RPVCCA_CC_SR_2011_08_02_I_Revision_TT_Trump_Golf_CourseCITY OF
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED:
Project Manager:
HONORABLE MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
JOEL ROJAS,DIRECTOR OF PLANNING,BUILDING®~tJf
AND CODE ENFORCEMENT
AUGUST 2,2011
REVISION "TI"TO THE TRUMP NATIONAL GOLF
COURSE PROJECT -PROPOSED FICUS HEDGES
CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER ci2-
Gregory Pfost,AICP,Deputy Community Development Director~
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No.2011-_,thereby denying Revision TT,an amendment to CUP No.
163,for proposed ficus hedges on the driving range.
DISCUSSION
On July 19,2011,the City Council heard public testimony and discussed proposed
Revision TT.At the meeting the Council closed the public hearing,and a majority of the
City Council voted to deny the Applicant's request (4-1,Councilman Campbell voting no).
The Council then directed Staff to come back to the August 2,2011 meeting with a
Resolution reflecting the Council's decision.
In denying the Applicant's request,the Council may take one of two actions:"Deny"or
"Deny without Prejudice".To "Deny without Prejudice"would allow the Applicant to submit
a new application for the same or similar project within a 12-month period.To simply
"Deny"the application would mean that according to Municipal Code Section 17.60.020.A,
an application which is the same as,or substantially the same as,an application upon
which final action had already been taken,could not be submitted within twelve months
from the previous action date.
Staff understands from the Trump Organization that they desire to submit a new
application for a different type hedge or landscaping than what was denied through
I-1
Revision TT.Consistent with the Municipal Code and direction from the City Council at the
July 19th meeting,Staff believes that it is important to not "Deny without Prejudice",but to
simply "Deny"Revision TT,and to also define what is meant by submitting an application
that is not the same or substantially the same as that found in Revision TT.Thus Staff has
added the following Section 5 to the attached Draft Resolution:
Section 5:The request is hereby denied and thus,within a 12-month period following the date of this
Resolution,the Applicant may not file,and the director shall not accept,an application which is the
same as,or substantially the same as,the application (Revision TT)that was denied through this
Resolution.However,within a 12-month period from the date of this Resolution,the Applicant may
submit a new application for a proposed hedge/landscaping that includes a native and drought-
tolerant species,does not include a hedge of any height in the area where the proposed southerly
hedge was to have been located as depicted in Revision TT,and is at the same height or shorter than
the northerly hedge that was proposed in Revision TT;these revisions would not be considered to be
the same or substantially the same as the application for Revision TT,which is being denied.
If the Applicant subm its a new application for proposed hedges/landscaping regardless of whether the
application is (or is not)the same or substantially the same as the hedges that were proposed in
Revision TT,said new application will be analyzed as a new application on its own merits,at a duly
noticed public hearing,with a decision (approval,approval with conditions or denial)rendered by the
City Council.
Thus,attached for the Council's consideration is the Draft Resolution denying the
Applicant's request.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts associated with this decision.
ATTACHMENT
Resolution No.2011-_,denying Revision TT
I-2
RESOLUTION NO.2011·
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
DENYING REVISION "TT"TO THE TRUMP NATIONAL GOLF CLUB,WHICH WAS A
REQUEST TO AMEND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.163 TO PERMIT CERTAIN FICUS
HEDGES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AT THE TRUMP NATIONAL GOLF COURSE.
