Arborgate Consulting Inc (2013) 0 •
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
ON-CALL PROFESSIONAL/ TECHNICAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT("Agreement") is made and entered into this 18th day of June, 2013, by
and between the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (hereinafter referred to as the "CITY") and
Arborgate Consulting, Inc. (hereafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
IN CONSIDERATION of the covenants hereinafter set forth,the parties hereto agree
as follows:
ARTICLE 1
SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.1 Project Description
The Project is described as on-call services as follows:
View Restoration Arborist Consulting Services.
1.2 Description of Services
CONSULTANT shall provide professional arboriculture services in connection
with the administration of CITY's View Preservation and Restoration Ordinance, Rancho
Palos Verdes Municipal Code section 17.02.040. The professional arboriculture services to
be performed by CONSULTANT shall include, but are not limited to, the services more
particularly described below:
(a) Upon request by City Staff, CONSULTANT shall conduct field visits,
telephone conferencing, and basic tree analysis via email pursuant to the procedures set
forth in the City's Local View Restoration Guidelines and Procedures, which is attached
hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference.
(b) Upon request by City Staff, CONSULTANT shall provide the City with
written reports that are approximately 1 to 2 pages each concerning, but not limited to,
foliage health and safety, growth rates, trimming or removal impacts, and other such topics
relating to arboriculture services.
(c) Upon request by City Staff, CONSULTANT shall provide expert
arboriculture testimony before the Planning Commission and the City Council when
considering the effect of foliage removal, trimming, and/or replacement for View
Restoration Application Permit requests.
These services are further described in the CITY's Request For Proposals, which is
attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this reference, and in
CONSULTANT's Proposal,which is attached hereto as Exhibit"C"and incorporated herein
Page 1 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
0 II
by this reference. In the event of any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and
incorporated documents, the terms of this Agreement shall control. In the event of any
conflict between Exhibits "B" and "C," the terms of Exhibit "B" shall control.
1.3 Schedule of Work
Upon receipt of written Notice to Proceed from the CITY, CONSULTANT shall
perform with due diligence the services requested by the CITY. Time is of the essence in
this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not be responsible for delay, nor shall CONSULTANT
be responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default by reason of strikes,
lockouts, accidents, or acts of God, or the failure of CITY to furnish timely information or to
approve or disapprove CONSULTANT's work promptly, or delay or faulty performance by
CITY, other consultants/contractors, or governmental agencies, or any other delays beyond
CONSULTANT's control or without CONSULTANT's fault.
ARTICLE 2
COMPENSATION
2.1 Fee
CITY agrees to compensate CONSULTANT in accordance with
CONSULTANT's Schedule of Hourly Rates,which is within Exhibit"C,"and in any case an
amount not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000) per fiscal year for services as
described in Article 1. On-call services that are reimbursed by a trust deposit shall not
count towards the maximum amount CONSULANT shall be paid for such services. The
rates in Exhibit "C" shall be in effect through the end of the Agreement.
2.2 Terms of Compensation
CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices for the work completed in the
previous month. CITY agrees to authorize payment for all undisputed invoice amounts
within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. CITY agrees to use its best efforts to
notify CONSULTANT of any disputed invoice amounts within ten (10)days of the receipt of
each invoice. However, CITY's failure to timely notify CONSULTANT of a disputed amount
shall not be deemed a waiver of CITY's right to challenge such amount.
Additionally, in the event CITY fails to pay any undisputed amounts due
CONSULTANT within forty-five (45) days after invoices are received by CITY then CITY
agrees that CONSULTANT shall have the right to consider said default a total breach of
this Agreement and be terminated by CONSULTANT without liability to CONSULTANT
upon ten (10) working days advance written notice.
Page 2 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
e •
2.3 Term of Agreement
This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 2013 and shall terminate on June
30, 2015 unless sooner terminated pursuant to Article 4 of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 3
INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE
3.1 Indemnification
To the maximum extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall defend,
indemnify, and hold the CITY, its officials, officers, employees, agents and independent
contractors serving in the role of CITY officials, and volunteers (collectively"Indemnitees")
free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses,
liabilities, losses, damages or injuries, in law or equity, to property or persons, including
wrongful death (collectively"Claims"), in any manner arising out of or incident to any acts or
omissions of CONSULTANT, its officials, officers, employees or agents in connection with
the performance of this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all
consequential damages, attorneys'fees, and other related costs and expenses, except for
such Claims arising out of the active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees.
With respect to any and all such Claims, CONSULTANT shall defend Indemnitees at
CONSULTANT's own cost, expense, and risk and shall pay and satisfy any judgment,
award, or decree that may be rendered against Indemnitees. CONSULTANT shall
reimburse Indemnitees for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them
in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. CONSULTANT's
obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by
CONSULTANT or Indemnitees. All duties of CONSULTANT under this Section shall
survive termination of this Agreement.
3.2 General Liability
CONSULTANT shall at all times during the term of the Agreement carry,
maintain, and keep in full force and effect, a policy or policies of Commercial General
Liability Insurance, with minimum limits of one million dollars ($1,000,000) for each
occurrence and two million dollars($2,000,000) general aggregate for bodily injury, death,
loss or property damage for products or completed operations and any and all other
activities undertaken by CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement. Said policy
or policies shall be issued by an insurer admitted to do business in the State of California
and rated in A.M. Best's Insurance Guide with a rating of A:VII or better.
3.3 Professional Liability
CONSULTANT shall at all times during the term of this Agreement, carry,
maintain, and keep in full force and effect a policy or policies of professional liability
insurance with a minimum limit of one million dollars($1,000,000)per claim and aggregate
Page 3 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
0 0
for errors and/or omissions of CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement. Said
policy or policies shall be issued by an insurer admitted to do business in the State of
California and rated in Best's Insurance Guide with a rating of A:VII or better. If a "claims
made" policy is provided, such policy shall be maintained in effect from the date of
performance of work or services on the CITY's behalf until three (3)years after the date of
work or services are accepted as completed. Coverage for the post-completion period may
be provided by renewal or replacement of the policy for each of the three (3) years or by a
three-year extended reporting period endorsement, which reinstates all limits for the
extended reporting period. If any such policy and/or policies have a retroactive date, that
date shall be no later than the date of first performance of work or services on behalf of the
CITY. Renewal or replacement policies shall not allow for any advancement of such
retroactive date.
3.4 Automobile Liability
CONSULTANT shall at all times during the term of this Agreement obtain,
maintain, and keep in full force and effect, a policy or policies of Automobile Liability
Insurance,with minimum of one million dollars($1,000,000) per claim and occurrence and
in the aggregate for bodily injuries or death of one person and five hundred thousand
dollars ($500,000) for property damage arising from one incident.
3.5 Worker's Compensation
CONSULTANT agrees to maintain in force at all times during the performance
of work under this Agreement worker's compensation insurance as required by the law. If
consultant has no employees, no such insurance is required by law. CONSULTANT shall
require any subcontractor similarly to provide such compensation insurance for their
respective employees.
3.6 Notice of Cancellation
(a) All insurance policies shall provide that the insurance coverage shall
not be cancelled or modified by the insurance carrier without thirty (30) days prior written
notice to CITY, or ten (10) days notice if cancellation is due to nonpayment of premium.
Additionally, CONSULTANT shall provide immediate notice to the City if it receives a
cancellation or policy revision notice from the insurer.
(b) CONSULTANT agrees that it will not cancel or reduce any required
insurance coverage. CONSULTANT agrees that if it does not keep the aforesaid insurance
in full force and effect, CITY may either immediately terminate this Agreement or, if
insurance is available at a reasonable cost, CITY may take out the necessary insurance
and pay, at CONSULTANT's expense, the premium thereon.
3.7 Entire Policy and Certificate of Insurance
Page 4 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
At all times during the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall maintain
on file with the CITY Clerk both a copy of the entire policy and a certificate of insurance
showing that the aforesaid policies are in effect in the required amounts. The commercial
general liability policy shall contain endorsements naming the CITY, its officers, agents and
employees as additional insureds.
3.8 Primary Coverage
The insurance provided by CONSULTANT shall be primary to any coverage
available to CITY. The insurance policies (other than workers compensation and
professional liability) shall include provisions for waiver of subrogation.
ARTICLE 4
TERMINATION
4.1 Termination of Agreement
(a) This Agreement may be terminated at any time,with or without cause,
by the CITY upon thirty(30)days prior written notice or by CONSULTANT upon ninety(90)
days prior written notice. Notice shall be deemed served if completed in compliance with
Section 6.14.
(b) In the event of termination or cancellation of this Agreement by
CONSULTANT or CITY, due to no fault or failure of performance by CONSULTANT,
CONSULTANT shall be paid compensation for all services performed by CONSULTANT, in
an amount to be determined as follows:for work satisfactorily done in accordance with all of
the terms and provisions of this Agreement as determined by the CITY, CONSULTANT
shall be paid an amount equal to the percentage of services performed prior to the effective
date of termination or cancellation in accordance with the work items; provided, in no event
shall the amount of money paid under the foregoing provisions of this paragraph exceed
the amount which would have been paid to CONSULTANT for the full performance of the
services described in this Agreement.
ARTICLE 5
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
5.1 Ownership of Documents and Work Product
All final documents, plans, specifications, reports, information, data, exhibits,
photographs, images, video files and media created or developed by CONSULTANT
pursuant to this Agreement ("Written Products") shall be and remain the property of the
CITY without restriction or limitation upon its use, duplication or dissemination by the CITY.
All Written Products shall be considered"works made for hire,"and all Written Products and
any and all intellectual property rights arising from their creation, including, but not limited
to, all copyrights and other proprietary rights, shall be and remain the property of the CITY
Page 5 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
•
without restriction or limitation upon their use, duplication or dissemination by the CITY.
CONSULTANT shall not obtain or attempt to obtain copyright protection as to any Written
Products.
CONSULTANT hereby assigns to the CITY all ownership and any and all
intellectual property rights to the Written Products that are not otherwise vested in the CITY
pursuant to the paragraph directly above this one.
CONSULTANT warrants and represents that it has secured all necessary
licenses, consents or approvals to use any instrumentality, thing or component as to which
any intellectual property right exists, including computer software, used in the rendering of
the services and the production of all Written Products produced under this Agreement, and
that the CITY has full legal title to and the right to reproduce the Written Products.
CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify and hold the CITY, and its elected officials, officers,
employees, servants, attorneys, designated volunteers, and agents serving as independent
contractors in the role of CITY officials, harmless from any loss, claim or liability in any way
related to a claim that CITY's use of any of the Written Products is violating federal, state or
local laws, or any contractual provisions, or any laws relating to trade names, licenses,
franchises, copyrights, patents or other means of protecting intellectual property rights
and/or interests in products or inventions. CONSULTANT shall bear all costs arising from
the use of patented, copyrighted, trade secret or trademarked documents, materials,
equipment, devices or processes in connection with its provision of the services and Written
Products produced under this Agreement. In the event the use of any of the Written
Products or other deliverables hereunder by the CITY is held to constitute an infringement
and the use of any of the same is enjoined, CONSULTANT, at its expense, shall: (a)
secure for CITY the right to continue using the Written Products and other deliverables by
suspension of any injunction, or by procuring a license or licenses for CITY; or(b) modify
the Written Products and other deliverables so that they become non-infringing while
remaining in compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. This covenant shall
survive the termination of this Agreement.
Upon termination, abandonment or suspension of the Project, the
CONSULTANT shall deliver to the CITY all Written Products and other deliverables related
to the Project without additional cost or expense to the CITY. If CONSULTANT prepares a
document on a computer, CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with said document both in a
printed format and in an electronic format that is acceptable to the CITY.
ARTICLE 6
GENERAL PROVISIONS
6.1 Representation
The CITY representative shall be the Community Development Director or his
or her designee. Gregory Applegate shall be the CONSULTANT's designated
representative. These individuals shall be the primary contact persons for the parties
Page 6 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
regarding performance of this Agreement. Additionally, Gregory Applegate shall be
principally responsible for performing the tasks assigned to CONSULTANT under this
Agreement. None of the work in Article 1 shall be performed by anyone other than Gregory
Applegate without the prior written consent of the City.
6.2 Fair Employment Practices/Equal Opportunity Acts
In the performance of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall comply with all
applicable provisions of the California Fair Employment Practices Act (California
Government Code Sections 12940-48),the applicable equal employment provisions of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 200e-217), and the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (42 U.S.C. § 11200, et seq.).
6.3 Personnel
CONSULTANT represents that it has, or shall secure at its own expense, all
personnel required to perform CONSULTANT's services under this Agreement.
CONSULTANT shall make reasonable efforts to maintain the continuity of CONSULTANT's
staff who are assigned to perform the services hereunder and shall obtain the approval of
the Community Development Director of all proposed staff members who will perform such
services. CONSULTANT may associate with or employ associates or subcontractors in the
performance of its services under this Agreement, but at all times shall CONSULTANT be
responsible for its associates and subcontractors' services.
6.4 CONSULTANT's Representations
CONSULTANT represents, covenants and agrees that: a) CONSULTANT is
licensed, qualified, and capable of furnishing the labor, materials, and expertise necessary
to perform the services in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this
Agreement; b)there are no obligations, commitments, or impediments of any kind that will
limit or prevent CONSULTANT's full performance under this Agreement; c) to the extent
required by the standard of practice, CONSULTANT has investigated and considered the
scope of services performed, has carefully considered how the services should be
performed, and understands the facilities, difficulties and restrictions attending performance
of the services under this Agreement.
6.5 Conflicts of Interest
CONSULTANT agrees not to accept any employment or representation
during the term of this Agreement or within twelve (12) months after completion of the work
under this Agreement which is or may likely make CONSULTANT "financially interested"
(as provided in California Government Code Sections 1090 and 87100) in any decisions
made by CITY on any matter in connection with which CONSULTANT has been retained
pursuant to this Agreement.
Page 7 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
4110 0
6.6 Legal Action
(a) Should either party to this Agreement bring legal action against the
other, the validity, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement shall be controlled by
and construed under the laws of the State of California, excluding California's choice of law
rules. Venue for any such action relating to this Agreement shall be in the Los Angeles
County Superior Court.
(b) If any legal action or other proceeding, including action for declaratory
relief, is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement or because of an alleged dispute,
breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with this Agreement,the prevailing party
shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees, experts' fees, and other costs, in
addition to any other relief to which the party may be entitled.
(c) Should any legal action about a project between CITY and a party
other than CONSULTANT require the testimony of CONSULTANT when there is no
allegation that CONSULTANT was negligent, CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for its
testimony and preparation to testify at the hourly rates in effect at the time of such
testimony.
6.7 Assignment
Neither this Agreement nor any part thereof shall be assigned by
CONSULTANT without the prior written consent of the CITY. Any such purported
assignment without written consent shall be null and void, and CONSULTANT shall hold
harmless, defend and indemnify the CITY and its officers, officials, employees, agents and
representatives with respect to any claim, demand or action arising from any unauthorized
assignment.
