shall be documented by Staff. The photographic
documentation shall be kept on file at the Planning, Building and Code
Enforcement Department and used as a benchmark by City Staff for making a
determination of significant view impairment in any future view preservation
1045172-1 13 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
enforcement actions. If foliage not subject to this View Restoration Permit should
grow up and impair the documented view, said new foliage shall be considered
significant view impairing foliage and shall be trimmed by the foliage owner to
match the view shown on the documented photograph.
1045172-1 14 P.C. Resolution 2008-13
April 8, 2008
Exhibit D — Tree Trimming Levels Tree
No. 15
"ors,
Free No. 19 'Free No. 20
(No Action) (No Action) Tree
, Tree No.42 No. 14 Tree No. 24
•
44 Tree I �
O'Melveny \ l' Wyman
No. 10 ��� -�
Cedar Aleppo Pine . ___4
loakolio,ivi,w-t.: � � Tree�. TreeTree i o. 36 "` .,« No. 7 Tree
Tree No. 47 A
O'Melven}' - , ' ,. No. 5
O'Melveny � No. 1
ktt1C"al ails y4 M + "" ' `
'.-,-.. . ,
Redwood(1) \ : I� :� '` ( ►;vv ,i .4, . 4
4• , j G a �4
r *NF
..� ...•A_ �Ir_ 'Re �. _r_.•--'w�_' r j� ,,, a ..d7 ' "s'F
g T,
� Ms`
r , +y
�—`"�. Z
rte a < ", . te ft r .�P"•'
}
,,.. ,. d 4 w�"S a'.. i p�.. _ r 10,-
'71.' t r
ice: ,i.:,,,-.�1F �j kts4,,,, : V
1,11,
�� • w., Y "• 2: 4 • y •` La
,,:-�h "' f.,t,P „ e 3�''ti.'•.�r.i„,-k ,a sic A. -F'. .."`.3L f t�', *'ql "" .rv.....
.;-, .
4.64-
.. �, r y
� 4
>
L.
' - . -.4 ", ,' 'if,* '.-. "l'.,,,, iiii ,j,....„ i . , 4,,, -,ttj,ixa,,A.; .,-::, .. ,,,,,_ , .
4.,9rø
t` ' 7-1:-;:',,,, . ,4, ,,, .
d * ,,rc �f. 4 *"�71,p•y , kt },,—'r Tripf Trees) � - � ��'`'
Tree
• ;a t Tree
4
- F i, e . , r ' ;'1. : = No. 23
dl!
„lei
tit% 4. l', ,,--5,..fr'..7*,..i./ „'. , ' 4,0k.
yyyFFF I+. ,
,,,,, ,,
From the viewing area at 3103 Dianora Drive- Peterson
Roza site visit photo dated Januar 6, 200 s -- Tree No. 31
,� Tree No. 10 Wyman Redwoods
- Tree .
�,--
(cedar)
No.
Canary Isla Tree No. 24 Tree No. 32-34
Tree No. 11
Tree No. 15 (now Wyman Wyman Redwoods
(Aleppo) exposed as Tree free Aleppo Pine
a
no.
has been ` Tree No• 7
__.
removed)
No. 8
,, 1 1't'
l
No. 1
,.,
1
yrc_ ., \ \, It,.
,
p ..° r 4
,,,,,f 4 .. I
f,''' ti ` ree trimming
n
v
_. fight level
% a _ %}- Tree
.
Tree
f. No. 5
f, F
' - . w. -'r - Tree No. 4
� ,, ,,,. ., � # Tree
No. 6
,. t No. 2 —
,iih. . ft/04
'. ....orlo. ,,,,, .� \ Tree o• 22
4 - 111, .,. ......„..,,..,...,
,...i, Iii - _
...74 ,-, -
Tree No. 23
-1,----__re ii.,,A, . , ../,
____ ______ _
.2, . . .
........ ......._, _ .
,..---- •
. ,
......„,. .....
, ,, \
. ,
•
4„ .
