VRC RES 1999-003 V.R.C. RESOLUTION NO. 99 - 03
A RESOLUTION OF THE VIEW RESTORATION
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
APPROVING VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 67 TO
TRIM AND REMOVE FOLIAGE AT 6924 GROVESPRING
DRIVE.
WHEREAS, on October 13, 1998 Mr. and Mrs. Roland Ilsen, and Mr. and Mrs.
Ringo Ling, owners of property located at 6847 and 6857 Abbottswood Drive, respectively
(herein "the applicants"), in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, submitted a Notice of Intent
to File View Restoration Permit No. 67 requesting a Pre-application meeting with Mr. and
Mrs. Norman Moentmann and Mr. and Mrs. William Mastous, the owners of foliage at 6924
Grovespring Drive and 6863 Abbottswood Drive, respectively, in the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes ("City") to attempt to resolve conflict regarding views the applicants alleged to be
significantly impaired by foliage on the properties located at 6924 Grovespring Drive and
6863 Abbottswood Drive; and,
WHEREAS, notice of Pre-application meetings were mailed to the applicants and
to Mr. and Mrs. William Mastous on October 29,1998, and to Mr. and Mrs. Norman
Moentmann on February 3, 1999, at least 5 days in advance of each meeting; and,
WHEREAS, two pre-application meetings were held, the first on November 4, 1998,
and the second on February 9, 1999, to discuss the view restortation process and to
attempt to reach an agreement. The applicants, Commissioner Warren Sweetnam and
City Staff were in attendance at both meetings and Mr. and Mrs. William Mastous attended
the first meeting ( on November 4, 1998) and Mr. and Mrs. Norman Moentmann attended
the second meeting (on February 9, 1999); and,
WHEREAS, while agreement between the applicants and Mr. and Mrs. William
Mastous was reached, no agreement was reached between the applicants and Mr. and
Mrs. Norman Moentmann (herein "the foliage owners") at the Pre-application meeting;
subsequently, the applicant's filed a formal view restoration application on April 7, 1999
and,
WHEREAS, notice of the View Restoration Commission ("Commission") hearing
was mailed to the applicants and to the foliage owner on April 28, 1999 at least 30 days
in advance of the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, on June 3, 1999, after all voting members of the View Restoration
Commission had visited the sites, the Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to
consider the request, at which time, all interested parties were given an opportunity to be
heard and present evidence.
W:1etr1vrp161-701671reso67.doc
V. R.C. Resolution No. 99-03
Page 1 of 7
NOW, THEREFORE, THE VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The applicants have a view, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the
City's development Code, of the Pacific Ocean, Malibu coastline and Santa Monica
mountains.
Section 2: The best and most important view, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of
the City's Development Code, is from the living rooms of both applicants' homes.
Section 3: The applicant located at 6857 Abbottswood Drive (Ling) has a view that
is significantly impaired by nine trees located on 6924 Grovespring Drive, the applicants
located at 6847 Abbottswood Drive (Ilsen) have views that are not significantly impaired
by the foliage on property located at 6924 Grovespring Drive.
Section 4: The applicants have complied with the early neighbor consultation
process and have shown proof of cooperation on their part to resolve conflicts. On
February 9, 1999, all of the applicants and the foliage owners (Mr. and Mrs. Norman
Moentmann) attended a pre-application meeting with Commissioner Warren Sweetnam
and City Staff in an attempt to resolve the conflict. Unfortunately, after lengthy, good-faith
negotiations by the applicants and the foliage owners, an agreement was not reached.
Section 5: Based on evidence provided by the applicants, the subject trees at
6924 Grovespring Drive significantly impair the view of the applicants located at 6857
Abbottswood Drive. All of the subject foliage exceeds the height of the ridgeline of the
primary structure on the foliage owner's property and significantly impairs the view from the
applicant's viewing area.
Section 6: The subject property is located less than one thousand (1,000) feet
from the applicants' properties in that the subject foliage is located on property adjoining
the applicant's property located at 6847 Abbottswood Drive and is approximately 20 feet
from the applicant's property located at 6857 Abbottswood Drive.