Notwithstanding the above, CONSULTANT may use the services of persons
and entities not in CONSULTANT's direct employ,when it is appropriate and customary to
do so. Such persons and entities include, but are not necessarily limited to, surveyors,
specialized consultants, and testing laboratories. CONSULTANT's use of subcontractors
for additional services shall not be unreasonably restricted by the CITY provided
CONSULTANT notifies the CITY in advance and the CITY authorizes such work.
6.8 Independent Contractor
CONSULTANT is and shall at all times remain, as to the CITY, a wholly
independent contractor. Neither the CITY nor any of its agents shall have control over the
conduct of CONSULTANT or any of the CONSULTANT's employees, except as herein set
forth, and CONSULTANT is free to dispose of all portions of its time and activities which it
is not obligated to devote to the CITY in such a manner and to such persons, firms, or
corporations as the CONSULTANT wishes except as expressly provided in this Agreement.
CONSULTANT shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of the
Page 8 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
1111 0
CITY or otherwise act on behalf of the CITY as an agent. CONSULTANT shall not, at any
time or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents, servants or employees, are in
any manner agents, servants or employees of CITY. CONSULTANT agrees to pay all
required taxes on amounts paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement, and to indemnify
and hold the CITY harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest
asserted against the CITY by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by
this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall fully comply with the workers' compensation law
regarding CONSULTANT and its employees. CONSULTANT further agrees to indemnify
and hold the CITY harmless from any failure of CONSULTANT to comply with applicable
workers' compensation laws. The CITY shall have the right to offset against the amount of
any fees due to CONSULTANT under this Agreement any amount due to the CITY from
CONSULTANT as a result of its failure to promptly pay to the CITY any reimbursement or
indemnification arising under this Article.
6.9 Titles
The titles used in this Agreement are for general reference only and are not
part of the Agreement.
6.10 Entire Agreement
This Agreement, including any other documents incorporated herein by
specific reference, represents the entire and integrated agreement between CITY and
CONSULTANT and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements,
either written or oral. This Agreement may be modified or amended, or provisions or
breach may be waived, only by subsequent written agreement signed by both parties.
6.11 Construction
In the event of any asserted ambiguity in, or dispute regarding the
interpretation of any matter herein, the interpretation of this Agreement shall not be
resolved by any rules of interpretation providing for interpretation against the party who
causes the uncertainty to exist or against the party who drafted the Agreement or who
drafted that portion of the Agreement.
6.12 Non-Waiver of Terms, Rights and Remedies
Waiver by either party of any one or more of the conditions of performance under
this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any other condition of performance under this
Agreement. In no event shall the making by the CITY of any payment to CONSULTANT
constitute or be construed as a waiver by the CITY of any breach of covenant, or any
default which may then exist on the part of CONSULTANT, and the making of any such
payment by the CITY shall in no way impair or prejudice any right or remedy available to
the CITY with regard to such breach or default.
Page 9 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
0 0
6.13 Severability
If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise
unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this
Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.
6.14 Notice
Except as otherwise required by law, any payment, notice or other communication
authorized or required by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed received
on (a) the day of delivery if delivered by hand or overnight courier service during
CONSULTANT's or CITY's regular business hours or (b) on the third business day
following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid,to the addresses listed below,
or at such other address as one party may notify the other:
To CITY:
Joel Rojas, AICP, Community Development Director
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
To CONSULTANT:
Arborgate Consulting, Inc.
Attn: Greg Applegate
1131 Lucinda Way
Tustin, CA 92780
•
Page 10 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the
date and year first above written.
Dated: G -6 -3 ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
("CONSULTANT")
By:
Gre ory legate, CEO
By: Jc
Aff/v_sJuliet Applegate, vayurer
Dated:
4/WX3
CIN OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
("CITY")
E .Y1c-'15cE
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: 124.,Legf-C-- By:
City Clerk City Attorney
Page 11 of 11
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc Agreement for On-Call Professional/Technical Services
0 0
Exhibit "A":
City's Local View Restoration Guidelines and Procedures
Exhibit "A"
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc
• •
CIN OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES
FOR
RESTORATION OF VIEWS WHERE
FOLIAGE IS INVOLVED (VIEW RESTORATION PERMITS)
AND PRESERVATION OF VIEWS WHERE FOLIAGE IS INVOLVED
(CODE ENFORCEMENT)
10,
ADOPTED ON:
July 20, 2010
Community Development Department
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PURPOSE 2
II. DEFINITIONS 3
III. ESTABLISHING THE VIEWING AREA 4
1V. APPLICATION PROCEDURES 0
V. MANDATORY FINDINGS 9
VI. COMMISSION ACTION 15
VII. APPEAL OF COMMISSION DECISION 21
VIII. VIEW PRESERVATION 22
ATTAC HM E NTS
Notice of Intent to File a View RestorationNiew Preservation Permit Application Form
View Restoration/View Preservation Permit Application Form
View Restoration Permit Early Neighbor Consultation Process
View RestorationNiew Preservation Permit Process Flowchart
View Restoration/View Preservation Appeal Process Flowchart
Map of Miraleste Recreation and Park District Boundaries
List of Streets within the Miraleste Homeowners'Association
RPV Development Code Section 17.02.040
Sample View Restoration Private Agreement
Documentation of Existing View or Foliage Form
•
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
PURPOSE
A. The View Restoration Commission was created in accordance with Article 17
of Paragraph A of Section 2 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Council of Homeowners
Association and the City of Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Cooperative View
Preservation and Restoration Ordinance, which was passed by the voters of the City on
November 7, 1989. The Ordinance has been codified into the City's Municipal Code as
Section 17.02.040, View Preservation and Restoration.
B. The ballot measure, which was approved by the voters, states the purposes
of the Ordinance as follows:
"The hillsides of the City constitute a limited natural resource in their
scenic value to all residents of and visitors to the City. The hillsides
provide potential vista points and view lots. The City's General Plan
recognizes these natural resources and calls for their protection. The
public health, safety and welfare of the City require prevention of
needless destruction and impairment of these limited vista points and
view lots. The purpose of this Ordinance is to promote the health, safety
and general welfare of the public by accomplishing the purposes set
forth below, and this Ordinance shall be administered in accordance with
such purposes. Where this Ordinance is in conflict with other City
ordinances, the stricter shall apply.
Specifically, this Ordinance:
1. Protects, enhances and perpetuates views available to property
owners and visitors because of the unique topographical features of the
Palos Verdes Peninsula. These views provide unique and irreplaceable
assets to the City and its neighboring communities and provide for this
and future generations examples of the unique physical surroundings
which are characteristic of the City.
2. Defines and protects finite visual resources by establishing limits
which construction and plant growth can attain before encroaching onto
a view.
3. Insures that the development of each parcel of land or additions to
residences or structures occur in a manner which is harmonious and
maintains neighborhood compatibility and the character of contiguous
sub-community development as defined in the General Plan.
4. Requires the pruning of dense foliage or tree growth which alone, or
in conjunction with construction, exceeds defined limits."
Page 2
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
Thus, the general purpose of the Ordinance is to promote the health, safety and
general welfare of the residents of the City, by balancing the rights of the residential
property owner with foliage against the rights of the residential property owner to have a
view from a viewing area restored so that it can be enjoyed, when that view has been
significantly impaired by foliage.
C. The Planning Commission accomplishes its purpose through a process of
View Restoration Permit application, site inspection, public hearings and a decision on
the application. The Commission's jurisdiction is limited to issues regarding view
impairment caused by foliage, through the issuance of View Restoration Permits, and
appeals of City Tree Review Permits and view preservation determinations.
D. View restoration requests involving trees located on City-owned property,
such as public parks, parkways and medians along public streets, are administered by
City Staff through the issuance of a City Tree Review Permit issued pursuant to Section
17.76.100 of the Municipal Code. Staff decisions on City Tree Review Permits, and
view preservation determinations are appealable to the Planning Commission. When
reviewing Staff decisions regarding City Street Tree Review Permits, the Commission
shall utilize the same process as is followed when the Commission reviews a View
Restoration Permit application, excluding the early neighbor consultation process.
Decisions of the Planning Commission on all view related permits are appealable to the
City Council.
II. DEFINITIONS
A. Viewing Area
Section 17.02.040 (A)(16) of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code defines
"viewing area" as follows:
"Viewing area" means that area of a structure (excluding bathrooms,
hallways, garages or closets) or that area of a lot (excluding the setback areas)
where the owner and City determine the best and most important view exists. In
structures, the finished floor elevation of any viewing area must be at or above
the existing grade adjacent to the exterior wall of the part of the building nearest
to said viewing area."
B. View
Section 17.02.040 (A)(14) of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code defines
"view" as follows:
"On the Palos Verdes Peninsula, it is quite common to have a near view
and a far view because of the nature of many of the hills on the peninsula.
Therefore, a 'view',which is protected by this section, is as follows:
Page 3
• 11)
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
a. A 'near view' which Is defined as a scene located on the
peninsula including, but not limited to, a valley, ravine, equestrian trail,
pastoral environment or any natural setting; and/or
b. A 'far view' which is defined as a scene located off the
peninsula including, but not limited to, the ocean, Los Angeles basin,
city lights at night, harbor, Vincent Thomas Bridge, shoreline or off
shore islands.
A 'View' which is protected by this Section shall not include vacant land
that is developable under the city code, distant mountain areas not normally
visible nor the sky, either above distant mountain areas or above the height of off
shore islands. A 'View' may extend in any horizontal direction (360 degrees of
horizontal arc) and shall be considered as a single view even if broken into
segments by foliage, structures or other Interference."
Ill. ESTABLISHING THE VIEWING AREA
A. Section 17.02.040 (B)(5) establishes the procedure for determining the
"viewing area" as follows:
"The determination of a viewing area shall be made by balancing the nature
of the view to be protected and the importance of the area of the structure or lot
from where the view is taken. Once finally determined for a particular application,
the viewing area may not be changed for any subsequent application. In the
event the city and owner cannot agree on the viewing area, the decision of the
city shall control. A property owner may appeal the determination of viewing
area. In such event, the decision on the viewing area will be made by the body
making the final decision on the application. A property owner may preserve his
or her right to dispute the decision on viewing area for a subsequent application
without disputing the decision on a pending application by filing a statement to
that effect and indicating the viewing area the property owner believes to be more
appropriate. The statement shall be filed with the city prior to consideration of
the pending application by the City."
B. The "viewing area" of the applicant's property is where the best and most
important view is taken. The determination of the "viewing area" is made "by balancing
the nature of the view to be protected and the importance of the area of the structure or
lot from where the view is taken". After adoption of a Resolution or after a decision is
rendered on a View Restoration Permit, View Preservation Application, or City Tree
Review Permit, the applicant(s), foliage owner(s) or any interested person may file a
timely appeal (accompanied with the appeal fee established by the City Council) of the
City's determination of the viewing area.
1. On developed lots, the "viewing area" may be located on any level
surface within the house (excluding bathrooms, closets, hallways or garages), which is
Page 4
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
at or above the existing grade adjacent to the exterior wall of the part of the building
nearest to the "viewing area" or within the buildable area of the lot. A viewing area may
be located on a patio, deck, balcony or lawn area which is adjacent to the primary
structure (generally within ten feet) and which is located on the same general grade on
the lot as the primary structure, excluding the required setback areas and used as a
gathering area. In determining the viewing area on a developed lot, greater weight
generally will be given to locations within the primary structure where a view is taken
than to locations outside of the primary structure where a view is taken, unless no view
is taken from within the primary structure.
2. On properties where the applicant claims that he or she has a view
from one or more locations either within or outside of the primary structure, it must be
determined where the best and most important view is taken to determine the "viewing
area" which is to be protected. The "viewing area" may only include multiple rooms or
locations on the applicant's property if those locations share the same view.
3. The "viewing area" may only be located on a second (or higher) story
of a structure if:
a. The construction of that portion of the structure did not require
approval of a height variation permit or variance, pursuant to Chapter 17.02.040 of the
Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, or would not have required such a permit if that
Section had been in effect at the time that portion of the structure was constructed; or
b. The viewing area is located in a part of the structure that constitutes
the primary living area of the house, which is the living room, dining room, family room
or kitchen. However, the viewing area may be located in the master bedroom, if a view
is not taken from one of the rooms comprising the primary living area, and the master
bedroom is located on the same story of the house as the primary living area.
4. In documenting the views, Staff usually will conduct the view analysis
in a natural standing position. In those cases where the view is enjoyed from a seated
position, Staff will verify if that is the case, and if so, will conduct the view analysis from
the seated position in that area at a height of not less than three (3)feet, six(6) inches.
5. Situations involving residential remodels that affect previously existing
viewing areas:
a. If a residence is legally remodeled whereby the viewing area,
which had been established previously through the issuance of an approved View
Restoration, View Preservation or City Tree Review Permit, is eliminated, the approved
View Restoration, View Preservation or City Tree Review Permit shall remain in full
force and effect, unless a new application is filed by the subject property owner, and
the prior determination is amended or repealed by a subsequent decision of the
Planning Commission or City Council or Community Development Director.
Page 5
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
b. If a residence is legally remodeled whereby the viewing area,
which had been established previously through the issuance of an approved View
Restoration, View Preservation or City Tree Review Permit, is modified so that the
viewing area is in a different location in the residence or is significantly altered by the
remodel, a new viewing area in the remodeled structure may be established by the
Planning Commission or City Council or Community Development Director pursuant to
a decision on a new View Restoration, View Preservation or City Tree Review Permit
application filed by the subject property owner. In such situations, any previously issued
View Restoration, View Preservation or City Tree Review Permit decision may be
entirely or partially amended or repealed by the subsequent decision of the Planning
Commission or City Council or Community Development Director.
IV. APPLICATION PROCEDURES
A. Once an applicant completes the early neighbor consultation process
described in Section V-A (Mandatory Findings) of these Guidelines and the view
problem is not resolved and the applicant wishes to proceed, the applicant(s) may
complete and submit a View Restoration Permit application form (see attached form) to
the City's Department of Community Development, accompanied by the appropriate
filing fees, in order to initiate a formal request for a View Restoration Permit.
B. It should be noted that the fees required for a View Restoration Permit are
established by the City Council by resolution.
C. The following fee structure pertains to View Restoration Permits only and is
designed so that the applicant pays two separate flat fees as follows:
1. The first fee is a fixed amount that is paid by an applicant to cover the
City's costs associated with processing steps, such as reviewing the application for
completeness, conducting the initial site visit and processing a formal application from
submittal through a Planning Commission decision. Specifically, said fees would cover
the costs of reviewing an application for completeness, conducting site visits, attending
the public hearing(s) and preparing the Staff Report(s) and Resolution(s).
2. The second fee or follow-up fee is a fixed amount established by City
Council resolution that would be paid by an applicant if an application is approved by
the Planning Commission. Specifically, this fee would cover the review of the
trimming/removal bids, the monitoring of the work, and the documentation of the
restored view.
