PC RES 2016-004 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CONDITIONALLY APPROVING A HEIGHT
VARIATION PERMIT AND GRADING PERMIT TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION A 1,583FT2 ADDITION CONSISTING OF A 704FT2
FIRST-STORY ADDITION, A 236FT2 SECOND-STORY ADDITION, AND
A 643FT2 THIRD-STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING MULTI-LEVEL
RESIDENCE. ALSO APPROVED ARE A FIRST-FLOOR 297FT2
TRELLIS-COVERED PATIO, A 228FT2 SECOND-FLOOR BALCONY AT
THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE AND A 181FT2 BALCONY AT THE
FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE
RESIDENCE IS PROPOSED TO BE 16.65' TALL, AS MEASURED
FROM HIGHEST POINT OF EXISTING GRADE (141.58') COVERED BY
THE STRUCTURE TO THE HIGHEST PROPOSED RIDGELINE
(158.23'),AND AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF 25.91'AS MEASURED FROM
THE LOWEST FINISHED GRADE (132.32') ADJACENT TO THE
STRUCTURE TO THE HIGHEST PROPOSED RIDGELINE (158.23'). A
NEW 136' LONG, 6' HIGH, RETAINING WALL WITH 213YD3 OF
GRADING (CUT)ARE ALSO APPROVED IN THE REAR YARD ON THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6149 ARROWROOT LANE (CASE NO
ZO N 2014-00024).
Whereas, on January 16, 2014, the applicant submitted a Height Variation application to
the Community Development Department, requesting approval to construct a 1,583 ft2 addition
consisting of a 667ft2 first-story addition, a 273ft2 second-story addition, a 643ft2 third-story
addition to an existing multi-level residence, a first-floor 297ft2 trellis-covered patio, a 268ft2
second-floor balcony at the rear of the residence and a I81 ft2 balcony at the front of the residence
on the property located at 6149 Arrowroot Lane; and,
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2014, Staff completed the initial review of the application and
deemed the application incomplete; and,
WHEREAS, on February 20, 2014, revised plans intending to address staff's concerns
were submitted, and on February 20, 2014 Staff deemed the application incomplete; and,
WHEREAS, after numerous additional incompleteness determinations and subsequent
plan changes, submittal of a major grading permit application for a (136' long) 6'tall retaining wall
with 213yd3 of cut, and a change of architect, the applicant submitted additional information and
on January 4, 2016, the application for Planning Case No. ZON2014-00024 was deemed
complete by Staff; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public
Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines, California
Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and
Government Code Section 65962.5(f)(Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), Staff found
no evidence that the approval of the requested applications would have a significant effect on the
environment. Further, the project includes the construction of a 1,583ft2 addition to an existing
2,535ft2 multi-level single-family residence. As such, this project has been determined not to have
a significant impact on the environment because the addition is not greater than 10,000 square
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 1 of 11
feet and the area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive. Therefore, the
proposed project has been found to be categorically exempt (Section 15301(e)(1)); and,
WHEREAS, on February 9, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present
evidence. During the public hearing, the Planning Commission considered testimony from Staff,
the applicant, as well as several members of the public (neighboring property owners) who had
concerns about the impact the proposed structure will have on their properties with the
Commission's discussion focusing on the potential privacy impact to the immediate neighbor.
Additionally, there was a question raised by the Commission regarding the applicability of Rancho
Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC) Section 17.02.040(b)(2) to pad lots. Due to the
immediate neighbor's privacy concern and the Commission's question, the Commission
continued the public hearing to March 8, 2016 to: 1) allow the applicant to address the immediate
neighbor's privacy concerns related to the windows on the upper floor of the east façade by
making modifications to these windows, and, 2) allow Staff and the City Attorney to research the
applicability of the setbacks for sloping lots criteria stated in RPVMC Section 17.02.040(b)(2).;
and,
WHEREAS, on March 8, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present
evidence.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: With respect to the application for a Height Variation to allow the
construction of an addition to the existing multi-level residence:
A. The applicant collected 65% of the signatures within the 500' radius, thus, fulfilling the
requirement of at least 60% of the landowners within 500 feet of the project site.
B. The proposed addition that exceeds sixteen feet in height does not significantly impair a
view from public property (parks, major thoroughfares, bike ways, walkways or equestrian
trails), which has been identified in the City's General Plan, as City-designated viewing
areas. Specifically, due to the location of the property and the topography in the immediate
area, the proposed structure does not significantly impair a view from the public trails, or
as defined by the City's General Plan.
