Loading...
VRC RES 1997-010 s 0 • V.R.C. RESOLUTION NO. 97 - 10 A RESOLUTION OF THE VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 32 TO REMOVE. WHEREAS, on February 18, 1997, Mr and Mrs. John Banister, and Mr. Norman Williams (co-applicants') who own property located at 6117 and 6113 Scotmist Dr., in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, filed an application requesting a View Restoration Permit ("Permit") to top, trim and/or remove several trees on the property located at 6016 Ridgegate Dr. ("the subject property"), in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes ("City") owned by Ridgegate Condominium Complex ("the foliage owner"); and WHEREAS, notice of the hearing before the View Restoration Commission ("Commission"), along with copies of the Staff report, were mailed to the co-applicants' and the foliage owner on April 15, 1997, 30 days in advance of the hearing; and WHEREAS, on May 15, 1997, after all voting members of the View Restoration Commission had visited the site, the Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request, at which time, all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The co-applicants' at 6117, and 6113 Scotmist Dr. have a view, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, which includes the Redondo Harbor, the greater Los Angeles Basin, and the city lights. Section 2_:_ The co-applicants' viewing area, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, includes: from (Mr. and Mrs. John Banister) 6117 Scotmist Dr., a dining room (breakfast nook), family room, a first floor bedroom, and from the rear yard patio area; from (Mr. Norman Williams) 6113 Scotmist Dr., the living room, dining room, and from a guest bedroom at the rear of the property. Section a: The subject property at 6016 Ridgegate Dr. contains fourteen (14) trees that significantly impair the co-applicants' view: seven (7) Eucalyptus trees, one (1) Acacia tree, three (3) Aleppo Pine trees, and three (3) Oleander Trees. 0 a Section 4: The co-applicants' have complied with the early neighbor consultation process and has shown proof of cooperation on their part to resolve conflicts, as evidenced by the letters dated February 17, 1997, September 16, 1994, April 20, 1994, and May 11, 1994, and receipt for registered mail (dated April 10, 1997) sent to the foliage owner at 6016 West Ridgegate Dr. Section 5: Based on evidence provided by the co-applicants', the subject trees at 6016 Ridgegate Dr. significantly impair a substantial portion of both applicants' primary view. On the property located at 6117 Scotmist Dr : Two (2) Eucalyptus trees (Nos.1 and 2) measure about 25 to 30 feet in height, two (2) Eucalyptus trees (Nos. 3 and 4) measure roughly 50 to 60 feet high, the Acacia tree, is 20 to 30 feet high, the Pine tree, is 15 to 18, and the Oleander tree measures roughly 10 to 12 feet high. On the property located at 6113 Scotmist Dr: Two (2) Pine trees (Nos. 1 and 2) measure 20 to 30 feet high, one (1) Eucalyptus tree (No.1) measures 25 to 30 feet in height, one Eucalyptus (No.2) measures 30 to 35 feet high, one (1) Eucalyptus (No. 3) measures 50 to 60 feet high, and the Oleander trees (No. 1, and 2) are 10 to 12 feet high (Exhibit A). All trees exceed the ridge line of the primary structure of the foliage owner's property, which is approximately 28 feet in height as measured from the existing building pad grade. The ridgeline of the primary structure is located at a lower elevation than the 16 foot elevation measured from the existing base of each tree. Section 6: The subject property is located less than one thousand (1,000) feet from both applicants' property. Section 7 The co-applicant and foliage owner properties were created in 1963 indicating that the subject trees did not exist prior to the establishment of the lots. Section & The recommended removal of the subject trees will not cause an increased or unreasonable infringement on the privacy of the foliage owner since the subject trees limit but do not totally eliminate all viewing onto the foliage owner's property from the co-applicant properties. As a result, no replacement shrubs are required for privacy. Section 9:The removal of the subject trees as identified in Condition No. 1 of attached Exhibit "A", is necessary in order to restore the co-applicants' view. Section 10; Pursuant to Section 15300 of the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project is categorically exempt under Class 4 of that section because the work required to restore the applicant's view does not include the removal of scenic and mature trees as identified by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan (Visual Aspects; Figure 41). V.R.C.Resolution No.97-10 Page 2 of 5 • Section 11: Based on statements made at the public hearing by the foliage owner (Mr. Alan Pendley, President of the Ridgegate Homeowners Association) who gave consent to remove all of the subject foliage, the View Restoration Commission orders the removal of said trees, as requested. Section 12: Any person aggrieved of this decision or by any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council. Pursuant to Section 17.02.040 (C.2.g.) of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, any such appeal must be filed with the City, in writing and with the appropriate appeal fee, no later than fifteen (15) days following the date of the View Restoration Commission final action. Section 13; Based on the foregoing information, and on the information and findings included in the Staff report and evidence presented at the public hearing, the View Restoration Commission hereby orders the removal of the seven (7) Eucalyptus trees, one (1) Acacia tree, three (3) Pine trees, and three (3) Oleander trees, in the rear yard at 6016 Ridgegate Dr. to restore views at 6117 and 6113 Scotmist Dr., as provided in, and subject to, the conditions outlined in the attached Exhibit "A". PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED on the 19th day of June, 1997, by the following vote: AYES: Black, Boudreau, Goern, Marshall, Karmielich, Long, Sweetnam NOES: A. Green ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: R. Green (excused) ,4 „Aim ► _ Rayi,ond Green, Chai man Carolyn Petr , Director of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement V.R.C.Resolution No.97-10 Page 3 of 5 0 • EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 32 1. The Ridgegate Condominium Homeowners Association shall remove the following trees as shown in Exhibit B (attached). Additionally, if the cost of removal exceeds the cost of lacing or trimming, the Association shall pay the difference, as agreed. 