Section 7: The foliage significantly impairing the view did not exist, as view
impairing vegetation, when the lot from which the view is taken was created. The foliage
owner's and the applicant's parcels are a part of Tract 27136, and were created in the early
1960's. Tract 27136 was mass graded as evidenced by the level building pads separated
by steep manufactured cut and fill slopes carved into the hillside. During mass grading
operations all vegetation is removed as reported in the Compacted Filled Ground Report
prepared on February 21, 1963, by Converse Foundation Engineers.
W:\etr\vrp\61-70\67\reso67.doc
V. R. C. Resolution No.99-03
Page 2 of 7
• 0
Section 8: Trimming and removal of the foliage to restore the applicant's view will
not cause an unreasonable infringement on the privacy of the foliage owner because the
only opportunity for viewing the foliage owners' rear yard is from the extreme edge of the
applicant's property. Furthermore, the existing lower branches of the trees and the
underbrush which provide some privacy are not in the view frame and therefore may
remain. From other areas of the applicant's property, infringement of the foliage owner's
privacy is not possible in that only portions of the top of the foliage owners roof may come
into view above the top of the steep 27 foot slope separating the properties.
Section 9: Trimming the subject tree as identified in the attached Conditions of
Approval (Exhibit "A"), is necessary in order to restore the applicant's view.
Section 10: Pursuant to Section 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).
Section 11: Based on the foregoing information, and on the information and
findings included in the Staff report and evidence presented at the public hearing, the View
Restoration Commission hereby orders the trimming of foliage at 6924 Grovespring Drive
in order to restore the view at 6857 Abbottswood Drive, as provided in, and subject to, the
conditions outlined in the attached Exhibit "A".
Section 12. Any interested person aggrieved of this decision or by any portion of
this decision may appeal to the City Council. Pursuant to Section 17.02.040 (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 after June 3,
1999, the date of the View Restoration Commission final action.
Section 13. For the foregoing reasons and based on information and findings
contained in the Staff Reports, minutes, and records of the proceedings, the View
Restoration Commission hereby approves View Restoration Permit No. 67 subject to the
Conditions of Approval contained in the attached Exhibit "A", which are necessary to
protect the public health, safety and welfare.
W:\etr\vrp\61-70\67\reso67.doc
V. R. C. Resolution No. 99-03
Page 3 of 7
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED on the 3rd day of June 1999.
AYES: Black, Drages, Green, McBride, Mehlman, Mueller, Chair Kipper
NOES: None
ABSTENTIONS: Sweetnam
ABSENT: Cordova, Long
ri
a anne Kipper, C r
N.
Joel "ojas, AIC
vire, or of Plann 7 •
Bui ding & Code Enforcement
\\MASTADON\PLANNING\RES067.DOC V.R.C.Resolution No.99-03
Page 4 of 7
0
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 67
1. Monterey Pine (Tree No. 1): Remove with the foliage owner's consent and grind
the stump, otherwise top to a level not to exceed the Ling building pad level. If
removed, replace with one 24-inch box tree or foliage of equivalent cost.
2. Monterey Pine (Tree No. 2): Lace and shape the tree.
3. Monterey Pine (Tree No. 3): Remove with the foliage owner's consent and cut the
stump flush with the ground, otherwise top to a level not to exceed the Ling building
pad level. If removed, replace with one 24-inch box tree or foliage of equivalent
cost.
4. Canary Island Pine (Tree No. 4):Lace and shape the tree.
5. Aleppo Pine (Tree No. 5): Remove with the foliage owner's consent and cut the
stump flush with the ground, otherwise top to a level not to exceed the Ling building
pad level. If removed, replace with one 24-inch box tree or foliage of equivalent
cost.
6. Aleppo Pine (Tree No. 6): Remove with the foliage owner's consent and cut the
stump flush with the ground, otherwise top to a level not to exceed the Ling building
pad level. If removed, replace with one 24-inch box tree or foliage of equivalent
cost.