C. The proposed addition that exceeds sixteen feet in height is not located on a ridge or
promontory. Furthermore, the proposed residence would be located on an existing
building pad, similar to other lots within the developed tract, and is not located on a
prominent mass of land that overlooks or projects onto a lowland or body of water on two
sides. Thus, this finding can be made.
D. The proposed addition that is above sixteen feet in height, when considered exclusive of
existing foliage, does not significantly impair a view from the viewing area of another
parcel. The subject tract (TM 23434) was developed to provide the residences views of
the Pacific Ocean, Catalina Island, Santa Barbara Island, and coastline. The Commission
assessed views from several properties which could potentially be impacted by the
proposed project as described below:
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 2 of 11
6100 Arrowroot Lane
Although the addition is visible in the view frame seen from the primary viewing area at
6100 Arrowroot Lane, the portion of the proposed addition above 16 feet is located at the
right periphery of the view frame, impairs a relatively small portion of the entire view, and
impairs only a single component (ocean) of the view, and as such, does not significantly
impair the view.
6107 Arrowroot Lane
Although the addition is visible from the primary viewing area at 6107 Arrowroot Lane, the
addition does not extend into the protected view frame of the home at 6107 Arrowroot
Lane.
6111 Arrowroot Lane
This residence has a view of the ocean, Catalina Island, Santa Barbara Island and the
coastline which is visible from several rooms including the living room and dining room.
Although this resident expressed concerns about the potential view impairment caused by
the proposed addition,the Commission did not complete a view analysis from this property
because the proposed addition is located north-west of this property, and the view from
6111 Arrowroot Lane is towards the southeast, south and southwest. Thus, the proposed
addition does not impair any protected views from the viewing areas of this residence.
Barkentine Road
The addition also does not extend into the protected view frames of the nearby properties
located on Barkentine Road due to the 15' to 35' elevation differential between the
properties on Barkentine Road and the subject property.
E. The Height Variation can be supported because although the proposed addition that is
above sixteen feet in height does create view impairment from the viewing area of another
parcel at 6100 Arrowroot Lane, the proposed second-story addition has been designed
and situated in such a manner as to reasonably minimize the impairment of a view. To
accomplish this, the applicant has made several modifications to the project including
reducing the size of the addition by 200ft2 and setting back the master bedroom portion of
the third level addition by 9' from the east elevation of the first level addition, and the
master bathroom portion by an additional 3' for a total of 12', in addition to maintaining a
10' setback where 5' is required.
F. The Height Variation can be supported since there is no significant cumulative view
impairment caused by granting the application. According to the City's Height Variation
Guidelines, to make this assessment, the Planning Commission evaluated the impacts of
a similar project as the proposed project the following five parcels"adjacent"to the subject
property at 6108, 6111, 6116, 6128 and 6132 Arrowroot Drive and due to the location of
the property and the topography of the surrounding area,the Commission is of the opinion
that there would not be any significant cumulative view impairment caused by granting the
proposed project.
G. The proposed addition complies with all other Code requirements, including the
development standards related to the RS-2 zoning district with respect to lot coverage and
setbacks.
H. The proposed addition is compatible with the immediate neighborhood character in terms
of the scale of surrounding residences, architectural style and bulk and mass.
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 3 of 11
Compatibility with neighborhood character is based on a comparison to the other
structures in the immediate neighborhood. The homes range in size from 2,018ft2 to
3,688ft2. The average home size for the 20 closest homes is 2,829ft2. The proposed
residence will yield a 4,106ft2 residence which is greater than the average square footage
of the 20 closest homes. Although the proposed structure is larger, the applicant has
made several modifications to the design throughout the review process, including
reducing the height of the structure, reducing the size of the proposed addition, setting
back the third level addition from the east elevation of the first level addition, as well as
incorporating a balcony into the front of the third level addition, all of which the Commission
believes have minimized the appearance of bulk and mass of the proposed structure as
viewed from the street and neighboring properties. Additionally, after receiving feedback
from neighboring property owners at the February 9th Planning Commission meeting, the
applicant set back the master bathroom by an additional three feet, increasing the
articulation on the east-facing façade which, further minimizes the appearance of bulk and
mass. Due to all the modifications made through the design and hearing process, the
Commission believes that the bulk, mass, structure height, number of stories, and overall
size of the residence would not negatively impact the neighborhood's visual character and
is ultimately compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
Furthermore, the proposed lot coverage and setbacks are consistent with those of the
surrounding properties. The architectural style of the proposed residence would maintain
the architectural style found in the immediate neighborhood by utilizing stucco siding and
clay tile roof materials, similar to the materials found in the immediate neighborhood.
