2015-20 View RESOLUTION NO. 2015-20
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE ROLLING HILLS
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ABATEMENT OF VIEW
IMPAIRMENT, IN ZONING CASE NO. 881 AND ZONING CODE
AMENDMENT NO. 2015-03.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY
FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Rolling Hills Municipal Code (“RHMC”) Chapter 17.26 governs the
process by which a property owner whose scenic view has become impaired by
vegetation growing on another property may obtain abatement of the view impairment.
Section 17.12.220 defines a view. Collectively, RHMC Chapter 17.26 and the definition
of a view make up the City’s “View Ordinance.” The City has been engaged in a long-
term effort to update the View Ordinance to clarify its provisions and address
circumstances that have arisen in the Committee on Trees and Views’ application of the
View Ordinance.
Section 2. Chapter 17.50 of the RHMC sets forth procedures for amending the
Zoning Ordinance. A public hearing before the Planning Commission is necessary
before a recommendation for a Zoning Code amendment can be made to the City
Council. After receiving presentations from staff at the February 17, 2015 and March 17,
2015 meetings, the Planning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing on
April 21, 2015, which was continued to May 19, 2015, June 16, 2015 and July 21, 2015.
Public comment was received at each continuance of the public hearing, which the
Planning Commission considered in concert with the recommendations of the City
Council’s Ad Hoc Committee created to recommend changes to the View Ordinance,
and reports from City staff. Notice of the public hearings was provided as required by
law.
Section 3. Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code Section 21000 to Section 21177, State
CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., and the CEQA
Guidelines of the City of Rolling Hills, staff analyzed the proposed amendments to the
View Ordinance and concluded that the amendments are exempt from CEQA because
they consist only of minor revisions and clarifications to the RHMC and will not have
the effect of deleting or substantially changing any regulatory standards or findings.
The proposed Ordinance is an action that does not have the potential to cause
significant effects on the environment, but rather will clarify the process by which
persons may apply for and obtain an order from the City to abate view impairments.
Accordingly, the proposed Ordinance is exempt pursuant to the “common sense”
exemption set forth in Section 15061 (b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because there is no
possibility that the Ordinance could have a significant effect on the environment.
Resolution No. 2015-20
- 2 -
Furthermore, the proposed Ordinance does not constitute a “project” that requires
environmental review (see specifically 14 CCR § 15378 (b)(2, 5)).
Section 4. After considering all of the evidence in the record on this matter,
the Planning Commission finds that the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments
comply with the requirements of the City of Rolling Hills General Plan and State
Planning and Zoning Laws (Government section 65000 et seq.).
Section 5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council
adopt an Ordinance amending Section 17.12.220 and Chapter 17.26 of Title 17 (Zoning)
of the RHMC as follows:
A. Amend Section 17.12.220 of the RHMC to amend the definition of “View” and
add the definition of “View corridor” in alphabetical order to read as follows:
"View" means a view from a principal residence, but not including from
bathrooms, hallways, garages or closets, and any immediately adjoining
patio or deck area at the same elevation as the residence which consists of
a visually impressive scene or vista not located in the immediate vicinity
of the residence, such as a scene of the Pacific Ocean, off-shore islands,
city lights of the Los Angeles basin, the Palos Verdes Hills or Los Angeles
Harbor.
"View impairment" means a significant interference with and obstruction
of a view by landscaping, trees or any other planted vegetation.
“View corridor” means a view from a designated viewing area broken
into segments by vegetation.
B. Amend Section 17.26.010 of the RHMC to read as follows:
17.26.010 Intent and purpose.
The City recognizes the contribution of views to the overall
character and beauty of the City. Views of the Pacific Ocean, Catalina
Island, City lights and Los Angeles Harbor are a special quality of
property ownership for many residential lots in the City. These views
have the potential to be diminished or eliminated by maturing
landscaping located on private property. The purpose of this chapter is to
protect this important community asset by establishing procedures for the
protection of views and abatement of view obstructions created by
landscaping, while at the same time protecting natural vegetation from
indiscriminate removal.