WHEREAS,an application package was filed by the Zuckerman Building Company and Palos
Verdes Land Holdings Company requesting approval of tentative parcel maps,vesting tentative tract
maps,conditional use permits,a coastal permit and a grading permit to allow the construction of a
Residential Planned Development of 120 single family dwelling units and for development of an 18-hole
golf course,a clubhouse and parking facilities on a 258 acre site bounded by Palos Verdes Drive South
on the north,Portuguese Bend Club and Community Association on the west,the Pacific Ocean on the
south and Los Angeles County Shoreline Park on the east;and,
WHEREAS,a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)was prepared and circulated for 45
days from June 7,1991 through July 22,1991,in order to receive written comments on the adequacy of
the document from responsible agencies and the public;and,
WHEREAS,subsequent to the circulation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report and
preparation of written responses,the applicant revised the scope of the project and reduced the number
of proposed single family residences to 40 units in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.50666 and 43 in
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.50667,and an 18 hole golf course with related facilities within the
boundaries of both Vesting Tentative Tract Maps,and,due to the changes in the project,an Addendum to
the Draft Environmental Impact Report (ADEIR)was prepared;and,
WHEREAS,based on review of the Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report,the City
determined that the information submitted in the ADEIR cited potential additional significant
environmental impacts that would be caused by the revised project,and directed preparation of a
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR).The SEIR,which incorporates information and
findings set forth in the Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report,was prepared and circulated
for 45 days from March 19,1992 through May 4,1992,during which time all interested parties were
notified of the circulation period and invited to present written comments to the information contained in
the SEIR,in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act;and,
WHEREAS,on June 1,1992,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.92-53,certifying Environmental Impact Report No.36 and adopted Resolution Nos.92-54,
92-55,92-56 and 92-57,respectively approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos.50666 and 50667,
Tentative Parcel Map Nos.20970 and 23004,Conditional Use Permit Nos.162 and 163,Coastal Permit
No.103 and Grading Permit No.1541 for a Residential Planned Development consisting of a total of
eighty-three (83)single family dwelling units,an 18 hole public golf course and public open space on
261.4 acres in Coastal Subregion Nos.7 and 8;and,
WHEREAS,on August 12,1992,after finding that an appeal of the City's approval of the project
raised a substantial issue,the California Coastal Commission denied Coastal Permit No.103,directed
the landowners to redesign the project to address the concerns raised by the Coastal Commission Staff
and remanded the project back to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for reconsideration;and,
WHEREAS,on December 7,1992,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.92-115 approving the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No.36 and adopted
Resolution Nos.92-116,92-117,92-118 and 92-119 approving Revisions to Vesting Tentative Tract Map
Nos.50666 and 50667,Tentative Parcel Map Nos.20970 and 23004,Conditional Use Permit Nos.162
and 163,Coastal Permit No.103,and Grading Permit No.1541 in order to address concerns raised by
the Coastal Commission with regard to adequate provisions for pUblic open space,public access and
habitat preservation;and,
I-3
WHEREAS,on April 15,1993,the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal
Development Permit No.A-5-RPV-93-5 (i.e.Coastal Permit No.103),subject to additional conditions of
approval.
WHEREAS,on October 5,1993,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.93-89 approving a second Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No.36 and
adopted Resolution Nos.93-90, 93-91,93-92 and 93-93 respectively re-approving Vesting Tentative
Tract Map Nos.50666 and 50667,Tentative Parcel Map Nos.20970 and 23004,Conditional Use Permit
Nos.162 and 163,and Grading Permit No.1541 in order to comply with a Court mandate to provide
affordable housing in conjunction with the project,pursuant to Government Code Section 65590;and,
WHEREAS,on November 5,1993,the California Coastal Commission adopted revised and
expanded findings in conjunction with the project;and,
WHEREAS,on September 6,1994,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.94-71 approving a third Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No.36 and Adopted
Resolution Nos.94-72,94-73, 94-74,94-75,94-76 and 94-77,respectively,approving Revision "A"to the
approved Ocean Trails project,including,but not limited to,relocation of the golf course clubhouse from
the area southwest of the School District property to an area north of Half Way Point,locating the golf
course maintenance facility and four (4)affordable housing units southeast of the corner of Palos Verdes
Drive South and Paseo Del Mar,reducing the number of single family residential lots from eighty-three
(83)to seventy-five (75)and increasing the height of the golf course clubhouse from thirty (30)feet to
forty-eight (48)feet;and,
WHEREAS,on January 12,1995,the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal
Development Permit No.A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e.Coastal Permit No.103),thereby approving its first
amendment to the permit,subject to revised conditions of approval;and,
WHEREAS,on September 27,1995,the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal
Development Permit No.A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e.Coastal Permit No.103),thereby approving its second
amendment to the permit;and,
WHEREAS,on February 1,1996,the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal
Development Permit No.A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e.Coastal Permit No.103),thereby approving its third
amendment to the permit;and,
WHEREAS,on March 11,1996,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.96-15 approving a fourth Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No.36 and Adopted
Resolution Nos.96-16,and 96-17,respectively,approving Revision "B"to the approved Ocean Trails
project,including,but not limited to,modifying the approved alignment of Paseo del Mar ("A"Streetl"J"
Bluff Road),revising the Conditions of Approval regarding several pUblic trails,and relocating the golf
course clubhouse approximately 80 feet to the west of its previously approved location;and,
WHEREAS,on July 11,1996,the California Coastal Commission approved Coastal Development
Permit No.A-5-RPV-93-005A (i.e.Coastal Permit No.103),thereby approving its fourth amendment to
the permit,subject to revised conditions of approval;and,
WHEREAS,on September 3,1996,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.96-72 approving a fifth Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No.36 and Adopted
Resolution Nos.96-73, 96-74, 96-75,96-76 and 96-77,respectively,approving Revision "C"to the
approved Ocean Trails project,including,but not limited to,relocation of two single family residential lots
in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.50667 from the end of Street "A"to the end of Street "C",revisions to
the boundaries of open space Lots B,C,G and H,conversion the split-level lots in Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No.50667 to single-level lots,revisions to the golf course layout,revisions the public trail
system,combination of parallel trails easements,construction of a paved fire access road west of the
I-4
Ocean Terraces Condominiums and amendments to several Conditions of Approval and Mitigation
Measures to modify the required timing for compliance;and,
WHEREAS,on September 9,1997,the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes adopted P.C.Resolution No.97-44 approving Revision "0"to the Ocean Trails project,which
involved an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No.162 (Residential Planned Development)to modify
the minimum rear yard setbacks on Lot Nos.6 through 9 to provide an adequate buffer between the
proposed residences and the potential brush fires that may occur on the adjacent habitat area;and,
WHEREAS,on April 21,1998,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.98-32 approving Revision "E"to the Ocean Trails project,which involved an amendment
to Conditional Use Permit No.163 (Golf Course)to modify the bonding requirements for the golf course
improvements;and,
WHEREAS,on June 16,1998,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.98-59,approving Revision "F"to the Ocean Trails project,which involved,modifying the
configuration of Streets "C"and "0"and Lot Nos.1 through 13 of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.50667
to accommodate the final location of the Foundation Setback Line,and a revision to Conditional Use
Permit No.162 (Residential Planned Development)to address maximum building height;and,
WHEREAS,on July 14,1998,the Planning Commission adopted P.C.Resolution Nos.98-26 and
98-27,thereby recommending approval of Addendum No.6 to EIR No.36 and Revision "G"to
Conditional Use Permit No.163 to the City Council;and,
WHEREAS,on August 18,1998,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.98-76 approving Addendum NO.6 to Environmental Impact Report No.36 and the
proposed Revision "G"to the Ocean Trails project,which included:1)an 18%increase in the size of the
clubhouse from 27,000 square feet to 32,927 square feet;2)an increase in the size of the maintenance
facility from 6,000 square feet to 9,504 square feet;3)a two foot increase in the upslope height of the
maintenance facility building;and,4)relocation of the maintenance building and reconfiguration of the
maintenance facility parking lot;and,
WHEREAS,on February 2,1999,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.99-10 approving Addendum No.7 to Environmental Impact Report No.36 and the
proposed Revision "H"to the Ocean Trails project,which included:changing 6 of the residential lots
within VTTM 50667 from flat pad lots to split level lots,lowering the overall pad elevation for each lot,and
lowering Street 'B'within the subdivision,and lowering the pad elevation for 6 other lots within the
subdivision.Additionally,the approval included the modification of the project's mitigation measures and
conditions of approval to allow the permitted construction hours for the entire Ocean Trails project to be
expanded to include Sundays through March 21,1999;and,
WHEREAS,on May 4,1999,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.99-29 approving Addendum No.8 to Environmental Impact Report No.35 and the
proposed Revision "I"to the Ocean Trails project,which included a change to the design of the storm
drain facilities of the Ocean Trails project from a tunneled pipe system to the existing on-site canyons.