I. The proposed addition would not create an unreasonable infringement of the privacy of
the occupants of abutting residences. The subject lot is located along Arrowroot Lane with
a building pad that is at a lower elevation than the neighbor to the west and at a higher
elevation than the building to the east which is improved with a single family residence.
The proposed portion of the addition over sixteen feet in height is located towards the east
side of the property. The south elevation is oriented towards the street, the north elevation
looks towards the rear slope of the subject property and the west elevation is connected
to the existing third level, while the east elevation overlooks the rear yard and portion of
the front yard of the property next door at 6111 Arrowroot Lane. Although the proposed
third level addition does overlook the neighbor's rear yard and portion of the front yard,
this area is already entirely visible from an east-facing window in the existing third level of
the residence.
Per direction given by the Commission at the February 9, 2015 Planning Commission
meeting, the applicant has made several changes to the proposed windows on the east-
facing façade including reducing the area and numbers of windows from four large
windows to one translucent sliding window, one three-panel combination bay/clerestory
window with two of the three lower windows to be opaque glass, and one clerestory
window in the master bathroom. Also, one additional small window is proposed on the
north side of the master bedroom, but it faces towards the applicant's rear yard, and so
does not impact the neighbor's privacy.
Because this area is already visible from the applicant's existing residence, and because
the modified windows help to minimize the privacy impact to the immediate neighbor, the
Commission believes that the proposed new third level addition would not create an
unreasonable infringement to the privacy for the abutting residence.
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 4 of 11
Section 2: Approval of a Major Grading Permit is warranted because:
A. The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the permitted primary use of the
lot. The primary use of the subject lot is residential as identified in the City's General Plan
and Zoning map. The proposed grading is to accommodate an enlargement the rear yard,
similar to what several other properties in the neighborhood currently enjoy, for the
enhanced utilization of this area by the residents of the property. More specifically, the
proposed improvements are accessory to the residential use of the property, which is the
primary use.
B. The proposed grading and/or related construction does not significantly adversely affect
the visual relationships with, nor the views from the viewing area of neighboring properties.
The proposed grading and retaining wall are to enlarge the rear yard for the existing
residence. The 6' retaining wall will not affect any views from neighboring properties, as
the view for the properties on Arrowroot Lane immediately to the east and west are taken
from the front (south side) of those properties and because the properties on Barkentine
Road are located at substantially higher elevations than the subject property. As a result,
the proposed project will not significantly affect views from neighboring properties.
C. The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural contours and finished
contours are reasonably natural. The existing "natural" contours of the project site are
largely the result of past grading for the development of the neighborhood and the
construction of the existing street by the developer. The 213yd3 of excavation with a (136'
long) 6' tall retaining wall is proposed to slightly expand the area of the rear yard, while
leaving the majority of the existing rear slope intact.
D. The grading takes into account the preservation of natural topographic features and
appearances by means of land sculpturing so as to blend any man-made or manufactured
slope into the natural topography. The existing "natural" contours of the project site are
largely the result of tract grading in the past. There are no significant natural topographic
features that would be disturbed by the proposed grading.
E. The grading is not for the creation of a new residential tract, as this tract was established
in 1957.
F. The grading utilizes street designs and improvements which serve to minimize grading
alternatives and harmonize with the natural contours and character of the hillside because
no modifications are proposed to streets or other public infrastructure.
G. The grading would not cause excessive and unnecessary disturbance of the natural
landscape or wildlife habitat through removal of vegetation because there are none on the
property.
H. The grading conforms to grading standards related to maximum finished slopes and
driveways. More specifically, the existing hillside is a result of the original tract grading
and no new finished slopes greater than 35% are proposed. Furthermore, similar
deviations were granted for some neighboring properties with similar topographical
configurations for the development of their rear yards.
I. A deviation to the code allowing grading on slopes of over 50% is warranted to allow the
applicant to improve the rear yard area accessory to primary residential use of the lot,
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 5 of 11
similar to what was allowed for the development of neighboring topographically
comparable properties.
