348 ORDINANCE NO. 348
AN IlVTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858 TO TEMPORARILY PLACE A
MORATORIUM �N 'THE PROCESSING AND CONSIDERATION OF ANY
APPLICATI4N SOUGHT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 17.26 (VIEW
PRESERVATION) OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE, AND
DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF.
The City Council of the City of Rolling Hi�ls does hereby ordain as fol�ows:
SECTION 1. Purpose. The general p�an of the City acknowZedges the contribution of
both trees and views to the character and beauty of the City. Recognizang that trees and views and the
benefits derived from each may come into conflict, the City's 1988 View Preservafion Ordinance was
established to create a process whereby a property owner could seek to abate an obstructed view
balancing tree- and view-related�alues.
In March 2013, the residents of Rolling Hills passed Measure B to amend the View Preservation
Ordinance (Cha.pter 17.26 of the City's Municipal Cade). The principal effect of Measure B was to shift
the protection af the ordinance from views that are capable of being enjoyed from a properry to �iews
that were actuaIly enjoyed from a property when the property owner acquired the property. In
particular, the initiative amended the ordinance as follows: (i} only a view that existed when the current
praperiy owner "actually acquired" the property may be restored; (ii) abatemerrt of view impairment is
l:�mited to obstructions caused by tree,s that were "�naturing" at the date of acquisition and trees that were
"�nature" at the time of property acquisition are excluded from consideration; (iii) abatement of view
impairment is intended to create "�iew corridors" and�iews through trees; and(iv) Measure B specif ed
that its provisions are to be appliesi retroactively.
Implementation of Measure B revealed various ambiguities in lang�age, resulting in uncertainty in its
application. Specifically at issue were the definitions of "mature" and "maturing" trees; the
interpretation of the date of acquisition of property; and the retroactive application of Measure B. On
February 8, 201b, the City Council approved Qrdinance No. 346 amending portions of the View
Preservation Ordinance that were ut�affected by Measure B and adopted Resolution No. 11 S2, which
adopted administrative regulatians interpreting Measure B.
In mid-2016, proponents of a new initiative measure began circulating a petition in order to propose a
wholesale rewrite of the View Preserva�ian Ordinance. The City Council appoin�ed an ad hoc
subcommittee of its mernbers to meet with the propanents in ati effort to collaboratively craft a new
ordinance that could be adopted by the Council without a vote of the electorate.
SECTION 2. Urgency findings. On November 28, 2016, the City Council held a duly noticed
public hearing. In light of the evidence submitted and testimony received during the public hearing, the
City Council finds as follows:
A. The adoption of Measure B in March 2013 by the electorate has led #o practical
difficulties in the application of the City's view presezvation ordinance (Ri�VIC Chapter 17.26);
B. As noted in Section 1, the City Council is currently actively studying the City's c�u�rent
view preservation ordinance and has determined to work with City residents callaboxa#ively to rewrite
the view preservation ordinance in arder to address the arnbiguities and uncertain�ies that haxrxper its
effective application and enforcement;
C. Pending the conclusian of that process, it is possible that application of the current view
preservation ordinance w�ill result in determinations and decisions that are inconsistent with the
ardinance being prepared, and that considerable time, expense and resources will be devoted to
evalua.ting applications�xnder an ordinance that may soon become obsalete;
D. Adoption of this interim ordinance is necessary to prevent incansistent application af the
City's view pr�servation ordinance during the pendency of#his process and to avoid a threat to public
health and safety;
E. This interim ardinance is necessary to protect the public safety, health, and welfare, by
prohibiting the acceptance, processing, andlor consideration of any application sought under the City's
current view preservation ordinance.
SECTION 3. Interi�n Zoning Regulations. Notwithstanding any provision of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code to the contrary, no applications for the protection of views and abate�nent of view
obstructions under Chapter i 7.26 shall be processed, considered or acted upon by the Committee on
Ordinance No. 348 i
Trees and Views or the City Council during the pendency of this Ordinance or any extension thereof.
SECTION 4. Exceptions. Enactrnent of this Ordinar�ce shall not preclude the City from processing
an applicatian under Chapter 17.26 filed and accepted as comp�ete prior to November 14, 201b.
Furthermare, enactment o�this Ordinance shall not preclude the City from enforcing the provisions of
Section i7.26.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code as to any failure or refusal of any person to
comply with a final decision made under Chapter 17.26 between March 2013 and No�ember 28,2016.
SECTION 5. SeverabiIity. If any part or provisian of this Ordinance ar the application to any
person ar circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance, including tl�e application of
such part of provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected and shall continue in fu�l
�orce and effect. To this end,the provisians of this Ordinance are severable.
SECT�ON 6. Conflicting Laws. For the tertn of this Ordinance, or any extension thereof, the
provisions of this Ordinance shall gavern aver any canflicting provxsions o£ any other City code,
ordinance,resolution or policy.
SECTION 7. Adoption. This ordinance is adopted pursuant to California Governmer�t Code
Sect�on 65858 and shall take effect immediately upon adoption by a four-fifths vote of the City Council.
This ordinance shall be in fiil� force and effect for a period of 45 days from the date af its adoption
unless extende� by the City Council in accordance with the provisions of California Gavernment Cade
Section 65858.
PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28'�day ofNovernber, 2016.
�
BEA DIERINGER, MAY R
ATTEST:
HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK
Ordinance No. 348 2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
C4UNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLIlVG HILLS )
I certify that the faregoing Ordinance No. 348 entitled:
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY QF ROLLING HILLS, PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858 TO TEMPOR.ARILY PLACE A
� MORATORIUM ON THE PROCESSING AND CONSIDERATIQN OF ANY
APPLICATION SOUGHT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 17.26 (V�EW
PRESERVATIOI� OF THE ROLLTNG HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE, AND
DECLARING THE URGENCY T'HEREOF.
was approved and adopted at a reg�lar meeting of the City Council on Navember 28, 2016 by the
following roll ca11�ote:
AYES: Councilmembers Black,Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer.
N�ES: Nane.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in campliance with the laws of California was posted a�the fallowing:
Administrative Offices.
���:��
HEIDI LUCE y
CITY CLERK
Ordinance No. 348 3