3. The establishment of a trust deposit account by an applicant to cover
the cost of the actual foliage trimming/removal, as described in Section VI-K
(Commission Action) is separate from the two processing fees described herein.
D. Once a formal View Restoration Permit application has been submitted, the
City will review the application to determine if the information is complete, before
Page 6
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
beginning processing the application. If any information is missing or components of
the application are incomplete, the applicant will be notified of any deficiencies in
writing, and the application will be held in abeyance until the necessary materials are
received by the City. If an applicant does not submit the necessary information and the
application remains incomplete for six (6) months, the City shall administratively
withdraw the application.
E. Once the application is deemed complete, the following sequence of steps
shall occur in order to process an application for a View Restoration Permit (also see
attached flow chart):
1. Staff notifies the foliage owner(s), in writing, that a formal request for
view restoration has been filed with the City, attaching a copy of the application.
2. Staff schedules and conducts site visit(s) to the applicant's and foliage
owner's properties. During the first site visit to the foliage owner's property, Staff will
inquire as to whether the foliage owner wishes to have the Commission members visit
their property. A foliage owner may request Commissioners visit his/her property in
order to fully assess the case or demonstrate unique site conditions, such as special
landscaping, slope stability or privacy concerns. Requests for the Commission to visit a
foliage owner's property must be made in writing by the foliage owner and will be
honored by the Commission.
3. Staff prepares a Staff Report to the Planning Commission, which will
include the following:
a. Application form;
b. Early Neighbor Consultation documentation;
c. An analysis of the six mandatory findings as set forth in Section
17.02.040(CX2)(c) of the City's Municipal Code;
d. Recommendation(s) on the disposition of the application;
e. Determination if any of the Commission members are ineligible to
participate on the application, based on a conflict of interest due to the proximity of a
Commissioner's properties to the property that is the subject of the application. If a
Commissioner owns property that is located within 500 feet of the subject property, a
conflict is presumed;
f. A tentative site visitation schedule for Commission members.
4. Staff establishes a date for the public hearing on the application and
provides written notice of the hearing to the applicant(s) and the foliage owner(s) a
minimum of 30 days prior to the hearing date. Notice of the hearing date shall also be
Page 7
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City or clearly posted on each
applicant's property.
5. Staff distributes the staff report to members of the Planning
Commission a minimum of two weeks prior to the actual hearing date, and the
Commissioners visit the site(s).
a. Commissioners are required to visit the applicant's property.
Eligibility to participate in the decision on a View Restoration Permit application is
dependant on the Commissioner visiting the applicant's site(s) prior to the public
hearing. If an applicant refuses access to his or her site, the request for a View
Restoration Permit will be denied.
b. Commissioners will visit the foliage owner's property if requested to
do so by the foliage owner(s), in writing. Even if no request is made, Commissioners
frequently will attempt to visit a foliage owner's property unless the foliage owner denies
a Commissioner access. Although a foliage owner has discretion as to whether to allow
Commissioners into his/ her property, by not allowing site visits of their property, it may
be more difficult for Commissioners to evaluate issues raised by the foliage owner when
considering an application.
c. Commissioners are responsible for arranging visits to the site(s).
However, no more than three (3)Commissioners may visit the site at the same time.
6. The Planning Commission conducts a public hearing pursuant to the
Commission's adopted Administrative Procedures. The Chairperson's instructions to
the audience will generally follow these guidelines:
a. Any person desiring to speak must first be recognized by the
Chairperson.
b. All participants must speak from the podium.
c. All speakers must first state their full names and addresses, and the
names of any persons in whose behalf they are appearing (if any).
d. All comments must be made clearly and audibly.
e. Repetition of comments should be avoided, and speakers will be
discouraged from reading a submission which has been copied and distributed to the
Commission or is contained in the agenda packet.
f. Normally, the applicant(s) and foliage owner(s) will be limited to a
five (5) minute presentation and a three (3) minute rebuttal (if requested). All other
persons will be generally limited to a three (3) minute presentation each.
Page 8
1110 411/
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
g. Except when necessary for immediate clarification of a particular
point, no person shall be allowed to speak a second time until all others wishing to
speak have had an opportunity to do so, and then only at the direction of the
Chairperson.
h. Due to unusual complexity of the case, submission of expert
testimony or a large number of speakers on a particular case, the Chairperson, at his or
her discretion, may allocate more than five (5) minutes per side and allow those wishing
to speak on each side to designate a spokesperson or to divide the allotted time among
themselves.
7. After the public hearing is closed and the Commission has reached a
decision on the application, a resolution reflecting the Commission's decision shall be
adopted by the Commission. The resolution shall be drafted by Staff and, where
appropriate, reviewed by the City Attorney. If necessary, at a subsequent meeting, the
resolution may be placed on the Commission's Consent Calendar for final action.
Adoption of the resolution shall result in the issuance of a View Restoration Permit or
denial of the request.
F. Foliage not Specifically Designated
Conditions of approval of View Restoration and Preservation Permit Applications specify
individual trees or plants to be trimmed or removed. However, view-impairing foliage
often grows in clusters or is screened by foliage in the foreground so that individual
plants are not readily discernible. Therefore, foliage which is located on the same
property and is in the view that was analyzed by Staff but was not specifically
designated in the view analysis because it was behind other foliage which was
specifically designated in the view analysis and was trimmed pursuant to the decision
and the conditions of approval, shall be trimmed to the same height that was
established by the Commission, for the designated foliage and the applicant shall pay
the additional expense of having the foliage trimmed.
G. Once the work is performed, Staff will document the applicant's view with
photographs taken from the applicant's viewing area with a standard camera lens that
will not alter the actual image that is being documented from the viewing area. The
photographs will be kept on file with the City and copies shall be given to all involved
parties to maintain the foliage in accordance with the City's final decision.
V. MANDATORY FINDINGS
Section 17.02.040(C)(2)(c) of the Municipal Code requires that, in order for a View
Restoration notice to be issued, the Planning Commission must make the following six
mandatory findings:
A. "The applicant has complied with the early neighbor consultation
process and has shown proof of cooperation on his/her part to resolve conflicts."
Page 9
110
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
1. Each applicant must provide evidence of early neighbor consultation
with each foliage owner, utilizing the process described below.
2. Evidence of adequate early neighbor consultation shall consist of each
applicant filing a "Notice of Intent to File a View Restoration Permit Application" with the
City prior to the submittal of a formal View Restoration Permit Application. Said notice
shall be on a form provided by the City and shall be signed by the owner of the
applicant's property. Each applicant shall indicate, by marking the appropriate box on
the "Notice of intent to File a View Restoration Permit Applications that the applicant has
made an attempt to contact the foliage owner prior to submittal and shall submit written
proof of that attempt in the form of a copy of a registered letter and the return receipt.
The notice shall include a signed statement from the applicant agreeing to meet with
City representatives and each foliage owner that will be named in the pending
application, to attempt to resolve any issues between the parties. The notice also shall
indicate at least three days and times when the applicant is available to attend the pre-
application meeting (see attached flowchart).
3. Upon receipt of a signed and complete Notice from an applicant, the
Community Development Director shall provide written notification to each foliage owner
listed in the Notice, via certified mail, of the pending application. The City's notification
letter shall also request that the foliage owner attend one pre-application meeting at City
Hall to discuss the City's view restoration process with City representatives and the
applicant(s). The notification letter to each foliage owner shall contain three possible
meeting times (date and time) identified by the City from which the foliage owner may
select. The determination of the three meetings shall be based on the applicants' and
City representatives' availability. The notification letter shall require that the foliage
owner respond back to the City in writing, within 10 working days of the City's certified
mailing of the notification, with one selected date.
4. If any foliage owner responds in writing with a date selection within the
specified time frame, the Community Development Director shall arrange a pre-
application meeting at City Hall between the applicants, the foliage owners and City
representatives. Notice of the meeting shall be provided by the City to all parties, at
least 5 working days prior to the meeting date.
The purpose of the pre-application meeting is to discuss the City's view
restoration process with the affected parties and attempt to resolve the issues in order
to avoid the filing of a formal application.
5. The initial pre-application meeting arranged by the City shall occur no
later than 60 calendar days from the date that a "Notice of intent to File a View
Restoration Permit Application" is filed by an applicant with the City. Additional pre-
application meetings with the City shall occur only if there is written consent from every
applicant and foliage owner. This does not preclude foliage owners and applicants from
meeting on their own with no City participation. if the applicant requests more than one
Page 10
•
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
meeting within a 12-month period, then the City shall charge the applicant a mediation
fee (as established by City Council resolution) for each additional meeting, and the
applicant shall pay the fee to the City prior to the scheduling of any additional mediation
meetings.
6. The Community Development Director or his/her designee shall attend
the pre-application meeting. In addition, a view restoration mediator shall attend the pre-
application meeting. Mediators who reside within 500 feet of the applicant or foliage
owner properties are ineligible to participate in the pre-application meeting.
7. Once an applicant submits a "Notice of Intent to File a View
Restoration Permit Application" and the City provides notification to a foliage owner of
the pending application and requests their attendance at a pre-application meeting, the
early neighbor consultation process shall be deemed to be terminated and the
applicant(s) may immediately file a formal View Restoration Permit Application with the
City if any of the following occurs:
a. A foliage owner fails to respond in writing with a date selection
within the time frame specified in the City's notification letter;
b. A foliage owner notifies the City in writing that he/she does not wish
to attend the pre-application meeting;
c. A foliage owner fails to attend the arranged pre-application meeting;
or
d. Unless waived in writing by every applicant for a particular
application, sixty(60) calendar days have elapsed from the date that a complete "Notice
of Intent to File a View Restoration Permit Application" was submitted to the City by the
applicant(s).
8. If an agreement is reached between the parties as a result of the pre-
application meeting, Staff and/or the Mediator will encourage the participants to prepare
and will assist in the preparation of the private agreement for the parties to sign (see
attached sample).
9. At the public hearing, the applicant may be asked to explain his/her
specific efforts to comply with the ordinance requirement for attempting to resolve
conflict.
B. "Foliage exceeding sixteen (16) 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."
Page 11
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
1. After the location of the "viewing area" on the applicant's property is
determined, the Commission must find whether foliage, which exceeds the lower of
sixteen feet or the ridge line of the primary structure, significantly impairs a view from
the "viewing area".
2. To determine which of the two measurements referenced in the
paragraph above is the lowest, the sixteen (16) foot height measurement shall be
measured from the base of the plant or tree (where it emerges from the ground).
3. For structures with multiple roofline heights that would block the view if
the foliage were not present, foliage on the property, shall be lowered to the roofline of
that portion of the structure that otherwise would block the view, as illustrated below in
Figure 1. Where a structure with multiple roofline heights does not otherwise block a
view, foliage on the property shall be trimmed to the applicable height limit set forth in
this paragraph "B".
Figure 1
.` ... Roofline'B' .� Foliage'B'
Foliage'A' _Shah be
Shall be ^' '� '� trimmed to
trimmed to Roofline`A' the height of
Roofline'B'
the height of
Roofline`A
Multiple Roofline Structure with Foliage
(Example:Ocean view from the epp i anr's viewing area)
4. Section 17.76.030 of the City's Development Code limits the height of
hedges. A "hedge" is defined by the Code as "shrubbery or trees planted and
maintained in such a manner as to create a physical barrier." A hedge can be included
in a View Restoration Permit application, if the top of the hedge exceeds sixteen feet„
the Planning Commission may require a hedge to be trimmed to the lesser of sixteen
(16) feet or the ridgeline of the primary structure, if necessary to restore the view.
However, if the top of the hedge is below sixteen feet or the ridgeline of the primary
structure, whichever measurement is lower, these cases shall be referred to the City's
Code Enforcement Division for resolution. Foliage which is determined by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department to be a fire hazard also shall be referred to the City's
Code Enforcement Division for immediate resolution.
5. The Planning Commission may, at its discretion, require the review of
any case by a qualified biologist or ornithologist, soils engineer, landscape architect,
arborist, or other appropriate professionals. The Staff shall be responsible for obtaining
qualified consultants to review and comment on the specific cases requested by the
Commission. In cases where expert advice is sought by the City, the applicant(s) shall
Page 12
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
be responsible for bearing those costs. Staff will advise the applicant of the estimated
additional expense for the expert advice. If the applicant refuses to pay for that
expense and does not augment the trust deposit to cover that expense, then the
application will be administratively withdrawn by City Staff. If the applicant agrees to pay
for the expert advice, and the advice is provided to the Commission, the Commission,
again at its discretion, may abide by, or reject, the advice of the consultant(s).
Commission decisions must be supported by substantial evidence in the record before
the Commission.
6. The Commission shall only take action on foliage which significantly
impairs a view from the applicant's viewing area. Foliage which does not significantly
impair a view may remain in the applicant's view frame. The following criteria may be
used to help determine whether a view is being "significantly" impaired by foliage:
a. Foliage Position Within the View Frame. Foliage that is located in
the center of a view frame is more likely to be found to create a significant view
impairment than foliage located on the outer edge of a view frame.
b. Single-component View vs. Multi-component View. Some view
frames contain a combination of different view components, such as a view of the
ocean, harbor and City lights (multi-component view); while some view frames consist
entirely of one component, such as only a view of the ocean (single-component view).
Foliage that entirely obscures one of the components of a "multi-component" view is
more likely to be found to create a significant view impairment than foliage that impairs
the same degree of view of a "single-component"view(see diagram below).
c. Prominent Landmarks. Greater weight should be given to
prominent landmarks or other significant features in the view frame such as the Vincent
Thomas Bridge, harbor, shoreline, distant mountain areas, city skylines, and Channel
Islands. As a result, foliage which impairs a view of any of these landmarks is more
likely to be found to create a significant view impairment.
viuv
iii.irw Mims^my icsia timaist. cone 1W4Ibi*5
Sollete.
c.bwoossor V
Page 13
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
C. "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."
Staff from the Department of Community Development will determine the
distance from the applicant's property line to the nearest property line of the site
containing the foliage under consideration.
D. "The foliage significantly impairing the view did not exist as view
impairing vegetation when the lot from which the view is taken was created."
1. Where the applicant's property and the property containing the foliage
in question, are both located in the same subdivision or in adjacent subdivisions, Staff
will determine the date at which the lots were created. Generally, the lots' recordation
date shall be the lots' creation date.
2. In other cases, the following sources of information may be used to
determine the time when the foliage under consideration began to impair the view:
a. Aerial photographs maintained by the City.
b. Other photographs taken on known dates indicating the presence of
vegetation or lack of vegetation.
c. Property descriptions prepared in connection with the sale of
property (e.g. multiple listing information, newspaper advertisements,
real estate flyers, etc.).
d. Testimony of witnesses.
e. Any reports documenting land conditions or site surveys that include
information about vegetation.
3. Recorded lot line adjustments shall not be considered to create a new
lot for the purpose of determining the date when the lot was created.
E. "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."
1. The burden of proving an "unreasonable infringement of indoor and/or
outdoor privacy" shall be on the foliage owner. The Commission will make a
determination on a case-by-case basis.
