Loading...
2500 Planning - Landscape Review CommitteeO CONSIDERATION OF STAFF LEVEL LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE. Mayor Lay commented on past discussions regarding the landscape review process. He indicated that he feels that a more formal review at the staff level should be initiated especially when a project calls for a•substantial amount of grading. Councilmembers discussed the City's current review of landscape plans for compliance with conditions in the Planning Commission resolutions of approval. Discussion ensued regarding the RHCA's Landscape Review Committee. Mayor Lay indicted that he had spoken with the Chair of the RHCA Landscape Review Committee regarding this subject. He also indicated that he had approached the City's Landscape Consultant who indicated that she feels that this would be.a good course of action. After the discussion, staff was authorized to establish a staff level Landscape Review Committee. 16/11/2004 14:29 310643E441 JENKINS & HOGIN LLP PAGE 02 JENKINS HOGIN, LLP A LAW PARTNERSHIP MEMORANDUM TO: Craig Nealis FROM: Michael Jenkins DATE: October 12, 2004 RE: View Impairment This responds to your request of September 17, 2004 for a summary of the legal principles that govern the imposition of conditions on discretionary permits pertaining to view impairment caused by vegetation. The City's Zoning Ordinance includes several provisions dealing with landscaping and vegetation, which are summarized as follows: 1. New development subject to site plan review, requires approval of a landscaping plan, defined in Section 17.12.120, as a plan for proposed landscaping of a site, indicating the type, size and location of vegetation. [Section 17.27.020] Among other things, the landscape plan must incorporate existing mature trees and utilize native plants. 2. Section 17.16.180 requires homeowners to maintain existing landscaping in a healthy condition, and prohibits removal of plant materials without replacement. 3. Landscape screening for game courts must not exceed the height • determined by the Planning Commission. [Section 17.16.210.A.7.m] 10/11/2004 14:29 X1064'^""1 JENKINS & HD""' LLP PAGE 03 Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 2 JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP 4. As part of site plan review, Section 17.46.050.B. (4) and (7) requires preservation of native vegetation and mature trees and incorporation of native, drought tolerant landscaping. In addition to the foregoing provisions, Chapter 17.26 provides a mechanism for neighbors to adjudicate view impairments. The above provisions reveal two competing considerations — preservation of existing mature trees versus maintenance of views by removal of view obstructions — that are harmonized by the procedure established in Chapter 17.26 for adjudicating view impairments caused by vegetation and by establishing authority to control future landscaping through the approval of landscape plans. The courts have recognized that protection of viewsfor aesthetic purposes is a proper exercise of the City's police power. For example, in Kucera v. LiZza, 59 Cal. App. 4th 1141 (1997), the California Court of Appeal upheld Tiburon's view preservation ordinance designed to restore preexisting views from the effects of vegetation, similar to Chapter 17.26 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. In upholding the ordinance, the court obrrves that "this ordinance does not wholly proscribe the landscaping use in question; it only controls the unreasonably obstructive growth of trees in situations limited by guidelines." Id. at 1149. Subsequently, the court of appeal inEchevarrieta v. Rancho Palos Verdes, 86 Cal. App. 4'472 (2001) upheld the view preservation ordinance in our neighbor city. Hence, the City's power to protect views in this manner is clear. Your memorandum of September 17, 2004 raises the question whether, in the approval of discretionary land use permits, the Planning Commission may go further and impose conditions requiring property owners to eliminate existing or potential future view impairments caused by vegetation. The presumption underlying this idea is that imposition of such a condition would make view preservation less burdensome and would reduce the number of cases that are filed under Chapter 17.26. 10/11/2004 14:29 310643E441 JENKINS & HOGIN l' PAGE 04 Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 3 jENIGNS HOGIN, LLP As a general matter, any condition imposed on a discretionary approval must bear a reasonable relationship to the impacts being created by the proposed development or activity:- That is, there must be an articulable connection — or nexus — between what is being approved, and the condition to be imposed. Otherwise, the condition would be considered "arbitrary and capricious" and would exceed the City's police power. Further, the burden of the condition must also be proportionate to the degree of inpact caused by the proposed development or activity. Finally, the Con -mission may not use conditions of approval as a substitute for legislation; if the Code provisions recited above are deemed inadequate, the Code may be amended — within limits — to approach the subject of view impairment in a different way. But, the Commission cannot implement new policy through the device of imposing conditions on discretionary permits. Conditions of approval of discretionary projects must mitigate the actual impact of the project under review and go no further. A condition that fails to advance the purpoT for which it is imposed is invalid, and might constitute a taking of property without corrpensation. Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n, 483 U.S. 825 (1987); Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994). To determine if a condition substantially advances a legitimate governmental interest, these cases require affirmative answers to the following questions: 1. Is the purpose of the condition a legitimate governmental purpose? 2. Does the means used to achieve the objective "substantially advance" the intended purpoT? a. Does the type of condition imposed address the same type of impact caused by the development? b. Is the condition "roughly proportional" to the burden created by the development? 10/11/2004 14:29 310643'" JENKINS & HOC""'_LP PAGE 05 Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 4 JEN'KINS 6z HOGIN, UP With those standards in mind, the question presented is whether and • under what circumstances may the Commission require the removal or alteration of existing vegetation as a condition of approval of a discretionary land use permit.' The answer is that the Commission may do so when the vegetation is a part of, is reasonably related to, or is affected by or affects the project under consideration. Likewise, a condition requiring the removal or alteration of landscaping that is not reasonably related to the project isnot permissible. Utilizing the analytical framework set forth above, the validity of such a condition in the context of a hypothetical developrrent project must be evaluated as follows: 1. Does the condition advance a proper public purpose? As noted above, the protection of identifiable views has been deemed a proper public purpose by the courts. A condition of a discretionary permit requiring removal or alteration of vegetation must protect a specific, identified view in order to satisfy this criterion; absent evidence of a specific view impairment, there is no public purpose supporting imposition of the condition. 2. Does the condition substantially advance the purpose? If a discretionary project creates or contributes to a view impairment, a condition that mitigates the impairment may be imposed: 3. Is the condition proportional? The condition must be tailored to the problem, and should not impose a burden greater than necessary to accomplish the objective. By way of example: 1. Hypothetical No. I: Construction of a new home will impair a 1 Obviously, the Commission may impose conditions on any new landscaping being imposed on property. 10/11/2004 14:29 3106436441 JENKINS & HOGIN L PAGE 06 Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 5 JENKINS & HoGIN, LIP neighbor's preexisting view of the ocean. Location of the pad makes it impossible to change the location of the proposed house. However, the impairment may be mitigated and the view partially restored by removal or modification of existing trees on the lot: A condition requiring removal or modification of the trees would satisfy the above criteria. 2. Hypothetical No: Z Numerous tall trees exist on a parcel that is undergoing new development. The trees have not been identified as impairing a significant view, and are unaffected by the new con ruction. A condition requiring removal or modification of the trees would not satisfy the above criteria. Further, such a condition would be tantamount to establishing new City policy, and would be contrary to existing policy of maintaining existing mature landscaping. Your memorandum of September. 17, 2004 requested that I consider four questions that emerged from a meeting among Planning Commissioners and members of the Association Board. Those questions, and my responses thereto, are as follows: - - - - - 1. May the Planning Commission include a provision in resolutions of approval of discretionary permits that prohibit a property owner from causing future view impairments caused by vegetation anywhere on the property? Certainly the City may regulate the type and future height ofnew vegetation proposed to be incorporated into a landscape plan. To the extent the condition purportsto address the effects of existing vegetation, the condition: a) would exceed the City's police power for the reasons discussed above in this memorandum; b) would serve only to duplicate the authority that exits in Chapter 17.26; c) would not serve to enhance the City's authority over that parcel because the City already possesses sufficient police power to enforce Chapter 17.26; and d) would not be self-executing, in that in order to enforce the condition the City would in every instance have to adjudicate the view irrpairment with a full-blown public hearing through a process not dissimilar to that provided in Chapter 17.26. 10/11/2004 14:29 310643pdd'. JENKINS & HOGTK1 '_LP PAGE 07 Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 6 JENIUNS & HOGIN, LLP 2. May the Planning Commission impose a condition in resolutions of approval requiring property owners to remove existing vegetation on their property to abate an existing view impairment? Based on the reasoning discussed above, if the project under consideration contributes to a view impairment and removal or modification of vegetation will mitigate that impairment, then the Commission may impose such a condition. However, the Corrmission may not use the fact that a property owner is before it for an approval to impose conditions wholly unrelated to the project under review. 