Loading...
VRC RES 2001-003 V.R.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - 03 A RESOLUTION OF THE VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 76 TO TRIM, REMOVE, OR RELOCATE FOLIAGE AT 32063 PACIFIC DR. WHEREAS, on March 3, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Peter LaBarbera, owners of property located at 6050 Ocean Terrace Drive (herein "the applicant"), in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, filed an application requesting a View Restoration Permit("Permit")to restore a view from their property that is significantly impaired by foliage owned by Mr. and Mrs. Yogesh Goradia, at 32063 Pacifica Drive (herein "the foliage owner's"), in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes ("City"); and, WHEREAS, after continuances and several unsuccessful attempts to try and resolve the matter without further City involvement, notice of the View Restoration Commission ("Commission") hearing was mailed to the applicants and the foliage owners on August 18, 2001, at least 30 days in advance of the hearing; and, WHEREAS, on September 20, 2001, 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. NOW, THEREFORE, THE VIEW RESTORATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The applicant at 6050 Ocean Terrace Drive has a view, as defined by Section 17.02.0 of the City's Development Code, of Santa Catalina Island and of the ocean. Section 2: The applicant's viewing area, as defined by Section 17.02.040 of the City's Development Code, is from the living room, dining room, breakfast nook and from the outdoor patio area. Section 3: The applicant has a view that is significantly impaired by seven Fan Palm trees, one Coral tree, eight queen palms, and six Eucalyptus trees on property located at 32063 Pacific Drive. Section 4: The applicant has complied with the early neighbor consultation process and has shown proof of cooperation on his part to resolve conflicts. On April 22, 1999 the applicant and foliage owner attended a pre-application meeting with the City and agreed to meet after the pre-application meeting to discuss a possible agreement. Both parties met on numerous occasions to discuss the view impairment issue and to attempt to reach an agreement; however, in August 1999 the applicant informed the City that he and the foliage owner could not reach agreement and filed a formal application. 0 0 application. Section 5: Based on evidence provided by the applicant, the subject trees at 32063 Pacifica Drive significantly impair the applicant's view. All of the subject foliage exceeds the height of the ridgeline of the primary structure or 16 feet and significantly impairs the view from the applicant's viewing area. Section 6: The subject property is located less than one thousand (1,000)feet from the applicant's property in that the foliage owner's property adjoins the applicant's property. Section 7: The applicant's and the foliage owners properties, lots 41 and 47, respectively, of Tract 31617 were created in December 1977. Tract 31617 was created using mass grading techniques that involve removal of all the existing vegetation and terracing the hillsides to create the building pads. According to the Environmental Impact Report for the property dated May 1973 "The entire area was explored on foot, and observations were immediately recorded in a field notebook. The property consists of hard packed, sun-baked, silty clay soils heavily invaded by weedy plant species. There are sparse areas of native vegetation (Artemisia Californica)". The report goes on to say, "brush and debris were removed off the site".that "the slopes on lots 12 through 62 have been cleaned of loose material and planted." Section 8: Trimming, removing, or relocating the foliage as recommended by Staff, will not cause an unreasonable infringement on the privacy of the foliage owner in that the view impairing trees do not currently provide privacy to the foliage owner or the adjoining property located at 32026 Sea Ridge Circle. Additionally, replacement foliage is provided for all foliage that is recommended for removal. Therefore, the recommended actions will not cause unreasonable infringement of the privacy of the foliage owner. Section 9: Trimming, removing or relocating the subject trees as identified in the attached Conditions of Approval (Exhibit "A"), is necessary in order to restore the applicant's view. Section 10: Pursuant to Section 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, removal and relocation of foliage at 32063 Pacific Drive in order to restore the view at 6050 Ocean Terrace, 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 17.02.0 (C)(2)(g) of the V.R.C.Resolution No.2001-03 Page 2 of 6 0 0 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 October 4, 2001 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 approved View Restoration Permit No. 76 subject to the Conditions of Approval contained in the attached Exhibit "A", which are necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED on the 4th day of October, 2001. AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: y ii,y_dial44!„. filbert Alberio, Chairman •eI Rojas 11 Director of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement V. R. C.Resolution No.2001-03 Page 3 of 6 0 0 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VIEW RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 76 1. Coral Tree: Trim and lace the crown of the tree down to a height not to exceed 16 feet or the ridgeline whichever is lower. Said trimming shall occur on a semi-annual basis beginning in October and occurring again in April. 2. Fan Palm 1 through 7 Option one: Trim to a height not to exceed 16 feet or the ridgeline whichever is lower. Option two: With the consent of the foliage owner, remove the existing trees and replace them. Option three: With the consent of the foliage owner, relocate these trees out of the applicant's viewing area and replant them in an area that will not significantly impair a view from any other property. The foliage owner may select option 2 or 3 in writing. Lacking his consent within 30 days from approval of this resolution or from denial of and appeal if applicable, whichever is later, Option 1 shall apply. 3. All Eucalyptus Trees: Option one: Trim to a height not to exceed 16 feet or the ridgeline whichever is lower. Option two: With the consent of the foliage owner, remove the existing trees and replace them. The foliage owner may select option 2 in writing. Lacking his consent within 30 days from approval of this resolution or from denial of and appeal if applicable, whichever is later, Option 1 shall apply. 4. Queen Palms 1 through 3 and 4 through 8: Option one: Trim to a height not to exceed 16 feet or the ridgeline whichever is lower. Option two: With the consent of the foliage owner, remove the existing trees and replace them. Option three: With the consent of the foliage owner, relocate these trees out of the V. R. C.Resolution No.2001-03 Page 4 of 6 0 411, applicant's viewing area and replant them in an area that will not significantly impair a view from any other property. The foliage owner may select option 2 or 3 in writing. Lacking his consent within 30 days from approval of this resolution or from denial of and appeal ifapplicable, whichever is later, Option 1 shall apply. 6. 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, or as specified above if different, beginning one year after the initial trimming of the foliage is completed and verified by Staff. 7. The selection of the type of replacement foliage shall be made by the foliage owner from an approved list of foliage types provided by the Director of Planning Building and Code Enforcement or approved by the City View Restoration arborist. Additionally, should the foliage owner chose to relocate the palm trees defined and described above, the City's contract arborist will monitor the relocation process. 8. 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 applicant or any subsequent owner of the applicant's property 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. 9. 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. 10.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. 11.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 W:\VIEW RESTORATION\VRP CASES\71-80\76\VRP 76 DRAFT VRC RESO 2001.DOC V. R. C.Resolution No.2001-01 Page 5 of 6 i . • e • 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. 12.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. 13.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. 14.The foliage owners shall, no later than 90 days after the Notice of Approval (First Notice) is mailed, complete the work to the extent required by this Permit and shall maintain the vegetation to a height that will not impair a view from another property in the future as specified in these Conditions of Approval. 15.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. 16.If the required work as specified herein is not completed by the foliage owner within 90 days of the issuance of the Notice of Approval, then the City of Rancho Palos Verdes will authorize a bonded tree service to perform the work at the subject property and at the foliage owner's expense. In the event that the City is required to perform the work at the foliage owner's expense, the City shall reimburse the applicant from the City trust account not later than 30 days after the expiration of the time period stipulated above. 17.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:\VIEW RESTORATION\VRP CASES\71-80\76\VRP 76 DRAFT VRC RESO 2001.DOC V. R. C. Resolution No.2001-01 Page 6 of 6