Page 14
410
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
2. Given the variety and number of options which are available to
preserve indoor privacy, greater weight generally will be given to protecting outdoor
privacy than to protecting indoor privacy.
F. "For property located within the boundaries of the Miraleste Recreation
and Parks District, the Commission shall also find that removal or trimming of
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 and Parks District with large numbers of trees."
1. The Miraleste Recreation and Parks District has adopted a procedure
for responding to view restoration and maintenance requests for foliage located on its
property. Such properties owned by the District are not subject to the City's View
Restoration Permit process.
2. Properties located within the boundaries of the District, but owned by a
person or entity other than the District, are subject to the View Restoration Permit
process and the additional finding above.
3. A map of the boundaries of the Miraleste Recreation and Parks District
and a list of the streets within the Miraleste Homeowners'Association are attached.
VI. COMMISSION ACTION
A. if the Commission is able to make all of the mandatory findings set forth in
Section V (Mandatory Findings) above, then the Commission must determine the
action(s) which must be taken to restore the view. Such action(s) may include culling,
lacing, trimming, or removal of the foliage, which is significantly impairing the view from
the viewing area. These terms are defined as follows:
1. Culling shall mean the removal of dead, decayed, or weak limbs or
foliage from a tree or shrub.
2. Lacing shall mean a comprehensive method of pruning that
systematically removes excess foliage from a tree or shrub, but maintains its shape.
3. Trimming shall mean the removal of limbs or foliage from a tree or
shrub. Trimming includes, but is not limited to:
a. "Crown reducing", which is a comprehensive method of pruning that
reduces a tree's or shrub's height and/or spread. Crown reduction entails the reduction
of the top, sides or individual limbs by means of removal of the leaders or the longest
portion of limbs to a lateral branch large enough to assume the terminal; and,
Page 15
• •
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
b. "Crown raising", which is a comprehensive method of pruning that
removes limbs and foliage from the lower part of a tree or shrub in order to raise the
canopy of the tree or shrub over the view.
c. "Topping", which is the cutting of branches and/or trunk of a tree or
shrub in a manner which substantially reduces the overall height of the tree or shrub.
4. Removal shall mean the removal and disposal of a tree or shrub, by
grinding the shrub's or tree's stump to the existing grade or a depth below existing
grade to be determined by the Planning Commission on a case-by-case basis. If
existing topography or other physical limitations identified by the tree service contractor
preclude mechanical stump grinding, the stump shall be flush cut to existing grade or as
close to existing grade as possible, as determined by the tree service contractor. If a
foliage owner wishes to keep the stump, he or she may so elect; then, in no case, may
the remaining stump height exceed 18 inches above grade. Unless otherwise directed
by the Commission in connection with the decision on a particular application, removal
of the foliage shall not include the removal and disposal of a plant's root system.
B. If any tree or shrub that is ordered to be culled, laced, or trimmed dies within
two years 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 Vl-E (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 Code.
C. Complete removal of any remaining portion of the tree or shrub that does not
significantly impair the view will only be ordered if the owner of the property where the
foliage is located consents to the complete removal of the remaining tree or shrub and
the Commission finds:
1. That upon the advice of the City's arborist, culling, lacing, or trimming
the foliage to sixteen (16) feet or the ridge line is likely to kill the tree or shrub or
threaten the public health, safety and welfare; or
Page 16
• 111,
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
2. That upon the advice of the City's arborist, culling, lacing, or trimming
the foliage to sixteen (16) feet or the ridgeline will destroy the aesthetic value of the
foliage that is to be trimmed, laced or reduced in height.
D. In order to balance trimming, the commission may require trimming portions
of a tree or shrub that are below 16 feet or the ridgeline provided the foliage owner
agrees. If a foliage owner agrees to such trimming, then he must do so either in
writing, within 30 days of final approval of a View Restoration or View Preservation
Permit or in public testimony taken during the hearing. If the foliage owner does not
agree, then the foliage owner will not be required to trim, lace or prune below that level
and the applicant will not be required to pay for the additional work.
E. The Commission also may order the applicant to replace trees or shrubs
which have been removed if the owner of the property where the foliage is located
consents to the replacement of the tree or shrub and the Commission finds:
1. That removal without replacement foliage will cause a significant
adverse impact on:
a. The public health, safety and welfare;
An example of this would be a situation where there is evidence before the Commission
that replacement foliage is needed to help stabilize a slope or minimize slope erosion.
b. The privacy of the owner of the property where the foliage is located;
An example of this would be a situation where there is evidence before the Commission
that replacement foliage to mitigate the loss of privacy provided by pre-existing foliage is
needed to help screen or block views from the applicant's property into the foliage
owner's usable yard area (deck, patio, pool/spa area, barbecue area) and/or residence
(unless interior privacy can be achieved by other means).
c, Shade provided to the dwelling or the property where the foliage is
located;
An example of this would be a situation where there is evidence before the Commission
that replacement foliage is needed to help provide shade to an area of the foliage
owner's property, such as a usable yard area (deck, patio, pool/spa area, barbecue
area)or residence, that is receiving shade from the foliage that is to be removed.
d. The energy-efficiency of the dwelling where the foliage is located;
An example of this would be a situation where there is evidence before the Commission
that replacement foliage is needed to help cool an area of the foliage owner's residence
in the summer months that is being kept cool by foliage that is to be removed.
Page 17
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
e. The health or viability of the remaining landscaping where the
foliage is located; or
An example of this would be a situation where there is evidence before the Commission
that replacement foliage is needed to help provide shade to existing sun-sensitive
landscaping on the foliage owner's property, that is receiving shade from the foliage that
is to be removed.
f. The integrity of the landscaping of the property on which the foliage
is located.
An example of this would be a situation where there is evidence before the Commission
that replacement foliage is needed to replace foliage that is a focal point or integral
element of an existing landscaping plan.
g. The function of the landscaping as screening of an unfinished wall or
structural elements of a deck or other similar structure on an adjacent property.
An example of this would be a situation where there is evidence before the Commission
that replacement foliage is needed to replace foliage that provides effective screening of
unsightly feature(s) located on an adjacent upslope property. Such features may include
but are not limited to unfinished walls, or the support elements underneath decks and
structures.
F. The Commission shall ensure that replacement foliage is reasonably
comparable to the foliage removed in terms of function and/or aesthetics while
understanding that the replacement foliage will not be of the same height, size and
breadth as the pre-existing mature foliage. For example, if replacement foliage is
determined to be necessary to replace foliage located on a slope, the replacement
foliage should be of a woody-root species variety that provides soil stability. The
selection of the type of replacement foliage shall be made by the foliage owner subject
to approval by the Community Development Director.
G. The Commission is not obligated to order replacement of every tree or shrub
ordered removed with a new tree or shrub. For example, two new replacement trees
may be able to provide the same level of privacy as five pre-existing trees that are
ordered removed. Replacement trees or shrubs generally should be of a 15-gallon size,
and should not be larger than a 24-inch box size, unless warranted by the need to
reasonably protect privacy or exceptional circumstances and the tree or shrub that is
being replaced is substantially larger than a 24-inch box size.
H. The Commission may require that a long-term foliage maintenance schedule
be incorporated into the conditions of approval of an approved View Restoration Permit.
The purpose of the maintenance schedule is to dictate the minimum frequency of future
trimming (i.e. semi-annual, annual or biennial) based on the growth rates of the subject
foliage so as to not significantly impair a view. Alternatively, the Commission may
Page 18
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
specify the amount of allowable growth as measured with respect to a fixed point of
reference that will not significantly encroach into the view, and require that when this
point is reached, the foliage owner may be required to trim the foliage back to the height
established by the Commission. In establishing the maintenance schedule, the
Commission may take into account seasonal dormant periods of the subject foliage,
when trimming is least harmful to the foliage.
I. The Commission shall require that a property owner trim or remove foliage
within ninety (90) days. If no date is specified by the Commission, the ninety day time
frame shall commence upon the receipt of a letter from the City notifying the foliage
owner to trim/remove the foliage. Such a letter is sent by the City once a trust account
has been established by the applicant for the cost of the trimming/removal and tree or
shrub replacement. Within the ninety (90) day time frame, but not less than two weeks
before the trimming/removal date, the foliage owner shall inform City Staff of the date
and approximate time the work is scheduled to occur, so that staff may be available on-
site to ensure the work is performed in accordance with the Commission's decision.
Staff strongly encourages that the foliage owner to schedule a date during the Monday
thru Friday workweek. Staff's on-site monitoring of the tree trimming/removal work shall
include, if necessary, directing the foliage owner to trim additional foliage that was not
specifically designated by the Planning Commission but found by staff to be significantly
impairing the same view after the specified foliage is trimmed, provided the Planning
Commission had imposed such a condition in its decision. Said additional foliage shall
be trimmed to the same height that was established by the Commission for the
designated foliage and the applicant shall pay the additional expense of having the
foliage trimmed.
If evidence is provided to the Commission that a tree or shrub, subject to tree
trimming or removal, contains nests (or eggs) of birds that are designated under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Department of Fish and Game Code, the
Commission may require that the subject foliage be trimmed within a ninety (90) day
time period after the nest(s) is determined by a qualified biologist or ornithologist to be
inactive.
If evidence is provided to the Commission that it is less harmful to trim certain
foliage during the foliage's dormant period, the Commission may require that the subject
foliage be trimmed ninety (90) days from an established date. In situations where
foliage is dormant during the winter months, the Commission shall require that the
trimming be performed during the months of November through March. In situations
where the Commission determines that not all of the foliage on a property needs to be
trimmed during a specific time of the year, the Commission may take either of the
following actions:
1. Establish a specified time period for trimming the time-sensitive foliage
and establish a different time period for trimming the remaining foliage. This will require
the foliage owner to perform two separate trimming actions.
Page 19
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
2. Establish a specified time period for trimming the time-sensitive foliage
and require that the remaining foliage also be trimmed at that time.
J. Unless the Commission specifies the amount of allowable growth pursuant to
subsection VI-H the Commission may require that all maintenance schedules
incorporated into the conditions of approval of a View Restoration Permit be reviewed at
a future date to allow the Commission an opportunity to assess the adequacy of the
maintenance schedule, as well as the foliage owner's ability to maintain the foliage in
compliance with the conditions of approval. The review date shall occur a minimum of
one year after the initial trimming is performed. The specific date shall be set by the
Commission at the time it makes its decision on a View Restoration Permit, and shall be
based on the growth rates of the subject foliage, as well as any other factors that the
Commission finds are pertinent to the decision. On or about the specified review date,
City Staff will inspect the foliage sites and transmit a brief report to the Commission
which describes whether the foliage is being maintained in accordance with the
conditions of approval. The report shall also contain a recommendation from City Staff
as to whether the maintenance schedule should be amended. The Commission shall
consider the report and determine if a public hearing to amend the conditions of
approval is necessary. If a public hearing is determined to be necessary, Staff shall
transmit to the Commission a report with recommendations for additional or modified
conditions of approval. Notice of the public hearing shall be provided in the same
manner as required by Municipal Code Section 17.02.040 for the original public hearing.
The Commission decision on the review hearing is appealable to the City Council
pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.02.040.
The Commission shall require that an applicant submit one (1) to three (3)
itemized estimates to the City for carrying out the work required by an approved View
Restoration Permit. The work estimate shall also include tree or shrub removal and
replacement costs for any tree or shrub that dies as a result of the ordered trimming,
provided that the tree or shrub was not a tree or shrub identified by the City Arborist as
likely to die as a result of said trimming. Said estimates shall be submitted within thirty
(30) days after the adoption of the Resolution and shall include the cost to have an ISA
certified tree trimmer or accredited arborist on site to perform or supervise the work
being done. Said estimates are to be supplied by licensed landscape or licensed tree
service contractors, acceptable to the City, which provide insurance by insurers in a
form acceptable to the City, and shall include all costs of cleanup and removal of debris.
Said insurance shall identify the property owner and the City (and its officers, agents
and employees) as additionally named insureds, and shall have a coverage amount of
no less than $1,000,000 for each occurrence and no less than $2,000,000 in the
aggregate. In addition, the applicant shall pay to the City an amount equal to the lowest
of the estimates and such funds shall be maintained by the City, in a City trust account
until completion of the work as verified by City Staff.
Upon completion of the work, the foliage owner shall submit a copy of a paid
invoice to the City. Within 10 calendar days of the submittal of the invoice and
verification by City Staff of compliance, the City shall authorize the transmittal of funds
Page 20
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
from the City trust account to the foliage owner. If there are remaining funds in the trust
account to cover the costs of removing and replacing trees or shrubs, then the funds
shall remain in the trust account for a period of two years or longer if determined by the
Planning Commission until City Staff determines that removal of dead trees or shrubs is
not warranted. A reimbursement check to the foliage owner shall be released by the
City no later than 30 days following Staffs authorization. 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 (less the monies needed
to remove and replace dead trees or shrubs)shall be refunded to the applicant within 30
days of receipt of the appropriate billing. if the paid invoice submitted by the foliage
owner is for an amount that exceeds the funds in the City's trust account established for
the initial trimming or removal and replacement of trees or shrubs, the foliage owner
shall only receive the funds from the City trust account and the foliage owner shall be
responsible for paying the difference. If a foliage owner chooses to do the required
work himself/herself, the foliage owner shall not be compensated from the City trust
account and the amount in the trust account shall be refunded to the applicant(s).
If the required work as specified herein is not completed, as verified by Staff,
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. 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.
VII. 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(CX2) 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(CX2); or
3. Disapprove the application upon finding that all applicable findings
cannot be made or all provisions of Section 17.02.040(CX2) have not been complied
with; or
Page 21
40
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
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.
VIII. 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
I7.02.040(BX3)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
through the issuance of a View Restoration Permit under
subsection C.2 of this section; or
b. If no View Restoration Permit has been issued by the View
Restoration Commission or Planning Commission, by permitting
foliage to grow to a height exceeding the lesser of:
(I)The ridge line of the primary structure on the property, or
(ii) Sixteen (16)feet.
If foliage on the property already exceeds the provisions of subdivisions (I)
and (ii) referenced above on the effective date of this Section, as approved by the
voters on November 7, 1989, and significantly Impairs a view from a viewing area
of a lot, then notwithstanding whether any person has sought or obtained
issuance of a view restoration permit, the foliage owner shall not let the foliage
exceed the height existing on the effective date of this section (November 17,
1989). The purpose of this paragraph is to ensure that the owners of foliage
which violates the provisions of this paragraph on the effective date of this
section shall not allow the foliage to increase in height. This paragraph does not
'grandfather'or otherwise permit such foliage to continue to block a view."
Page 22
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
A. View Preservation After the Issuance of a View Restoration Permit
(Maintenance Trimming)
1. After the issuance of a View Restoration Permit (VRP) and the initial
foliage trimming and/or removal has been completed in accordance with the approved
permit, Staff shall document the restored view through the use of color or black and
white photography or other method approved by the Commission. The photographic
documentation shall be made part of the City's permanent records and shall be kept on
file at the Community Development Department. Once the initial work associated with
an approved View Restoration Permit is performed and the restored view is
documented with a photograph, the photographic documentation of the restored view
shall be used as a benchmark by City Staff for making a determination of significant
view impairment in any future view preservation enforcement actions that become
necessary.
