2014-01 Fournier see Reso 1167RESOLUTION N0.2014-41 CTV Please see City CouncilResolution No. 1167
A RESOLUTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS COMMITTEE ON TREES
AND VIEWS DECLARING A SIGNIFICANT VIEW RvIPAIRMENT
CAUSED BY SPECIFIC TREES LOCATED AT 33 CREST ROAD
EAST AND SETTING FORTH RESTORATIVE ACTION TO ABATE
THE IMPAIRMENT.
THE ROLLING HILLS COMMITTEE ON TREES AND VIEWS OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. On February 28, 2013 a view impairment complaint ("Complaint") was jointly filed
by Mr. and Mrs. Fournier, property owners of 30 Crest Road East and Mr. and Mrs. Occhipinti, property
owners of 34 Crest Road East claiming that view impairment was caused by trees located at 33 Crest
Road East, owned by Mr. and Mrs. Sherman. The owners and all future owners of 33 Crest Road East
are collectively referred to in this Resolution as "Owners of 33 Crest Road East."
Section 2. The Complaint was referred to a mediator to conduct mediation services pursuant to
Rolling Hills Municipal Code 17.26.040, Paragraph B.
Section 3. After that mediation failed to achieve agreement, Mr. and Mrs. Fournier,
("Complainants") on March 11, 2014 separately from Mr. and Mrs. Occhipinti, applied to the City of
Rolling Hills Committee on Trees and Views (CTV) for resolution of the complaint and requested a
public hearing before the CTV.
Section 4. In the application the Complainants requested that their view be restored to the time of
their first picture of the view from their property taken 3 years after they acquired the property. They
acquired the property in 1993; whereas the picture was taken in 1996. The Complainants requested
restoration of the view of the Pacific Ocean, coastline, Catalina Island and off shore islands.
Section 5. A public hearing was properly noticed and advertised pursuant to Rolling Hills
Municipal Code Sections 17.26.040, Paragraph C and 17.26.050, Paragraphs A and B. The subject
public hearing was conducted on April 14, 2014, August 19, 2014, and October 28, 2014 and included a
field trip to 30 Crest Road East and 33 Crest Road East. Evidence was heard and presented from all
persons interested in the Project and from members of the City staff. The Committee reviewed,
analyzed and studied the evidence submitted.
Section 6. In June 1988, the City adopted a View Preservation Ordinance. The ordinance
established preservation of views as a primary value of the community and created a process by which a
property owner could seek to abate an obstructed view. In November 2003, the ordinance was modified
relative to the composition of the Committee on Views and Trees, the body designated to consider view
applications.
In March 2013, the residents of Rolling Hills passed Measure B amending the View Preservation
Ordinance. The principal effect of Measure B was that it shifted the protection of the ordinance from
views that are capable of being enjoyed from a property to views that were actually enjoyed from a
property when the property owner acquired the property. In particular, the initiative amended the view
ordinance as follows:
The ordinance protects only a view that existed when the current property owner acquired
ownership of the property;
The ordinance limits the protection of the ordinance to views obstructed by "maturing"
vegetation, thereby excluding views obstructed by trees that were "mature" at the time of the
property acquisition; and
The intent of the ordinance is to cause restoration of views to "view corridors," and "views
through trees".
Section 7. The Rolling Hills Committee on Trees and Views finds as follows regarding the
Complaint:
A. Pursuant to Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.26.050 D (3), a view existed from
30 Crest Road East in 1976, three years after the complainants acquired the property as defined in
Section 17.12.220 "View" of the Municipal Code, as depicted in the photograph attached hereto as
Exhibit A. The Committee finds that the viewing area for 30 Crest Road East is an office to the east of
Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV -1-
the main entrance, a dining area west of the main entrance and an office to the west of the dining area
and areas immediately adjacent thereto along the southern side of the residence on 30 Crest Road East,
each from the standing perspective of an average height person, ("Designated Viewing Areas").
B. Pursuant to Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.26.050 D (3) and Section 17.26.090
(3), the Committee finds that the Complainants have shown by clear and convincing evidence that the
view from the Complainants' property is significantly impaired because 63 trees plus a hedge located at
33 Crest Road East significantly impair the view from the Designated Viewing Areas, as defined in
Section 17.12.220 "View Impairment" of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and as specified in Section
7A above.
C. Pursuant to Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.26.050 E, the Committee finds the
restorative action set forth below in this Resolution is necessary to abate the view impairment by
creating view corridors and views through trees, that the restorative action will not adversely affect the
environment, and that the action will not unreasonably detract from the enjoyment or privacy of the
property at 33 Crest Road East.
