TREES AND VIEWS COMMITTEE

1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 AGENDA Trees and Views Committee Meeting TREES AND VIEWS COMMITTEE Tuesday, October 05, 2021 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 5:00 PM Executive Order N-29-20 This meeting is held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020. All Planning Commissioners will participate by teleconference. Public Participation: City Hall will be closed to the public until further notice. A live audio of the Planning Commission meeting will be available on the City's website (https://www.rolling-hills.org/PC%20Meeting%20Zoom%20Link.pdf). The meeting agenda is also available on the City's website (https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php). Join Zoom Meeting https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85782776563?pwd=L0VlZE9xRmlpQUsweW1LL0J0RnVoQT09 Meeting ID: 857 8277 6563 Passcode: 206495 Dial by your location (669) 900-9128 Meeting ID: 857 8277 6563 Members of the public may submit comments in real time by emailing the Planning office at Planning@cityofrh.net. Your comments will become a part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name but do not provide any other personal information (i.e., phone numbers, addresses, etc) that you do not want to be published. 1

5. NEW BUSINESS NONE. 6. OLD BUSINESS 6.A. VIEW PRESERVATION COMPLAINT - 61 EASTFIELD DRIVE (JUGE - COMPLAINANT) AND 59 EASTFIELD DRIVE (TAMAYO/SIERRA - VEGETATION OWNER) RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to prepare a resolution. 7. ITEMS FROM STAFF NONE. 8. ITEMS FROM THE TREES & VIEWS COMMITTEE 9. ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: To be determined. 10. Notice: Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in the City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and attendance at this meeting. Juge's Application.pdf Juge Emails.pdf Tamayo_Sierra Emails.pdf Rolling Hills - 6.23.21 Memo re Juge v Tamayo-c1.DOC Rolling Hills Committee on Trees & Views Hearing Procedure-c1-c1.pdf 17.26.020___Definitions..pdf 2

1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 AGENDA Trees and Views Committee Meeting TREES AND VIEWS COMMITTEE Tuesday, October 05, 2021 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 5:00 PM Executive Order N-29-20 This meeting is held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020. All Planning Commissioners will participate by teleconference. Public Participation: City Hall will be closed to the public until further notice. A live audio of the Planning Commission meeting will be available on the City's website (https://www.rolling-hills.org/PC%20Meeting%20Zoom%20Link.pdf). The meeting agenda is also available on the City's website (https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php). Join Zoom Meeting https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85782776563?pwd=L0VlZE9xRmlpQUsweW1LL0J0RnVoQT09 Meeting ID: 857 8277 6563 Passcode: 206495 Dial by your location (669) 900-9128 Meeting ID: 857 8277 6563 Members of the public may submit comments in real time by emailing the Planning office at Planning@cityofrh.net. Your comments will become a part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name but do not provide any other personal information (i.e., phone numbers, addresses, etc) that you do not want to be published. 1

5. NEW BUSINESS NONE. 6. OLD BUSINESS 6.A. VIEW PRESERVATION COMPLAINT - 61 EASTFIELD DRIVE (JUGE - COMPLAINANT) AND 59 EASTFIELD DRIVE (TAMAYO/SIERRA - VEGETATION OWNER) RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to prepare a resolution. 7. ITEMS FROM STAFF NONE. 8. ITEMS FROM THE TREES & VIEWS COMMITTEE 9. ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: To be determined. 10. Notice: Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in the City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and attendance at this meeting. Juge's Application.pdf Juge Emails.pdf Tamayo_Sierra Emails.pdf Rolling Hills - 6.23.21 Memo re Juge v Tamayo-c1.DOC Rolling Hills Committee on Trees & Views Hearing Procedure-c1-c1.pdf 17.26.020___Definitions..pdf 2

Agenda Item No.: 6.A Mtg. Date: 10/05/2021 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: VIEW PRESERVATION COMPLAINT - 61 EASTFIELD DRIVE (JUGE - COMPLAINANT) AND 59 EASTFIELD DRIVE (TAMAYO/SIERRA - VEGETATION OWNER) DATE: October 05, 2021 BACKGROUND: Subject to other provisions of Chapter 17.26, a property owner may initiate a view impairment complaint by way of the process set forth in Section 17.26.040. The complainant shall follow the process established by Chapter 17.26 in seeking preservation or restoration of a pre-existing view. A. Initial Reconciliation. B. Mediation. C. Advisory Opinion from the CTV. If the complainant is not satisfied by the recommendation of the mediator, the complainant may request a public hearing before the Committee on Trees and Views (See Juge's Application). D. Review Hearing before the City Council. If either party is not satisfied by the recommendation of the CTV, said party may request a public hearing before the City Council to review the decision of the CTV. E. Arbitration. If the vegetation owner does not participate in mediation or mediation is unsuccessful or if either or all of the parties disagree with an advisory opinion of the City, and the parties voluntarily pursue resolution by binding arbitration then City will reimburse a portion of the parties' arbitration costs pursuant to City Council resolution. The following provisions establish the procedures required of the parties prior to any City reimbursement related to arbitration. At the June 1, 2021 Committee on Trees and Views Meeting, staff presented that on October 28, 2020, Mr. Juge (Complainant), the property owner of 61 Eastfield Drive, filed an application with the Planning and Community Services Department requesting for review before the Committee on Trees and Views. Mr. Juge included letters and pictures he has sent to Dr. Tamayo and Mr. Sierra (Vegetation-owners) showing how his views have been affected by the Vegetation-owners' trees and hedges. Complainant's records show that he purchased his property in 1982. On July 15, 2018, Complainant sent 3