Upon receipt of a complaint from a View Restoration Permit (VRP)
applicant or the subsequent owner of an applicant's property, that foliage subject to a
VRP decision has exceeded the height limit imposed by a View Restoration Permit, City
Staff shall visit the site and examine the photographic documentation on file or other
evidence to determine whether the foliage has been maintained in a manner that is
consistent with the approved View Restoration Permit (VRP). If foliage which is the
subject of an approved VRP exceeds the height limits prescribed in the approved VRP,
the City shall order that the foliage owner bring the foliage into compliance within 30
days. If the foliage owner does not comply within the specified time, the City will impose
a fine (established by Council Resolution) and the matter will be forwarded to the City
Attorney's office. Alternatively, if the foliage does not exceed the height limits
prescribed in the approved VRP, the City will impose a fine (established by Council
resolution) against the applicant. If City Staff determines that the foliage is in
compliance with the VRP, no further action will be taken in response to the complaint.
Unless specified in a Commission approved long-term maintenance schedule, a
property owner shall be limited to filing a complaint about foliage subject to an approved
VRP, without payment of a fee a maximum of once every twelve (12) months. If a
property owner wishes to file a complaint more frequently than once every twelve (12)
months, the property owner may do so upon payment of a fee established by City
Council Resolution.
2. If foliage not subject to the View Restoration Permit subsequently
grows into the VRP applicant's documented view, said new foliage shall be considered
significant view impairing foliage only if the new foliage exceeds the lesser of the ridge
line of the primary structure on the property or sixteen (16) feet. Upon notification from
a property owner that the new foliage has grown into the documented view, Staff will
visit the VRP applicant's property to verify that the new view-impairing foliage is not in
compliance with the foliage conditions shown in the documented photo. If such a
situation is found, then Staff shall issue a written notice to the foliage owner informing
him/her that Staff has verified that the documented view is significantly impaired by
foliage on the property. Such notice shall require that the foliage owner trim or remove
Page 23
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
the offending foliage to the condition shown in the documented view photograph on file
with the City, within 30 days of receiving such notice and maintain such foliage on a
schedule equivalent to the minimum trimming maintenance cycle imposed by the
Commission or Council for the foliage that is subject to the associated View Restoration
Permit.
3. If the maintenance trimming described in Sections VIII-A2 and A3 is not
completed by the foliage owner as specified by City Staff, 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. 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 permit. 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.
B. View Preservation in Absence of a View Restoration Permit
1. An owner of foliage is responsible for protecting any right he or she has
to exceed the foliage height limitations that went into effect on November 17, 1989, by
submitting the appropriate documentation, which can include photographs.
2. The property owner wishing to protect his/her existing view is
responsible for submitting: 1.) documentation of the view, as it existed on or after the
effective date of the Ordinance; and/or 2.) documentation of the view impairing foliage
as it existed on November 17, 1989. Documentation shall consist of the submittal of a
"Documentation of Existing View or Foliage" Form (attached) accompanied by color or
black and white photographs, which clearly provide evidence that accurately depicts the
view and/or foliage as it existed from the property owner's viewing area on the date the
photograph was taken. The submitted documentation shall be verified by City Staff with
a visit to the view impaired site. If Staff is able to verify that the photographs accurately
depict the view from the property owner's viewing area, as defined in these Guidelines,
then the property owner's photographs will be incorporated into the City's files. if said
photographs do not accurately depict the view from the "viewing area", then Staff will
advise the property owner that the documentation has been rejected. Any verified
photographs will be kept on file in the Department of Community Development and shall
be used as a bench mark in future view preservation enforcement actions.
3. Once documentation of a view and/or foliage has been submitted to the
City and verified by City Staff, a property owner may file a Notice of Intent to File a View
Preservation Application requesting one of the following view preservation actions:
a. That foliage which exceeded the lesser of: a) the ridgeline of the
primary structure on the property; or b) sixteen (16) feet, and significantly impaired the
view from a viewing area of a lot on November 17, 1989 be trimmed to the height that
existed on November 17, 1989, as shown in the submitted and verified documentation;
Page 24
410
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
b. That foliage which exceeds the lesser of: a) the ridgeline of the
primary structure on the property; or b) sixteen (16) feet and has grown into a property
owner's view, as documented and verified by City Staff on or after the effective date of
the ordinance (November 17, 1989), and significantly impairs the view from a viewing
area of the lot, be trimmed so as to eliminate the significant view impairment.
4. Upon receipt of a Notice of Intent to File a View Preservation
Application, Staff will visit the applicant's property to verify if there is a significant
impairment and to eliminate the need to proceed further in the process if there is no
significant view impairment. If Staff determines that no significant view impairment
exists from the viewing area, then Staff shall advise the applicant that there is no need
to proceed with the Notice of Intent to File request. Notwithstanding Staffs initial field
determination, the applicant still may formally apply for a View Preservation Permit
seeking the Director's Final Determination on the permit request. If the Director's Final
Determination in response to said application is that View Preservation action is not
warranted, no further action by the foliage owner is necessary in response to the filed
application. The Director's Final Determination is appealable to the Planning
Commission.
If a significant view impairment is found, then Staff shall issue a written
notice to the foliage owner informing him/her that Staff has verified that the documented
view is significantly impaired by foliage on the property, and such notice shall request
that the foliage owner trim or remove the offending foliage to the condition shown in the
provided documented view photograph within 30 days of receiving such notice.
a. If the foliage owner voluntarily performs the necessary work within
30 days of receiving notice, then no further permit processing shall be required.
b. if no work is performed within 30 days of receiving the notice, then
the applicant may file a formal application. Once a formal View Preservation Permit
application has been submitted, a Notice of the Director's Determination shall be issued
to the applicant and foliage owner(s) giving the foliage owner ninety (90) days to
perform the necessary work.
c. The Director may require that a long-term foliage maintenance
schedule be incorporated into the conditions of approval of an approved View
Preservation Permit. The purpose of the maintenance schedule is to dictate the
minimum frequency of future trimming (i.e. semi-annual, annual or biennial) based on
the growth rates of the subject foliage so as to not significantly impair a view.
Alternatively, the Director may specify the amount of allowable growth as measured with
respect to a fixed point of reference that will not significantly encroach into the view, and
require that when this point is reached, the foliage owner may be required to trim the
foliage back to the height established by the Director. In establishing the maintenance
schedule, the Director may take into account seasonal dormant periods of the subject
foliage, when trimming is least harmful to the foliage.
Page 25
• •
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
d. The Director's Determination may be appealed to the Planning
Commission by the applicant, the foliage owner or any interested party by filing a written
appeal and submitting the appropriate fee, as established by City Council resolution, to
the City within fifteen (15) days of the receipt of the Director's Determination Notice.
Prior to the public hearing, Commissioners shall conduct a site visit to the applicant's
property pursuant to Section IV (E)(5). Commissioners will also visit the foliage owner's
property if requested in writing to do so by the foliage owner(s). The decision of the
Commission may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant, the foliage owner or
any interested party by filing a written appeal and submitting the appropriate fee, as
established by City Council resolution, to the City within fifteen (15) days of the
Commission's decision.
5. Once the appeal process has been exhausted, the City's View
Preservation Determination Decision shall be final. If the City's final determination is
that view preservation action is warranted on a particular property, the foliage owner
shall be responsible for trimming the foliage, at his/her expense, as so ordered by the
City. If the required work as specified herein is not completed, as verified by Staff,
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. 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 Preservation permit. 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.
6. Once the initial work associated with a formal View Preservation
decision is performed, Staff will document the applicant's view with photographs taken
from the applicant's viewing area with a standard camera lens that will not alter the
actual image that is being documented from the viewing area. The photographs will be
kept on file with the City and copies shall be given to all involved parties to use for future
trimming purposes.
7. The filing of an application by a property owner requesting a view
preservation action without payment of a fee shall be limited to a maximum of once
every twelve (12) months. If a property owner wishes to file an application more
frequently than once every twelve (12) months, the property owner may do so upon
payment of a fee established by City Council Resolution.
8. Upon receipt of a written complaint from a View Preservation Permit
(VPP) applicant or the subsequent owner of an applicant's property, that foliage has
exceeded the height limit imposed by a View Preservation Permit, City Staff shall visit
the site and examine the photographic documentation on file or other evidence to
determine whether the foliage has been maintained in a manner that is consistent with
the approved View Preservation Permit (VPP). If foliage, which is the subject of an
approved VPP, exceeds the height limits prescribed in the approved VPP, the City shall
Page 26
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
order that the foliage owner bring the foliage into compliance within 30 days. If the
foliage owner does not comply within the specified time, the City will impose a fine
(established by Council Resolution) and the matter will be forwarded to the City
Attorney's office. Alternatively, if the foliage does not exceed the height limits
prescribed in the approved VPP, the City will impose a fine (established by Council
resolution) against the applicant. If City Staff determines that the foliage is in
compliance with the VPP, no further action will be taken in response to the complaint.
C. Review Criteria for View Preservation Applications in the Absence of a View
Restoration Permit
In order for a View Preservation Application to be approved, the Community
Development Director must make the following five findings:
1. The applicant has complied with the early neighbor consultation
process and has shown proof of cooperation on his/her part to resolve conflicts.
a. Each applicant must provide evidence of early neighbor
consultation with each foliage owner, utilizing the process described below.
b. Evidence of adequate early neighbor consultation shall consist of
each applicant filing a "Notice of Intent to File a View Preservation Application" with the
City prior to the submittal of a formal View Preservation Application. Said notice shall
be on a form provided by the City and shall be signed by the owner of the applicant's
property. Each applicant shall indicate, by marking the appropriate box on the "Notice of
Intent to File a View Preservation Permit Application" that the applicant has made an
attempt to contact the foliage owner prior to submittal and shall submit written proof of
that attempt in the form of a copy of a registered letter and the return receipt.
(1). Upon receipt of a signed and complete Notice from an
applicant, the Community Development Director shall provide written notification to each
foliage owner listed in the Notice, via certified mail, of the pending application. The
City's notification letter shall also request that each foliage owner trim or remove the
offending foliage to the height and condition shown in the provided documented view
photograph within 30 days of receiving such notice.
(2). Once an applicant submits a "Notice of Intent to File a View
Preservation Permit Application", and the City provides notification to a foliage owner of
the pending application, the early neighbor consultation process shall be deemed to be
terminated and the applicant(s) may immediately file a formal View Preservation
Application with the City if the foliage owner fails to voluntarily perform the work within
30 days of receiving written notice from the City.
(3). If an appeal hearing is necessary, the applicant may be asked
to explain his/her specific efforts to comply with the ordinance requirement for
attempting to resolve conflict.
Page 27
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
2. Foliage exceeding sixteen (16) 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.
a. After the location of the "viewing area" on the applicant's property is
determined, the Director must find whether foliage, which exceeds the lower of sixteen
feet or the ridge line of the primary structure, significantly impairs a view from the
"viewing area".
b. To determine which of the two measurements referenced in the
paragraph above is the lowest, the sixteen (16) foot height measurement shall be
measured from the base of the plant or tree (where it emerges from the ground).
c. For structures with multiple roofline heights that would block the
view if the foliage were not present, foliage on the property shall be lowered to the
roofline of that portion of the structure that otherwise would block the view. Where a
structure with multiple roofline heights does not otherwise block a view, foliage on the
property shall be trimmed to the applicable height limit set forth in this paragraph 2.
d. Section 17.76.030 of the City's Development Code limits the height
of hedges. A "hedge" is defined by the Code as "shrubbery or trees planted and
maintained in such a manner as to create a physical barrier." A hedge can be included
in a View Preservation Permit application, if the top of the hedge exceeds sixteen feet in
height or the ridge line of the primary structure, whichever measurement is lower. In
such cases, the Director may require a hedge to be trimmed to the lesser of sixteen (16)
feet or the ridge line of the primary structure, if necessary to restore the view. However,
if the top of the hedge is below sixteen feet or the ridge line of the primary structure,
whichever measurement is lower, these cases shall be referred to the City's Code
Enforcement Division for resolution. Foliage which is determined by the Los Angeles
County Fire Department to be a fire hazard also shall be referred to the City's Code
Enforcement Division for immediate resolution.
e. The Director shall only take action on foliage which significantly
impairs a view from the applicant's viewing area. Foliage which does not significantly
impair a view may remain in the applicant's view frame. The following criteria may be
used to help determine whether a view is being "significantly" impaired by foliage:
(1). Foliage Position Within the View Frame. Foliage that is
located in the center of a view frame is more likely to be found to create a significant
view impairment than foliage located on the outer edge of a view frame.
(2). Single-component View vs. Multi-component View. Some view
frames contain a combination of different view components, such as a view of the
ocean, harbor and City lights (multi-component view); while some view frames consist
Page 28
11)
View Restoration and Preservation Permit Guidelines and Procedures
July 20, 2010
entirely of one component, such as only a view of the ocean (single-component view).
Foliage that entirely obscures one of the components of a "multi-component" view is
more likely to be found to create a significant view impairment than foliage that impairs
the same degree of view of a "single-component" view(see attached diagram).
(3). Prominent Landmarks. Greater weight should be given to
prominent landmarks or other significant features in the view frame such as the Vincent
Thomas Bridge, harbor, shoreline, distant mountain areas, city skylines, and Channel
Islands. As a result, foliage which impairs a view of any of these landmarks is more
likely to be found to create a significant view impairment.
3. "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."
Staff from the Department of Community Development will determine the
distance from the applicant's property line to the nearest property line of the site
containing the foliage under consideration.
4. The foliage significantly impairing the view did not exist as view
impairing vegetation in November 1989 or thereafter.
5. 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."
a. The burden of proving an "unreasonable infringement of indoor
and/or outdoor privacy" shall be on the foliage owner. The Director will make a
determination on a case-by-case basis.
b. Given the variety and number of options which are available to
preserve indoor privacy, greater weight generally will be given to protecting outdoor
privacy than to protecting indoor privacy.
Page 29
• 0
Exhibit "B":
City's Request For Proposals
Exhibit "B"
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc
)
4r)
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
April 25, 2013
Consultant
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS—View Restoration Arborist
Consultant for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Dear Consultant:
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is requesting proposals from qualified consulting firms to
provide professional arboriculture services in connection with the administration of the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes' View Preservation and Restoration Ordinance (View Ordinance). The
purpose of this letter is to provide you with the information needed to submit a proposal for
review by the City and, if selected, enter into a contract with the City.