3. May the Planning Commission include language in resolution of approval of discretionary permits requiring that new vegetation included within a landscape plan not cause a future view impairment (i.e. not be permitted to grow over a certain height, or by precluding certain species of trees known to grow very tall) ? Yes, the Commission may limit the height of new landscaping if reasonably likely to cause a future view impairment or may limit the species of allowable vegetation in sensitive locations. 4. May City staff accomplish No. 3 above in connection with over-the- counter discretionary approvals? Yes, the staff may exercise the same power as the Commission when approving "minor" entitlements. In sum, the imposition of a "standard" condition of approval prohibiting future view impairments regardless of the existence of an existing view impairment is not only legally suspect, but would not serve any practical purpose. In order for the condition to be enforced, due proces requires that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing at which evidence would have to be adduced supporting both the existence of a "view" and a view "impairment." The process would, in the end, be nothing more than a backdoor version of the existing process in Chapter 17.26, minus the mediation process. The City would be in no better, or stronger, position than it is now. On the other hand, a condition imposing specific criteria on new landscaping would be readily enforceable. Cuy 0/ leollin9 INCORiOr2A.TED JAFiUL.R` _4, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com MEMORANDUM TO: MIKE JENKINS, CITY ATTORNEY FROM: - CRAIG .NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 2004 On 9/15, Planning Commission Members Arvel Witte and Loren DeRoy met (ad hoc) with RHCA Board Members Don Crocker and Ray Ferris at the request of the RHCA to discuss Commission and staff landscape plan approval procedures. Recently, the RHCA disbanded their landscape committee and they are now considering whether they should reactivate another committee. Planning Director Yolanta Schwartz, RHCA Manager Peggy Minor, City Landscape Consultant Julie Heinsheimer and I attended the meeting. The group discussed potential methods to prevent future view impairments and reduce the frequency of future view impairment cases by having the City record findings against properties via the discretionary land use and administrative approval process setting forth specific vegetation standards. The group felt that by imposing such conditions, a property owner would :be placed in a position to cooperate with a view restoration request from an adjoining property owner without undergoing the City or RHCA view impairment process. Toward that end, there were four questions posed by the group that require your consideration: ► Can the Planning Commission include a provision in resolutions of approval (Site Plan/Variance/CUP) that a property owner is prohibited from causing future view impairments due to vegetation on their entire property? ► Can the Planning Commission impose a condition in resolutions of approval requiring a property owner to remove existing vegetation on their property to abate an existing view impairment? ► Can the Planning Commission include language in resolutions of approval indicating that planting introduced in the specific landscape plan area of the lot after the completion of the required landscape plan (return of bond), cannot cause a future view impairment? -1- { ► Can City staff be authorized to have property owners sign a statement, when approving "over-the-counter" projects, that they will not introduce or allow vegetation on their property, now or in the future, to cause a view impairment? Can this statement limit the vegetation to, perhaps, roof height? Please let me know if you require further information. Your cooperation is appreciated. Thank you for your support. CRN:mlk cc: City Council Planning Commission Don Crocker, RHCA Board of Directors Ray Ferris, RHCA Board of Directors Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager Arvel Witte, Planning Commission Loren DeRoy, Planning Commission Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director Julie Heinsheimer, City Landscape Consultant -2- DESIRABLE PLANT LIST Desirable Qualities for Landscape Plants • Ability to store water in leaves or stems. • Produces limited dead and fine material. • Extensive root systems for controlling erosion. • Low levels of volatile oils or resins. PLANT LIST LEGEND Fuel Modification Zone A - Setback - 0-20' B - Irrigated - 20-100' C - Thinning - 100-200' D - Interface - 200-300' Comment Code • Ability to withstand drought. • Prostrate or prone in form. • Ability to withstand severe pruning. • Ability to resprout after a fire. Geographical Area Water Needs C -Coastal H -High IV -Interior Valley - M -Moderate D -Deserts L -Low VL-Very Low 1 Not for use in coastal areas 2 Should not be used on steep slopes 3 May be damaged by frost. 4 Should be thinned bi-annually to remove dead or unwanted growth 5 Good for erosion control. 6 Grows best in well drained soils. 7 Produces flowers or fruit that attracts birds and or butterflies. 8 Adaptability can vary. 9 Can be used as a lawn substitute. 10 Showy flowers. 11 Produces edible fruit. 12 California native or native cultivar 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Evergreen/Deciduous E -Evergreen D -Deciduous E/D-Partly or Summer Deciduous Tends to be short lived. High fire resistance. Dead fronds or leaves need to be removed to maintain fire safety. Tolerant of heavy pruning. Must be cut back after flowering. May require partial shade in desert or valley areas. Perennial Tolerates saline soils. Grows naturally in riparian areas. Good tree for lawns. Produces habitat or food for wildlife. The following plant list is provided as a suggested guideline (not exclusive) for fuel modification landscapes within Los Angeles County. Plants not listed (grasses, annuals etc.) may be used if approved with the fuel modification plan. The desirable planting list is based on comments from numerous professionals and public agencies, Sunset Western Garden Book, Bob Perry's Landscape Plants for Western Regions, and the California Department of Water Resources study entitled, WUCOLS (Water Use Classification of Landscape Species). The plant list is arranged by fuel modification zone, geographical area, and plant type and includes a comment code to assist in plant selection and maintenance requirements. GROUNDCOVERS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME ZONE WATER NEEDS HEIGHT SPREAD E/D GEOGRAPHICAL AREA - COMMENTS Abelia grandiflora 'Prostrata' Prostrate Glossy Abelia A,B M 1 - 2' 3 - 4' E C,IV - 3 Achillea tomentosa Woolly Yarrow A.B.0 L 6 - 10" 6 - 12" E C,IV - 9,19 Aeonium species NCN A,B,C L Varies Varies E C,IV - 2,3.8,14 . juga reptans Carpet Bugle A H 4 - 6" 2 - 4" E C.IV - 2,18.19 Aptenia cordifolia Red Apple Ice Plant A.B M.L - 12" varies E !VD - 1.2.3.19 Arctostaphylos species Manzanita B,C.D L.VL Varies Varies E Varies A. edmundsii Little Sur Manzanita B,C,D L.VL 1 - 2' 4 - 6' E C,IV - 4.6.12 A. 'Emerald Carpet' Emerald Carpet Manzanita B.C.D L,VL 1' 4 - 6' E C,IV - 4.6.12 Arctotheca calendula Cape Weed A,B M,L -12" -18" E C,IV,D - 3.7.10,19 Artemisia californica 'cultivars' Sagebrush - Prostrate Forms B.C.D L,VL varies varies E C.IV.D - 4.6,8.12.23 A. caucasica Silver Spreader B,C,D L,VL 3-6" 2' E C,IV.D - 4,6 Asarum caudatum Wild Ginger A M,H 7-10" 2' D C,IV-3,18.19 Atriplex semibaccata Creeping Saltbrush B L,VL 1' 1-5' E C,IV.D - 13.20 Baccharis pilularis 'Pigeon B.p. Point' 'Twin Dwarf Coyote Brush B.C.D L.VL 12-24" -6' E C,IV,D - 4.5,12 B.p. Peaks' Dwarf Coyote Brush B,C.D L,VL 12-24" -6' E C.IV.D - 4.5.12 Cerastium tomentosum Snow -In -Summer A,B M.L 6-8" 2-3' E C,IV.D - 10.19 Chamaemelum nobile Chamomile A,B M 6-8" -12" E C,IV,D - 9,16,19 Cistus salviifolius 'Sunset' Sageleaf Rockrose B,C L,VL 1-2' 6' E C,IV.D-4,5,6.7,10,16,20 C. Rockrose B,C L.VL 1-2' 6-8' E C,IV,D-4.5,6,7,10.16.20 C. 'Warley rose' Rockrose B,C L,VL 1' 4' E C,IV,D-4.5,6,7,10,16,20 Coprosma kirkii NCN B M,L -2' 6-8' E C,IV - 3,4.5,8,18,20 Coreopsis auriculata 'Nana' NCN A,B,C L,VL 5-8" -2' E/D C,IV - 3.8.19 Cotoneaster C. adpressus praecox Cotoneaster B M,L -18" -6' D C.IV.D - 2 C. salicifolius 'Emerald Carpet' Prostrate Willowleaf Contoneaster B M,L 12-15" -8' E C,IV,D - 4 C.s. 'Repens' Prostrate Willowleaf Contoneaster B M,L -6" -6' E C,IV.D - 4 Dalea greggii Trailing Indigo Bush B L.VL 12-18" 5-10' E C,IV - 6 Dichondra micrantha Dichondra A.B H.M -6" -2' E C,IV - 9 Duchesnea indica Indian Mock Strawberry A,B L -6" -4' E C.IV.D - 11.16.19 Dymondia margaretae NCN A,B M,L -3" 12-24" E C,IV - 3.8 Epilobium californica California Fuchsia B,C.D L,VL 1-2' 3-5' E/D C,IV,D-4,5,7,10,12,13,23 Erigeron glaucus Seaside Daisy A,B,C,D M,L 10-12" -2' E C,IV-3.6.8,10,12,18,19.20 E. karvinskianus Mexican Daisy A,B,C,D M,L 10-20" -3' E C,IV-3,6.8.10,18,19,20 Euonymus fortunei 'Colorata' Purple -Leaf Winter Creeper B M 1-2' -6' E IV - 1,5.8.16 Festuca cinerea(ovina'Glauca') Blue Fescue A,B M,L -12" -2' E C,IV,D - 4 F. rubra Red Fescue A.B M,L -16" -30" E C,IV,D - 4,9 Fragaria chiloensis Wild Strawberrry A,B,C,D L,VL 6-12" -24" E C,IV,D -4,10.11.12.20 Gazania rigens var Ieucolaena Trailing Gazania A,B L 6-10" -24" E C,IV,D - 10.19 Glechoma hederacea Ground Ivy A M 3-6" -18" E/D C,IV,D - 8,19 Hedera helix & varieties English Ivy A,B M,L 6-18" -4' E IV,D - 1.4,5.16 Helianthemum nummularium Sunrose B L 6-8" -3' E C,IV,D - 6,10 Herniaria glabra Green Carpet A M 2-3" -16" E C,IV,D - 8 Hypericum calycinum Aaron's Beard B M,L 6-12" -3' E C,IV,D - 4.5,7,16 H. coris NCN B M,L 6-12" -2' E C,IV,D - 4,5,7,16 Iberis sempervirens Evergreen Candytuft A,B M 6-12" -6-12" E C,IV,D - 10,19 Iva hayesiana Poverty Weed B,C,D L,VL 2-3' 4-5' E C,IV,D - 4.5.12.16,23 Laurentia fluviatilis Blue Star Creeper A M 2-4" 6-12" E C,IV - 8.19 Lonicera japonica Japanese Honeysuckle B • M 1-2' 6-10' E IV - 1,5,7,10,16 Lysimachia nummularia Moneywort A H,M 2-6" -2' E C,IV - 18.19 GROUNDCOVERS cont'd BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME ZONE WATER NEEDS HEIGHT SPREAD E/D GEOGRAPHICAL AREA - COMMENTS Mahonia aquifolium'Compacta' Compact Oregon Grape A,B M,L 1-2' 2.3' E C,IV-4.7.12.18.23 M. repens Creeping Mahonia _ A,B M,L 2-3' 2.3' E C,IV-4.7,12,18.23 Myoporum 'Pacificum' Pacific Myoporum B M,L 2-3' -30' E IV • 1.4,5,16 M. parvifolium NCN B M,L 4-6" 9' E IV • 1.4 Nandina domestica 'Harbour Dwarf' Dwarf Heavenly Bamboo A.B M,L 1 1/2 -2' 2.3' E C,IV.D - 15 Oenothera berlandieri Mexican Evening Primrose B,C,D L,VL 10-12" 4' E IV.0- 1.4.7,10,17.19 O. stubbei Baja Evening Primrose A.B,C,D L,VL 5" 2' E IV.D - 7.19 Ophiopogon japonicus Mondo Grass A M 8-12" 12-24" E C,IV- 18 Osteospermum fruticosum Trailing African Daisy A.B M -18" -4' E IV -1.10.19 Pelargonium peltatum Ivy Geranium A,B M -2' -4' E IV - 1,3,7,10.19 P. tomentosum Peppermint -Scented Geranium A,B M -18" 2-4' E IV -1,3,7,10,19 Phyla nodiflora (Lippia repens) Lippia A,B M.L 2-15" -3' E/D C,IV,D - 9.16,19 Polygonum capitatum Pink Clover A,B M,L -18" -2' E IV,D- 1,10,19 Potentilla tabernaemontanii Spring Cinquefoil A,B M,L 2-6" -12" E C,IV,D - 9,10,19 Ribes viburnifolium Catalina Perfume A,B,C,D L,VL -3' -3' E C,IV- 12,18,23 Rosmarinus officinalis R.o. 