D. The City reviewed the proposed restorative action's environmental impacts under the
California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources. Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and the
regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA
Guidelines") and determined the proposed project to be exempt from environmental review pursuant to
Section 15304 (Minor Alterations of Land) and Section 15061(b)(3) ("Common Sense Exemption") of
the CEQA Guidelines. The project is exempt because only two trees will be removed; one is a dead
eucalyptus (Tree 39) and the other is a live black pine (Tree 71). Neither tree is known to be located in
an environmentally sensitive area. Section 15304 exempts minor alterations of land, but does not
include removal of "healthy, mature, scenic trees" except for limited purposes not applicable here. This
project does not involve removal of multiple "healthy, mature, scenic trees" because one of the two trees
to be removed is dead; thus, the project falls within the categorical exemption. Additionally, no
evidence was presented to the City during the site visits or through written or verbal testimony that Tree
71 serves as a habitat for wildlife species that cannot occupy the remaining approximately 120 trees on
the property, which include several other pine trees. The remainder of the trees impacted by the project
will experience crown reduction or lacing, but a substantial amount of their foliage will remain and no
evidence was introduced to suggest that the crown reduction or lacing will cause an adverse
environmental impact. Thus, it can be said with certainty that there will be no environmental impact
from the proposed removal of one live tree and one dead tree.
E. With the exception of Tree 39 and 71, this order provides for cleaning out, shaping up
and trimming, lacing and reducing the height of the crowns of the trees rather than removing the trees.
F. The Initial Restorative Action and Maintenance set forth in this resolution provides for the
work to be done in winter months, per the recommendation of the selected Arborist and per International
Society of Arboriculture standards.
G. Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.26.060 C provides that subsequent maintenance
of the vegetation in question shall be performed in accordance with the final decision of the CTV at the
cost and expense of the Owners of the vegetation, however, Section 17.26.060 D provides that the CTV
may modify the cost allocation if grounds exist to justify such a modification. The CTV finds that the
requirement that 63 trees and a hedge be maintained to preserve the Complainants' restored view could
potentially create a significant financial burden on the Owners of the vegetation, providing sufficient
grounds to justify a modification in the allocation of maintenance costs. The CTV finds that the
pendency of two complaints against a single property constitutes further grounds justifying a
modification. As further grounds justifying modification in the allocation of maintenance costs, the
CTV finds that preservation of the views created by this resolution requires a substantial change in the
maintenance of the trees on 33 Crest Road East.
H. As stated in Section 1 above, originally a joint complaint was filed against trees located at
the property at 33 Crest Road East by Complainants from two separate properties. The joint complaint
included some trees that obstructed views from both properties, hereforth referred to as "common trees."
All of the trees at issue in the Fournier complaint are "common trees." The Complainants provided a
Tree Survey of trees located at 33 Crest Road East, conducted by a Certified Surveyor, and the trees
were identified by a Certified Arborist. The trees have been identified by numbers as Tree Number One
through Tree Number 121, which includes the hedge, looking in a southwesterly and southeasterly
direction from the perspective of the Fournier and Occhipinti properties. The tree survey plan is hereby
attached as Exhibit B.
Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV -2-
Section 8. The Committee therefore orders the following restorative action pursuant to Rolling
Hills Municipal Code Section 17.26.050 E.
A. Pursuant to Section 17.26.060 A, within thirty (30) calendar days of adoption of this
resolution, the Complainants are hereby required to obtain and present to the Owners of 33 Crest Road
East, a minimum of three (3) bids from licensed qualified contractors for the performance of the initial
restorative action set forth in this Resolution as well as a cash deposit in the amount of the lowest bid,
sufficient to cover 50 percent of the Initial Restorative Action on the "common trees." In order to
qualify, the contractors must provide insurance, which protects and indemnifies the City and the
Complainants from damages attributable from negligence or wrongful performance of the work. Any
such insurance shall be subject to the approval of the City.
B. Pursuant to Section 17.26.060 B, the Owners of 33 Crest Road East may select any
licensed and qualified contractor to perform the Initial Restorative Action (defined below) (as long as
the insurance requirement of the above paragraph is satisfied), but shall pay for any cost above the
amount of the cash deposit. The work for the Initial Restorative Action shall be completed no Iater than
March 9, 2015 provided that a cash deposit in the full amount of the lowest bid for the initial restorative
action has been received.
C. Subsequent maintenance of the subject vegetation shall be performed as follows:
Complainants and the Owners of the vegetation shall each bear 33 and 1/3 percent of the cost of
maintenance of the "common trees"; said cost shall be determined by the lowest of 3 bids obtained by
the Owners of 33 Crest Road East, with any amount above the lowest bid being paid for by the Owners
of 33 Crest Road East. All vegetation subject to the restorative action described in this Resolution and
any future planting, including replacement trees, shall be maintained so that the view shown in the
photograph to be taken by City staff or designee following the Initial Restorative Action, as detailed
below, is preserved.
