PC RES 2012-008 P.C. RESOLUTION NO, 2012-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING VIEW
RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 2012-00064 TO TRIM AND/OR
REMOVE FOLIAGE LOCATED AT 22 AND 24 NARCISSA
DRIVE.
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2012, Ms. Da'ad Makhlouf, owner of property located at 25
Narcissa Drive, (herein "the Applicant"), in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, filed an application
requesting a View Restoration Permit ("Permit") to restore a view from her property that she
believed to be significantly impaired by foliage owned by Ms. Corinne Gerrard at 22 Narcissa
Drive, and by Mr. Mark Paulucci at 24 Narcissa Drive (herein "the Foliage Owners"), in the City
of Rancho Palos Verdes ("City"); and,
WHEREAS, notice of the Planning Commission ("Commission") hearing was mailed to
the Applicant and the Foliage Owners on April 5, 2012; and,
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2012, 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.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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
Applicant at 25 Narcissa Drive has a view of the ocean, offshore Islands (Catalina & Santa
Barbara), coastline, Long Point, Abalone Cove, and portions of the Palos Verdes Nature
Preserve.
Section 2: The Applicant's viewing areas at 25 Narcissa Drive, as defined by Section
17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, are the living room, kitchen, dining room, guest
bedroom and master bedroom, with the primary viewing area being the living room.
Section 3: The Applicant at 25 Narcissa Drive has a view that is significantly impaired
by four(4) trees (Nos. 1-4) located at 24 Narcissa Drive.
Section 4: Finding "A" of the View Restoration Guidelines states: "The applicant has
complied with the early neighbor consultation process and has shown proof of cooperation on
his/her part to resolve conflicts." On November 21, 2011, Ms. Da'ad Makhfouf submitted a
Notice of Intent to File for View Restoration Application No. 2011-00064, which requested a pre-
application meeting with Mr. Mark Paulucci, and Corinne Gerrard, (the "Foliage Owners")
Foliage Owners at 24 Narcissa Drive and 22 Narcissa Drive, respectively. The applicant also
requested a pre-application meeting with Ms. Patricia Horan and Joan Bauer (trustee) foliage
owners at 28 Narcissa Drive, regarding their vacant lot known as APN 7572-017-014, located
next to 28 Narcissa Drive.
Therefore, in accordance with Section V (A) of the View Restoration Guidelines, the Applicant
has complied with the early neighbor consultation process,
P.C. Resolution 2012-08
Page 1 of 3
Section 5: Finding "B" of the View Restoration Guidelines states: "Foliage exceeding
sixteen (1 6) feet or the ridge line of the primary structure, whichever is lower, significantly
impairs a view from the applicant's viewing area, whether such foliage is located totally on one
property, or when combined with foliage located on more than one property." All of the foliage
that significantly impairs the view (Tree Nos. 1-4) exceeds 16 feet in height and the ridgeline of
the primary structure on the property at 24 Narcissa Drive. However, Staff has determined that
Tree Nos. 5 through 19 do not significantly impair the view. This is because the trees impair a
minimal portion of the overall view and/or are located towards or at the periphery of the view.
Section 6: Finding "C" of the View Restoration Guidelines states: "The foliage to be
removed is located on property, any part of which is less than one thousand (1,000) feet from
the applicant's property line." The Foliage Owners' properties at 22 and 24 Narcissa Drive are
located less than 1,000 feet from the Applicant's property at 25 Narcissa Drive, thus Finding "C"
can be made.
Section 7: Finding "D" of the View Restoration Guidelines states: "The foliage
significantly impairing the view did not exist as view impairing vegetation when the lot from
which the view is taken was created." Both of the Foliage Owners' lots were created in April
1948 by Tract No. 14500. The Applicant's lot was created in September 1951 by Tract No.
13836. Historic photos, one taken in 1951 and another sometime between 1949 and 1951
which show the trees at 24 Narcissa Drive already approximately 20 feet in height. Because of
the topography of the Applicant and Foliage Owner's properties, even a small tree would almost
immediately impair the Applicant's view. As such, the foliage significantly impairing the view
(Tree Nos. 1-4) existed as view impairing vegetation, when the lot from which the view is taken
was created.
Tree Nos. 5-10 are much smaller, and most likely did not impair the view when the lot from
which the view is taken was created.
Regarding the trees at 22 Narcissa Drive, historic photos taken in 1952 appear to show the
Eucalyptus tree (No. 18) at a relatively tall height, thus this tree likely existed as view impairing
vegetation, when the lot from which the view is taken was created. However, the other trees on
the property, (Nos. 11-17 & 19) appeared much smaller or were not visible at all in the historic
photos, and thus did not exist as view impairing vegetation, when the lot from which the view is
taken was created
Section 8: Finding "E" states: "Removal or trimming of the foliage will not cause an
unreasonable infringement of the privacy of the occupants of the property upon which the
foliage is located," As discussed in Sections 5 & 7, due to non-compliance with Findings "B"
and/or "U', respectively, no trimming or removal of any of the trees located at 22 and 24
Narcissa Drive will occur. As such, the finding "E" is not applicable.
Section 9: Finding "F" of the View Restoration Guidelines states: "For property 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 I 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."
P.C. Resolution 2012-08
Page 2 of 3
The subject properties are not located in the Miraleste Recreation and Park District. As such,
this finding does not apply.
Section 10: Pursuant to Section 15270 (a) of the California Environmental Quality Act,
the proposed project is statutorily exempt because CEQA does not apply to projects which a
public agency rejects or disapproves, and Staff is recommending that the Planning Commision
disapprove this View Restoration Permit based on Staff's lack of the ability to fully adopt findings
"B" and "D".
Section 11: Any interested person aggrieved of this decision or by any portion of this
decision may appeal to the City Council. Pursuant to Section 17.202.040 (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.
Section 12: Based 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 denies VRP2011-00064.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED on the 81h day of May 2012.
AYES: Commissioners Gerstner, Lewis, Nelson, Tomblin,
Vice Chairman Emenhiser, Chairman Tetreault
NOES: None
ABSTENTIONS: None
ABSENT: None
RECUSALS: Commissioner Leon
,v 'Paul Te result
Chairman
Joel Roj 'CP
Comma�ity evelophht Director
P.C. Resolution 2012-
Page 3 of 3