Section 3: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of this
decision may appeal the project to the City Council. Pursuant to Sections 17.02.040(C)(1)(j) of
the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, any such appeal must be filed with the City, in writing,
setting forth the grounds of the appeal and any specific actions requested by the appellant, and
accompanied by the appropriate appeal fee, no later than fifteen (15) days following March 8,
2016, the date of the Planning Commission's final action.
Section 4: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings
included in the Staff Report, Minutes and other records of proceedings, the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby conditionally approves a Height Variation and Major
Grading Permit (ZON2014-00024), to allow the applicant to construct a 1,583 ft2 addition
consisting of a 704ft2 first-story addition, a 236ft2 second-story addition, a 643ft2 third-story
addition to an existing three-story residence, a first-floor 297ft2 trellis-covered patio, a 228ft2
second-floor balcony at the rear of the residence, a 181 ft2 balcony at the front of the residence,
and a 136' long, 6' tall, retaining wall with 213yd3 of grading on the property located at 6149
Arrowroot Lane, subject to the conditions of approval in the attached Exhibit 'A'.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 8th day of March 2016, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Cruikshank, Emenhiser, Vice Chairman Tomblin and Chairman Nelson
NOES: Commissioner James
ABSTENTIONS: None
RECUSALS: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Bradley and Leon
)t,&(. 7
Robert A. Nelson
Chairman
Terry ' :d igue
Interim Commu - Development Director
Secretary to the Planning Commission
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 6 of 11
EXHIBIT 'A'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
HEIGHT VARIATION AND GRADING PERMIT
PLANNING CASE NO. ZON2014-00024
(6149 Arrowroot Lane)
General Conditions:
1. Prior to the submittal of plans into Building and Safety plan check, the applicant and the
property owner shall submit to the City a statement, in writing, that they have read,
understand, and agree to all conditions of approval contained in this Resolution. Failure
to provide said written statement within ninety (90) days following the date of this approval
shall render this approval null and void.
2. The applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City, and/or any of
its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities
thereof, from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other actions
and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in
nature), and alternative dispute resolutions procedures (including, but not limited to
arbitrations, mediations, and other such procedures) (collectively "Actions"), brought
against the City, and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments,
agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set
aside, void, or annul, the action of, or any permit or approval issued by, the City and/or
any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City), for or
concerning the project.
3. Prior to conducting any work in the public right of way, such as for curb cuts, dumpsters,
temporary improvements and/or permanent improvements, the applicant shall obtain an
encroachment permit from the Director of Public Works.
4. Approval of this permit shall not be construed as a waiver of applicable and appropriate
zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County and/or City laws and regulations. Unless
otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Municipal Code shall apply.
5. The Community Development Director is authorized to make minor modifications to the
approved plans and any of the conditions of approval if such modifications will achieve
substantially the same results as would strict compliance with the approved plans and
conditions. Otherwise, any substantive change to the project shall require approval of a
revision by the final body that approved the original project, which may require new and
separate environmental review.
6. The project development on the site shall conform to the Commission-approved plans and
to the specific standards contained in these conditions of approval or, if not addressed
herein, shall conform to the RS-2 residential development standards of the City's Municipal
Code.
7. Failure to comply with and adhere to all of these conditions of approval may be cause to
revoke the approval of the project pursuant to the revocation procedures contained in
Section 17.86.060 of the City's Municipal Code.
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 7 of 11
8. If the applicant has not submitted an application for a building permit for the approved
project or not commenced the approved project as described in Section 17.86.070 of the
City's Municipal Code within one year of the final effective date of this Resolution, approval
of the project shall expire and be of no further effect unless, prior to expiration, a written
request for extension is filed with the Community Development Department and approved
by the Planning Commission.
9. In the event that any of these conditions conflict with the recommendations and/or
requirements of another permitting agency or City department, the stricter standard shall
apply.
10. Unless otherwise designated in these conditions, all construction shall be completed in
substantial conformance with the plans stamped APPROVED by the City with the effective
date of this Resolution.
11. This approval is only for the items described within these conditions and identified on the
stamped APPROVED plans and is not an approval of any existing illegal or legal non-
conforming structures on the property, unless the approval of such illegal or legal non-
conforming structure is specifically identified within these conditions or on the stamped
APPROVED plans.