6117 Scotmist (Banister Property) Eucalyptus Trees No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (1) Acacia and (1) Oleander Tree (1) Pine Tree 6113 Scotmist Dr. (Williams Property) Pine Trees Nos. 1 and 2 Eucalyptus Trees Nos. 1, 2, and 3 Oleander Trees Nos. 1 and 2: 2. The co-applicants' at 6117 and 6113 Scotmist Dr. shall, not later than 30 days after approval of this permit, present to the City, a minimum of three (3) itemized estimates to carry out the aforementioned work, including installment of any required replacement foliage. Such estimates are to be supplied by licensed landscape or licensed tree service contractors, acceptable to the City, which provide insurance certificates in a form acceptable to the City, and shall include all costs of cleanup and removal of debris. In addition, the applicant shall pay to the City an amount equal to the lowest of the three estimates and such funds shall be maintained in a City trust account until completion of work. 3. The foliage owner shall select a contractor from the estimates provided by the applicants or another licensed firm of their choice subject to approval by the City, to perform the required work. However, the foliage owner shall only be reimbursed for the amount of the lowest bid submitted by the co-applicants'. 4. The co-applicants' may reduce the scope of the trimming required by this Permit by giving the City and the foliage owner written notice of such decision within 30 days of this approval. The co-applicants' shall deposit funds to the City in a trust account in an amount sufficient to cover the remaining work. However, V.R.C.Resolution No.97-10 Page 4 of 5 0 • • removal of the vegetation which the co-applicants' have chosen to eliminate would then require an entirely new View Restoration application and fee. 5. The co-applicants' may withdraw their view restoration request and their trust account funds if they do so within five (5) days after they send the three (3) estimates required by Condition No. 2 above. In the event that the co-applicants' withdraw their request in a timely manner, the foliage owner is not required to perform the work specified by this Permit and this Permit is of no further force and effect. 6. The foliage owner at 6016 Ridgegate Dr., shall, not later than 90 days after the notice of approval (first notice) is mailed, remove the subject trees on their properties to the extent required by this Permit, and shall maintain all vegetation to a height that will not impair a view from another property in the future. 7. The City shall reimburse the foliage owner at 6016 Ridgegate Dr., from the City's trust account, not later than 30 days after receipt of the appropriate billing and the satisfactory completion of the required work, specified by this Permit in an amount not to exceed the amount of the co-applicants' trust account. 8. If after 90 days the required work as specified in Condition 1 is not completed, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes will 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 at the foliage owner's expense, the City shall reimburse the co-applicants' from the City trust account not later than 30 days after the City completes the work. 9. Subsequent to the removal of the foliage, the co-applicants' may, at their discretion, document the restored view for future reference by submitting to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, photographs of the restored view taken from the viewing area of both applicants' properties along with a "Documentation of Existing Foliage" form available at the Planning, Building & Code Enforcement Department. N:\PLAN N I NG\G U EST\VRC\STAFF.RPT\VRC\RESO\RESO32.RSO V.R.C.Resolution No.97-10 Page 5 of 5 I ,.....,.. 1 irlit . . , . . Irmy i.46.44770dr‘ ,,,,.._ ..... ...\__, iril . . ........---- LL, 1(.211 7 /t38 .........;„....aam••sgs"'"Al l 'ii. , :. :. D,m • ••______.......-,• I \ ...... '"' ..u.mr x I , //50 %- .:7------' . -. --.. - N //? ., .. - ., 2 ........ ....••• , .. . .... ., .._......, ,. •••• ....... \, \ , . -----___. • , -,.,,,,\ \,, , , , , .....„ : , „ , ..„_ . ,,„% ,., \ I 1 . . , • /-------_---,,,s „,, I.Iii...—•.‘ ,,,.-..„,. \ ,., I(i . , 9 .„'' NI \ \ \ \\I--? . \ , . , \ . N NN NNAlpt-- ‘ 11. .,, ..„.- :, \\ , , , . . .. \., D 2 \\ \\ \\` ,:\ ‘. \ :, 1 la . , _ ..... ,. , . , , r. „Aar, $ \ ; CT. .. . „ ......:-. \ ' —.._............ . RI i G- ---........ - .-- 4ftftuft. 4-74----. ----- --e. lilt . " .: . . .'• ' : . ''''... • s. C . , ' EUCALYPTUS #1 -h \ \ ' " II .. l EUCALYPTUS #3 • ��; �'�� iI ,,; •� EUCALYPTUS #2 \\ \ t., EUCALYPTUS #4 • , EUCALYPTUS #3 ' 49 \ B . 10 \ k \ SC •,\ \\ ‘ .,; �,�../- ,�' PINE #1 ..... OLEANDER , - _ -- _._ ,... i. tta �, .•,,.. PINE #2 ACACIA �. 11111111111111101W111.- I PINE -- 4_-." ,�- 'r ,OLEANDER#1 : i . - OLEANDER#2 • I . 0\' 1:\,:\\\ EUCALYPTUS #1 EUCALYPTUS #2 . \ I3I� 33a____;,..........i 6203 6117 6113 4 --"---' . ,. . ? -..., NORTH __..t.....- -- )-_........... F ..., Illin T I T FYI-IIRITa inn i