PC RES 2003-064PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-64
" • • i "i IL I 10 LCK4 0101• 0i
• • " i • y • • � y i • • •
i l 1 � • y � r �•
WHEREAS, on May 14, 2003, Mr Naveen Reddy, owner of property located at 14
Amber Sky 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 his
property that is significantly Impaired by foliage owned by Mr. and Mrs. Cook, at 19 Amber
Sky Drive, Mr. and Mrs Velken, at 17 Amber Sky Drive and Mr. and Mrs Watanabe, at 15
Amber Sky Drive (herein "the foliage owner"), 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 September 19, 2003; and,
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2003, after all 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
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The applicant at 14 Amber Sky Drive has a view, as defined by Section
17 02 040 of the City's Development Code, of the ocean and Catalina Island.
Section 2: The applicant's viewing area, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the
City's Development Code, is from the living room of 14 Amber Sky Drive
Section 3: The applicant has a view that is significantly impaired by three (3) trees
located at 19 Amber Sky Drive, twelve (12) trees at 17 Amber Sky Drive and five (5) trees
at 15 Amber Sky Drive
Section 4: On March 26, 2003 the applicant and the foliage owners attended a
pre -application meeting with the City After several months of negotiation, the applicant
informed the City that an agreement could not be reached with the foliage owners. Since
the applicant and the foliage owners could not resolve the matter privately, the applicant
was released to formally file the View Restoration application request Therefore, in
accordance with Section V of the View Restoration Guidelines, the applicant has
complied with the early neighbor consultation process.
W Wiew RestorationWRP Cases1151 - 1601157 - Reddy\PC Resolution2003_64 doc
PC Resolution 2003-64
December 11, 2003
Section 5: Based on evidence provided by the applicant, the subject trees located
at 15, 17, & 19 Amber Sky Drive significantly impair the applicant's view All of the
subject foliage exceeds the height of the ridgeline of the primary structure or 16 feet and
significantly impairs the view from the applicant's viewing area
Section 6: The subject properties, 15, 17, & 19 Amber Sky Drive are located within
1000 feet of the applicant's property
Section 7: All of the properties that are a part of this application were created in
1961 under Tract No 25817 (Exhibit F). When the subject lots were created, the tract
was stripped of all vegetation during the mass grading Standard grading procedures
require all vegetation to be stripped and removed Therefore the subject foliage did not
exist before the creation of the applicant's lot.
Section 8: The recommended trimming of the subject trees will not increase the
visibility of the foliage owners' residences from the applicant's property The portion of the
foliage that impairs the view is either above the foliage owners' rooflines or 16 feet in
height. in addition, most of the foliage on the properties located at 15 and 17 Amber Sky
Drive is located in the rear yard The foliage located on the front yard will not be trimmed
below the 16 feet or the ridgeline of the foliage owner's residence. Therefore, trimming
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: Trimming, removing or lacing the subject trees as identified in the
attached Conditions of Approval (Exhibit "A"), is necessary in order to restore the
applicant's view
Section 10: 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 applicant's 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 11: 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 orders the trimming, removal and/or lacing of foliage at 15,
17, & 19 Amber Sky Drive in order to restore the view at 14 Amber Sky Drive, as provided
in, and subject to, the conditions outlined in the attached Exhibit "A"
Section 12. 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
W \View Restoration\VRP Cases\151 - 160\157 - Reddy\PC Resolution20o3 64 doc
P C Resolution 2003-64
December 11, 2003
Section 13. 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. 157 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 11th day of December 2003
AYES Commissioners Mueller, Lyon, Cartwright, and Cote
NOES None
ABSTENTIONS None
ABSENT Commissioner Duran Reed
V
t.
Craig Mueller
Vice -Chairman
irecttr of PlannW
uildi0a & Code Enforcement
WAView Restoration\VRP Cases\1 51 - 160\157 - Reddy\PC Res doc PC Resolution 2003- 61f
December 11, 2003
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO 157
1. Palm tree (labeled Tree No. 5) located at 19 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim the lower palm fronds by removing the lower fronds The upper palm fronds
shall remain to grow above the view.
2 Palm tree (labeled Tree No. 6) located at 19 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim the lower palm fronds by removing the lower fronds The upper palm fronds
shall remain to grow above the view.
3 Palm tree (labeled Tree No. 7) located at 19 Amber Sky Drive:
Upon completion of the tree trimming requirements for trees No. 5 and No 6, as
stated in the conditions above, Staff will re-evaluate the view impairment, if any,
created by this subject tree If the subject tree is found to significantly impair the view
from 14 Amber Sky Drive, then the foliage owner shall trim the subject tree down to
a 16 -foot level (as measured from base) or to the level of the foliage owner's (Cook)
roofline (ridgeline), whichever is lower
4 Aleppo Pine tree (labeled Tree No. 10) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim tree by heavily lacing crown
5. Pepper tree (labeled Tree No. 11) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
Remove tree and require one replacement tree.