Revision "I"only amended the drainage for the east side of the Ocean Trails project,involving La Rotonda
Canyon;and,
WHEREAS,on June 2,1999,Landslide C at the Ocean Trails site was re-activated;and,
WHEREAS,on July 20,1999,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.99-55 approving Addendum No.9 to Environmental Impact Report No.36 and the
proposed Revision "J"to the Ocean Trails project,which included:1),the conditions requiring the
establishment of a maintenance district be revised by eliminating the maintenance district and having the
golf course owner be the sole responsible entity for maintenance thereby excluding the future residential
homeowners;2)withdrawn by applicant;3),the timing of the installation of ornamental fencing on each
I-5
residential lot be delayed until prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy;4),delay the construction of
two trails within VTTM 50666 from the Second Stage to the Third Stage of phasing within the Public
Amenities Plan;5),lower the approved residential building pad elevations and create split-level pads in
VTTM No.50666;6),delay the payment of traffic impact fees to prior to Final Map No.50666;7),allow an
increase in total building area of the clubhouse by permitting a basement space;8),withdrawn by
applicant;and 9),revise the hours permitted for golf course landscape gardening;and,
WHEREAS,on May 16,2000,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.2000-27 approving Addendum No.10 to Environmental Impact Report No.36 and the
proposed Revision "K"to the Ocean Trails project,which allowed a portion of the golf course to open for
play before all of the required public amenities have been completed due to delays caused by the failure
of Landslide C on June 2,1999;and,
WHEREAS,on June 21,2000,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted
Resolution No.2000-38 certifying a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report to Environmental
Impact Report No.36,adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program,adopting a Statement of Overriding
Considerations,and the proposed Revision "L"to the Ocean Trails project,for the repair of Landslide C at
Ocean Trails;and,
WHEREAS,on July 18,2000,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved
Revision M to the Ocean Trails Project,thereby approving an amendment to the Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP),an amendment to the HCP Implementing Agreement,and approval of a Conservation
Easement over the lower portion of Shoreline Park;and,
WHEREAS,on September 5,2000,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
approved Revision N to the Ocean Trails Project,thereby approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and
amending the project to accommodate a change to the design of the storm drain facilities of the Ocean
Trails project from a tunneled pipe system to the existing on-site canyons.Revision "N"only amended
the drainage for the west side of the Ocean Trails project,involving Forrestal Canyon;and,
WHEREAS,on February 20,2001,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved
Revision P to the Ocean Trails Project,thereby approving an amendment to allow Ocean Trails an
extension of time to provide 4 on-site affordable housing units for rent from "prior to one year of the
opening of the clubhouse"to "prior to the opening of the 18-hole golf course";and,
WHEREAS,on August 19,2003,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved
Revision "T"to the Ocean Trails Project,thereby approving an amendment to allow an expansion to the
Clubhouse Building;and,
WHEREAS,on November 5,2003,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved
Revision "U"to the Ocean Trails Project,thereby approving an additional expansion to the Clubhouse
Building;and,
WHEREAS,on April 20,2004,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved
Revision "V"to the Ocean Trails Project,thereby allowing:1)basement areas of one-story structures to
be excluded from the existing 30%"Maximum Habitable Space"requirement,but require that the
basement habitable area be added to the first floor habitable area in complying with the "Maximum
Habitable Space Square Footage"requirement;2)permitting a change in the height of Lot #2 to allow for
a subterranean garage;and 3)permitted construction of retaining walls and access to the proposed
subterranean garage;and,
WHEREAS,on June 7,2005,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved
Revision "W"to the Trump National Golf Club project thereby revising CUP No.162,CUP No.163,