12. The construction site and adjacent public and private properties and streets shall be kept
free of all loose materials resembling trash and debris in excess of that material used for
immediate construction purposes. Such excess material may include, but not be limited
to: the accumulation of debris, garbage, lumber, scrap metal, concrete asphalt, piles of
earth, salvage materials, abandoned or discarded furniture, appliances or other household
fixtures.
13. All construction sites shall be maintained in a secure, safe, neat and orderly manner, to
the satisfaction of the City's Building Official. All construction waste and debris resulting
from a construction, alteration or repair project shall be removed on a weekly basis by the
contractor or property owner. Existing or temporary portable bathrooms shall be provided
during construction. Portable bathrooms shall be placed in a location that will minimize
disturbance to the surrounding property owners, to the satisfaction of the City's Building
Official.
14. Permitted hours and days for construction activity are 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday
through Friday, 9:00AM to 5:00PM on Saturday, with no construction activity permitted on
Sundays or on the legal holidays specified in Section 17.96.920 of the Rancho Palos
Verdes Development Code. During demolition, construction and/or grading operations,
trucks shall not park, queue and/or idle at the project site or in the adjoining street rights-
of-way before 7AM Monday through Friday and before 9AM on Saturday, in accordance
with the permitted hours of construction stated in this condition. When feasible to do so,
the construction contractor shall provide staging areas on-site to minimize off-site
transportation of heavy construction equipment. These areas shall be located to maximize
the distance between staging activities and neighboring properties, subject to approval by
the building official.
15. All grading, landscaping and construction activities shall exercise effective dust control
techniques, either through screening and/or watering.
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 8 of 11
16. A minimum 2-car garage shall be maintained, with each required parking space being
individually accessible and maintaining minimum unobstructed dimensions of 9' in width
and 20' in depth, with minimum 7' vertical clearance.
17. Exterior residential lighting shall be in compliance with the standards of Section 17.56.030
of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code. No outdoor lighting is permitted where
the light source is directed toward or results in direct illumination of a parcel of property or
properties other than that upon which such light source is physically located.
18. All grading, landscaping and construction activities shall exercise effective dust control
techniques, either through screening and/or watering.
19. No more than 50% of any existing interior and exterior walls or existing square footage
may be removed or demolished. Residential buildings that are remodeled or renovated
such that 50% or greater of any existing interior or exterior walls or existing square footage
is demolished or removed within a two-year period shall be considered a new residence
and shall then conform to all current development standards for that zoning district and
the most recently adopted version of the Uniform Building Code.
Project Specific Conditions:
20. This approval allows for the following:
• Construction of a 1,583ft2 addition consisting of:
o A 704ft2 first-story addition;
o A 236ft2 second-story addition;
o A 643ft2 third-story addition;
o A first-floor 297ft2 trellis-covered patio;
o A 228ft2 second-floor balcony at the rear of the residence;
o A 181 ft2 balcony at the front of the residence
The additions will result in a 4,106ft2 residence including the attached existing 429ft2 two-
car garage.
21. The approved residence shall maintain setbacks of 20' front (75' proposed), 15' rear (73'
existing and proposed), 5' east side (10' proposed) and 5' west side (20'-3" existing and
proposed).
22. The maximum ridgeline elevation of the proposed addition shall not exceed 158.23'. The
height of the structure as measured from the highest existing grade(141.58')to the highest
proposed ridgeline (158.23') shall not exceed 16.65'. The overall height of the structure
as measured from the lowest finished grade (132.32') to the highest proposed ridgeline
(158.23') shall not exceed 25.91'.
BUILDING HEIGHT CERTIFICATION IS REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED BY A
LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR OR CIVIL ENGINEER PRIOR TO ROOF SHEATHING
INSPECTION.
23. Unless modified by the approval of future planning applications,the approved project shall
maintain a maximum of 40% lot coverage (32% proposed).
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 9 of 11
24. Barring any appeals, the silhouette frame shall be removed within seven (7)days after the
Planning Commission decision appeal period has ended.
25. The approved grading is for 213yd3 of cut in the rear yard and for a 136' long, 6' tall,
maximum height retaining wall located north of the existing residence.
26. Haul routes to transport soil shall be approved by the Public Works Division prior to
issuance of any Grading or Building permit.