C. Amend Section 17.26.040 of the RHMC to read as follows:
Resolution No. 2015-20
- 3 -
17.26.040 Abatement of view impairment - Procedure.
Any person who owns or has lawful possession of a residence from which
a view is impaired, pursuant to the definition of “view impairment” in Section
17.12.220 of this title, by vegetation growing on property other than their own
may seek abatement of the view impairment under the following procedure:
A. Mediation Application. The complainant shall submit a complete application
for abatement of view impairment by mediation on a form provided by the
City. The application shall be accompanied by a fee as provided for in
Section 17.30.030 of this title. The complainant shall describe in the
application what efforts have been made by the complainant to resolve the
view impairment prior to filing the mediation application. An application
shall not be accepted for filing unless the complainant can demonstrate that
the owner of the view-impairing vegetation has been given notice of the
impairment and a reasonable opportunity to abate it, but has refused to do
so.
B. Eligibility. A person shall not be precluded from filing an application for
abatement of a view impairment on grounds that vegetation located on the
complainant’s property contributes to impairment of the requested view. A
person who has obtained an order abating impairment of a view against a
property shall not be precluded from filing a subsequent application to abate
impairment of the same view by vegetation on another property. An
application may be filed to abate impairment of one or more distinct views
listed in Section 17.12.220 “View;” however, if multiple views are identified,
each must be disjointed and observable from a separate viewing area.
C. Mediation. Upon receipt and acceptance of an application as complete, the
City Manager shall refer the matter to a mediator for conduct of a mediation
session to abate the view impairment. The mediator shall be responsible for
notifying the property owner of the view-impairing vegetation of the
application and for scheduling and managing the mediation process. At the
conclusion of mediation, the mediator shall advise the City Manager as to
whether the complaint has been resolved. Agreement reached through
mediation shall be reflected in an executed contract and implemented in
accordance with the terms of the agreement.
D. Public Hearing Application. In the event mediation fails to achieve
agreement, the complainant may submit an application and accompanying
fee as provided for in Section 17.30.030 of this title for a public hearing.
Upon receipt and acceptance of an application for a public hearing as
complete, the City Manager shall schedule the matter for a public hearing
before the Committee on Trees and Views. If a complete application for a
public hearing is not received within 30 days of the mediator’s notification
set forth in Section 17.26.040(C), the City shall terminate all proceedings
Resolution No. 2015-20
- 4 -
related to the application.
D. Amend Section 17.26.050 of the RHMC to read as follows:
17.26.050 Hearing procedure and findings.
A. Notice Required. Public notice of the hearing shall be given a minimum of
fifteen days prior to the hearing. The hearing shall not proceed unless proof
is shown that the owner of the tree or other obstructing vegetation received
notice of the hearing as provided herein:
1. Notice shall be given by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the
owner of the tree or other obstructing vegetation and to the
complainant;
2. Notice shall be given by first class mail to all property owners within
one thousand feet of the exterior boundary of the property on which
the tree or other obstructing vegetation are located and to other
persons who, in the Committee's judgment, might be affected.
B. Content of Notice. The notice shall state the name of the complaining party,
the name of the property owner against whom the complaint is filed, the
location of the tree or other vegetation, and the time and place of hearing.
The notice shall invite written comments to be submitted prior to or at the
hearing.
C. Conduct of Hearing. The Committee shall adopt rules for the conduct of
required hearings. At the hearing, the Committee shall consider all written
and oral testimony and evidence presented in connection with the
application. If during the course of the proceedings it is discovered that
information submitted in an application is inaccurate or incomplete such
that it could be misleading, or a significant change has occurred impacting
either the view or the obstruction, an applicant may be directed to amend the
application or submit supplemental information. In the event the
Committee requires expert advice in consideration of the matter, the cost of
obtaining such evidence shall be borne by the complainant or both parties as
determined by the Committee, pursuant to written agreement with the City.
The City shall select such expert and enter into an agreement only upon
receipt of a payment for the selected service from the party or parties. An
application shall be deemed withdrawn and all proceedings shall be
terminated with respect thereto if the parties to a complaint notify the City
that it has been voluntarily resolved or the complainant requests a delay of
the proceedings for more than one hundred eighty (180) days unless good
cause exists for the delay.
D. Findings. Based on the evidence received and considered, the Committee
may find any of the following:
Resolution No. 2015-20
- 5 -
1. That no view exists within the meaning of this chapter;
2. That a view exists within the meaning of this chapter, but that the view
is not significantly impaired; or
3. That a view exists within the meaning of this chapter and that it is
significantly impaired.
4. The Committee shall make specific written findings in support of the
foregoing determinations.