VTTM50666,and Grading Permit No.1541 to accommodate a new driving range in place of 16
residential lots within VTTM50666;and,
I-6
WHEREAS,on May 2,2006,the City Council approved Revision "z"to the Trump National Golf
Club project to revise Conditional Use Permit No.163 to allow a change in the golf course design to
permit an increase in height for Waterfall #1 and new back tees on Hole #2,and to revise Grading Permit
No.1541,to allow an additional temporary 3-month opening of the golf course and driving range to the
public;and,
WHEREAS,on March 20,2007,the City Council approved Revision "BB"to Conditional Use
Permit No.163 and a Variance,thereby overturning the Planning Commission's decision to deny the
request for a 70'tall flagpole on the sUbject property;and,
WHEREAS,on December 18,2007,the City Council denied Revision "GG"to Conditional Use
Permit No.163,thereby denying a 12'high ficus hedge located at the western edge of the existing Driving
Range;and,
WHEREAS,VH Property Corp.,submitted an application to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
requesting approval of Revision "TT"to the Trump National Golf Club project to revise the conditions of
approval found within CUP No.163,and to revise mitigation measures adopted in association with
certified Environmental Impact Report No.36 (adopted for the Golf Course and Residential project)and
the certified Mitigated Negative Declaration (adopted for Revision W for the driving range),so as to allow
two ficus hedge rows (southerly and northerly)to be planted on the western edge of the existing Driving
Range;and,
WHEREAS,a Notice of Public Hearing for the Revision "TT"request to be heard by the City
Council on July 19,2011,was published in the Peninsula News on Thursday,June 30,2011,mailed to all
property owners within a 500'radius of the subject site,mailed to all neighboring homeowner
associations,mailed to the Trump National interested parties list and posted on the City's listserver for the
Trump National project;and,
WHEREAS,on July 19,2011,after notice was issued pursuant to the provisions of the
Development Code,the City Council held a public hearing to consider the applicant's request for Revision
"TI"to the Trump National Golf Club project,at which time all interested parties were given an
opportunity to be heard and present evidence;and,
WHEREAS,pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,Public
Resources Code Sections 21000 et.seq.("CEQA"),the State CEQA Guidelines,California Code of
Regulations,Title 14,Sections 15000 et.seq.,the City's Local CEQA Guidelines,and Government Code
Section 65952.5(e)(Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement),this project is Statutorily Exempt from
CEQA,per California Code of Regulations,Title 14,Section 15270,as CEQA does not apply to projects
which a public agency disapproves;and,
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES
HEREBY FIND,DETERMINE,AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1:The Applicant's request for Revision TT included a request to permit two rows of ficus
("Ficus Nitida")trees/hedges along the western edge of the Driving Range.The first row,which is the
more northerly row,was proposed to be 9.8'high at its northern end and gradually decreasing in height to
6.0'high at its southerly end.The second row,which was directly south and west of the row described
above,was proposed to be 7.7'high at its northern end and gradually increasing in height to 11.0'high at
its southerly end.
Section 2:Pursuant to California Code of Regulations,Title 14,Section 15270,Revision TT is
Statutorily Exempt from CEQA because CEQA does not apply to projects which a pUblic agency
disapproves.
Section 3:Pursuant to Section 17.60.050 of the Development Code,in denying the request for
Revision "TI"to CUP No. 163 the City Council finds that:
I-7
a.The site is not adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed ficus hedges ("use"or
"hedges")and for all of the yards,setbacks,walls,fences,landscaping and other features required by this
title or by conditions imposed under this section to integrate said use with those on adjacent land and
within the neighborhood because the proposal is not well integrated with uses on adjacent lands as it
affects views from adjacent residential properties in the Portuguese Bend Club and Seaview
developments,as well as the public rights of way of Palos Verdes Drive South and the north/south public
trail located between the driving range and the western property line.