7. Monterey Pine (Tree No. 7): Lace and shape the tree.
8. Ash (Tree No. 8):Trim the crown to a height not to exceed 3 feet above the Ling's
existing building pad level.
9. Aleppo Pine (Tree No. 9): Trim the crown to a height not to exceed 3 feet above
the Ling's existing building pad level.
10. The foliage owner shall be responsible to maintain the foliage in such a manner as
to not significantly impair the applicant's view by trimming the foliage specified in
this permit on an annual basis, beginning one year after the initial trimming of the
foliage is completed and verified by Staff
11. If any tree that is trimmed dies within one year of the initial work being performed
due to the performance of the work, then the applicants or any subsequent owner
W:\etr\vrp161-70\67\reso67.doc
V.R. C.Resolution No. 99-03
Page 5 of 7
0 0
- of the applicants' properties shall 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 V-E of the VRP Guidelines
and Procedures.
12. No sooner than one year after the initial trimming is completed, City Staff shall report
to the Commission as to the adequacy of the maintenance schedule, as well as the
foliage owner's ability to maintain the foliage in compliance with these conditions of
approval. The Commission shall consider the Staff report and determine if a public
hearing to amend the conditions is necessary. If the Commission determines that
a hearing is necessary, then a hearing will be held pursuant to Section V.I. of the
VRP Guidelines and Procedures.
13. The applicant shall, not later than 30 days after approval of this permit, present to
the City, at least one itemized estimate to carry out the aforementioned work. Such
estimate is to be supplied by a licensed landscape or licensed tree service
contractor, acceptable to the City, which provides insurance certificates in a form
acceptable to the City, and shall include all costs of cleanup and removal of debris.
In addition, the applicant shall pay to the City an amount equal to the City accepted
estimate and such funds shall be maintained in a City trust account until completion
of work.
14. The foliage owners shall select a contractor from the estimate(s) provided by the
applicant or another licensed firm of their choice subject to approval by the City, to
perform the required work. However, the foliage owner shall only be reimbursed for
the amount of the lowest bid submitted by the applicant. If the foliage owner
chooses to do the required work himself, then the foliage owner shall not be
compensated from the trust account and the amount in the trust account shall be
refunded to the applicant.
15. The applicant may reduce the scope of the trimming required by this Permit by
giving the City and the foliage owner written notice of such decision within 30 days
of this approval. The applicant shall deposit funds to the City in a trust account in
an amount sufficient to cover the remaining work. However, trimming or removal
of the vegetation which the applicant has chosen to eliminate would then require an
entirely new View Restoration application and fee.
16. The applicant may withdraw the view restoration request and the trust account funds
if the applicant does so within five (5) days after the applicant sends the estimate
required herein. In the event that the applicant withdraws the request in a timely
manner, the foliage owner is not required to perform the work specified by this
Permit and this Permit is of no further force and effect.
W:\etr\vrp161-70\67\reso67.doc
V. R. C.Resolution No. 99-03
Page 6 of 7
0 0
17. The foliage owners shall, no later than 90 days after the Notice of Approval (First
Notice) is mailed, remove the trees specified in Condition Nos. 1, 3, 5 and 6 if they
consent to removal. However, if the applicant does not consent to removal of the
trees, then within 90 days of November 1, 1999, the foliage owner shall complete
the trimming work to the extent required by this Permit and shall maintain the
vegetation to a height that will not impair a view from another property in the future
as specified in these Conditions of Approval.
18. The City shall reimburse the foliage owner 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, an amount not to exceed the amount
of the applicant's trust account.
19. If the required work as specified herein is not completed within the stipulated time
periods, then 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 applicant from the City trust account not later than 30
days after the City completes the work.
20. Subsequent to the trimming or removal of the foliage, the applicant may, at his
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 applicant's viewing area along with a "Documentation of
Existing Foliage or View" form available at the Planning, Building & Code
Enforcement Department.
W:\etr\vrp\61-70\67\reso67.doc
V.R. C.Resolution No.99-03
Page 7 of 7