'Huntington Blue' NCN B L -18" -4' E C,IV,D - 4,5,16 R.o. 'Prostratus' Prostrate Rosemary B L -24" -6' E C,IV,D - 4.5.16 Salvia sonomensis Creeping Sage B,C,D L 8-12" 3-4' E C,IV-6,12,13,23 Santolina chamaecyparissus Lavender Cotton A.B L -24" -3' E C,IV,D - 10 S. rosmarinifolius (virens) Green Lavender Cotton A,B L -24" -3' E C,IV,D - 10 Sedum species Stonecrops A,B L,VL Varies Varies E C,IV-2,8,14 Senecio mandraliscae NCN A.B M,L -18" -5' E C,IV 3,14,19 S. serpens Blue Chalkstics A,B M,L 12" -3' E C,IV-3,14,19 Scaevola 'Mauve Clusters' NCN A.B M,L 4-6" 3-4' E C,IV- 6,18.19 Soleirolia soleirolii Baby's Tears A H,M 3-6" -18" E C,IV - 3.18.19 Teucrium chamaedrys 'Prostratum' Prostrate Germander A,B M,L 4-6" -3' E C,IV,D - 4,16 T. cossonii NCN A,B L 4-6" -2' E C,IV - 6.10 Thymus praecox arcticus Mother of Thyme A.B M,L 2-6" -18" E C,IV,D - 8 T. pseudolanuginosus Woolly Thyme A,B M,L 2.3" -12" E C,IV,D - 8 Trachelospermum jasminoides Star Jasmine B M,L -2' 4-5' E C.IV.D - 5,7,10.16 Trifolium fragiferum Var. O'connor's O'Cornor's Legume B M,L 6-15" -6' E C,IV,D - 5.9,16.19 Verbena hybrida Garden Verbena A,B L,VL 6-12" 1 1/2-3' E C,IV,D - 3,7,10,13 V. peruviana NCN A,B,C L,VL -8" -2' E C,IV,D - 7, 10 V. pulchella gracilior Moss Verbena A,B L,VL 12-15" 2-3' E C,IV,D - 8,10,19 V. tenuisecta Moss Verbena A,B L,VL 12-15" 2-3' E C,IV,D - 8,10,19 Wedelia trilobata Wedelia B M,L -12" 4-6' E C,IV.D - 3,16. 20 Zoysia tenuifolia Korean Grass A M.L -6" -18" E C,IV,D - 9 SHRUBS BOTANICAL NAME PERENNIALS/SUCCULENTS COMMON NAME ZONE WATER NEEDS HEIGHT SPREAD E/D GEOGRAPHICAL AREA - COMMENTS Acanthus mollis Bear's Breech A.D H,M -4' 4-6' Achillea filipendulina A. millefolium Aeonium species Agaranthus species Fernleaf Yarrow Common Yarrow NCN Lily -Of -The -Nile B,C A.B,C A,B A,B L.VL L,VL L M 4-5' -3' varies varies 2' 2' varies varies Agave species Aloe species Anigozanthos flavidus Agave Aloe Kangaroo Paw VL.L A,B L,VL L.VL ML varies varies varies varies • E/D E E E E/D E E C.IV,D - 3.8,14 ,16,17,18.19 C.IV,D - 10.16,17,19 C.IV.D - 10,16,17.19 C.IV-3.8,14 C.IV - 3,4.7,10.14.19 C,IV,D - 3.10.14,17 C,IV, - 3,7,8,14 ..._ .a-..• .2 C c.IV-3,0,/.1U,1`! A. manqlesii NCN A,B M,L 3' -3' E C,IV - 3.6.7,19 Arbutus unedo 'Compacta' Dwarf Strawberry Tree B M,L 6-8' -8' E C,IV,D - 5.7,11,18.23 A.u. 'Elfin King' NCN B M,L 3-5' -6' E C,IV,D - 5.7.11,18.23 A.u. 'Octoberfest' NCN B M,L 6-8' -8' E C.IV,D - 5,7,11,18,23 Arctostaphylos species Manzanita B,C,D L,VL varies varies E C.IV.D - 4.6.7,10.12 Artemisia 'Powis Castle' NCN B,C L.VL -3' 6' E C,IV - 4.6,12.23 A. stellerana Beach Worm Wood B.0 L.VL -3' -3' F. C.IV 4,6.12.19.23 Aspidistra elatior Cast -Iron Plant A,B M,L -30" -3' E C.IV - 3,18,19 Baccharis species B,C,D L,VL varies varies E C,IV,D - 4,5,6.12,21.23 Begonia species Begonia A,B H,M varies varies E C,IV-3.8,10,14,18 Berberis thunbergii Japanese Barberry B M,L 4-6' 4-6' D C,IV,D - 4 B. thunbergii 'cultivars' A.B M,L varies varies D C,IV,D - 4 Bergenia crassifolia Winter Blooming Bergenia A.B M,L -20" -20" E C,IV - 3,18,19 Buddleia davidii Butterfly Bush B M,L -10' -12' E/D C,IV,D - 7.10.16.17 Buxus microphylla japonica Japanese Boxwood B M.L 4-6' 4-6' B.m. koreana E C,IV,D - 16 Korean Boxwood B M,L 4-6' 4-6' E C,IV,D - 16 Caesalpinia gilliesii Bird of Paradise Bush B L,VL -10' -10' E/D C,IV,D - 7,10 C. mexicana Mexican Bird of Paradise B L,VL 10-12' -15' E/D C,IV,D - 7.10 C. pulcherrima Red Bird of Paradise B L.VL -10' -10 E/D C,IV,D - 7.10 Calliandra californica Baja Fairy Duster B,C,D L.VL -3' 4-5' E/D C,IV,D - 4,6.7.10 C. eriophylla Fairy Duster B,C,D L,VL -3' 4.5' E/D C,IV,D - 4,6,7,10,12 Callistemon citrinus'compacta' Bottlebrush B L.VL -5' -5' E CIV,D - 5,7,10,20 Calycanthus occidentalis Spice Bush B,C,D M.L 4-12' -5' D C.IV - 12,18 Carissa macrocarpa (grandiflora 8,'cultivars') Natal Plum A,B M,L -7' -7' E C,IV - 4.11,16 Cassia artemisioides Feathery Cassia B L,VL 3-6' -6' E C,IV,D - 10, Ceanothus species Wild Lilac B,C,D L,VL varies varies E/D C,IV,D - 4,6,7,10,12.23 Cercocarpus betuiloides Mountain Mahogany B,C,D L,VL 5-12' -10' E C,IV,D - 4,6,12,23 Choisya ternata Mexican orange B M 6-8' -8' E C,IV - 10,18 Cistus species Rockrose B L,VL varies varies E CiIV.D - 4,5,6,10.17.20 Clivia miniata Clivia A,B H,M 2' 2' E C,IV - 3,10.14.18.19 Colocasia esculenta (caladium) Elephant's Ear A,B H -6' -6' E/D C,IV - 3,14,18,19 Comarostaphylis diversifolia Summer Holly B,C,D L.VL 6-10'+ 6-8'+ _ E C,IV,D - 6,7,12,18.23 Convolvulus cneorum Bush Morning Glory B L 2-4' 2-4' E C,IV,D - 6,10 Coprosma pumila NCN B M -3' 8' E IV- 1.4,16.20 C. repens Mirror Plant B M -10' -6' E IV- 1,4,16.20 . Cotoneaster species Cotoneaster B M.L 2-18' 3-15' E E/D C,IV,D - 4.10,16 Cotyledon species NCN A,B L 1-3' 1-3' E C,IV - 3,8,14 Crassula species NCN A,B L 1-9' 1-9' E C,IV - 3,8.14 Cyrtomium falcatum Holly Fern A,B H,M 2-3' 3-4' E C,IV - 15 Dasylirion longissima Mexican Grass Tree B • L,VL -10' 8' E C,IV,D - 15 fl whooIori c'_._i _ VL -6 -6' E C,IV,D - 15 SHRUBS cont'd BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME ZONE WATER NEEDS HEIG Dietes bicolor Fortnight Lily, African Iris B M.L 2.3' D. vegeta (iridioides) Fortnight Lily B M,L -4' Echium fatuosum Pride of Madeira B L.VL -10' Elaeagnus pungens & cultivars Silverberry B M,L 6-15' Encelia californica Coast Sunflower B,C,D L.VL 3-5' E. farinosa Brittle Bush B,C,D L.VL 3-5 Erigonum giganteum St. Catherine's Lace B,C.D L.VL - 8' Escallonia species Escallonia B M.L 2-15' Euonymus japonica & 'cultivars' Evergreen Euonymus B M 2-10' Fatsia japonica Japanese Aralia A,B M 5-12' Fouquieria splendens Ocotillo A,B,C,D VL 8-25' Fremontodendron species & 'cultivars' Flannel Bush B.C,D L.VL 5-20' Gardenia jasminoides Gardenia A.B H 3-6' Garrya species Silktassel B,C,D M,L 4-8' Hakea suaveolens Sweet Hakea B L 10-20' Hebe species & 'cultivars' Hebe B M 3-6' Hemerocallis hybrids Daylily A,B M,L 1-6' Hesperaloe parviflora NCN B,C VL 3-4' Hibiscus rosa - sinensis Chinese Hibiscus B M -15' Iris species Bearded Iris A.B M -30" I.douglasiana Douglas Iris A,B,C M.L -2' Isomeris(Cleome) arborea Bladderpod B,C.D L.VL 3-6' Justicia brandegeana Shrimp Plant B M -3' J. californica Chuparosa B.C,D L,VL 2-5' Keckiella cordifolia Heart -Leaved Penstemon B,C,D L,VL 5-6' Kniphofia uvaria Red -Hot Poker A,B L 2-3' Larrea tridentata Creosote Bush B,C,D VL 4-8' Lavandula agnstifolia English Lavender B L 3-4' L. dentata French Lavender B L 3' L. intermedia Lavandin B L 1-2' L. stoechas Spanish Lavender B L 2-3' Leonotis Ieonrus Lion's Tail B L 3-6' Leucophyllum candidum Violet Silverleaf B L,VL 4-5' L. frutescens Texas Ranger B L,VL 6-8' L. Iaevigatum Chihuahuan Sage B L.VL 3-4' Limonium perezii Sea Lavender A.B L -2' Liriope muscari Big Blue Lily Turf A.B M 1-2' Lobelia laxflora Mexican Bush Lobelia B L 2-3' Lupinus species Lupine B,C,D L.VL varies Mahonia aquifolium Oregon Grape B,C.D M.L 6-8' M. fremontii Desert Mahonia B,C,D L 3-12' M. 'Golden Abundance' NCN B,C,D M,L 5-6' M. lomarifolia Venetian Blind Mahonia B,C M,L 6-10' M. nevinii Nevin Mahonia B,C,O L 3-10' M. pinnata California Holly Grape B.C,D M,L 4-5' , Malva sp. Mallow B,C L varies Mimulus sp. (Diplacus) Monkey Flower B,C,D L 1-4' Myrtus communis 'compacta' Dwarf Myrtle B M 5-8' Nandina domestica Heavenly Bamboo B M 6-8' IT SPREAD E/D GEOGRAPHICAL AREA- ' COMMENTS 2-3' E C.IV.D - 4.10.15,19 -4' E C,IV.D - 4,10,15.19 -10' E C.IV - 4,6.7,10.19.20 6-15' E C.IV.D - 16 3-5' E/D C,IV - 5,6,10.4,17 3.5 E/D C,IV,D - 4,5,6,10.12,17 - 8' E C,IV - 4.6.10,12,19.20 2-10' E C.IV-4,10.16 -6' E C.IV.D - 4,16 6.10' E C,IV - 18 8-15' E IV,D-6,10,12 -15' E C.IV.D - 4.6,10,12 3-5' E C.IV - 10,18 4-8' E C,IV.D - 4,5,7,10.12 -15' E C,IV - 4.8 3-6' E C.IV - 4.5.7,10.16 2-6' E/D C.IV.D • 7,10,17,19 4-6' E IV,D - 6,7,19 -12' E C,IV - 3,7.10 -2' E C,IV.D - 10 -2' E C,IV - 10,12.18 4-6' E C,IV,D - 4,6,10,12.20 -4' E C,IV,D - 4,7,10 -4' D IV,D - 4.6,7.10.12 8-10' E/D C,IV-4,7.12 3-4' E C,IV.D - 3,7,10.19 4.8' E IV.D - 6.12.23 3-4' E C,IV,0 - 4,6,7,10,17 3' E C,IV,D - 4.6.7,10.17 2.3' E C,IV,D - 4,6,7,10.17 3' E C,IV,D - 4,6,7,10.17 4-6' E C,IV.D - 3,7,10,17 4-5' E IV,D - 4.6,7,10 6.8' E IV.D - 4,6,7.10 4.5' E IV.D - 4.6,7,10 -2' E C,IV - 3,10.15,19.20 2' E C,IV - 18 4-6' E C,IV,D - 4,7,10 varies E/D C,IV.D - 4,6,7,10,12,17 6-8' E IV,D - 4,6,11,12,18,23 4-8' E C,IV.D-4,6,10,11,12,23 6' E IV,D-4,6,10,11.12,18,23 6-10' E C,IV.D - 4,6,11.18.23 6-12' E C,IV,D-4,6,10,11,12.23 4-6' E C,IV-4.6,10,11,12,18,23 varies E/D C,IV,D - 6.7,10,13 1-4' E C,IV,D - 4,6,7,10,12 5-8' E C,IV,D • 16 4-5' E C,IV,D • 4,15 SHRUBS cont'd BOTANICAL NAME N.d. 'Compacta' Nephrolepis cordifolia Nerium oleander COMMON NAME NCN Southern Sword Fern ZONE B A,B WATER NEEDS M HEIGHT 4-5' SPREAD 3-4' E/D GEOGRAPHICAL AREA - COMMENTS E C.IV.D-4,15 M,L 2-3' Oleander B N.o. 'Petite Salmon' Opuntia species Pelargonium species NCN Prickly Pear, Cholla etc. B A.B,C.D M,L M 8-20' 3-6' 10.20' E C,IV-4.15 E C,IV.D - 10,16 L,VL 3-4' varies Geranium Penstemon species Phlomis fruticosa Phormium tenax Beard Tongue Jerusalem Sage New Zealand Flax A,B A,B,C,D P.t 'cultivars' Photinia fraseri Pittosporum tobira NCN Common Photinia Tobira P.1.'Variegata' P.t.'Wheeler's Dwarf' Portulacaria afra Punica granatum 'Nana' Pyracantha species Rhamnus california R. crocea NCN Dwarf Pittosporum Elephant's Food Dwarf Pomegranate Firethorn B B B B B B M,L L M.L A,B B A,B M varies varies 3-4' 5-9' 5-7' varies varies varies 3.5' 6' E C,IV - 3,10,16 E C.IV.D - 8.12.14,23 E C.IV - 3.10,19 E/D C.IV.D - 7,10,12.17,19 E C,IV,D - 6,7,10,17,19 E C.IV.D - 4.19 M M,L M,L M M L L varies 10-15' 6-15'+ 5-8' 1-3' 5-12' 3' varies 10-20' 8-15' 6-8' 2-4' 6-12' Cotfeeberry Redberry Hollyleaf Redberry India Hawthorn R.c. ilicifolia Rhaphiolepis indica B B,C,D B.C.D B,C,D R.i 'cultivars' Rhus integrifolia R.(Malosma) laurina R. ovata Ribes aureum R. malvaceum R. sanguineum & 'cultivars' R. speciosum R. viburnifolium Romneya coulteri Rosa species Salvia species Simmondsia chinensis Strelitzia reginae Trichostema lanatum Tulbaghia violacea Viburnum species Westringia fruticosa Xylosma congestum X.c. 