GENERAL BACKGROUND
GENERAL BACKGROUND—City of Rancho Palos Verdes
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes (the City) was incorporated in 1973 and consists of a total
area of about 13.6 square miles with 7.5 miles of coastline. The Palos Verdes Peninsula,
induding the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, consists of unique topography that varies from steep
canyon walls to low valleys with elevations that range from sea level to 1,480 feet. The City is
bound on the north by the cities of Rolling Hills Estates, Rolling Hills and Palos Verdes Estates,
and to the east by San Pedro (City of Los Angeles). The population of the City, according to the
U.S. Census Bureau in 2011, is 41,946 and the character of the community is primarily
residential. Because of the City's location on a peninsula, many residents are afforded ocean
and city basin views. Since the City's incorporation in 1973, residents sought to protect their
views from needless encroachment by foliage. Thus, in November 1989, the voters of Rancho
Palos Verdes passed an ordinance (Proposition M)that created a City administered process to
restore and preserve their views.
GENERAL BACKGROUND—View Restoration Permit Program
The View Restoration Division of the Community Development Department is responsible for
administering the View Ordinance, which is considered to be one of the most stringent view
ordinances in the State, relating to vegetation. The View Ordinance is codified as Section
17.02.040 of the City's Development Code and the view application application process and
procedures are outlined in the City's adopted "View Restoration and Preservation Guidelines"
Request for Proposal
Rancho Palos Verdes— View Restoration Arborist Consulting Services
Page 2 of 6
To address view impairments caused by foliage located on private property, residents submit a
pre-application for view restoration. The City will contract a mediator in an effort to resolve the
issue between the view applicant and the tree owner. If an agreement cannot be reached as a
result of the pre-application, the resident seeking a view may choose to submit a formal
application for View Restoration. If a formal application is submitted, City staff will often seek
the opinion of a consulting arborist concerning a tree's age, trimming risks, etc. in order to
formulate trimming recommendations to the Planning Commission or City Council. The City
also has another permit process called View Preservation which was created to preserve views
that existed in 1989 or later. The View Preservation Permit process is predicated on the City
protecting views that are documented by residents.
A description of these permits and the View Restoration process can be found at URL:
htto://aalosverdes.corm/rov/otanning/vrestoration/index.cfm
The City's Development Code(Chapter 17)and Municipal Code can be accessed at URL:
http://oalosverdes.com/rovicityderk/munidatabasefindex.cfm
SCOPE OF WORK
The City is seeking the assistance of a consultant with expertise in conducting on-site field
assessments, and preparing professional arboriculture reports which will be utilized in
connection with the administration of the City's View Preservation and Restoration Ordinance.
The professional arboriculture services to be performed by the consultant shall include, but are
not limited to,the services more particularly described below:
1. Upon request, by City Staff, conducting field visits, telephone conferencing, and basic
tree analysis via email pursuant to the procedures set forth in the City's Local View
Restoration Guidelines and Procedures
2. Upon request, by City Staff, providing the City with brief, usually 1-2 page written reports
concerning, but not limited to, foliage health and safety, growth rates, trimming or
removal impacts, and other such topics relating to arboriculture services.
3. Upon request, by City Staff providing expert arboriculture testimony before the Planning
Commission and the City Council when considering the effect of foliage removal,
trimming, and/or replacement for View Restoration Application Permit requests.
Proposal and Qualifications
Format and Contents
Consultants interested in being considered for providing the above-described services should
submit a written proposal of the firm's or consultant's qualifications, and methodologies for
conducting on-site tree assessments and preparing arborist reports. The proposal should
Request for Proposal
Rancho Palos Verdes— View Restoration Arborist Consulting Services
Page 3 of 6
demonstrate that the firm or consultant has the appropriate background, experience, technical
capabilities, staff, and certifications to adequately provide those types of services. To insure the
firm/consultant is capable of providing this level of service to prepare arborist reports in a timely
manner, the following minimum qualifications must be met:
• Firm/consultant must have/be a certified arborist and provide the certification
number
• Firm/consultant must be a member of the American Society of Consulting
Arborists(ASCA)
• Must carry adequate professional liability insurance consistent with details on
pages 4 and 5 of this RFP
• Firm/consultant must possess the ability and tools necessary to create arborist
reports
• All prepared arborist reports must. be compatible with Microsoft Word and
PowerPoint for presentations prepared by City Staff
The proposal should include, at minimum, the following:
(If any items listed below are not applicable, please indicate as such.)
1. Name, address and phone number of the interested firm/individual consultant and
contact person;
2. A statement of any possible conflict of interest the consultant may have in providing the
requested services on a specific request.
3. Detailed narrative statement including a description of the firm's proposed approach to
providing the range of above-described services the firm and previous experience
including sample arborist reports;
4. An organizational chart showing the names and resumes of the primary consulting
certified arborist and other key personnel who would provide the services to the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes, along with their background,experience and qualifications;
5. Hourly billing rate of the firm/individual consultant who would be providing the
requested services;
6. The mark-up for reimbursable expenses not identified elsewhere in the proposal.
Standard billing rates for other direct expenses normally involved in the preparation of
an arborist report, including, but not limited transportation, postage, communication,
reproduction, equipment, etc., including hourly breakdown for services provided, and
Request for Proposal
Rancho Palos Verdes— View Restoration Arborist Consulting Services
Page 4 of 6
scale of previous projects). The detailed cost estimate should be as specific as
possible, minimizing variable costs to the greatest degree possible ;
7. Preliminary estimates of the typical cost of providing the requested services.
Specifically, please also provide an estimated cost for the sample case below.
Please see the photo below as an example of a typical View Restoration Assessment.
A hypothetical case would be to assess whether 10 feet of trimming down the 20-foot
tall Coral tree shown below would likely kill or injure the tree. A typical case would
require a field visit to Rancho Palos Verdes, a field assessment of a specific tree and a
brief 1-2 page follow up report for Staffs review.
,.- w
•
"-" � • •�nom.
••
•O r 4.
_ ,
.4,31r
4,4
•
4
•
Please indicate all costs for this sample project including the details mentioned in item
No. 6 above.
8. Statement of Qualifications.
9. The names, addresses, and telephone numbers for a minimum of three references
from other governmental or private entities where similar work has been performed.
Any additional information that the consultant wishes to submit may be attached in the form of
appendices.
Insurance Requirements
The City will require the firm/consultant selected to provide insurance, and proof thereof as
follows:
• Workman's Compensation, in accordance with State Laws
• Commercial General Liability in the amount of $1 million for each occurrence,
with $2 million in the general aggregate for bodily injury, death, loss or property
•
Request for Proposal
Rancho Palos Verdes—View Restoration Arborist Consulting Services
Page 5 of 6
damage for products or completed operations and any and all other activities
undertaken by the consultant in the performance of this Agreement
Said policy or policies shall be issued by an insurer admitted to do business in
the State of California and rated in A.M. Best's Insurance Guide with a rating of
A:VII or better.
• Professional Liability in the amount of$1 million per claim and in the aggregate.
Said policy or policies shall be issued by an insurer admitted to do business in the
State of California and rated in Best's Insurance Guide with a rating of A:VII or
better.
• A policy or policies of Automobile Liability Insurance, with minimum of one million
dollars ($1,000,000) per claim and occurrence and two million dollars
($2,000,000) in the aggregate for bodily injuries or death of one person and five
hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) for property damage arising from one
Incident.
Selection Process
Deadline for Submission
Four copies of the proposal shall be submitted no later than 4:3Oom on May 24, 2013 to the
Community Development Department, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275,Attn:Amy Seeraty,Associate Planner.
Following the receipt of proposals from interested consultants, Staff will review the proposals for
the purpose of selecting one consultant. If a need for additional information from any of the
submitted proposals is necessary, City Staff intends to Contact respondents by Wednesday,
May 29, 2013. If selected, the consultant will be required to submit an additional eight
copies of their proposal.
Selection Schedule
The request for Qualifications and Project Proposal draft schedule is as follows:
April 25, 2013 RFP issued
May 24, 2013 Response to RFP due to City
May 29, 2013 Staff will contact consultants if City has questions
0 0
Request for Proposal
Rancho Palos Verdes— View Restoration Arborist Consulting Services
Page 6 of 6
June 5, 2013 Firm selected by Staff
June 18, 2013 Contract presented to the City Council for Approval
Selection criteria will include, but not be limited to the following:
1. Demonstrated background and experience in preparing arborist reports.
2. Completion of Submittal Requirements
3. References
4. Depth of resources to perform work
5. Cost
Discretion
The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals or to request and obtain, from one or
more of the consulting firms, supplementary information as may be necessary for City Staff to
analyze the proposal pursuant to the consultant selection criteria. The City may require
consultants to participate in additional rounds of more refined submittal before the ultimate
selection of a consultant team is made. These rounds could encompass revisions of the
submittal criteria in response to the nature and scope of the initial proposal.
The Consultant, by submitting a response to this Request for Proposal (RFP), waives all right to
protest or seek any legal remedies whatsoever regarding any aspect of this RFP. The City may
choose to interview one or more of the firms/companies responding to this RFP.
Contact Information
Firms may submit questions or comments to Ms. Seeraty regarding this RFP at any time, from
date of consultant's receipt of this RFP through the RFP response date. Questions regarding
the request for proposal should be submitted via email to Ms. Seeraty who may be reached at
amvse.rDvscom. A response to your questions will be provided to you by Ms. Seeraty. Thank
you for your attention to this matter.
Si,cerely,
4 oel R jas,AIC-
Corn nity De = • •ment Director
cc: Gregory Pfost,AICP, Deputy Community Development Director
Amy Seeraty,Associate Planner
File
0 ID
Exhibit "C":
Consultant's Proposal, including Schedule of Hourly Rates
Exhibit "C"
R6876-0001\1585814v3.doc
0 10
/i
ARBORGATE CONSULTING,INC.
ARBORICULTURE&HORTICULTURE
May 10,2013 RECEIVED
MAY 1 3 2013
Ms.Amy Seeraty
City of Rancho Palos Verdes COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Community Development Department
30940 Hawthorn Blvd. DEPARTMENT
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275-5391
Re: View Restoration Arborist Consultant for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Dear Ms. Seeraty:
Please find enclosed 4 copies of my proposal and 4 copies of my references. I have also enclosed samples
of smaller reports as I believe that is more in line with your intentions. If you like,I can e-mail copies of
larger reports and some more related to view issues.
I have had occasion to work with citizens in respect to your ordinance. On one such case I brought down
an attorney from the bay area who is also an arborist and had worked on drafting view ordinances up
there. He found it pretty"bullet-proof'. I have also worked with many Orange County HOAs who have
CC&Rs with view protection clauses and have helped train and safe otherwise good trees.
I don't believe there is anyone who could provide what you need to help implement this ordinance better,
and yet minimize the loss of trees. As you probably know,there is also the State Government Code
53067,which decries topping. Many tree services call topping"crown reduction"as a way to protect
themselves from suits based on this code. Real crown reduction that does not destroy the tree requires a
higher level of arboricultural understanding than many tree services have.
There is also the issue of independence. A tree service anxious to make money make take a job and write
a report to justify their topping. Tree services often offer consulting,but usually lack independence and
none I know of have a registered consulting arborist on staff
I believe there are many trees planted in error. Their landscape architect,landscape contractor or on their
own selected a species that either did not respect the ordinance,or they didn't really know the
characteristics of that species. Many times the best solution is to just remove and replant with a good
species. Your area has hundreds of species that could be selected and many that would not need pruning
to control the height.
As you consider the various proposals please keep in mind not only my years of experience and
credentials,but also the range of experience I can apply to your needs. No young assistants or junior
arborists will work on your projects. On my web site you can find the range of other services I provide.
Thank you for your consideration.
Res11 submitted,
ti
Arbor to Consulting,Inc.
Greg Applegate,ASCA,ASLA
Registered Consulting Arborist#365
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
110
/1
ARBORGATE CONSULTING,INC.
ARBORICULTURE&HORTICULTURE
Consulting Arborist Proposal for
View Restoration
Introduction
Business Background
This proposal is submitted by Arborgate Consulting,Inc.,a California S Corporation,engaged
entirely in consulting. Mr.Greg Applegate is the CEO and sole consultant. He performs all
inspections and reporting. He maintains independence and objectivity by having no
complementary business activity that could benefit from his recommendations. Mr.Applegate
has been working in horticulture since 1963 and as a professional consultant since 1984.
Project Background
The City contacted Arborgate Consulting and requested this proposal. The City is requesting
consulting to help administer the View Ordinance. Due to the many residents who have view
homes,the View Ordinance is one of the most stringent view ordinances in California,and is
codified as Section 17.02.040. If a resident fills out an application for View Restoration because
the issue was not resolved through the mediator,City staff may seek the opinion of a consulting
arborist. The consulting arborist will provide information regarding the tree's age,trimming
risks,etc. in order to formulate recommendations to the Planning Commission or City Council.
Scope of Work
The City is seeking the assistance of a consultant with expertise in conducting on-site field
assessments,and preparing professional arboricultural reports to be utilized in the administration
of the City's View Preservation and Restoration Ordinance. The professional arboricultural
services to be performed by the consultant shall include,but are not limited to,the services
described below:
1. Upon request,by City Staff,conducting field visits,telephone conferencing,and basic
tree analysis via email pursuant to the procedures set forth in the City's Local View
Restoration Guidelines and Procedures.
2. Upon request,by City Staff,providing the City with brief,usually 1-2 page written
reports concerning,but not limited to,foliage health and safety,growth rates,trimming or
removal impacts,and other such topics relating to arboricultural services.
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
41,
1
Page 2 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr.Joel Rojas,City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc., Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
3. Upon request,by City Staff providing expert arboricultural testimony before the Planning
Commission and the City Council when considering the effect of foliage removal,
trimming,and/or replacement for View Restoration Application Permit requests.
Consulting Equipment
A large horticultural and arboricultural library and software/database collection
40-foot extending fiberglass height measurement pole
AirKnife for root crown examination
Biltmore stick
Calipers
Computers,laptops,tablet with Microsoft Office Word,PowerPoint and Excel
A business level high speed cable modem
Diameter tapes
HP Color Laserjet 5550 dtn 11x17 printer
IML Resistographs F300 and MD300
Nikon AW 100 and D600(full frame)digital cameras
Nikon range finder/hypsometer
Outdoor green laser pointer
Shigometer
Soil test probe and bucket augur
Sounding hammers
Qualifications of Consulting Arborist
Registered Consulting Arborist#365
Certified Arborist WE-0180a
Certified Tree Risk Assessor PNC-444
Greg Applegate has worked in the horticulture field, including landscape architecture,nursery
and arboriculture for over forty-five years. Compare the registration numbers and certification
numbers for comparable experience. Mr.Applegate is not just a certified arborist or member of
ASCA,besides the other qualifications Mr.Applegate had the third highest score in the quarter
that he took the arborist's certification exam and was one of the first to be certified in southern
California. His certificate number is WE-0180a. He was also the third person to graduate from
the American Society of Consulting Arborists' (ASCA)Arboricultural Consulting Academy. He
was the first person in the nation to qualify for registration in ASCA under the new more
stringent Academy standards. The status of being a registered ASCA member requires passing a
number of exams and review of past reports. It is different than just being a member of ASCA.