Specifically,when the development of the Trump National Golf Course project (formally known as Ocean
Trails)was initially considered by the City Council in 1992,conditions were imposed by the City Council to
ensure that the development of the project would be integrated with uses upon adjacent land and within
the surrounding neighborhoods and that the project would not result in adverse impacts to existing views
from properties in the vicinity of the project site.In making its decision at that time,the City Council
reviewed the project in accordance with existing goals,policies and guidelines within the "General Plan",
"Coastal Specific Plan"and the "Coastal Development and Design Guidelines for Subregions 1 and 7".
The Council approved the project with many conditions and mitigation measures that restrict building
(residential and non-residential)heights as well as landscaping heights to ensure that views are
maintained over the project site.The proposed hedges are not well integrated into the site because they
are inconsistent with these conditions and mitigation measures,which were designed to integrate the
entire project with uses on adjacent land and within the surrounding neighborhood.More specifically,the
proposed hedges are inconsistent with the following conditions and mitigation measures:
•CUP No.163 -K-2.b.Landscaping within the project area shall be planted in such a
manner so that views from adjacent properties and any public right-of-way are not
affected.
The proposed ficus hedges are inconsistent with this condition because the proposal
affects ocean views from adjacent properties within the Portuguese Bend Club and
Seaview neighborhoods and the public right-of-way of Palos Verdes Drive South.
Furthermore,the proposed hedges would create a tunnel effect along the north/south
public trail,which is located between the driving range and the subject site's western
property line,thereby also affecting views of the ocean and Catalina Island from the
public trail.
•EIR NO.36,Mitigation Measure No.73.The project proponent shall not use view-
obstructing plant species.
The proposed hedges are inconsistent with this mitigation measure because they would
consist of a landscape species,Ficus Nitida,that is a fast growing species that can will
be difficult to maintain in a manner that will not cause repeated view obstructions from
other properties.
•MND for Revision W,Mitigation Measure 10 -Aesthetics A-1:Subject to review and
approval by the Director of Planning,Building and Code Enforcement,prior to issuance
of any grading permits,the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan that
identifies the type of vegetation proposed for the driving range and surrounding areas,
specifically including the southerly berm.The type of vegetation utilized shall be
consistent with the allowable vegetation permitted on the subject site,as defined in the
project's HCP,and shall not be of a type that would grow higher than the ridge elevation
of the southerly berm.Further,said vegetation shall be maintained to a height that will
not grow higher than the ridge elevation of the southerly berm.
The proposed hedges are inconsistent with this mitigation measure because the proposal
includes vegetation that would be located higher than the ridge elevation of the southerly
berm and thereby will impair views.
I-8
In addition to the conditions and mitigation measures that are associated with integrating the project with
neighboring properties in relation to preserving views,and to ensure that the development of the entire
project site is well integrated into the existing site and adjacent lands related to the natural setting and
landscape species,additional conditions of approval and mitigation measures were imposed previously
by the City Council.The proposed hedges would not be well integrated with uses on adjacent land or
within the adjacent neighborhoods because the proposed ficus species is inconsistent with the following
mitigation measures:
•EIR No.36,Mitigation Measure No.106.Native vegetation and drought tolerant species
shall be used by the project proponent,to the extent possible in common open space
and golf course.
The proposal is not a native species nor is it drought tolerant and,therefore,is
inconsistent with this mitigation measure.
b.In approving the proposed ficus hedges at the specific location that has been proposed,there will
be a significant adverse effect on adjacent property because,given the extent of the City Council's prior
deliberation to ensure that the entire project will affect views as little as possible,as discussed in Section
3a above,the proposed hedges would affect views significantly.
c.The proposal is contrary to the General Plan because it will not be consistent with the goals of the
General Plan.Specifically,a Goal of the General Plan (Page 176)states,
"Palos Verdes Peninsula is graced with views and vistas of the surrounding Los Angeles basin
and coastal region.Because of its unique geographic form and coastal resources,these views
and vistas are a significant resource to residents and too many visitors,as they provide a rare
means of experiencing the beauty of the peninsula and the Los Angeles region.It is the
responsibility of the City to preserve these views and vistas for the public benefit and,where
appropriate,the City should strive to enhance and restore these resources,the visual character of
the City,and provide and maintain access for the benefit and enjoyment of the public.