'Compacta' Yucca species NCN Lemonade Berry Laurel Sumac Sugar Bush Golden Currant Chaparral Currant Red Flowering Currant Fuchsia -Flowering Gooseberry Catalina Perfume Matilija Poppy Rose Sage Jojoba Bird of Paradise Wooly Blue Curls Society Garlic Viburnum Coast Rosemary Shiny Xylosma Compact Xylosma Yucca B B B,C,D B.C.D B.C,D B,C,D B,C,D B,C.D B,C,D B.C,D B,C A.B B,C.D B,C,D B B,C,D A,B B B B B M M,L M,L M,L M,L varies 3-15' 2-3' 3-15' 4-8' 4' varies 4-15' 3' 3-15' 4-8' E C,IV,D - 4,19 E C,IV,D - 4.7,10,16 E C.IV.D - 5.16 E C,IV,D - 5,16 E C,IV,D - 16 E C,IV-3,14 D C.IV,D - 7,11,20 E/D C,IV,D - 4,16 E/D C,IV,D - 12,21,23 E IV -5,12.23 E IV -5,12.23 E C,IV,D - 4,5.10 M,L L L L L L M.L L L L M L L,VL M L,VL M M M,L M,L M,L B,C,D L.VL varies 3.10'+ 6-15'+ 3-15' 3-6' 6.8' 4-12' 3-6' 3' -8' varies varies 3-8'+ 5' 3-5' 18' varies 5-7' 15'+ 8-12' varies varies 6-20' 6-15' 6-15' 3-6' 6.8' 4-8' 3-6' 12' 4' varies varies 4-8' 4' 5' 2' varies 6.12' 15'+ 8-12' varies E C,IV,D - 5,10 E C,IV-4.5,12,23 E C,IV • 4,5,12,23 E C,IV,D - 4.5,12.23 D C,IV,D - 7.10.12.23 D IV - 7,10,12.23 D C,IV,D - 7,10,12,23 D C,IV,D - 4,7,10,12,23 E C,IV-7,10,12,23 D C,IV,D - 5.6,10.12.17 E/D C,IV,D - 10,16,17 E/D C,IV,D - 4,7,10,12,17.23 E C,IV,D-4,6,11,23 E C,IV-3,4,10,18 E C,IV,D - 6,7,10.12,17 E/D C.IV.D - 3.10.19 E/D C,IV,D - 3,7,10 E C,IV,D - 4,6,18 E C.IV.D-5,16,18 E C.IV.D - 5,16,18 E C,IV,D - 6,10,12.15 TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME ZONE WATER NEEDS HEIGHT FT SPREAD FT E/D GEOGRAPHICAL AREA - COMMENTS Acacia farnesiana Sweet Acacia B L 15-20' 15-20' _ D IV.D- 10 A. greggii Catclaw Acacia B,C,D L,VL 15-25' 15-25' E IV,D- 10,12,21.23 A. saligna Willow Acacia B L 15-35' 12-25' E C.IV.D - 10 A. smallii NCN B,C,D L,VL 15-20' 15-20' D C.IV,D - 10.21.23 A. stenophylla Shoestring Acacia B M,L 20-45' 10-20' E C.IV,D - 10.22 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf Maple B,C,D M 30-95' 30-95' D C,IV- 12.21,23 A. negundo Box Elder B M,L -60' -50' D IV,D- 12.23 A. palmatum Japanese Maple B M -20'+ -20' D C,IV-6 A. saccharinum Silver Maple 8 M 40-100' 40-100' D C,IV,D - 22 Aesculus californica California Buckeye B,C,D M,L 20+ 30' D C,IV,D - 6,7,10,12.23 Agonis flexuosa Peppermint Tree 8 M,L 25-35' 25-35' E C,IV - 3,22 Albizia julibrissin Silk Tree B M -40' 40'+ D C,IV.D - 7,10.22 Alnus cordata Italian Alder B M 40' 25' D C,IV,D - 22 A. rhombifolia White Alder B H,M 50-90' 40' D IV -12.21,23 Arbutus 'Marina' NCN B M.L -40' -40' E C,IV,D - 5.7,10,11.23 A. unedo Strawberry Tree B M,L 12-35' 20-35' E C.IV,D - 5,7.10,11,23 Archontophoenix cunninghamiana King Palm B M 50' 10-15' E C,IV-3.10.15 Bauhinia variegata Purple Orchid Tree 6 M 20.35' 35' E/D C,IV- 4,10 Betula pendula European White Birch B M 30-40' 30' D C.IV,D - 6,22 Brachychiton acerifolius Flame Tree B L 60' 45-50' D C,IV,D - 10,22 B. populneus Kurrajong Bottle Tree B L 30-50' 30' E C,IV,D - 10.22 Brahea armata Blue Hesper Palm B L,VL 40' 10' E C.IV.D - 6,10,15 B. edulis Guadalupe Palm B L.VL 30' 10' E _ C,IV,D - 6,15 Callistemon citrinus Lemon Bottlebrush B M.L -25' -15' E C.IV,D - 4.7.10 C. viminalis Weeping Bottlebrush B M,L 20-30' -15' E C.Ii - 4.7,10 Calodendrum capense Cape Chestnut B M 30' 25-40' D C.IV - 7,10 Carya illinoensis Pecan B M,L 70' 70' D C,IV,D - 6,11 Cercidium floridum Blue Palo Verde B,C,.D L,VL 30' 30' D IV.)- 6,10,12.21.23 C. micropyllum Littleleaf Palo Verde B,C,D L,VL 25' 25' D IV,D- 6,7,10.12.21.23 Cercis occidentalis Western Redbud B,C,D M,L 20' 20' D C,IV,D - 7.10.12.23 Chamaerops humilis Mediterranean Fan Palm B M 20' 20' E C,IV,D - 15 Chilopsis linearis Desert Willow B,C,D L -35' -35' D IV,D - 6,7,10,12.23 Chionanthus retusus Chinese Fringe Tree B M 20' 20' D C,IV - 10 Chitalpa tashkentensis Chitalpa B M,L 20-30' 20.30' D C,IV,D - 7,10 Chorisia speciosa Floss Silk Tree B M 30-60' 30-40' D C,IV,D - 10.22 Cinnamomum camphora Camphor Tree B M,L 50'+ 60'+ E C,IV,D - 22 Cocculus laurifolius Laurel Leaf Snail Seed B M 25' 30'+ E C,IV,D - 4 Cordyline australis Giant Dracaena B M 30' 15' E C.IV.D - 15 Cupaniopsis anacardioides Carrot Wood B M 40' 40' E C,IV,D - 20 Dracaena drago Dragon Tree B M,L 20' 20' E C,IV - 3.10.14.15 Eriobotrya deflexa Bronze Loquat B M.L 20' 20' E C.IV,D - 10 Erythrina species Coral Tree B M,L Varies Varies D C,IV,D - 3,7.8 Eucalyptus citriodora Lemon -scented Gum B M.L 75-100' -40' E IV,D - 1,7.22 E. maculata Spotted Gum B M,L 60-80' -40' E IV,D - 1,7.22 E. nicholii Willow Peppermint 8 M,L -40' -30' E IV,D - 1,7.22 E. sideroxylon Red Ironbark B M'L 35-80' -35' E IV,D- 1,7,10 E. torquata Coral Gum B M,L -25' -20' E IV.D - 1,6.7,10,20 Feijoa sellowiana Pineapple Guava B M,L 18-25' -25' E C,IV,D -3,7,8,10,11,16 Ficus species Fig B M,L Varies Varies E,D C.IV,D - 3.8 TREES cont'd BOTANICAL NAME Fraxinus augustifolia F. dipetala COMMON NAME ZONE WATER NEEDS HEIGHT FT Raywood Ash Foothill Ash F. latifolia F. velutina F.v. coriacea Oregon Ash Arizona Ash Montebello Ash Geijera parviflora Ginkgo biloba Gleditsia triacanthos Heteromeles arbutifolia Hymenosporum flavum acaranda mimosifolia uglans californica Koelreuteria bipinnata K. paniculata Australian Willow Maidenhair Tree Honey Locust Toyon Sweetshade Tree B B,C,D B 8,C B,C,D B B B B,C.D B M L,VL 25+35' 18-20' SPREAD FT 30' 20.30' E/D GEOGRAPHICAL AREA. D D COMMENTS C,IV.D - 22 C,IV.D - 12.21,22,23 M M,L M.L M.L M,L M,L L,VL 40-80' 20-50' 20-40' 25-30' 35-80' 35-70' 15-30' 40.60' 30.50' 20-40' 20-30' 30-60' -30' 15-30' D D D E D D E C,IV.D - 12.22,23 C,IV.D - 22,23 C.IV,D - 12,22,23 C,IV.D - 6 C,IV.D - 6.22 WD -6.22 C,IV.D - 5,7,10,12,23 M,L 20.40' Jacaranda Southern California Black Walnut Chinese Flame Tree Golden Rain Tree B B.C.D Lagerstroemia indica Liquidambar formosana L. styraciflua Liriodendron tulipfera Lithocarpus densiflorus Magnolia species Crape Myrtle Chinese Sweet Gum American Sweet Gum Tulip Tree Tanbark Oak Magnolia B B B B B B B,C,D Maytenus boaria Metasequoia glypstroboides Metrosideros excelsus Morus alba Olea europea Parkinsonia aculeata Pistacia chinensis Pittosporum phillyraeoides P. rhombifolium P. undulatum Platanus acerifolia P. racemosa Mayten Tree Dawn Redwood New Zealand Christmas Tree White Mulberry Olive Jerusalem Thorn Chinese Pistache Willow Pittosporum Queensland Pittosporum Victorian Box B B B B B B 8 B B 8 B M,L L M M,L M,L M M M L M 25-40' 20-35' 20-40' 20-35' -30 40-60' 60' 60-80' -60' Varies 15-20' -30' 30-45' -45' -40' -20 25' -25' 40' -40' Varies E D D D D D D D D E E.D IV -10 C,IV.D - 10,22 C,IV, - 5,6,12,23 C,IV,D - 6.22 IV,D - 20.22 IV,D - 10.22 C,IV,D - 7 C,IV,D - 7 C,IV,D - 22 C,IV - 6,12.23 C.IV,D - 6,8,10.22 M,L 30-50' 30' E IV • 6,22 H,M L,VL M,L L,VI L,VL M.L L M M -80' -30' 20-60' -35' 15-30' -60' 15-25' 15-35' Podocarpus gracilior P. macrophyllus Populus fremontii Prosopis glandulosa P. g. var. 'torreyana' Prunus species & 'cultivars' P. ilicifolia P. lyonii Punica granatum Ouercus agrifolia 0. chrysolepis O. douglasii O. engelmannii O. ilex O. kelloggii O. lobata O. palustris O. rubra London Plane Tree California Sycamore Fern Pine Yew Pine Fremont Cottonwood Honey Mesquite Mesquite Cherry Hollyleaf Cherry Catalina Cherry Pomegranate Coast Live Oak Canyon Live Oak Blue Oak Engelmann Oak Holly Oak California Black Oak Valley Oak Pin Oak Red Oak r - B B,C,D B B B,C,D B B B B,C,D B,C,D B B,C,D B,C,D B,C,D B,C,D B B,C,D B,C,D B 8 L L M M M L,VL L,VL varies L,VL L,VL L L,VL M,L M M M L,VL H,M H,M -25' -40' -30' 30-50' 20-30' 15-30' -50' 10-15' 40-80' 50-100' -60' -50' 40-60' 25-30' 40-50' varies 15-30' 20-45' 12-18' 30-70' 30-60' 50' 60' 40-70' 30-80' 70'+ 50-80' -90' -25' -25' 30-40' 50-100' -60' -45' 40-60' 25-30' 40.50' varies 15.30' 30'+ -20' 70'+ 20-60' >50 >60' 40-70' -60' 70'+ 5-70' 90' D E C,IV - 22 C,IV - 5,6.7,10 0 I IV,D - 1 1,16 E IC,IV,0 - 11.16,20 D �C.IV,D-3.6.7,10,22, D IC,IV,D - 22 E IC.IV,D - 10 E IC,IV,D - 22 E IC,IV-22 D IC,IV,D - 22 D IC,IV,D - 12,21,22.23 E IC,IV,D - 16.22 E IC,IV,D - 16,22 D IC,IV,V- 12,21,22,23 D IC,IV.D - 5,7,22,23 D IC.IV.D - 5,7,12.22,23 E,D IC,IV,D-7.8.10,11,16 E IC,IV,D - 7,11,12.16.23 E IC,IV,D - 7,11,12,16.23 D IC,IV,D - 7,11,20 E IC,IV,D - 6,12,23 E C,IV- 6,12,36 D IC,IV,D - 6,12,23 E IIV.D • 6,12.23 E IC,IV,D - 6.23 D IIV-6,12,23 D IC,IV-6,12.23 D IC,IV.D - 6.22,23 D IC,IV-6,23 TREES cont'd BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME ZONE WATER NEEDS HEIGHT FT SPREAD FT E/D GEOGRAPHICAL AREA - COMMENTS Q. suber Cork Oak B M 70-100' -100' E C,IV,D - 6,23 Q. virginiana Southern Live Oak B M,H 60' 100' _ E/D C,IV.D - 22 Q. wislizenii Interior Live Oak B,C.D M,L 30.75' 75'+ _ E IV.D - 6.12.23 Rhus lancea African Sumac B L 20.30' 20-30' E C,IV,D - 20.22 Robinia ambigua Locust B M.L 30.50' -30' D IV,D - 1.7.10.22 R. pseudoacacia Black Locust B L -75' 30-40' D IV,D - 1,5,7,10.20.22 Sapium sebiferum Chinese Tallow Tree B M -35' -35' D lIV,D - 22 Schetflera actinophylla Queensland Unbrella Tree A.B H.M 20'+ 20'+ E C -3.8,18 S.pueckleri Tupidanthus A,B H,M 20'+ 20'+ E C-3.8.18 Syagrus romanzottianu_m Queen Palm B M 50' -20' E �C,IV - 15 - Tabebuia chrysotricha Golden Trumpet Tree B M 25-30' -30' E C,IV - 6,10.22 T. impetiginosa Pink Trumpet Tree B M 35' -30' E C,IV - 6,10.22 Taxodium mucronatum Montezuma Cypress B H -L 75' 35' E/D IV - 22 Tipuana tipu Tipu Tree B M -50' -50' D C,IV - 10.22 Trachycarpus fortunei Windmill Palm B M -30' -6' E C,IV,D - 15 Tristania conferta Brisbane Box B L,VL 30-60' -40' E C,IV - 22 Umbellularia californica California Bay B.C.D L,VL 30-75' 30-75' E C,IV,D - 5,12.23 Zelkova serrata Sawleaf Zelkova B M 60' 60' D IV,D - 22 Ziziphus jujuba Chinese Jujube B M,L 20-30' 20-30' D C,IV.D - 11.20,22 UNDESIRABLE PLANT LIST Certain plants are considered to be undesirable in the landscape due to characteristics that make them highly flammable. These characteristics can be either physical or chemical. Physical properties would include large amounts of dead material retained within the plant, rough or peeling bark, and the production of copious amounts of litter. Chemical properties include the presence of volatile substances such as oils, resins, wax, and pitch. Certain native plants are notorious as species containing these volatile substances. Plants with these characteristics should not be planted in fire hazard areas. Should these species already exist within these areas, they should be removed because of the potential threat they pose to any structures. They are referred to as target species since their complete or partial removal is a critical part of hazard reduction. The following is a partial list of plants that should be avoided near structures. UNDESIRABLE PLANT SPECIES (TARGET SPECIES) Natives: Adenostoma fascicu/atum - Chamise Adenostoma sparsifolium - Red shank Artemisia ca/ifornia - California Sagebrush Eriogonum faciculatum - Common Buckwheat Salvia species - Sage* Ornamentals: Cortadera species - Pampas Grass Cupressus species - Cypress Eucalyptus species - Eucalyptus* Juniperus species - Juniper Pinus species - Pine • * Except as permitted in the plant list Others - Other plants may be considered to be undesirable because of their ability to naturalize and become a pest. These types of plants should be avoided, especially in sensitive riparian or coastal areas where they could become established and compete with native vegetation. Plants should fit the location and situation. Avoid using shallow rooted ground covers on steep slopes. Iceplant, while an effective ground cover on flat surfaces would be undesirable on a steep slope because it's shallow rooted nature may cause it to slide off the slope if the root zone becomes saturated during a rain storm. This would expose the bare soil to erosion. Care should be taken to avoid erosion problems created or enhanced by total vegetation removal. In areas where target species comprise the total vegetation, partial removal is recommended with replacement planting using desirable species as the long range goal. City op Roiling Jd,PP INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO..2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com MEMORANDUM TO: MIKE JENKINS, CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CRAIG NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 2004 On 9/15, Planning Commission Members Arvel Witte and Loren DeRoy met (ad hoc) with RHCA Board Members Don Crocker and Ray Ferris at the request of the RHCA to discuss Commission and staff landscape plan approval procedures. Recently, the RHCA disbanded their landscape committee and they are now considering whether they should reactivate another committee. Planning Director Yolanta Schwartz, RHCA Manager Peggy Minor, City Landscape Consultant Julie Heinsheimer and I attended the meeting. The group discussed potential methods to prevent future view impairments and reduce the frequency of future view impairment cases by having the City record findings against properties via the discretionary land use and administrative approval process setting forth specific vegetation standards. The group felt that by imposing such conditions, a property owner would be placed in a position to cooperate with a view restoration request from an adjoining property owner without undergoing the City or RHCA view impairment process. Toward that end, there were four questions posed by the group that require your consideration: ► Can the Planning Commission include a provision in resolutions of approval (Site Plan/Variance/CUP) that a property owner is prohibited from causing future view impairments due to vegetation on their entire property? ► Can the Planning Commission impose a condition in resolutions of approval requiring a property owner to remove existing vegetation on their property to abate an existing view impairment? ► Can the Planning Commission include language in resolutions of approval indicating that planting introduced in the specific landscape plan area of the lot after the completion .of the required landscape plan (return of bond), cannot cause a future view impairment? - -1- Itri) Pr 1101 PAr,r, ► Can City staff be authorized to have property owners sign a statement, when approving "over-the-counter" projects, that they will not introduce or allow vegetation on their property, now or in the future, to cause a view impairment? Can this statement limit the vegetation to, perhaps, roof height? Please let me know if you require further information. Your cooperation is appreciated. Thank you for your support. CRN:mlk cc: City Council Planning Commission Don Crocker, RHCA Board of Directors Ray Ferris, RHCA Board of Directors Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager Arvel Witte, Planning Commission Loren DeRoy, Planning Commission Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director Julie Heinsheimer, City Landscape Consultant -2- City 0/ leoffin JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com MEMORANDUM TO: MIKE JENKINS, CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CRAIG NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 2004 On 9/15, Planning Commission Members Arvel Witte and Loren DeRoy met (ad hoc) with RHCA Board Members Don Crocker and Ray Ferris at the request of the RHCA to discuss Commission and staff landscape plan approval procedures. Recently, the RHCA disbanded their landscape committee and they are now considering whether they should reactivate another committee. Planning Director Yolanta Schwartz, RHCA Manager Peggy Minor, City Landscape Consultant Julie Heinsheimer and I attended the meeting. The group discussed potential methods to prevent future view impairments and reduce the frequency of future view impairment cases by having the City record findings against properties via the discretionary land use and administrative approval process setting forth specific vegetation standards. The group felt that by imposing such conditions, a property owner would be placed in a position to cooperate with a view restoration request from an adjoining property owner without undergoing the City or RHCA view impairment process. Toward that end, there were four questions posed by the group that require your consideration: ► Can the Planning Commission include a provision in resolutions of approval (Site Plan/Variance/CUP) that a property owner is prohibited from causing future view impairments due to vegetation on their entire property? ► Can the Planning Commission impose a condition in resolutions of approval requiring a property owner to remove existing vegetation on their property to abate an existing view impairment? ► Can the Planning Commission include language in resolutions of approval indicating that planting introduced in the specific landscape plan area of the lot after the completion of the required landscape plan (return of bond), cannot cause a future view impairment? -1- ®Printed on Recycled Paper. ► Can City staff be authorized to have property owners sign a statement, when approving "over-the-counter" projects, that they will not introduce or allow vegetation on their property, now or in the future, to cause a view impairment? Can this statement limit the vegetation to, perhaps, roof height? Please let me know if you require further information. Your cooperation is appreciated. Thank you for your support. CRN:mlk cc: City Council Planning Commission Don Crocker, RHCA Board of Directors Ray Ferris, RHCA Board of Directors Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager Arvel Witte, Planning Commission Loren DeRoy, Planning Commission Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director Julie Heinsheimer, City Landscape Consultant -2- Sept 15, 2004 Landscaping Meeting with Association and City - what does the Association want? -what does the City want? - decide on requirements, codify them and communicate toour residents _. - City General Plan Goals: rural, open space and unobstructed views -add to that -water conservation - fire retardant shrubs and .trees - provide a list of "good/bad" shrubs and trees - -use a Landscape pamphlet for communication/education of residents - use "Be Waterwise" Campaign by DWP as a guideline? - authorize City Staff to dictate landscaping and view conditions for developments which qualify for "over the counter approvals" Possible issues involving landscaping - in front yard setbacks - in easements - hedges - \ - 1©/11/2664 14:29 3106438441 JENKINS & HOGIN LLP PAGE 62 JENKiNS & HOGIN, LLP A LAW PARTNERSHIP MEMORANDUM TO: Craig Nealis FROM: Michael Jenkins DATE: October 12, 2004 RE: View Impairment This responds to your request of September 17, 2004 for a summary of the legal principles that govern the imposition of conditions on discretionary permits pertaining to view impairment caused by vegetation. The City's Zoning Ordinance includes several provisions dealing with landscaping and vegetation, which are ssmmarized as follows: 1. New development subject to site plan review, requires approval of a landscaping plan, defined in Section 17.12.120, as a plan for proposed landscaping of a site, indicating the type, size and location of vegetation. [Section 17.27.020] Among other things, the landscape plan must incorporate existing mature trees and utilize native plants 2. Section 17.16.180 requires homeowners to maintain existing landscaping in a healthy condition, and prohibits removal of plant materials without replacement. 3. Landscape screening for game courts must not exceed the height determined by the Planning Commission. [Section 17.16.210.A.7.in] 10/11/2004 14:29 91064°'^'l1 JENKINS & HOr7.TkI LLP PAGE 09 JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 2 4. As part of site plan review, Section 17.46.050.B. (4) and (7) requires preservation of native vegetation and mature trees and incorporation of native, drought tolerant landscaping. . In addition to the foregoing provisions, Chapter 17.26 provides a mechanism for,neighbors to adjudicate view impairments. The above provisions reveal two competing considerations — preservation of existing mature trees versus maintenance of views by removal of view obstructions — that are harmonized by the procedure established in Chapter 17.26 for adjudicating view impairments caused by vegetation and by esablishing authority to control future landsaping through the approval of landscape plans. The courts have recognized that protection of viewsfor aesthetic purposes is a proper exercise of the City's police power. For example, in Kucera v. Lizza, 59 Cal. App. 4th 1141 (1997), the California Court of Appeal upheld Tiburon's view preservation ordinance designed to restore preexisting views from the effects of vegetation, similar to Chapter 17.26 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. In upholding the ordinance, the court obterves that "this ordinance does not wholly proscribe the landscaping use in question; it only controls the unreasonably obstructive growth of trees in situations limited by guidelines." Id. at 1149. Subsequently, the court of appeal inEchevarrieta v. Rancho Palos Verdes, 86 Cal. App. 4th 472 (2001) upheld the view preservation ordinance in our neighbor city. Hence, the City's power to protect views in this manner is clear. Your memorandum. of September 17, 2004 raises the question whether, in the approval of disretionary land use permits, the Planning Commission may go further and impose conditions requiring property owners to eliminate existing or potential future view impairments caused by vegetation. • The presumption underlying this idea is that imposition of such a condition would make view preservation less burdensome and would reduce the number of cases that are filed under Chapter 17.26. 10/11/2004 14:29 310643E441 • JENKINS & HOGIN LI PAGE 04 Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 3 JEN INS & HOGIN, LLP As a general matter, any condition imposed on a discretionary approval must bear a reasonable relationship to the impacts being created by the proposed development or activity.- That -is, there must be an articulable connection — or nexus — between what is being approved, and the condition to be imposed. Otherwise, the condition would be considered "arbitrary. and capricious" and would exceed the City's police power. Further, the burden of the condition must also be proportionate to the degree .of impact caused by the proposed development or activity. Finally, the Commission may not use conditions of approval as a substitute for legislation; if the Code provisions recited above are deemed inadequate, the Code may be amended — within limits — to approach the subject of view impairment in a different way. But, the Corrmission cannot implement new policy through the device of imposing conditions on discretionary permits. Conditions of approval of disretionary projects must mitigate the actual impact of the project under review and go no further. A condition that fails to advance the purpoR for which it is imposed is invalid, and might constitute a taking of property without compensation. Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n, 483 U.S. 825(1987); Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374(1994). To determineif a condition substantially advances a legitimate governmental interest, these cases require affirmative answers to the following questions: 1. Is the purpose of the condition a legitimate governmental purpose? 