From the viewing area at 3102 Corinna Drive- Roza
View Restoration Permit Guidelines and Procedures
September 19, 2006
owner will be billed for all City expenses incurred in enforcing the View Restoration
order. If the foliage owner does not pay the invoice, a lien or assessment may be
recorded against the foliage owner's property, pursuant to Title 8, Chapter 24 of the
Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code.
Vill. APPEAL OF COMMISSION DECISION
A. A decision of the Commission on a view related permit is appealable to the
City Council. After considering the written and oral testimony at the appeal hearing, the
City Council may take one of the following actions:
1. Affirm the decision of the Planning Commission and approve the
application upon finding that all applicable findings have been correctly made and all
provisions of Section 17.02.040(C)(2) of the Municipal Code have been complied with;
or
2. Approve the application but impose additional or different conditions as
the City Council deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of Section 17.02.040(C)(2); or
3. Disapprove the application upon finding that all applicable findings
cannot be made or all provisions of Section 17.02.040(C)(2) have not been complied
with; or
4. Refer the matter back to the Planning Commission to conduct further
proceedings. The remanded proceedings may include the presentation of significant
new evidence which was raised in conjunction with the appeal. The City Council shall
state the ground(s) for the remand and shall give instructions to Planning Commission
concerning any error found by the City Council in the Commission's prior determination.
B. The appeal hearing may be conducted in a room other than the regular City
Council chambers (e.g. the Fireside Room at the Hesse Park Community Center). The
establishment of specific time allotments for speakers is optional and may be set or
waived by the Mayor at the Mayor's discretion. The room may be arranged in a manner
that promotes a "round table" discussion among the involved parties.
Vill. VIEW PRESERVATION
With regard to foliage obstructing a view after the issuance of a View Restoration
Permit or upon the effective date of the Ordinance (November 17, 1989), Section
17.02.040(5)(3) of the Municipal Code states:
"Foliage Obstruction. No person shall significantly impair a view from a
viewing area of a lot:
a. By permitting foliage to grow to a height exceeding the height
determined by the View Restoration or Planning Commission
Page 22
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, California Page 1 of 1
g.The applicant,the owner of the property where the foliage is located,or any other interested person may appeal the decision of
the view restoration commission to the city council by filing with the city clerk a written notice of appeal,including the grounds for
the appeal,and any specific action being requested by the appellant,together with the appeal fee established by resolution of the
city council,within fifteen calendar days after the view restoration commission adopts the resolution setting forth its decision.The
decision of the view restoration commission is final if no appeal is filed within fifteen calendar days.If such an appeal is timely and
properly filed,a copy of the findings of the view restoration commission and all materials on file with the director shall be
transmitted to the city council,which shall be part of the appeal hearing record,together with the notice of appeal and any other
written materials submitted by interested parties.Additional written materials shall be submitted to the city clerk at least seven
calendar days prior to the date that the appeal will be heard by the city council.
Upon receiving the notice of appeal,the city clerk shall schedule the matter for review at a forthcoming meeting of the city council.
At the city council meeting,oral testimony shall be limited to five minutes in length for each of the parties whose properties are
affected by the decision and two minutes per person for other individuals.Oral testimony shall be limited to the issues raised in the
written appeal.At the conclusion of the oral presentation,the city council may do one of the following:
L Affirm the decision of the view restoration commission and approve the application upon finding that all applicable findings have
been correctly made and all provisions of subsection(C)(2)of this section are complied with;
ii.Approve the application but impose additional or different conditions as the city council deems necessary to fulfill the purposes
of subsection(C)(2)of this section;
iii.Disapprove the application upon finding that all applicable findings cannot be made or all provisions of subsection(C)(2)of this
section have not been complied with;or
iv. Refer the matter back to the view restoration commission to conduct further proceedings.The remanded proceedings may
include the presentation of significant new evidence which was raised in conjunction with the appeal.The city council shall state
the ground(s)for the remand and shall give instructions to the view restoration commission concerning any error found by the city
council in the commission's prior determination.
http://palosverdes.com/rpv/cityclerk/mun idatabase/detail.cfm?this_title=17&this section=040&thi... 4/9/2008