a letter to Vegetation-owners attempting to discuss the restoration of his views. Communication regarding reconciliation went on until May 26, 2020, when the Complainant asked for mediation. Both parties continued to communicate regarding mediation until October 9, 2020, when Vegetation-owners asked who will be responsible for the mediator's fee. Records show that the Complainant never responded to the question, thus ending all communication between the two parties. Complainant claimed that he met the requirements of the Municipal Code because the mediation phase has exceeded the 60-day period. RHMC Section 17.26.040 - View impairment dispute resolution process. 1. Mediation. 2. If the initial reconciliation does not yield a resolution of the complaint, and the complainant wishes to further utilize the procedures under this chapter, then the complainant must request, in writing, that the vegetation owner enter into mediation. The vegetation owner shall have sixty days from the date of the request for mediation to accept or reject the request in writing. The vegetation owner's failure to respond within sixty days will be deemed a formal refusal of mediation and the complainant may proceed to an advisory hearing before the Committee on Trees and Views. 3. The participants will have sixty days from the date of the filling of acceptance of mediation to select a mediator. If they cannot agree on a mediator within sixty days, they may jointly request that the City select a mediator. Any mediator which is selected pursuant to this subsection shall be provided with a link to a copy of this chapter. Per RHMC, the complainant may proceed to an advisory hearing before the Committee on Trees and Views if Vegetation-owners fail to respond within 60 days. In this case, vegetation-owners responded to Complainant's request for mediation, however, Complainant stopped communicating with Vegetation- owners. Based on the action of the Complainant not responding to the question, the Mediation Phase was not completed. In addition, Vegetation-owners requested postponement of the public hearing. Mr. Sierra was out of the country and would not have been able to attend the meeting. Lastly, Dr. Tamayo also stated that Mr. Juge never responded to her question and thus, the mediation never occurred. Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.26.010 states: "Owners and residents should maintain trees on their property in a healthy condition for both safety reasons and for preservation of outward views. Before planting trees, owners and residents should consider view blockage. By this chapter, the City establishes a process by which persons may seek to preserve and restore views which existed at any time since they purchased the property from unreasonable obstruction by the growth of vegetation. By this chapter the City also establishes a list of factors to be considered in determining appropriate actions to restore views while preserving the rights of property owners by not unreasonably reducing privacy or shade or other benefits provided by vegetation on a property. When a view obstruction dispute arises, the parties should act reasonably to resolve the dispute through friendly communication, thoughtful negotiation, compromise and other traditional means, such as discussions with the appropriate neighbors." Based on the actions stated above and the goal of the RHMC to resolve disputes through friendly communication, thoughtful negotiation and compromise, Staff recommended to the Committee that the two parties continue and complete the Mediation Phase with the caveat that there will be an end date to the Mediation Phase. This allowed both parties to resolve their dispute or provided them with the 4