2. Does the means used to achieve the objective "aibstantially advance" the intended purpoR? a. Does the type of condition imposed address the same type of impact caused by the development? b. Is the condition "roughly proportional" to the burden created by the development? 10/11/2004 14:29 91064?Q 1 1.1 JENKINS & HOrT"' LLP PAGE 05 Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 4 jENKINS & HOGIN, LLP With those standards in mind, the question presented is whether and • under what circumstances may the Commission require the removal or alteration of existing vegetation as .a condition of approval of a discretionary land use permit.' The answer is that the Commission may do so when the vegetation is a part of, is reasonably related to, or is affected by or affects the project under consideration. Likewise, a condition requiring the rerroval or alteration of landscaping that is not reasonably related to the project isnot permissible. Utilizing the analytical framework set forth above, the validity of such a condition in the context of a hypothetical development project must be evaluated as follows: 1. Does the condition advance a proper public purpose? As noted above, the protection of identifiable views has been deemed a proper public purpoby the courts. A condition of a discretionary permit requiring removal or alteration of vegetation must protect a specific, identified view in order to satisfy this criterion; absent evidence of a specific view impairment, there is no public purpose supporting imposition of the condition. 2. Does the condition substantially advance the purpose? If a discretionary project creates or contributes to a view impairment, a condition that mitigates the impairment may be imposed: 3. Is the condition p,aportional? The condition must be tailored to the problem, and should not impose a burden greater than necessary to accomplish the objective. By way of example: 1. Hypothetical No. 1: Construction of a new home will impair a 1 Obviously, the Commission may impose conditions on any new landscaping being imposed on property. 1©/11/2004 14:29 3106438441 p • • • JENKINS & HOGIN L' PAGE 06 Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 5 PENKINS & HoGIN, LI.P neighbor's preexisting view of the ocean. Location of the pad makes it impossible to change the location of the proposed house. However, the impairment may be mitigated and the view partially restored by removal or modification of existing trees on the lot. A condition requiring removal or modification of the trees would satisfy the above criteria. 2. Hypothetical No. 2: Numerous tall trees exist on a parcel that is undergoing new development. The trees have not been identified as impairing a significant view, and are unaffected by the new construction. A condition requiring removal or modification of the trees would not satisfy the above criteria. Further, such a condition would be tantamount to establishing new City policy, and would be contrary to existing policy of maintaining existing mature landscaping. Your memorandum of September. 17, 2004 requested that I consider four questions that emerged from a meeting among Planning Commissioners and members of the Association Board. Those questions, and my responses thereto, are as follows: 1. May the Planning Commission include a provision in resolutions of approval of discretionary permits that prohibit a property owner from causing future view impairments caused by vegetation anywhere on the property? Certainly the City may regulate the type and future height ofnew vegetation proposed to be incorporated into a landscape plan. To the extent the condition purportsto address the effects of existing vegetation, the condition: a) would exceed the City's police power for the reasons discussed above in this memorandum; b) would serve only to duplicate the authority that exiTS in Chapter 17.26; c) would not serve to enhance the City's authority over that parcel because the City already possesses sufficient police power to enforce Chapter 17.26; and d) would not be self-executing, in that in order to enforce the condition the City would in every instance have to adjudicate the view impairment with a full-blown public hearing through a process not dissimilar to that provided in Chapter 17.26. 10/11/2004 14:29 310643E441 JENKINS & HOr4Tti LLP PAGE 07 Craig Nealis October 11, 2004 Page 6 JENHINS & HOGIN, LLP 2. May the Planning Commission impose a condition in 'solutions of approval requiring property owners to remove existing vegetation on their property to abate an existing view impairment? Based on the reasoning discussed above, if the project under consideration contributes to a view impairment and removal or modification of vegetation will mitigate that impairment, then the Commission may impose such a condition. However, the Commission may not use the fact that a property owner is before it for an approval to impose conditions wholly unrelated to the project under review. 3. May the Planning Commission include language in resolution of approval of discretionary permits requiring that new vegetation included within a landscape plan not cause a future view impairment (i.e. nor be permitted to grow over a certain height, or by precluding certain species of trees known to grow very tall) ? . Yes, the Commission may limit the height of new landscaping if reasonably likely to cause a future view impairment or may limit the species of allowable vegetation in sensitive locations. 4. May City staff accomplish No. 3 above in connection with over-the- counter discretionary approvals? Yes, the staff may exercise the same power as the Commission when approving "minor" entitlements. .In sum, the imposition of a "standard" condition of approval • prohibiting future view impairments regardless of the existence of an existing view • impairment is not only legally suspect, but would not serve any practical purpo. In order for the condition to be enforced, due proces requires that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing at which evidence would have to be adduced supporting both the existence of a "view" and a view "impairment." The process would, in the end, be nothing more than a backdoor version of the existing process in Chapter 17.26, minus the mediation process. The City would be in no better, or stronger, position than it is now. On the other hand, a condition imposing specific criteria on new landscaping would be readily enforceable. City 0/ leoftinl JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com MEMORANDUM TO: MIKE JENKINS, CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CRAIG NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 2004 On 9/15, Planning Commission Members Arvel Witte and Loren DeRoy met (ad hoc) with RHCA Board Members Don Crocker and Ray Ferris at the request of the RHCA to discuss Commission and staff landscape plan approval procedures. Recently, the RHCA disbanded their landscape committee and they are now considering whether they should reactivate another committee. Planning Director Yolanta Schwartz, RHCA Manager Peggy Minor, City Landscape Consultant Julie Heinsheimer and I attended the meeting. The group discussed potential methods to prevent future view impairments and reduce the frequency of future view impairment cases by having the City record findings against properties via the discretionary land use and administrative approval process setting forth specific vegetation standards. The group felt that by imposing such conditions, a property owner would be placed in a position to cooperate with a view restoration request from an adjoining property owner without undergoing the City or RHCA view impairment process. Toward that end, there were four questions posed by the group that require your consideration: ► Can the Planning Commission include a provision in resolutions of approval (Site Plan/Variance/CUP) that a property owner is prohibited from causing future view impairments due to vegetation on their entire property? ► Can the Planning Commission impose a condition in resolutions of approval requiring a property owner to remove existing vegetation on their property to abate an existing view impairment? ► Can the Planning Commission include :language in resolutions of approval indicating that planting introduced in the specific landscape plan area of the lot after the completion of the required landscape' plan (return of bond), cannot cause a • future view impairment? _ ` -1- ► Can City staff be authorized to have property owners sign a statement, when approving "over-the-counter" projects, that they will not introduce or allow vegetation on their property, now or in the future, to cause a view impairment? Can this statement limit the vegetation to, perhaps, roof height? Please let me know if you require further information. Your cooperation is appreciated. Thank you for your support. CRN:mlk cc: City Council Planning Commission Don Crocker, RHCA Board of Directors Ray Ferris, RHCA Board of Directors Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager Arvel Witte, Planning Commission Loren DeRoy, Planning Commission Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director Julie Heinsheimer, City Landscape Consultant -2- Subj: City of Rolll..w Hills Tree List Date: Thursday, September 23, 2004 8:57:06 AM From: petra@bluedoorgardens.com To: cityofrh@aol.com Dear Craig, Attached please find a tree/shrub list put together by Julie Heinsheimer (Blue Door Gardens). Please. note that some of these trees mature above 25 feet, however, they can easily be kept at a height of 25 feet. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions (Phone number: (310) 377-1611) or if you have problems opening the attachment. Thank you, Petra Baldovino @ Blue Door Gardens. Return -Path: <petra@bluedoorgardens.com> Received: from rly-ya03.mx.aol.com (rly-ya03.mail.aol.com [172.18.141.35]) by air-ya01.mail.aol.com (v101_rl.4) with ESMTP id MAILINYA11-1514152f234175; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:57:06 -0400 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by rly- ya03.mx.aol.com (v101_rl.5) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYA37-1514152f234175; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:56:39 -0400 Received: from Isanca2-ar29-4-41-064-209.Isanca2.elnk.dsl.genuity.net ([4.41.64.209] helo=Flowerpower) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1 CAVxO-0004Xp-00 for cityofrh@aol.com; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 08:56:30 -0700 From: "Petra Baldovino" <petra@bluedoorgardens.com> To: "Craig Nealis" <cityofrh@aol.com> Subject: City of Rolling Hills Tree List Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 08:56:31 -0700 Message-ID:<000001c4a185$e51ad600$1401a8c0@Flowerpower> MIME -Version: 1.0 Content -Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01 C4A14B.38BBFE00" X -Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMaiI-Priority: Normal X -Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-AOL-I P: 207.217.120.22 X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE:' 0:0:0: X-AOL-SCOLL-URL COUNT: 0 9/23/04 America Online : Cityofrh Page 1 Yo\4 wrtt "� TREE LIST FOR CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Tree (T) Shrub (S) Botanical Name Common Name S Acacia redolens Prostrate Acacia T Acer palmatum Green Japanese Maple T Acer palmatum Atropurpureum' Red Japanese Maple T Acer palmatum Dissectum' Green Laceleaf Japanese Maple T Acer palmatum 'Ornatum' Red Laceleaf Japanese Maple T Agonis flexuosa Peppermint Tree T . Albizia julibrissin 'Rosen' Silk Tree, Mimosa . T Arbutus unedo Strawberry Tree (Multi) T Cassia leptophylla Gold Medallion Tree S Ceanothus Julia Phelps' Phelps Ceanothus T Cercis canadensis Forest Pansy' Forest Pansy Eastern Redbud T Chionanthus retusus Chinese Fringe Tree T Eriobotrya deflexa Bronze Loquat S Fremontodendron 'California Glory' Fremontodendron T Geijera parvifolia Australian Willow T Jacaranda mimosifolia Jacaranda Tree T Lagerstroemia hybrids Crape Myrtle (Color TBD) T Leptospermum laevigatum Australian Tea Tree (White flowering) T Magnolia grandiflora 'Little Gem' Little Gem Magnolia T Magnolia x soulangeana 'Alexandrina' Saucer Magnolia T Olea europaea European Olive T Photinia x fraseri Photinia T Pittosporum phillyreoides Willow Pittosporum T Podocarpus henkelii Long -Leafed Yellowwood T Prunus cerasifera 'Atropurpurea' Purple Leaf Plum S Pyracantha crenatoserrata (P. fortuneana) 'Graberi' Graber's Pyracantha T Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen Pear T Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak T Schinus molle California Pepper Tree T Tabebuia chrysotricha Golden Trumpet Tree T Tabebuia impetiginosa Pink Trumpet Tree T Ulmus parvifolia Chinese Elm Source: Street Trees Recommended for Southern California, Street Tree Seminar, Inc. Subj: Landscape J _ __ _t Meeting on Nov. 17 Date: Monday, November 8, 2004 6:48:14 PM From: Witte A B To: Cityofrh Craig I'd like to retain on our agenda the items I submitted last time but did not have a chance to be discussed by the attendees. I'll be gone for a few days this week, but will return on Sunday. regards, Arvel 11/9/04 America Online : Cityofrh Page 1 TREE LIST FOR CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Tree (T) Shrub (S) Botanical Name Common Name 5 Acacia redolens Prostrate Acacia T Acer palmatum Green Japanese Maple T Acer palmatum Atropurpureum' Red Japanese Maple T Acer palmatum Dissectum' Green Laceleaf Japanese Maple T Acer palmatum 'Ornatum' Red Laceleaf Japanese Maple T -Agonis flexuosa • Peppermint Tree T Albizia julibrissin 'Rosen' Silk Tree, Mimosa T Arbutus unedo Strawberry Tree (Multi) T Cassia leptophylla Gold Medallion Tree 5 Ceanothus Julia Phelps' Phelps Ceanothus T Cercis canadensis Forest Pansy Forest Pansy Eastern Redbud T Chionanthus retusus Chinese Fringe Tree T Eriobotrya deflexa Bronze Loquat S Fremontodendron 'California Glory Fremontodendron T Geijero parvifolia Australian Willow T Jacaranda mimosifolia Jacaranda Tree T Lagerstroemia hybrids Crape Myrtle (Color TBD) T Leptospermum laevigatum Australian Tea Tree (White flowering) T Magnolia grandiflora 'Little Gem' Little Gem Magnolia T Magnolia x soulangeano 'Alexandrine' Saucer Magnolia T Oleo europaea European'Olive T Photinia x fraseri Photinia T Pittosporum phillyreoides Willow Pittosporum T Podocorpus henkelii Long -Leafed Yellowwood T Prunus cerasifera Atropurpurea' Purple Leaf Plum S Pyracantha crenatoserrata (P. fortuneana) 'Graberi' Graber's Pyracantha T Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen Pear T Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak T Schinus molle California Pepper Tree T Tabebuia chrysotricha Golden Trumpet Tree T Tabebuia impetiginosa Pink Trumpet Tree T Ulmus parvifolia Chinese Elm Source: Street Trees Recommended for Southern California, Street Tree Seminar, Inc. Sept 15, 2004 Landscaping Meeting with Association and City -what does the Association want? - what does the City want? -decide on requirements, codify them and communicate to our residents -City General Plan Goals: rural, open space and unobstructed views -add to that - water conservation - fire retardant shrubs and trees -provide a list of "good/bad" shrubs and trees. --use a Landscape pamphlet for communication/education of residents -use "Be Waterwise" Campaign by DWP as a guideline? -authorize City Staff to dictate landscaping and view conditions for developments which qualify for "over the counter approvals" Possible issues involving landscaping - in front yard setbacks - in easements - hedges 714) (G II e?oLLin9 /iL''L Community ogiloeiation of cRanefo Jnatos Rules No. 1 PORTUGUESE BEND RD. • ROLLING HILLS, (310) 544-6222 ROLLING HILLS 4 Memorandum As - CALIF. 90274 CALIFORNIA To: Craig Nealis, City Manager () By From: Peggy R. Minor, Association Manager!/ Date: June 8, 2004 Re: Joint Meeting with City and Association Representatives re Landscape Requirements (310) 544-6766 Fax JUN 0 5 2004 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Board members Don Crocker and Ray Ferris have agreed to represent the Board in discussions with 2 City representatives selected by the City to discuss community- landscape requirements and clarify responsibilities of the City and Association. It is my opinion that the most knowledgeable person re landscaping for large grading projects is Julie Heinsheimer. It seems to me that she would be helpful to meet with the 2 City and Board representatives in making sure the landscaping requirements are developed so that residents are not duplicating landscaping approvals. PRM: JR RH CITY — NEALIS — Joint Meeting for Landscape Requirements 6-8-04 \Nss\/r „ko 111)4 •VALMONTE ADMINISTRATION —CENTER,__ 3801 Via La Selva Palos Verdes Estates California 90274-1119 (310) 378-9966 www.pvpusd.k12.ca.us Ira J. Toibin, Ph.D. Superintendent of Schools . Board of Education Barbara Lucky President Dora M. de la Rosa Vice President David L. Tomblin Clerk Gabriella Holt Member Ellen Perkins Member DepartmentFAXNumbers Superintendent (310) 378-0732 Business Services (310) 791-1306 Educational Services (310) 791-2919 Human Resources (310) 791-2948 Pupil Services (310) 378-1971 Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District May 20, 2004 Mr. Craig Nealis, City Manager City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills CA 90274-5171 Dear Craig: IlAY 2 1 2004 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS BY In response to your inquiry, I have looked into the practice of closing the gate that leads to Rancho del Mar High School and the District Warehouse. All personnel have been told that the last person to leave the site is to lock the gate. Unfortunately, the last person to leave may vary from day-to-day. That person might even be a driver with the Palos Verdes Transit Authority; all drivers have a key to the gate. I have been told that sometimes a bus may return to the facility as late as 11:00 p.m.. Adult Education personnel leave the site between 9:00 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. Community groups that use the facility during the weekend on a regular basis have been issued a key to .the gate and are asked to lock the gate upon departure. We do not have employees who work during the weekend that would be able to monitor compliance with this requirement. Rosemary Humphrey, the principal of Rancho del Mar, frequently drops by the site on weekends to check the school and secures the gate if it has been left unlatched. Ira J. Toibin, Ph.D. Superintendent of Schools IJT/rm ti community:RH Craig Nealis 5-20-04 • :iJ Mai 26 04 O3:43p PV Transit 310 544 7109 p.' Palos Uerdes Peninsula PUPTA TRflOSIT MINORITY May 26, 2004 Mr. Craig Nealis City Manager City of Rolling Hills #2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear Mr. Nealis: Office: [3101 544-7108 Fax: [3101 544-7109 Email: pvtransit@palosverdes.com Mailing Address P.O. Box 2656 Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA 90274 Per your request, I have attached the PV Transit weekday driver assignment sheet for May 24 . This list shows the driver sign -on times and location and start -time for each route. Drivers have fifteen minutes after their sign -on time to inspect their vehicles prior to leaving the yard. The first several drivers do not start their vehicles until 6:00 a.m. Please call me if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Martin Gombert Assistant Administrator 1' k (Pot \ate o May 26 04 03:43p PV Transit 310 544 7109 p.2 Weekday Driver Assignments Monday, May 24th Name Harry Ramona Joseph Robert Clyde Jordan Annie Roshell Mable Darlene Otis Johnson Lisa Shirley Marilyn Juanita Serraine Wuily Route Green Al Green B1 Gold B1 Blue Al Blue B1 Green BB Silver Al White Al Whie B1 Orange Al - Blue Cl Green Trp. Gold Al Silver B1 Green Cl Silver Cl Green Western White Tripper Sign -On Eat 5:45 AM 5:45 AM 5:45 AM 5:45 AM 5:45 AM 5:45 AM 6:00 AM 6:00 AM 6:00 AM 6:00 AM 6:00 AM 6:15 AM 6:15 AM 6:30 AM 6:45 AM 6:45 AM 6:45 AM 7:00 AM Start Time Start Location 6:25 AM PV Drive NorthlDapptegray 6:02 AM PV Library 6:25 AM Golden Cove Plaza 6:13 AM Golden Cove Plaza 6:26 AM Golden Cove Plaza 6:53 AM Miraleste Plaza 6:28 AM PVHS 6:38 AM PVHS 6:18 AM PV Library 6:44 AM PV Drive North/Westem 6:37 AM PVHS 6:50 AM Miraleste School 6:47 AM Miraleste School 7:03 AM PVHS 7:13 AM Ridgecrest School 7:14 AM PV Library 7:15 AM PV Drive North/Western 7:28 AM PV Library Notes 1. Drivers have 15 minutes to inspect their vehicle before they leave the yard. 2. Some vehicles are parked at RPV City Hall. May 25, 2004 PALOS VERDES PENINSULA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT- 38 CREST ROAD WEST, CHRONOLOGY OF APPROVALS 1960 PVPUSD purchases the school site from a private entity. The site was used previously as Palos Verdes College. February 26, 1963 Conditional Use Permit issued to construct additional buildings including elementary school buildings, warehouse, maintenance, administration, and educational material storage/library buildings. The structures were not built. CUP lapsed. June 5, 1964 CUP was denied by the Planning Commission to construct a maintenance building, and garage for storage of 37 buses, administration building and elementary school building. 1979 Due to declining enrollment, La Cresta Elementary School was closed. 1981 CUP (ZC # 257), was granted to use the site as Adult Education School for Harbor College, with conditions: a. review use in 1 year b. enrollment limited to 225 students c. parking for 90 cars required d. hours of operation 10:00 am to 9:45 pm and on Saturday 10:00 am- 1:00 pm e. security, maintenance and/or grounds personnel to provide security 24 hours f. all lights, except for security purposes, must be turned off by 11:00 pm. Annual review of CUP extended the use by Harbor College Adult Education. 1984 PVPUSD applies for continuation of the Harbor College Adult School and for a CUP for a PV Continuation High School at the site. The Commission approved the continuation of Harbor College classes but denied the continuation high school. The City Council, after an appeal by the school district, upheld Commission's decision. 