He was the first certified tree risk assessor in California and for a while the only one. His degree
is in Landscape Architecture from Cal Poly,Pomona in 1973. Mr. Applegate is a member of
ASLA,the American Society of Landscape Architects;ISA,the International Society of
Arboriculture; STS,the Street Tree Seminar;IPS,the International Palm Society;IOA,
International Oak Society,ASCA,and the American Society of Consulting Arborists. Attached
please find a current resume. Below is a sample of relevant past projects:
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
410
Page 3 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr. Joel Rojas, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc., Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
Insurance
This consultant carries$2,000,000 general liability and E&0,and$1,000,000 auto insurance No
claims have ever been made against any of the above policies.
Arborgate Consulting does not carry Workman's Compensation Insurance because I have no workers.
Conflict of Interest Statement
Arborgate Insurance has no projects or cases pending which could cause a conflict of interest.
Experience
Campus Arboricultural Consulting
Alverno High School tree protection
Arcadia High School-Full campus tree evaluation&hazard analysis
Broadacres Elementary School Hazard Evaluation after roots cut for Century Paving-
Cal Poly,Pomona—Tree preservation study for Oakridge Landscape, Inc.
CalState Fullerton,Phase III Housing tree survey for Fong Hart Schneider
Cal State Long Beach—Hazard evaluation for Dennis.J.Amoroso Construction
Cal State Long Beach Chancellor' Office-prepare Maintenance guidelines with LPA
Cal State Long Beach parking lot trees for EPT,Landscape Architecture-
Cal State Long Beach,Physical Plant Expansion,tree preservation for Golden Rain L/S
Cal State Northridge-tree preservation for SJ Amoroso Construction
California Institute of Technology(CalTech)—tree preservation at KISS Institute
California School for the Deaf Tree Appraisal for City of Riverside
Camino Grove Elementary School for Arcadia USD
Chaminade School Baseball Diamond Expansion for Rosenheim&Assoc
Chapman College—Tree evaluation for Arnel Development Company
Compton School District-Hazard Evaluation for GKK Works
Corona del Mar High School-Tristania diagnosis
Crafton Hills College—full campus survey,hazard analysis,and tree preservation
Crean Lutheran High School—tree evaluation and pruning recommendations
Curtis School—Tree preservation for EEK
El Camino College—tree preservation and hazard analysis for Bovis Lend Lease
Fountain Valley High School-Hazard Evaluation for Angeles Contractor
Friends Christian Church High School,Yorba Linda—tree evaluation
Hamilton High School—tree preservation report for IBI Group-
Harvard Westlake School Preservation of Mexican Ash for Matt Construction
Huntington Beach High School-safety pruning specifications&training
Huntington Christian School Redwoods Adjoining New Modulars •
Keppel Elementary School Tree Moving Analysis-Sheck Developers
L.Rincon Elementary Hazard Evaluation of Liquidambars for Dougherty&Dougherty
Long Beach Community College Golf Mall Tree Preservation Study-Gonzales-Goodale
Long Beach Schools Sycamore Hazard Evaluation for GKK Works
Long Beach West Cabrillo High School-McCarthy
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
Page 4 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr. Joel Rojas, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc., Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
Los Angeles City College--campus tree survey and hazard analysis
Los Angeles Southwest College Ficus Report for Ted Tanaka Architects
Los Angeles Trade Tech—tree preservation
Loyola High School—diagnosis and tree preservation
Loyola Marymount Campus-many projects: diagnostic,hazard analysis,and preservation
Marlborough School,many projects,tree preservation,street tree survey,diagnosis,etc
Marymount High School—diagnostics,tree preservation
Mt. Saint Mary's College-Doheny Campus—Tree preservation study
McKinley Elementary School San Gabriel Unified School District-Thomas Blurock Architects
Nellis School Summary Findings—for JKB Construction Mgmt
Orange Unified School District—hazard analysis
Pierce Junior College—Parking lot tree preservation report for Sasaki Associates
Pomona Unified School District 4 schools report
PSI, Santa Monica—Tree Preservation Study
Redhill Lutheran Church and School-diagnostics
Rio Hondo college--Oak tree relocation study and full campus evaluation and hazard analysis
Riverside City College—Full campus tree evaluation&hazard analysis
Roosevelt Elementary School San Gabriel Unified School District-Thomas Blurock Architects
Saddleback College--Ficus trees root damage
Saddleback College-Ficus at James B.Utt Library,for Fong,Hart,Schneider
Saddleback School District—Trabuco Elementary School Oak hazard evaluation
San Marcos High School tree inventory and evaluation for Lusardi,
San Ysidro School District,Beyer School Cherry Transplant Suitability Evaluation
Sepulveda Middle School—Tree Preservation Report for Bojorquez&Lefner
South Region Elementary School#10—Tree evaluation for Nuvis
Simons School,Pomona—Tree Preservation Report for Fong Hart Schneider
St Margaret's Episcopal School-Ganado Parking Lot Tree Preservation
Sutter Middle School Tree Preservation Report for Hill Partnership
Tarbut vTorah School,Irvine—tree inspection at nursery and site for Snyder Langston
The Claremont Colleges—expert witness consulting for Korda,Johnson,&Wall
The Country School tree preservation study through LRM
The Newcomb School LBUSD Oak trees preservation for The Planning Center-
Third Street Elementary School—Hazard evaluation for Icon Engineering
UCI—campus arborist,diagnostic,hazard analysis,preservation and specifications over 20 years
UCI Medical Center-Hazard evaluation and general arboricultural consulting
UCLA—several diagnostic projects through Glen Dake Landscape Architect
UCLA Eucalyptus Preservation Plan for Kariskint-Crumb Landscape
USC—campus arborist,full campus survey,hazard analysis,preservation&specifications over 11 years
USC Medical Center-general arboricultural consulting
Valley Elementary School#10—Tree Preservation Report for Hill Partnership
Villa Park Electuary School Tree Hazard Evaluation for Orange Unified School District
Washington Elementary School tree preservation report for IBI Group
Webb School,Claremont—various projects including diagnosis and tree risk assessment
West Cabrillo High School Tree Hazard Evaluation for Long Beach Unified School District
West Los Angeles College-Tree Management&Preservation Study
Westminster High School-Tree Protection for Day Construction Co
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
Page 5 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr. Joel Rojas, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc.,Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
General Arboricultural Consulting
301 Street Architects-Maloof Tree Preservation and Relocation
AES Huntington Beach Power Generation Facility—species and maintenance recommendations
Amgen-Maintenance Manual and Tree Preservation Report for Mia Lehrer Associates
ARB-Irvine Regional Park tree preservation during sewer line excavation
Airport Center-Buildings#2&3 Tree&Palm Assessment Report for Jupiter Realty Corp.
Alzheimer's Residence-Yorba Linda,Tree Preservation Report for Yorba Linda LLC
AMCAL Multi Housing-94th&Broadway LA-protected tree report
Anaheim Marriot Hotel—Palm evaluation,diagnosis and replacement inspection
Aquarium of the Pacific,tree preservation
AT&T Mobility—eucalyptus study for Cal Trans
Bar Harbour at Capo by the Sea for California Pacific Homes
Barlow Hospital,tree preservation plan for Jack Bryant&Associates
Bay Laurel—Encinitas Torrey pine preservation monitoring for Greystone Homes
Bayside Palm Evaluation&Diagnosis for RPW Services Inc.
Belmont Village Senior Care Facility Tree Preservation Plan for Belmont Corporation
Bixby Ranch Co—tree preservation,and maintenance guidelines.
Boeing Fitness Center Tree Preservation Report for Boeing Corporation
Bolinger Estates Preservation Report for Brandywine Development
Boyle Engineering Corp.-Diagnose Parking Lot Tree Problem
Brittany-pruning,maintenance,&installation specifications for John Laing Homes-
Broad&Westminster-ficus removal&appraisal report for Morgan Development
Burton Associates-Oakcreek Golf Course Tree Preservation Plan
CalTrans—appraisal and expert witness consulting,various cases
CalTrans-diagnosis of Washingtonias in San Clemente for Richard Fisher Associates
CalTrans—palm evaluation for E.L.Yeager Construction Co
Calafia pruning recommendations for Clark&Green
California Lakes tree preservation for Dangermond&Associates
California Lakes tree preservation for Metropolitan Water District
California Lakes tree selection for Immersive Design
Cantada Maintenance&Pruning Guidelines,etc for California Pacific Homes
Casa Paloma San Juan Capistrano tree preservation plan for Birtcher Senior Properties
Centex Homes,Inc.-Legacy at Bryant Ranch—Oak&Pomegranate Preservation Plan
Cerritos Regional Park Tree Evaluation and Preservation Report for Calvin R.Abe Associates
Chrystal Court,Palm I.D.and Appraisal for Four Seasons Nursery
Church of Our Savior—Tree Preservation Study
City of Azusa—construction monitoring oaks and palms
City of Garden Grove-appraisal of trees at 11277 Garden Grove Blvd
City of Highland—Various tree and landscape appraisal cases
City of Huntington Beach,Edison Park Tree Inventory
City of Huntington Beach,certification of landscape plans
City of Inglewood—Expert witness consulting and testimony
City of Irvine—Jamboree Road pine appraisal
City of Laguna Beach,City Hall Hazard Evaluation&pruning supervision
City of Laguna Beach,blue gum hazard evaluation
City of Laguna Niguel median trees study for Ann Christoph Associates
City of Laguna Woods,Moulton Parkway olive evaluation
City of Laguna Woods Hazard Analysis El Toro Road Ficus and Grevillea evaluation
City of Lancaster-Lancaster Blvd Street Trees for Fong Hart Schneider
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
Page 6 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr. Joel Rojas,City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc., Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
City of Loma Linda-review status of trees in parks and LMD areas
City of Los Angeles-Yucca Park preservation of memorial pine,and expert witness consulting
City of Orange—various projects
City of Palm Springs-Whitewater Golf Course tree evaluation
City of Pasadena Water&Power-Tree Inventory and evaluation
City of Rancho Mirage-City Hall Tree Inventory and evaluation
City of San Juan Capistrano City Hall tree hazard evaluation
City of San Marcos Torrey pine appraisal
City of Torrance—Street tree root evaluation for Ranco Construction
City of Tustin-Pasadena St Tree preservation
City of Walnut Ashley Park Pepper Tree Hazard Evaluation
City of Yorba Linda-Main Street safety pruning recommendations
City of Yorba Linda,6 parks—eucalyptus psyllid management report
City of Yorba Linda-Old Town.Pine Preservation Study
City of Yorba Linda-Yorba Linda Blvd.Pine Preservation Study
Claremont Senior Care Facility for Atkinson&Associates
Coto de Caza oak preservation for Clark&Green
County of Los Angeles—on call arboricultural consulting through Nuvis Landscape Architects
Cucamonga Corner Point Arborist Report for Lantex
Cypress Business&Professional Center Tree Preservation Report for Nick Adachi Architects
Del Obispo and Camino del Avion Tree Preservation for EPT,Landscape Architecture
Disney Hong Kong Project plant selection for WDI
Disney's Animal Kingdom—plant selection,procurement,specifications,etc
Disney's California Adventure—procurement,plant selection,replacement guidelines for WDI
Disneyland-Main Street,Oak Health Study
Disneyland-Hazard evaluation,diagnosis of tree problems,etc.
Disneyland Hotel-diagnosis of tree problems,etc
DisneySeas--Toyko plant selection for WDI
Dominguez Ranch Eucalyptus Preservation Report for City of Yorba Linda
Dominigoni Reservoir Tree Assesment for The Planning Center
Dreamworks—Evaluation of oak trees-Glendale
East Lake Village Shopping Center,parking lot tree preservation for Sambucetti&Burns
Eisenhower Park,Orange-Tree Protection and Root Cutting Specifications for conduit trenching
El Segundo Community Center for LPA
Esplanade Shopping Center—Oxnard Phase 1 &2 Tree Reports for M&H Development
Fairfield Ranch-Centex Homes Oak Suitability Study for Smithgall Johnson&Associates
Fairhaven Memorial Park&Mortuary—tree preservation,diagnostics and tree selection
Forsum, Sommers,Murphy-San Juan Capistrano Condominiums,tree preservation.
George Air Force Base Conversion,tree&palm selection for Douglas Newcomb Inc
Hewes Park Orange—Tree Preservation Plan for TNR
Higgens Ranch Project Tree Preservation Plan for Polygon Homes
Hillcrest Park,Fullerton-Arboricultural Management&Preservation Plan for RHA
Hollyhills Drain Construction,BH--Tree Preservation Study Diversified Landscape&Maint
Hollywood Park Tree Evaluation for Mia Lehrer Associates
Home Depot Inglewood—Tree Preservation and monitoring
Homestead Village-Calabasas, Oak Tree Preservation Plan for Huitt-Zollars
Howard Johnson Anaheim Landscape Appraisal for Richard Price
Inland Empire Center,Fontana,tree preservation plan for Birtcher-Trackman
In-N--Out Burger Restaurants-Santa Maria&San Ramon Tree Preservation Plans
Irvine Spectrum,Eucalyptus Windrow Preservation Plan for RPA
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
1110 •
Page 7 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr. Joel Rojas,City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc., Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
Jamboree Road widening,Pines Preservation Plan for Clark&Green
Jamboree Road Widening Appraisal of Trees at Risk for the City of Irvine
Jordan Avenue Oak Preservation Report for New Urban West
Kaiser Hospital Fontana—tree moving evaluation for Hamilton Construction
Kaiser Permanente Pasadena-Pruning recommendations
Kaufman&Broad-Tree Assesment/Buena Park
Koll Center tree evaluation&recommendations for IMA Design Group
Laguna Canyon Road preservation of eucalyptus study for The Irvine Company-
Lake
ompanyLake Forest Corridor Center(Home Depot)Tree Preservation Report for Steadfast Properties
LaMirada Community Regional Park Root Report for EPT
LaPuente Parks Tree Study for Heimberger&Hirsh,Landscape Architecture
Land Concern,Landscape Architecture-Tree Lists for projects in Colorado
Landscape Architect Exam,Plant Materials for State of California,Consumer Affairs
Legacy at Bryant Ranch,preservation and maintenance guidelines for Citation Homes
Los Angeles AF Base Palm Preservation&Replacement Program and tree risk assessment
Lynne Deane Barbaro&Associates-Frederick's Development,Oxnard tree preservation
Magnolia Memorial Park—Hazard evaluation of stone pines
Marriot Courtyard—Pasadena Damage Appraisal for Koll Construction
Mayberry Ranch-Diagnose tree problems and prepare Maintenance guidelines
Mesa Verde Shopping Center Tree Preservation Report for Tarlos Associates
MetroLink—San Bernardino,Palm Preservation Report for DMJM
Milestone Builders-San Dimas Oaks,Oak tree preservation
Miramar Nurseries—Electronic catalog with Garden Soft plant selection software
Montage Resort in Laguna Beach—Tree Risk Assessment
MTA Redline Station-Universal City tree preservation Tatsumi&Partners
MTA Expo Line—species selection and review of Expo recommendation
MTA Div.13-Street Tree Study,Metro Bus Maintenance and Operations Facility 920 Vignes
MTA Irrigation Recommendations Regarding Court Ruling
MWD—California Lakes Tree Preservation and Resort Species Selection and tree preservation
Newport Coast review pines for The Irvine Company
Newport Center—Ficus preservation during remodel,for LPA
Newport Fashion Island-Diagnosis various tree problems and make recommendations
Newport Fashion Island pine preservation for The SWA Group,Landscape Architecture
Newport Fashion Island-Replacement tree study
Newport Harbor Lutheran Church,tree preservation plan for Taylor Woodrow
Normandy Place-Eucalyptus pruning and maintenance guidelines
Oakbrook Village-Hazard evaluation,diagnosis of tree problems,etc.