freedom to proceed to the Advisory Phase which also provided both parties with a clear path forward. Staff continued to support and facilitated the process, when needed. Staff recommended that the Committee on Trees and Views advise the complainant, Mr. Juge, and vegetation owners, Dr. Tamayo and Mr. Sierra, to mediate their dispute and continue the hearing for 60 days from June 1, 2021. Furthermore, staff recommended that the Committee impose the following conditions: 1. City staff will assist the parties, upon joint request, in selecting a mediator – either by suggesting potential mediators or selecting a mediator for them. 2. Neither party may request a CTV hearing before they have had one full day of mediation. 3. If, after the first day of mediation and before the 60 days has expired, one or both of the parties believe that further mediation will be fruitless, one or both parties may submit a request in writing and must, under penalty of perjury, state that they attempted mediation in good faith but that efforts have been and will be fruitless. 4. If only one party requests a hearing, but the other wishes to continue mediation, the party requesting hearing shall so notify the other party. The hearing will move forward on the pre- assigned date or at an earlier date if feasible; however, the non-requesting party may present evidence at the hearing to rebut the requesting party’s assertion that mediation was attempted in good faith, and such evidence may go towards determining whether a pre-existing view exists and whether it has been obstructed. S e e RHMC sec. 17.26.050(A) (evaluation factors are non- exclusive). At the August 17, 2021 Committee Meeting, staff reported that both parties have not settled on a mediator. Mr. Juge sent names of mediators to Dr. Tamayo. Dr. Tamayo did not agree to Mr. Juge's recommendations. Dr. Tamayo reached out to the City for recommendations. The City Attorney's office provided names that were provided to Dr. Tamayo and Mr. Juge. for consideration. As of August 2, 2021, Dr. Tamayo reached out to the mediators and has yet to receive a response from one and the other was out of town for a few days. The Committee provided a new deadline to resolve the dispute and adjourned the meeting to October 5, 2021. The time extension is intended to provide both parties more time to find a mediator they both can agree on and hopefully, amicably resolve the on-going view dispute. Following the meeting, staff reached out to both parties asking if staff could provide further assistance. Staff provided additional mediators who are local to the area to both parties. Both parties waited for responses from the local mediators. On September 1, 2021, Dr. Tamayo emailed Mr. Juge and copied city staff stating that they have decided to withdraw their intention to mediate. Dr. Tamayo and Mr. Sierra claim that the complainant has not made any effort in the past to claim his view. Additionally, they are claiming that the vegetation that the claimant wants trimmed provide privacy between the two subject properties, provide relief from the heat by providing shade to the existing residence and lastly, provide visual screening for the pool area. Dr. Tamayo and Mr. Sierra submitted photos showing that the vegetation have existed for years on the property. Mr. Juge submitted supporting documents that show the vegetation owner’s vegetation did not exist when he first purchased his property. He also provided a photo key of the vegetation he wants trimmed and how low they should be trimmed. He has also stated that he had a previous agreement with the vegetation owners that allowed him to trim the vegetation but later changed their minds. 5

Both parties have submitted documents supporting claims of view impairment and supporting claims that views did not exist. Submitted documents are included in the attachments. To date, the requirements for reconciliation, mediation and advisory opinion from the committee have been met. This dispute has been going on for years, and the process was further delayed due to the COVID pandemic. Time extensions were also added to meet the mediation requirements of the Municipal Code. DISCUSSION: The Committee on Trees and Views must make specific findings in support of their determinations on whether or not there is view impairment. If the Committee finds that a pre-existing view exists and that it has been significantly impaired, restorative recommendations shall be made to abate the view impairment. The Commttee shall take into consideration Section 17.26.050 to determine whether a pre- existing view has been obstructed and Section 17.26.060 for restorative recommendations. Provided below are definitions, findings, considerations and restorative actions that must be taken into consderation when making a determination on the view complaint. Per the Committee's directions, staff will prepare a resolution reflecting the Committee's decision after deliberation occurs at the October 5, 2021 public hearing. The proposed resolution will be presented at an Adjourned Committee meeting, date to be determined by the Committee during the October 5, 2021 public hearing. Definitions. "Pre-existing view" means the view that existed at any time since the complainant's property was most recently purchased for fair market value through an arm's length purchase or sale, as evidenced by a deed. The pre-existing view cannot be the result of a natural disaster or illegal activities. "View" means a visually impressive scene or vista, such as the Pacific Ocean, off-shore islands, mountains, lights of the Los Angeles basin, the Palos Verdes Hills and canyons, the Los Angeles Harbor and/or Long Beach Harbor, and similar, as observed from a viewing point. A view may include structures or vegetation in the foreground or background of the view seeker's property. A "view" may be observed from one or more viewing point, and may be panoramic. "View impairment" means any obstruction of a pre-existing view by vegetation on another property within the City that significantly diminishes that pre-existing view. "Viewing point" means any view from the primary living area or active use area of a primary residence, excluding views from minor rooms, such as garages or closets, and also includes views from accessory buildings or structures, including pool decks and gazebos, but excluding animal pens, aviaries, corrals, greenhouses, porte cocheres, riding rings, run-in sheds, sheds, stable/barns, free-standing storage rooms, and tack rooms. Findings. The Committee shall be guided by the provisions of Chapter 17.26, including the evaluation criteria set forth in Section 17.26.050, and the hierarchy of restorative actions set forth in Section 17.26.060, respectively, in attempting to resolve the view impairment complaint. Based on the evidence received and considered, the Committee shall make any of the following findings and adopt an advisory resolution in support of the foregoing determination: i. That no view exists within the meaning of this chapter; ii. That a view exists within the meaning of this chapter, but that the view is not significantly impaired; or iii. That a view exists within the meaning of this chapter and that it is significantly impaired. The Committee shall make specific written findings in support of the foregoing determinations. Recommendation. If the Committee finds that a pre-existing view exists within the meaning of Chapter 17.26 and that it is 6