1985 and 1986 Extension of the CUP for Harbor College classed granted. November 1985 City entered into an agreement settling and resolving a dispute over the use of the La Cresta Elementary School as a continuation high school for a period of two years. (No CUP processed). The following conditions were agreed upon: a. district to install a standard 5' high gate across the bottom of the stairs leading from Crest Road to the site b. district to plant oleander trees along Crest Road c. school hours to be 7:30 am to 4:30 pm only d. average daily attendance not to exceed 150 students - e. students who drive to register their cars with the school, and school to provide students with a sticker min' dr p,i r-6rc- ItAc,- eu ¶ 9-04- 4 bolt, 4qt ,u - vim , sc,f-&..)e 4"./f-"tr^ c`4-44 er).2— c&et 1%3 L4 ,.�e..� CA) T�"k 44(44 .ail �(�.v�' 1 s f4 1 cv f. smoking to be limited to specific areas g. Community groups shall continue to have access and permission to the playing fields on the site h. the playing areas shall be maintained in good condition i. any other operation of the school property shall comply with city's conditional use permit requirements. 1987- The agreement for the use of the site as a continuation high school is amended to extent the use"for two years,.with the same conditions as were set in 1985. 1990 The agreement for the use of the site as a continuation high school is amended to extent the use for two years, with the same conditions as were set in 1985. October 1995 City Council approved Zoning Text Amendment to allow Joint Powers Transit Authority to utilize the school district site for transportation purposes. November 1985 CUP approved for one year for the use of the district property by the JPTA to store 10 vans on 2,500 sq. ft. area and utilize 500 sq.ft. of the maintenance building for offices. The conditions of approval included: a. annual review required b. backing up of vehicles prohibited • c. access to be outside of the City's gate d. car pooling among driveways encouraged e. no maintenance of the 14 vehicles shall be allowed on site f. service shall not be increased g. vehicles not to leave the site earlier than 6:00 a.m. h. speed limit shall be observed and noise shall be monitored i. any modification shall require a new CUP (-1996-1998 CUP extended annually for the use of the site for transportation uses. However, in 1996 the CUP was amended to allow 14 vans on a 3,500 sq.ft. area: The:1998 CUP review (April 21, 1998, resolution No. 98-7) amended one of the conditions to allow staff to yearly review of this use. November 2001 City entered into an agreement with the School District to allow Palos Verdes School District Adult Education classes on the site, with the following provisions: a. The chain link gate from Crest Road by the stairs leading into the district property to be locked b. district to maintain the landscaping along Crest Road c. Rancho del Mar Continuation High School to be open bt. 7:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., and the Adult School to close not later than 9:30 p.m. d. average daily attendance for Rancho del Mar not to exceed 150 students, and for the Adult School not to exceed 100 students e. any changes in the operation shall comply with City's conditional use permit requirements f. smoking is prohibited on site g. the playing fields shall be kept free and clear of dry brush and weeds h. no additional freestanding outdoor lights are allowed i. district may place additional four temporary portable classrooms on the site, however no more than two may be retained on site permanently. December 2003 The School District filed a Zoning Text Amendment application requesting that rental of costumes and related items be allowed on the school district property. February 2004 City Council adopted an ordinance amending the Zoning Code to allow rental of costumes on the school district property in the RAS-2 zone with a Conditional Use Permit. February 2004 Costume Closet applied for a CUP to construct a' new 7;200 sq.ft. building to operate the rental of costumes. May 18, 2004 Planning Commission adopted resolution (2004-15) approving the CUP. (Vote 4-1 —Commissioner Margeta voted "NO") Conditions include: Separate entrance —(area to be fenced off); no outside lights except those necessary for safety and security, as well as to comply with City regulations; if use ceases or any changes are proposed to hours, mode of operation, etc.. , the CUP must be modified and reviewed and approved by the PC; no dry cleaning on premises; hours of operation as stated in Resolution; May 24, 2004 Report submitted to City Council. City Council received and filed the report. (Vote 4-0; Heinsheimer was absent). Subj: City of Rolli.., Hills Tree List Date: Thursday, September 23, 2004 8:57:06 AM From: petra@bluedoorgardens.com To: cityofrh@aol.com Dear Craig, Attached please find a tree/shrub list put together by Julie Heinsheimer (Blue Door Gardens). Please note that some of these trees mature above 25 feet, however, they can easily be kept at a height of 25 feet. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions (Phone number: (310) 377-1611) or if you have problems opening the attachment. Thank you, Petra Baldovino @ Blue Door Gardens. ----------------- Headers --------------------------- Return-Path: <petra@bluedoorgardens.com> Received: from rly-ya03.mx.aol.com (rly-ya03.mail.aol.com [172.18.141.35]) by air-ya01.mail.aol.com (v101_0.4) -with ESMTP id MAILINYA11-1514152f234175; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:57:06 -0400 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by rly- ya03.mx.aol.com (v101_r1.5) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYA37-1514152f234175; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:56:39 -0400 Received: from Isanca2-ar29-4-41-064-209.Isanca2.elnk.dsl.genuity.net ([4.41.64.209] helo=Flowerpower) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1 CAVxO-0004Xp-00 for cityofrh@aol.com; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 08:56:30 -0700 From: "Petra Baldovino" <petra@bluedoorgardens.com> To: "Craig Nealis" <cityofrh@aol.com> Subject: City of Rolling Hills Tree List Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 08:56:31 -0700 Message -ID: <000001c4a185$e51ad600$1401a8c0@Flowerpower> MIME -Version: 1.0 Content -Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01 C4A14B.38BBFE00" X -Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMaiI-Priority: Normal X -Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-AOL-IP: 207.217.120.22 X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:0:0: X-AOL-SCOLL-URL COUNT: 0 9/23/04 America Online : Cityofrh Page 1 rcrr. La-N.S4 f-fic v TREE LIST FOR CITY OF ROLLING HILLS • Tree (T) Shrub (S) Botanical Name Common Name S Acacia redolens Prostrate Acacia T Acer palmatum Green Japanese Maple T Acer palmatum Atropurpureum' Red Japanese Maple T Acer palmatum Dissectum' Green Laceleaf Japanese Maple T Acer palmatum 'Ornatum' Red Laceleaf Japanese Maple T Agonis flexuosa Peppermint Tree T Albizia julibrissin 'Rosen' Silk Tree, Mimosa T Arbutus.unedo Strawberry Tree (Multi) T Cassia leptophylla Gold Medallion Tree S Ceonothus 'Julia Phelps' Phelps Ceanothus T Cercis canadensis 'Forest Pansy' Forest Pansy Eastern Redbud T Chionanthus retusus Chinese Fringe Tree T Eriobotrya deflexo Bronze Loquat 5 Fremontodendron 'California Glory' Fremontodendron T Geijera parvifolia Australian Willow T Jacaranda mimosifolia Jacaranda Tree T Lagerstroemia hybrids Crape Myrtle (Color TBD) T Leptospermum laevigatum Australian Tea Tree (White flowering) T Magnolia grandiflora 'Little Gem' Little Gem Magnolia T Magnolia x soulangeana Alexandrina' Saucer Magnolia T Oleo europaea European Olive T Photinia x fraseri Photinia T Pittosporum phillyreoides Willow Pittosporum T Podocarpus henkelii Long -Leafed Yellowwood T Prunus cerasifera Atropurpurea' Purple Leaf Plum 5 Pyracantha crenatoserrata (P.fortuneana) 'Graberi' Grabers Pyracantha T Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen Pear T Quercus ogrifolia Coast Live Oak T Schinus molle Catifomia Pepper Tree T Tabebuia chrysotricha Golden Trumpet Tree T Tabebuia impetiginosa Pink Trumpet Tree T Ulmus porvifolia Chinese Elm Source: Street Trees Recommended for Southern California, Street Tree Seminar, Inc. Cry 0/ INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1951 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (3'10)377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 10-A Mtg. Date: 10/14/02 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF STAFF LEVEL LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: OCTOBER 14, 2002 Mayor Allen Lay has requested that this subject be included on this evening's agenda for discussion. Mayor Lay will provide background regarding this subject. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the City Council discuss this subject and provide appropriate direction to staff. CRN:mlk 10/14/021ay.sta r'rn n1BC1 on Recycled PWPIP Sept 15, 2004 Landscaping Meeting with Association and City - what does the Association want? - what does the City want? - decide on requirements, codify them and communicate to our residents - City General Plan Goals: rural, open space and unobstructed views -add to that -water conservation - fire retardant shrubs and trees - provide a list of "good/bad" shrubs and trees - -use a Landscape pamphlet for communication/education of residents - use "Be Waterwise" Campaign by DWP as a guideline? - authorize City Staff to dictate landscaping and view conditions for developments which qualify for "over the counter approvals" Possible issues involving landscaping - in front yard setbacks - in easements - hedges CITY LANDSCAPING RESPONSIBILITIES Following are the steps that the City undertakes regarding landscaping plans: ► The Planning Commission may require, as a component of discretionary review (Site Plan Review/Variance/CUP), that the applicant prepare a landscaping plan. Than plan can include restrictions regarding the type of planning material and contain limitations on mature height of trees or have strict maintenance height requirements for trees. Normally this plan requires that a bond for the value of the planting, material and irrigation system, plus 15% be provided to guarantee performance. ► Staff, with the assistance of our Landscape Consultant, reviews the landscape plans in terms of appropriateness and meeting the conditions outlined by the Planning Commission. ► Staff inspects the landscaping once it is planted for compliance with the requirements of the Commission. Two years after the planting has been sustained, the bond or other financial instrument is returned to the applicant. ► Additionally, the County of Los Angeles can require certain types of landscaping to be planted on slopes for slope failure mitigation strategies. sLe,,,, ri —t NJtlr►d Ca4 .- 5p; R,C.}-Aktes(�, s6 Cu—,56'dni,/y G,Gjoik— R, i - avid p-,- UPS /041k -744'1/ '%4 4-6C,0 ? PremAck-- ciyiJ a? _ a. (6 . sP e7 fiAL4- 111 e J -(14% C9rC Afirl wtvAtcit. k 474 i616 t-4.) eft,. /Q11,,A Pkowesz r•rtt uQ 1 Gtr u16 (t- r �. L S. Pia2. � 5J l .., . 66r6ApA rAJ4a V'Y G teaa-�. �