The trees shall be maintained in accordance with the final decision of the Committee on Trees and
Views so as to not allow for future view impairments from the Designated Viewing Areas of 30 Crest
Road East.
Tree maintenance shall be done in the winter months (December — March) and shall be completed by
March 9 of the year in which the work is to be done, as specified by this Resolution for maintenance of
the trees.
D. A notice of the decision shall be recorded against the title of 33 Crest Road East and 30
Crest Road East and shall run with the land, thereby giving notice of this resolution to all future owners.
E. Initial restorative action shall be limited to the 63 trees and a hedge as identified on the
Tree Survey plan and the restorative action described below.
F. The initial restorative action ("Initial Restorative Action") shall consist of the following:
Tree #
Tree Type
Action
Maintenance
1
Eucalyptus
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
2-3
Olive Tree
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
6
Eucalyptus
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
7
Canary Island Pine
Lace
Every two years
8
Brazilian Pepper
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
9-16
Photinia
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
17
Pittosporum
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
18
BrazilianPepper
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
19
Pittosporum
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
20-23
Eucalyptus
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
24-27
Eucalyptus
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV -3-
30
Canary Island Pine
Lace
Every two years
31
Pittosporum
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
33
Canary Island Pine
Lace
Every two years
39
Eucalyptus
Remove
44
Pittosporum
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
*51
Redwood
Height reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
60-63
Canary Island Pine
Lace
Every two years
66-70
Melaleuca
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
71
Black Pine
Remove, including stump & roots
72
Pittosporum
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
73-78
Melaleuca
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
82-85
Melaleuca
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
86
Podocarpus
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Every two years
101
Brazilian Pepper
Crown reduction to ridgeline of house
Annually
102
Olive Tree
Maintain height to ridgeline of house
Annually
103-110
Brazilian Pepper
Maintain height at ridgeline of house
Annually
111
Photinia (Hedge)
Maintain height at ridgeline of house
Annually
*Tree #51. The applicant shall provide a certificate from the surveyor stating that the entire tree trunk is
located within the boundary of the Sherman Property. Otherwise no action shall be taken.
G. The actions described above shall be accomplished per ISA industry standards and best
arborist practices, and the following definitions shall apply:
Crown Reduction: Height reduction to specified height by removing selective branches, deadwood,
stems and foliage to reduce the height and spread of a tree.
Lace: Thin out thick areas of the canopy to expose the structure of dominant branches, clean out the
crown, shaping and balancing the tree.
Ridgeline of house: The higher of the two ridgeiines at 33 Crest Road East, as perceived from the
Designated Viewing Areas at 30 Crest Road East.
Section 9. Upon conclusion of the Initial Restorative Action, the Complainant shall contact the
City to schedule a site visit during which City staff shall visit 30 Crest Road East and take a photograph
from the Designated Viewing Areas to be attached as Exhibit for the purposes of establishing
the level of restorative action for fixture maintenance.
Section 10. There shall be no restorative action required for the remainder of the trees on the
property at 33 Crest Road East not listed in the Initial Restorative Action in this Resolution. However,
trees on the property and not included in this Resolution shall be maintained at current configuration and
any new growth that extends into the views established by this Resolution shall be removed at the same
time as the maintenance is conducted for the other trees, at the sole expense of the Owners of 33 Crest
Road East.
Section 11. The parties by mutual agreement, if they so desire, may modify the implementation
action in this Resolution, as set forth in Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.26.060 D. Any such
mutual agreement shall be recorded.
Section 12. In the event that any party requests inspection of implementation of CTV Resolution
2014-01 on grounds that the restorative action or maintenance is not compliant with this Resolution, the
City may be required to incur substantial costs in investigating the complaint. Therefore, the City shall
Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV -4-
be entitled to recover its costs as determined by the City Manager, which may be recovered for activities
including, but not limited to, hiring independent consultants.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by Members of the Committee on Trees and Views
this 18th day of November 2014.
ivllr. �vt,
-
. Smith
Chairperson
ATTEST:
Heidi Luce
City Clerk
Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV -5-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES } SS
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS }
The foregoing Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS COMMITTEE ON TREES
AND VIEWS DECLARING A SIGNIFICANT VIEW IMPAIRMENT
CAUSED BY SPECIFIC TREES LOCATED AT 33 CREST ROAD
EAST AND SETTING FORTH RESTORATIVE ACTION TO ABATE
THE IMPAIItAENT.
was approved and adopted at a meeting of the Committee on Trees and Views on November 18, 2014,
by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Committee Member Gray and Chairperson Smith.
NOES: Committee Member Mirsch.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Heidi Luce, City Clerk
This decision is final 20 days from its adoption unless appealed to the City Council pursuant to Chapter
17.54 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code.
Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV -6-
Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV -7-
Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV -8-
Exhibit C
Resolution No. 2014-01 CTV -9-