significantly impaired pursuant to the conditions outlined in Section 17.26.050, it shall recommend such restorative action as is necessary to abate the view impairment, pursuant to Section 17.26.060 of Chapter 17. The Committee may recommend conditions as are necessary to prevent future view impairments. 17.26.050 - Considerations for applying the view preservation ordinance A . The following nonexclusive factors, for which the parties can prove by a preponderance of the evidence, are to be considered in determining whether a pre-existing view has been obstructed: 1. The viewing point(s) from which the view is observed; 2. The extent of the view obstruction, both currently and at the maximum height the tree/vegetation is likely to reach (as described by the most current edition of the New Sunset Western Garden Book); 3. The quality of the view, including the existence of landmarks, vistas, or other unique view features; 4. The extent to which trees and/or vegetation have grown to obscure the enjoyment of the view from the claimant's property since the claimant acquired his/her property; 5 . The extent to which the vegetation on the property preserves privacy (visual and auditory), wind screening, energy conservation, and/or climate control; 6. The extent to which the vegetation owner can establish the earliest known date when the complained of vegetation was planted or existed on the vegetation owner's real property; and 7 . The degree to which the complainant diligently tried to protect and maintain their view through informal agreements with the vegetation owner or prior vegetation owner(s) and to initiate initial discussions with the current vegetation owner; and the degree to which the current vegetation owner has reasonably participated in initial discussions. B. The following applicable, nonexclusive factors, for which the parties can prove by a preponderance of the evidence, may be considered in determining the appropriate restorative action, if any is necessary: 1. The variety of tree, its projected rate of growth (as described by the most current edition of the New Sunset Western Garden Book) and maintenance requirements; 2. The aesthetic quality of the tree(s), including but not limited to species characteristics, size, growth, form and vigor; 3 . Location with respect to overall appearance, design or use of the tree on the vegetation owner's property, including, but not limited to blending, buffering, or reduction in the scale or mass of a structure; 4 . Soil stability provided by the tree(s), considering soil structure, degree of slope and extent of the tree's root system; 5. The extent to which the vegetation owner can establish the earliest known date when the complained of vegetation was planted or existed on the vegetation owner's real property; 6 . Privacy (visual and auditory) and wind screening provided by the tree(s) to the tree owner and to neighbors; 7. Energy conservation, shade and/or climate control provided by the trees; 8. Wildlife habitat provided by the trees. 17.26.060 - Restorative action. A . Restorative actions may include, but are not limited to, the following, in order of preference, assuming no countervailing health or safety interest(s) exist (See Attachment 17.26.020 Definitions for graphics): 1. Lacing. Lacing is the most preferable pruning technique that removes excess foliage and can improve the structure of the tree. 2. Crown Raising. 3. Crown Reduction. Crown reduction is preferable to tree removal, if it is determined that the impact of 7

crown reduction does not destroy the visual proportions of the tree, adversely affect the tree's growth pattern or health, or otherwise constitute a detriment to the tree(s) in question. 4. Heading Back. Heading back is only to be permitted for trees specifically planted and maintained as a hedge, espalier, bonsai, or in pollard form and if restoration actions in subsections (A) through (C) of this section will not accomplish the determined preservation action and the subsequent growth characteristics will not create a future obstruction of greater proportions. 5. Topping. Topping is only to be permitted for trees/vegetation species for which it is appropriate. 6. Removal. Removal may be considered when the above-mentioned restoration actions are judged to be ineffective and may be accompanied by replacement plantings or appropriate plant materials to restore the maximum benefits lost due to vegetation removal. B. Restorative action shall include written conditions (including ongoing maintenance), directions, and a schedule by which the mandates must be completed, and may be made to run with the land and apply to successors in interest. The complainant may bear the cost of the initial restorative action, unless the parties agree to share the costs in some other manner. Subsequent maintenance of the vegetation in question may be performed at the cost and expense of the owner of the property on which the vegetation is growing, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties or required pursuant to any final arbitration agreement or court order. The vegetation shall be maintained so as not to allow for future view impairments. C. In cases where restorative action may affect the health of a tree, such actions should be carried out in accordance with standards established by the International Society of Arboriculture for use in the State of California. Severe pruning (heading back and/or topping) should be avoided due to the damage such practice causes to the vegetation's form and health. Where removal is required, replacement by appropriate species should be considered. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to prepare a resolution reflecting the Committee's decision on the case. ATTACHMENTS: Juge's Application.pdf Juge Emails.pdf Tamayo_Sierra Emails.pdf Rolling Hills - 6.23.21 Memo re Juge v Tamayo-c1.DOC Rolling Hills Committee on Trees & Views Hearing Procedure-c1-c1.pdf 17.26.020___Definitions..pdf 8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40