27. Prior to building permit issuance, the 24" diameter Pine tree located in the front yard, east
of the driveway shall be laced and trimmed up to the 20' level as measured from the base
of the tree (where it emerges from the ground) such that the crown (excluding structural
limbs) is raised up out of the ocean and Santa Barbara Island view (see Exhibit B). The
owner of the property shall be responsible for maintaining the above-mentioned Pine tree
on an annual basis during the cooler months of the year (November-
March). Notwithstanding the trimming requirements for the aforementioned Pine tree, the
owner of the property shall be responsible for maintaining the foliage on the property,
which exceeds 16 feet in height or the ridgeline of the primary structure, so as not to
significantly impair the surrounding views.
28. The north-east facing and east-facing lower window panels of the bay window on the
east façade of the structure shall be fixed (not openable) and shall be constructed with
translucent glass as shown on the plans dated February 25, 2016.
29. Any changes to the third-story windows on the east-facing façade of the residence
shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director, who may,
at his/her discretion, require that the window revisions be reviewed by the Planning
Commission at a noticed public hearing.
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 10 of 11
EXHIBIT 'B'
A
i4,-.
. ,
. , , ,, ,, , ,1
N,,t.• ..!,:3/4‘, ,.„, :::- 4''', .
1 '.,-*'i. , s.„-•' ,
htf -'1,,''A',4.•
...). k
Ilk ' , .i )1t; Ire., . ,•
1, '., ; 4 ...
,
.., • ' • *
• • t 0
' Vitt%' ' •' *
, '* - j
-'
„,,, , • : ,•• . • •... ,„.., .,. . , 4.
,
/11
\ ,
-
i
... . .
. • . . - •,, - ,, t
. .- *, Itr;lk,. 1 , 7
'+a '; 4 .. . •
' •...... 4.. 6 jr j..iejt. .,,,
500,1”
, alibi '..V.' .. • .' '
. ...''..
:4 Pine tree shall be laced and • .---- _,..,
— , I. _
i .
........
i ..., 411., ' . ..
„ trimmed up to the 20' level
,_,..
:t indicated by the yellow line on
an annual basis •
..........._
,
.• ...
ammair----- T ' 11"11111111161
........- ift, ...,........ --al"''''''-'
irl ,,...,, -,.. ,
4 4 ,,A,s I ,• i . #
-'it •. 'ita ' ' , • . ,
, ' ,
. e -,
,, .. ,....„
41010.0101001 titr--•. --/( 'iv , .01, , l' i `•,` ,,. ' '' ' r 4-1' ',
' ':, ' ,' ',i' ""‘e4.'4,;,c.i"'..,;,',''''''''''','"i14:1.44r4(1,'t.**•.'':41?' ,- .ji,.'l, , ,..,,j:** ''::' '4.., .' - .., A\, -,,,,,,,,r\' . ,
' - ',.1r4i,prik .41r .., , . ,. ' •,,,,,,, - - ...:7„...tir,--,,,,J;
-,Z.,,,, • • -.....„ ..,-
-.."--1 -,. .,' ,, ', f';'''';7%7' , vp: 4 : i; 4f4 0 , e -"1:"" . ' •'''''' '' lk
i ,k /1)iot
,.,
_ — '';,,,z,,,,,— . :1111t,:i.4.: ' f. ' .,--, .i‘01.,, ' .i,•,', -4.1,,,t.- . . '-',
,, 0, . .:, ,.., ,,,,, i .s.,.• ---N-44, ... k * .41.',11', I
' ‘11j, '.. • ,''' .'" ' 4.1 ,. :I"‘....41att• '4:' . \ ,
terc• ', 0.,..,...., .i.. ,' '•'' I 0,,' v "1st..,,., ..!,," =1:- t.- , \ \,NAL\ .. I
„, . likf .1'9,4.1',;., ::‘,/' *-1:14' ''', ' ) 41').. •-•,...'''''. '.''''' ' ' \':* \74-... "\'` ' 1
' -, ,. t..-.-i"- 1 .• : , . *,,,,, ,,,,,,,...4.1.... ..„,,,....,,:::,„. -,,( ,,,, , ., : 0, .
.,,,,:,2,:,i.:.: . ,,\ 4 , ,,,t .,.,„„„.
.....,„. ...,„
v.
A. . -.'INI,, ... .. , . 41 ‘ - , 7,`4• , ,
. . • -4 ; ..
) Y.., # jr;.(t"I 4. ' .... .
1.. \\ , .• , iii . - /,
Act.,,... : .\ ,..0
/ . Nii --. ' , . .,,, ti, - . •• , s' - --a,.., .
,.
P.C. Resolution No. 2016-04
Page 11 of 11