E. Action. If the Committee makes finding of subsection (D)(3) of this section, it
shall order such restorative action as is necessary to abate the view
impairment, including, but not limited to, removal, pruning, topping,
thinning or similar alteration of the vegetation. Such order is not intended to
create an unobstructed view for applicants. Instead it is intended to create
view corridors and a view through trees. The Committee may impose
conditions as are necessary to prevent future view impairments. In no event
shall restorative action be required if such action would adversely affect the
environment or would unreason-ably detract from the privacy or enjoyment
of the property on which the objectionable vegetation is located. If
restorative action is precluded by the existence of one or more such limiting
factors, the Committee shall make specific written findings to that effect.
F. Environmental Review. If the Committee makes finding of subsection (D)(3)
of this section and orders restorative action, the proposed order shall be
reviewed by City staff to determine the appropriate level of environmental
review. If the action is determined to be exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), a resolution containing the
Committee’s written findings shall be presented for adoption at the
Committee’s next meeting. If the action is determined not to be exempt from
CEQA, the complainant shall bear the City’s reasonable costs of
environmental review and CEQA compliance, including consultant fees.
G. Finality of Decision. The Committee's decision shall be final on the date the
Committee adopts a resolution setting forth its decision. The decision shall
become effective thirty days after adoption of the resolution, unless an
appeal has been filed to the City Council pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 17.54. For purposes of such an appeal, references to the Planning
Commission in Chapter 17.54 shall be interpreted as inclusive of the
Committee on Trees and Views.
E. Amend Section 17.26.060 of the RHMC to read as follows:
17.26.060 Implementation of restorative action.
A. The complainant shall bear the cost of the initial restorative action. Within
thirty days of a final decision ordering restorative action, the complainant
shall obtain and present to the owner of the obstructing vegetation three bids
Resolution No. 2015-20
- 6 -
from licensed and qualified contractors for performance of the work, as well
as a cash deposit in the amount of the lowest bid. In order to qualify, the
contractors must provide insurance which protects and indemnifies the City
and the complainant from damages attributable to negligent or wrongful
performance of the work. Any such insurance shall be subject to the approval
of the City.
B. The owner of the obstructing vegetation may select any licensed and
qualified contractor to perform the restorative action (as long as the
insurance requirements of subsection A of this section are satisfied), but
shall be responsible for any cost above the amount of the cash deposit. The
work shall be completed no more than ninety days from receipt of the cash
deposit or if additional time is necessary due to weather or unique
conditions of the vegetation, at the earliest date recommended by the
contractor and approved by the City Manager.
C. Subsequent maintenance of the vegetation in question shall be performed at
the cost and expense of the owner of the property on which the vegetation
is growing, unless the Committee adopts a final decision providing an
alternative cost allocation, which shall be accompanied by written findings
justifying the alternative cost allocation. The vegetation shall be maintained
in accordance with the final decision so as not to allow for future view
impairments.
F. Amend Section 17.26.080 of the RHMC to read as follows:
17.26.080 Notification of subsequent owners.
Within thirty days of the final decision of the Committee, or the
City Council on appeal, an informational covenant shall be recorded
against the title of the property on which the offending vegetation exists
and the complainant’s property, on a form provided by the City, which
shall run with the land and be binding upon all successors in interest.
G. Add Section 17.26.100 of the RHMC to read as follows:
17.26.100 Indemnification.
Complainants shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City,
its agents, officers, attorneys and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, attorneys or employees
to attack, set aside, void or annul a decision of the Committee or City
Council on appeal restoring an impaired view or that otherwise
challenges, or seeks damages resulting from, the issuance, defense,
implementation, or enforcement of a view restoration order (collectively
"action"). Nothing in this reimbursement obligation shall provide to the
Resolution No. 2015-20
- 7 -
complainant any control over decisions made by the City in connection
with an action.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of August, 2015.
/s/ Brad Chelf
______________________________
BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
/s/ Heidi Luce
______________________________
HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 2015-20
- 8 -
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2015- 20 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE ROLLING HILLS
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ABATEMENT OF VIEW
IMPAIRMENT, IN ZONING CASE NO. 881 AND ZONING CODE
AMENDMENT NO. 2015-03.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
August 18th, 2015 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioner Cardenas, Gray, Kirkpatrick and Chairman Chelf.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Smith.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
/s/ Heidi Luce
_______________________________
CITY CLERK