The proposed hedges are inconsistent with this Goal because they are not consistent with preserving,
enhancing or restoring visual resources for the benefit of the public.Specifically,when the City Council
approved Revision W to accommodate the driving range,which removed 16 residential home sites and
enhanced the views over the site,this decision was consistent with the portion of the Goal that states:"....
It is the responsibility of the City to preserve these views and vistas for the public benefit and,where
appropriate,the City should strive to enhance and restore these resources ..."However,the proposal to
install two ficus hedges,which together will cause further impairment of views than what was approved
under Revision W,is contrary to this Goal.
d.The proposal is located within the "Natural","Socio/cultural",and "Urban Appearance"overlay
control districts established by Municipal Code Chapter 17.40,and the proposed hedges are not
consistent with all applicable requirements of that chapter,because the two hedges are not consistent
with Urban Appearance overlay control district and its performance criteria.Specifically,according to
Section 17.40.060,the "Urban Appearance"overlay control district was established to:
"...2.Preserve,protect and maintain significant views and vistas from major public view corridors
and public lands and waters within the city which characterize the city's appearance as defined in
the visual aspects portion of the general plan and the corridors element of the coastal specific
plan;
"3.Ensure that site planning,grading and landscape techniques,as well as improvement
planning,design and construction will preserve,protect and enhance the visual character of the
I-9
city's predominant land forms,urban form,vegetation and other distinctive features,as identified
in the general plan and the coastal specific plan;..."
Additionally,Chapter 17.40.060.C indicates that the following performance criteria shall be used in
assessing any and all uses and developments and whether they will:
"1.Result in the change in elevation of the land or construction of any improvement which would
block,alter or impair major views,vistas or viewsheds in existence from designated view
corridors,view sites or view points at the dates of adoption of the general plan and the coastal
specific plan in such a way as to materially and irrevocably alter the quality of the view as to arc
(horizontal and vertical),primary orientation or other characteristics;...
8.Result in changes in topography or the construction of improvements which would block,alter
or otherwise materially change significant views,vistas and viewshed areas available from major
private residential areas of the community which characterize the visual appearance,urban form
and economic value of these areas."
Due to the affect upon views that will be caused by the proposed two ficus hedges,the proposal is
inconsistent with the purpose and performance criteria of the "Urban Appearance"overlay control district.
Section 4:For the forgoing reasons,and based on information and findings contained in the
public record,including the staff reports,minutes,records of proceedings,and evidence presented at the
public hearings,the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby denies Revision "TT",which
was a proposed amendment to Conditional Use Permit No.163.
Section 5:The request is hereby denied and thus,within a 12-month period following the date
of this Resolution,the Applicant may not file,and the director shall not accept,an application which is
the same as,or substantially the same as,the application (Revision TT)that was denied through this
Resolution.However,within a 12-month period from the date of this Resolution,the Applicant may
submit a new application for a proposed hedge/landscaping that includes a native and drought-tolerant
species,does not include a hedge of any height in the area where the proposed southerly hedge was to
have been located as depicted in Revision TT,and is at the same height or shorter than the northerly
hedge that was proposed in Revision TT;these revisions would not be considered to be the same or
substantially the same as the application for Revision TT,which is being denied.
If the Applicant submits a new application for proposed hedges/landscaping regardless of
whether the application is (or is not)the same or substantially the same as the hedges that were
proposed in Revision TT,said new application will be analyzed as a new application on its own merits,
at a duly noticed public hearing,with a decision (approval,approval with conditions or denial)rendered
by the City Council.
Section 6: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 or any
other applicable short period of limitations.
I-10
PASSED,APPROVED,and ADOPTED this 2nd day of August 2011.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )ss
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES )
I,Carla Morreale,City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,hereby certify that the above Resolution
No.2011-_was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting
held on August 2,2011.
City Clerk
I-11