VRC RES 2001-002 •
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING VIEW
RESTORATION PERMIT NO. 81 TO TRIM OR REMOVE
FOLIAGE AT 7 HEADLAND DRIVE
WHEREAS, on November 2, 1999, Mr. and Mrs. Bob Shahnazarian, owner of
property located at 6 Headland Drive (herein "the applicant"), in the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, filed an application requesting a View Restoration Permit ("Permit") to restore the
view from their property that is significantly impaired by foliage owned by Mr. and Mrs.
Bruce Tilley at 7 Headland Drive (herein "the foliage owners"), in the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes ("City"); and,
WHEREAS, notice of the View Restoration Commission ("Commission") hearing,
along with copies of the Staff report, were mailed to the applicant and the foliage owners,
WHEREAS, on March 15, 2001, 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 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The applicant at 6 Headland Drive has a view, as defined by Section
17.02.040 of the City's Development Code of the Pacific Ocean, San Pedro City lights, the
Vincent Thomas Bridge, and the Los Angeles harbor.
Section 2: The applicant's primary viewing area, as defined by Section 17.02.040
of the City's Development Code, is from the living room, dining room and family room.
Section 3: The applicant's view is significantly impaired by three Aleppo pines, one
Olive tree and one Podocarpus Gracilior tree on property located at 7 Headland Drive
(Tilley property).
Section 4: The applicant has complied with the early neighbor consultation process
and has shown proof of cooperation on his part to resolve conflicts. At some point,
between 1996 and 1999, before this process began, the Shahnazarians offered $10,000
to remove said trees.
Section 5: Based on evidence provided by the applicant, the subject trees at 7
Headland significantly impair the applicant's view. All of the subject foliage exceeds the
ridgeline of the primary structure and significantly impairs the view of the ocean, bridge and
the harbor 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.
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 subject
parcel is a part of private property record of survey as per BK 62 pg 36 &3, and was
created in or about 1950. The applicant's lot is dated 1959. When created, this entire
section involved mass grading which included the removal of all existing vegetation. A
copy of a portion of the grading plan and the Final Geology and Compacted Filled Ground
Report documents the removal of all vegetation. This would indicate that any trees that
were present on the site in 1959 were removed when the mass grading for the tract
occurred and therefore, were not view-impairing foliage when the lot was created.
Section 8: Trimming the foliage as required to restore the applicant's view, will not
cause an unreasonable infringement on the privacy of the foliage owners in that views into
the front yard and all the windows facing the street of the foliage owner's house located at
7 Headland Drive are obstructed because the house is five feet below the street level and
the foliage on the trees is high enough to allow view under the foliage.
Removing the lower branches from the Aleppo pine trees and trimming the Olive and
Podocarpus Gracilior trees will not cause infringement of the foliage owner's privacy
located at 7 Headland Drive for the following reasons: 1) only portions of Aleppo pine trees
on the foliage owner property will be removed, and these currently do not provide any
privacy because they are at or above ridge line level, 2) view of the residence is sheltered
by a slope that ends beneath street level so that only the roof and the top of the façade
windows are seen, and 3) view of the residence in front is screened primarily by a wall in
the front yard and by growing Podocarpus trees under the Aleppo pine trees. Therefore,
trimming the trees will not cause unreasonable infringement of the privacy of the foliage
owner.
Section 9: The trimming or removal of the subject trees as identified in the attached
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: The time within which the judicial review of the decision reflected in this
Resolution, if available, must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California
Code of Civil Procedure.
Section 12: Based on the foregoing information, and on the information and findings
\\MASTADON\PLANNING\ETR\VRP\81-89\VRP 81\RESOLUTION NI DOC
•
•
included in the Staff report and evidence presented at the public hearing, the View
Restoration Commission approves View Restoration Permit No. 81, and orders the
trimming or removal of foliage at 7 Headland Drive to restore the views at 6 Headland Drive
as provided in, and subject to, the conditions outlined in the attached Exhibit"A", which are
necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED on the 15th day of March 2001
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
Gilbert Alberio, Chairman
Joel Rojas, A .C.'.
Qirector of Pl.nni g, Building & Code Enforcement
\\MASTADON\PLANNING\ETR\VRP\81-89\VRP 81\RESOLUTION N1 DOC