OCTA-review specifications, letters etc for Denne Design Group
One Carter—Tree Preservation reports,construction monitoring
Orange County Badminton Club palm evaluation&recommendations for CP Landscape
Pacific Hills-Maintenance evaluation and prepare Maintenance guidelines
Pacific Point Tree Preservation Reports for Sun Cal Companies
Pacific Scene Development-Chino Hills,Oak tree preservation
Palm Desert Mall,Diagnose Parking Lot Trees for Carlasio Landscape-
Parker Hannifin site,Tree Preservation Study for LPA
Pasadena Avenue Tree Preservation Study for BSI
Paseo Westpark Phoenix canariensis monitoring for Merit Property Management
Pepper Tree Lane Hazard Analysis of Schinus for Spectra Enterprises
Philbert Trust 122 acre estate Oak Woodland&Tree Protection for RPA
Pierwalk II Huntington Beach—Tree Preservation Plan&monitoring for TNR
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
ID
Page 8 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr. Joel Rojas, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc.,Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
Playa Vista Tree Preservation,procurement,and monitoring for Playa Capital
Point Happy Ranch,Cathedral City,Tree&Palm Preservation Plan for The Sundstrom Co
Princeton Town Homes, Street Trees for Professional Community Management
Ravenea,pruning,maintenance,& installation spec editing for Forsum, Summers,&Murphy
Roland Heights Oak Preservation for Pacific Communities Development
Rosedale,Azusa—Oak and Palm Monitoring for City of Azusa since 2005
San Bernardino County Court House Pine Preservation for PBS&J
San Clemente Municipal Golf Course Tree Preservation Plan for Rainville Bye
San Dimas Oaks,Oak tree preservation for Milestone Builders
San Juan Capistrano Condominiums Tree Preservation Forsum Summers&Murphy,Inc.
San Juan Capistrano Pepper/Construction Mitigation for Gerald J.Chazan,Inc.
San Manuel Indian Casino Tree Preservation Report for Roger Leonard Architecture
Sand Canyon Flood Control project,Oak protection and monitoring-Mike Bubalo Construction
Santiago-Foothill Properties Oak review&monitoring for PBR
Sinaloa Shopping Center Tree Preservation&Tree Moving Reports for McDaniel Builders
Sisters of Social Service Oak Preservation Report for Calvin Abe Associates
South Coast Plaza&Repertory Theatre diagnostics for Bruce Wayne Company
St. John Fisher Catholic Church,Rancho Palos Verdes-Tree Evaluation&Preservation
Staubach Retail Services-AutoNation Tree Preservation Report for PBS&J
Stephen Dawson&Catherine Zyetz—Rancho Palos Verdes View Issues
Stetson Engineers—tree preservation at Patton Well Site,Pasadena
Summit at Warner Center Landscape Appraisal for Calvin R.Abe
Sunrise Assisted Living,Canoga Park-Tree Preservation Plan for Ivy Landscape Architecture
Sunrise Assisted Living,Carlsbad-Tree Preservation Plan for Sunrise Development
Sunrise Assisted Living,Huntington Beach Tree Preservation Plan for Ivy Landscape Architect
Sunrise Assisted Living,La Palma Tree Preservation Plan for Sunrise Development
Sunrise Assisted Living,Santa Monica-Tree Preservation Plan for Ivy Landscape Architecture
Sycamore Commons pruning supervision for TMC
Target Store Cerritos Tree Preservation Plan for Perkowitz+Ruth
Target Store Costa Mesa Tree Preservation Plan for Perkowitz+Ruth
Target Store Pasadena Tree Preservation Plan for Perkowitz+Ruth
Tatsumi&Partners,Landscape Architecture-MTA,Universal City tree preservation
Tentative Tract 13330,Eucalyptus preservation study for Barrinson Development
Tentative Tract 15565 Tree Preservation Specifications for Muskoka Development
The Shops at Lake Avenue-Tree Preservation Study for Forest City Development
The SWA Group, Landscape Architecture-Newport Center pine preservation
Toyota of Buena Park,tree preservation for Matson Architects
Travilla,pruning,maintenance,&installation spec editing for Forsum,Summers,&Murphy
The Irvine Co-Old Myford Road Tree Preservation Plan
The Irvine Co-Trabuco Grove various diagnosis projects
The Irvine Co-Tustin Ranch Eucalyptus Inventory
The Irvine Co-Tustin Ranch Sectors 2-5,Eucalyptus preservation
The Irvine Co-Upper Castaways Tree Monitoring for Coastal Community Builders
The Irvine Co-Upper Castaways Tree Preservation Plan for Coastal Community Builders
University Park Pre-Construction Tree Monitoring for Bemus
University Research Park UCI,tree&plant selection and follow-up tree health evaluation
Valley View Yorba Linda Tree Preservation Report for Stonegate Development Co
Veterans Park tree evaluation&report Mia Lehrer Associates
Vida Lido Shopping Center-Hazard evaluation,maintenance guidelines for Fritz Duda
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell; 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
• s
Page 9 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr.Joel Rojas, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by: Arborgate Consulting, Inc., Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
Vintage Reserve Oak Planting&Irrigation Recommendations for Brehm Homes
Vons 2047 Simi Valley Tree Preservation Report for Perkowitz+Ruth
Walgreen's Drug Store Tree Preservation Report for Evergreen Devco
Weseloh Chevy/Honda-San Juan Capistrano,Tree Preservation Plan
West Covina Oak Preservation Plan for Prestige Homes
West Covina II&III Tree Preservation Report for Pacific Communities
West Covina Tree Preservation Report for Pacific Communities
White's Point Air Base Tree Preservation Plan for Lotus Development International
Yorba Linda Presbyterian Church Tree Preservation Report for TA Construction
Approach to ProvidingServices
Mr.Applegate believes in thorough examination of the trees and their environment. He was the
first in Orange County to make use of the Shigometer in analyzing tree health and decay. He
makes use of other diagnostic tools, such as the Resistograph,penetrometer,increment borer,
increment hammer,AirKnife and diameter tapes, for accurate information. He also uses starch
tests and other scientific methods to quantify results for more objective decision-making.
Whenever needed,samples are taken to the local lab for testing and culturing.
Besides the above experience,this consultant has served as an expert witness in over 50 cases.
Many were rooted in view issues that led to neighbors cutting each other's trees without
permission. I have testified in such cases from San Diego to Santa Barbara.
Having a background in landscape architecture,landscape contracting, and growing I take a long
range view of the landscape as a living plant community,rather than as individual plants serving
as ornaments to the built environment.
Reports are attractively presented, in simple to understand, logical terms. Any necessary jargon
is explained and defined.
Corporate Organization
Greg Applegate is 50%owner,the CEO and sole consultant. He provides all field work and
writes all reports.
Juliet Applegate is 50%owner,the Treasurer and edits all reports. Her degree is in economics
and she graduated from the Claremont Colleges in 1974.
There are no employees.
Disclaimer
Good, current information on tree assessment will be applied. However,even when every tree is
competently inspected,inspection involves sampling,therefore some areas of decay or weakness
may be missed. A complete tree hazard evaluation is not expected as part of this scope.
Weather,winds and the magnitude and direction of storms are not predictable and some failures
may still occur despite the best application of professional standards. Future tree maintenance
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
40 •
Page 10 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr. Joel Rojas, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc., Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
will also affect the trees health and stability and is not under the supervision or scrutiny of this
consultant. Future maintenance activity such as trenching for sprinkler repair will also affect the
health and safety,but are unknown and unsupervised by this consultant. Trees are living,
dynamic organisms and their future status cannot be predicted with complete certainty by any
expert. This consultant does not assume liability for any tree failures involved with any property.
As with a person's annual physical exam,a health assessment of mature trees is a"snap shot"not
a guarantee. This consultant cannot verify with complete certainty the health and soundness of
the trees,but will make an expert evaluation,considering public safety paramount. Since the
health and status of each tree is ultimately determined by the physical changes that take place
around it during site improvements, and in response to pruning. Any requests for tree risk
assessment will be made under separate agreements.
This consultant will not be providing landscape architectural services or drawings.
Schedule
For Scope of Work Above:
The arboricultural view impairment evaluation and tree evaluation reports will be completed
within two weeks of receiving a written assignment from City Staff and all the relevant
background plans and information. The field visit and complete tree evaluation reports will be
mailed or emailed within three weeks of a notice to proceed.
Fees
Meetings,field visits,tree inspections,telephone conferencing and discussions, report
writing,and other hourly consulting $180 per hour
Sample Project from Item 7 in RFP. Assignment:Assess whether 10 feet crown reduction of
the 20-foot tall Coral tree,Erythrina caf ra, shown in the RFP would likely kill or injure the tree.
A field visit to Rancho Palos Verdes, a field assessment of the specific tree and a brief 1-2 page
follow up report for Staffs review would typically be billed at 3 to 3.5 hours for the site visit and
1 to 1.25 hours for the report. No charge for mileage. Average charge=4.5 hours @$180/hr.
Duplication,binding,laboratory work,necessary rental equipment and other approved expenses
will be billed at invoice plus a 10%handling charge.
Terms
All accounts are due in full within 30 days of original invoice date. A 12%finance charge sill be
added to all past due balances using a simple periodic rate of 1%per month on the unpaid
balance.
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
Page 11 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-8-13 Submitted to: Mr.Joel Rojas, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc., Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
Arborgate Consulting will be fully reimbursed for all reasonable time and costs to collect unpaid
invoices,including reasonable and necessary attorney fees,commencing 90 days after original
statement date.
Agreement
It is understood that payment of fees and expenses is not contingent upon the results of any legal
action,any finding to be reported,or the occurrence of a subsequent event
Please indicate your understanding and acceptance of the above by signing below.
Respectfully submitted, Approved by,
Greg Applegate,ASCA,ASLA Mr.Joel Rojas,Community Development Director
Date Date
Arborgate Consulting,Inc. City of Rancho Palos Verdes
1131 Lucinda Way Community Development Department
Tustin, CA 92780 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.73L6138
•
Page 12 Consulting Arborist Proposal for View Restoration
5-843 Submitted to: Mr.Joel Rojas, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Submitted by:Arborgate Consulting, Inc., Greg Applegate, 714-731-6240
Credentials American Society of Consulting Arborists-Registered Consulting Arborist#365
International Society of Arboriculture-Certified Arborist#WE-180
International Society of Arboriculture-Certified Tree Risk Assessor-MC-444
Mr. Applegate is an independent consulting arborist, CEO of Arborgate Consulting,
Experience Inc. He has been in the horticulture industry since 1963, providing professional
arboricultural consulting since 1984 within both private and public sectors. His
expertise includes appraisal, tree preservation, diagnosis of tree and palm problems,
construction impact mitigation, environmental assessment, forensic consulting and
testimony, hazard evaluation, pruning programs, species selection and tree health
monitoring.
Mr.Applegate has consulted for insurance companies,major developers,theme parks,
museums, homeowners, homeowners' associations, landscape architects, landscape
contractors,property managers,attorneys and governmental bodies.
Notable projects on which he has consulted are: Disneyland, Disneyland Hotel,
DisneySeas-Tokyo, Disney's Wild Animal Kingdom, the New Tomorrowland,
Disney's California Adventure, Disney Hong Kong project, Knott's Berry Farm, J.
Paul Getty Museum, Tustin Ranch,Newport Coast, Crystal Court,Newport Fashion
Island Palms, Bixby Ranch Country Club, Playa Vista, Laguna Canyon Road and
Myford Road for The Irvine Company, MTA Expo Line, MWD-California Lakes,
Paseo Westpark Palms,Loyola-Marymount campus,Cal Tech,Cal State Long Beach,
Pierce College,The Irvine Concourse,UCI,USC,UCLA,LA City College,LA Trade
Tech, Riverside City College, Crafion Hills College,MTA projects, and the State of
California review of the Landscape Architecture License exam(re:plant )
Educatiors Bachelor of Science in Landscape Architecture,
California State Polytechnk University,Pomona 1973
Arboricultural Consulting Academy (by ASCA)
Arbor-Day Farm,Kansas City 1995
Continuing Education Courses in Arboriculture
required to maintain Certified Arborist status and for ASCA membership
Proiesslonal Affiliations American Society of Consulting Arborists(RSCA),Registered Member
American Society of Landscape Architects(ASLA),Full Member
International Society of Arboriculture(ISA),Regular Member
ASCA 2011 Nominations Committee
California Oak Foundation,Member
International Palm Society(fl'S),Member
California Tree Failure Report Program,UC Davis,Participant
Street Tree Seminar(STS),Member
community Altiliadons Horticulture Advisory Committee,Saddleback College (1988-1995
ASCA web site,west coast tree question responder (2007 and continuing)
SoCalif ASLA visibility committee 1980-82
Landscape Arch.License Exam prep,Instructor,Cal Poly Pomona (1986-90)
American Institute of Landscape Architects Board of Directors (1980-82)
California Landscape Architect Student Scholarship Fund-Chairman (1985)
International Society of Arboriculture-Examiner-tree worker certification(1990)
ASCA,Industry definitions committee and A3G committee 2009-2010
Guest lecturer at UCLA,Cal Poly,Saddleback College,&Palomar Junior College
The Tree People (2000 and continuing)
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.
Horticulture&Arboriculture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138
REFERENCES for GREG APPLEGATE
5/7/2013
Lynne Tjomsland
Manager of Grounds and Gardens
J. Paul Getty Trust
1200 Getty Center Dr, Ste 100
Los Angeles CA 90049-1670
Richard Demerj is n
Director of Campus Planning
University of California, Irvine
750 University Tower
Irvine CA 92697-2325
Eric Johnson
University of Southern California
941 W. 35th Street
Los Angeles CA 90089-0631
Mike Cannell
Metropolitan Transit Authority
One Gateway Plaza
MS 99-17-2
Los Angeles CA 90012
Mia Lehrer
Mia Lehrer + Associates
3780 Wilshire Blvd.
Suite 250
Los Angeles CA 90010
Mr. Cal W a i ste n
Walt Disney Imagineering
P.O.Box 25020
Glendale, CA 91221-5020
ARBORGATE CONSULTING,INC.
Arboriculture&Horticulture
1131 Lucinda Way,Tustin,CA 92780, Ph.714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138