6 Canary Island Pine tree (labeled Tree No. 12) located at 17 Amber Sky
Drive:
Trim the tree by removing the lower branches and foliage (crown raise) up to a level
that is two (2) feet above the level of the ocean horizon indicated by the solid red line
in Exhibit C.
7 Eucalyptus tree (labeled Tree No. 13) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
W.\View Restoration\VRP Cases\151 - 160\157 - Reddy\PC Resolution2003_64 doc
PC Resolution 2003-64
December 11, 2003
Trim the tree by removing the lower branches and foliage (crown raise) up to a
level that is two (2) feet above the level of the ocean horizon indicated by the
solid red line in Exhibit C
8. Unknown type of trees (possibly coffee berry trees) (labeled Tree Nos. 14 &
15) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim trees down to 16 -foot level (as measured from base) or to the level of the
foliage owner's (Velken) roofline, whichever is lower
9 Eucalyptus tree (labeled Tree No. 16) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
Remove tree and require one replacement tree
10 Pine tree (labeled Tree No. 17) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
Remove tree and require one replacement tree
11 Olive tree (labeled Tree No. 18) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim tree down to the level of the foliage owner's (Velken) roofline (ridgeline)
12. Pine tree (labeled Tree No. 19) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim tree down to the level of the foliage owner's (Velken) roofline (ridgeline)
13. Pine tree (labeled Tree No. 20) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim tree down to the level of the foliage owner's (Velken) roofline (ridgeline)
14 Sycamore tree (labeled Tree No. 22) located at 17 Amber Sky Drive:
Reduce the crown of the tree 4 feet and heavily lace
15 Olive tree (labeled Tree No. 24) located at 15 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim tree by heavily lacing crown
16. Olive tree (labeled Tree No. 25) located at 15 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim tree by heavily lacing crown
W Mew Restoration\VRP Cases\1 51 - 160\157 - Reddy\PC Resolution2003-64 doc
PC Resolution 2003-64
December 11, 2003
*113
17. Olive tree (labeled Tree No. 26) located at 15 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim tree by heavily lacing crown
18 Olive tree (labeled Tree No. 27) located at 15 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim tree by heavily lacing crown
19. Olive tree (labeled Tree No. 28) located at 15 Amber Sky Drive:
Trim tree by heavily lacing crown
20 Upon completion of said trimming, if additional foliage on the subject properties is
found to be significantly impairing the view, than the offending foliage shall be
trimmed to a height as not to impair the view from the applicant's property
21 The foliage owners 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.
22 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
applicant or any subsequent owner of the applicant's property shall be
responsible for providing a replacement tree or shrub to the foliage owner. 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
applicant 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, 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.
23 The selection of the type of replacement foliage shall be made by the foliage
owner from an approved list of foliage types provided by the Director of Planning
Building and Code Enforcement or approved by the City View Restoration
arbonst
W Mew Restoration\VRP Cases\151 - 160\157 - Reddy\PC Resolution2003_64 doc
PC Resolution 2003-64
December 11, 2003
AW
24 No sooner than one year after the initial trimming is completed, pursuant to
Section VI -J of the Guidelines (Commission Action), City Staff shall report to the
Commission as to the adequacy of the maintenance schedule, as well as the
foliage owners' ability to maintain the foliage in compliance with these conditions
of approval. The Commission shall consider the Staff report and determine if a
public hearing to amend the conditions is necessary. If the Commission
determines that a hearing is necessary, then a hearing will be held pursuant to
Section VW of the View Restoration Guidelines and Procedures
25 The applicant shall, not later than 30 days after approval of this permit, 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 if have an ISA certified tree trimmer or accredited arborist on
site to perform or supervise the work being done In addition, the applicant 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
26 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 owners shall only be
reimbursed for the amount of the lowest bid submitted by the applicant If the
foliage owners choose to do the required work, then the foliage owners shall not
be compensated from the trust account and the amount in the trust account shall
be refunded to the applicant
27 The applicant 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 30
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
28 The applicant may withdraw the view restoration request and the trust account
funds if the applicant does so within five (5) days after the applicant sends the
estimate required herein. In the event that the applicant withdraws the request in
a timely manner, the foliage owners are not required to perform the work
specified by this Permit and this Permit is of no further force and effect.
29 The foliage owners shall, no later than 90 days after the Notice of Approval (First
Notice) is mailed, complete the work to the extent required by this Permit and
shall maintain the vegetation to a height that will not impair a view from another
W Mew Restoration\VRP Cases\151 - 160\157 - Reddy\PC Resolution2003_64 doc
PC Resolution 2003-64
December 11, 2003
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.
30 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 forage 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
31 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.
32 Subsequent to the trimming or removal of the foliage, the applicant may,
W \View Restoration\VRP Cases\151 - 160\157 - Reddy\PC Resolution2003_64 doc
P C Resolution 2003-64
December 11, 2003