Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-03-06 City Council (12)TO: City of Palo Alto C ty Manager’s Report ............ ..... FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE:MARCH 6, 2000 CMR:150:00 SUBJECT:734 DE SOTO DRIVE (FILE 00-AP-01): APPEAL BY PHILLIP LALLY (738 DE SOTO DRIVE) OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR’S DENIAL OF AN APPLICATION TO REMOVE A PROTECTED COAST LIVE OAK FROM A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY PURSUANT TO PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 8.10 ~REE PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the original protected tree removal application denial. BACKGROUND On November 15, 1999, the applicant, Phillip Lally, 734 De Soto Drive, submitted an application to remove a Coast Live Oak located on his neighbor’s property at 738 De Soto Drive. The application included an affidavit ’ from the neighboring property owner, Sarah Welch, trustee for Ruth Welch, and a statement from Nancy Welch Ryan granting Mr. Lally permission to remove the tree. The application included an arborist’s report stating the tree condition was vigorous, healthy and not an imminent hazard. On December 21, 1999, acting on behalf of the Director of Planning and Community Environment, the Planning Division Arborist denied the protected tree removal application because the required finding stating that the tree is either dead, dangerous or a public nuisance could not be made (See Attachment A). The property was sold to Mr. Wen Jang Hwang in late December 1999. Mr. Hwang has not been available to confirm his support to remove the tree. DISCUSSION The tree is located in the 20-foot front yard setback near the property line between 738 and 734 De Soto Drive. The Planning Arborist’s review of the tree found it to be relatively young (30 years compared to a century or more average life span), vigorous, healthy and of sound structure. CMR:150:00 Page 1 of 4 Required Findings In the absence of new development on a site, one of three required criteria must be met to approve a protected tree removal application (PAMC Section 8.10.050 [a]): the tree should be removed because it is dead, dangerous or constitutes a nuisance under Section 8. 04. 050 (2) of this Code". The appellant has submitted a letter challenging the findings made by the Director to deny the tree removal application. The appellant has not provided statements addressing one or more of the three required criteria. The analysis below states each of the required criteria for a protected tree removal application, the rationale in making the finding for denial and a discussion of the appellant’s objections and staffs response to these objections. Criteria #1: Is the tree dead? The arborist report and staff concur that the tree is not dead.. Criteria #2: Is the tree dangerous? Staff has evaluated the tree, structure and rooting and has determined the tree does not meet the definition of "dangerous" meaning an imminent hazard or threat to the safety of persons or property. The applicant’s arborist report rated the failure potential for this tree as ’low’, citing a minor codominant branch attachment that may be a future concern (see Attachment C). In the appeal letter, however, the applicant states that he believes that some portion of the root system is under both houses and poses some danger to the structural integrity of both structures (see Attachment B). This was not substantiated by the arborist in the report that was submitted. Staff inspected the branch area and root system of the tree, and considers any defects to be minor and the tree structure to be sound.. Any potential damage from roots is of little concern because the tree is far enough removed from the structures. Typically, damaged foundations result from a trunk or buttress root close or adjacent to a foundation (see Attachment D). Additionally, the tree is favorably located in the front setback near the property line and is not dangerous or a detriment to the property. Criteria #3 Does the tree constitute a nuisance? The tree does not meet the definition of "nuisance", meaning any tree or shrub on any private property or in any street, of a type or species apt to destroy, impair or otherwise interfere with any street improvements, sidewalks, curbs, approved street trees, gutters, sewers, other public improvements, including utility mains or services. CMR: 150:00 Page 2 of 4 The appellant has also provided additional reasons for the appeal, and stated the primary argument is that leaves and acorns drop and are clogging the downspouts. Also, the appellant cited the possibility of danger from a sizable limb falling and danger to the structural integrity of both houses (see Attachment B). Staff advised the appellant that pruning branches away from the houses would reduce debris drop and with normal maintenance and care, this tree will not be a hazard to either property and would benefit the property owners and surrounding neighborhood. The points raised in the appeal letter do not relate directly to the required tree removal criteria found in the Tree Preservation and Management Regulations (see Attachment E). POLICY IMPLICATIONS The decision to deny the original application is consistent with the objective of the Natural Environment Element of the Comprehensive Plan which seeks to "Preserve andprotect heritage trees, including native oaks and other significant trees, on public and private property. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This project is exempt from the provisions of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section 15270 (A), Projects Which Are Disapproved, of CEQA Guidelines, because it was a project that had been previously denied. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Decision letter from the Planning Division Arborist dated 12/21/99 Attachment B: Letter from the appellant dated January 6, 2000 Attachment C: Arborist Report dated 11/12/99 Attachment D: Pictures of site and tree Attachment E: Tree Preservation and Management Regulations (PAMC 8.10) PREPARED BY:Dave Dockter, ’Planning Division Arborist DEPARTMENT HEAD:~~~ DGi~cDtcWrr oA~DjGAWFand Community Environment { 1" ~FLEMINq/ ’~J City Manager k/ CMR: 150:00 Page 3 of 4 cc: Mr. Phillip Lally Mr. Wen Jang Hwang CIVlR: 150:00 Page 4 of 4 December 2!, 1999 City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment ¢OIPY Attachment A Mr. Lally 738 De Soto JDrive Palo Alto, C)k 94303 Planning Division Re: Protegted Tree Removal application #99-PTR-12 Dear Mr. Laity: I am m receipt of your protected tree removal application for the "Quercus agrifolia, Coast Live ~""Oak located on a neighboring property at 734 De Soto Drive. Other information ¯included wasl an affidawt of trustee, Sarah Welch, for Ruth Welch the property owner, and other associated documents granting permission to remove the subject tree on her property. ¯ The tree ex~eds 11.5~inches measured at 4.5-feet above natural grade, a Protected Tree, and therefore ma~ not be removed unless the tree is dead, hazardous or a nuisance to public property. I Mve reviewed your application and the arborist report (Arbor Care dated November 1~, 1999)¯ The report indicates the tree is vigorous and healthy with noted. structural defects. Based upon t~e information provided to the City and my inspection of the subject tree, I have determined ~e provisions allowing removal provided withinthe Municipal Code have not been met. InJthe absence of development, the information and conditions must evidence or confirrh the s~ubject tree to be dead, dying, dangerous (imminent hazard) or considered a public nuisanlce as defined under Section 8.04.050 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. As stated in the "arborist report, the tree exhibits no immediate danger. My personal inspection of, the cited defects found that they are of minor consequence (~ader normal maintenance and care). The tree is in healthy condition, has a favorable life expectancy and in the event that new construction of either property occurs, the tree is ideally situated in the setback area 6f each lot. The Coast Live Oak is a significant tree that provides shade, character and environmental value to your;property and the neighborhood properties. Effort to retain this long-lived tree should continue to reward the occupants for many years. To assist you in accomplishing this successfully, I have attached Palo Alto Municipal Code 8.10, Ordinance 4362; Care of Native Oaks and a brochure from Canopy: Trees for Palo Alto for your use. 250 Hamilton Avenue EO. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.2441 650.3292.154 fax Mr. Lally December 21, i999 Page 2 Please contact m~ at (650) 617-3145 if you have any further questions. Sincerely, DAVE DOCKTER Planning Division Arborist ISA Certified WC-.0351 Attachments:Tree Preservation and Management Regulations Care of Native Oaks, California Oak Foundation Publication Canopy: Trees for Palo Alto Newsletter Lisa Grote, Chief Planning Official George White, Platming Manager ~Architectural [~:Design Enhancement ~Environmental Impaqt Ass( ~omprehensive Plan Ame) Idment Home,,Improvement EZ[~Conditional Use Permit ’ [~variance ~Site and Design ~Zone Change ’" ~Subdivision E~Parcel Map Parcel Number : ¯ O P’roperl:,y Owner,, ~-.,.,The APPLICANT & PROPERTY OWNER must be placed on the submitted¯_ ~nailing list in order to be notified of Meetings, Hearings or action taken. Address: ~,~~y ~Vn, ~,Phone: ~" 7~--~/Y -’" ~ T~" ’State~ ~ ~ Zo" ~/~ "’. ....r"u~: .?.~ :..~ ..= .: ....~ t~:~ ..: - ~t’ . ....{.~...~.~:..~..:.:..."~..: ." ,. " .-.~, ....~.:...~’~.. ;. "-..." th~s" a~lou ication~s}., is sublect, to 100% recoverof planning cos~, I undermana mat bnarges mr ...... start ume spem procesmng Tn~s pp ~ will be based on the Policy and ProCedures document provided to me. I undemtand that my ~mt~al. depomt ~s an esbmate of these charges and not a fee, and I agree to abide ~y the billing policy stated,~ ~ " Attachment City. of Pat~ Alto- ci~ ~l. The primarg., reason I~wantto remove this tree is that’it continuous~ drops leaves and"acorns on my roof and,they,clog, the,down,spouts.~tn ev .e~T,heav7 rain the. p~of.floods.,and w:a,teT. ~,~ ,~, q.~r ,tl3e~,~fl. ~.hing am 7# years oltt and I ~ this Is personalIy, dimgerous. The tre¢ i.s far.too, cl .osc.to both housc~.(Plcase- s¢ tla¢. &awing furnished.. in sup .po~ of my appca!.) CIOse to haiftli~ f~li~e’i~ above be i06f’~ 0f~lie Ii0uses.Th. ere is c.ertm’n~y~ome dafig~ofa sizable limb, falling on either lzouse. Some portion ofthe tootsystem iS mlder the lfouses and.this po .~.,s som~ ~ ..d~ger to thest .n~. tmalinte.~it~ o f,~em=fBoth~.ho~es’.a~e, .~it~t on. s!abs~ and. .~re is ~o m~t.SI~ e to. ~rmi. "~inapectiom) If the iV forbi~ rekiov~l, o~ tl~ t~ tl~ ~ City must accept anan~ial re~mibilit~ for" damage to either house tlmt may.,be caused~y..th~ tree in the futttre. l~inally, this.tr~ is.not.apa~ularly at~.’ve spccimcn~ It ~tainly do=shot have ~ appearance that comes to mifidwhen someone meati6ns a li~,e Tree Care Management ¯ Arborist Services Attachment C Friday, November 12, 1999. Phil Lally 738 De Soto Dr. Palo Alto, CA 94303-2806 Dear Phil: Thank you for inviting Arbor Care to present an arborist report for the purpose of filing for a permit to remove (1) Quercus agrifolia located at 734 De Soto Dr.. As my colleague, Mr. Neil Woolner and the city of Palo Alto have previously informed you, the tree you and your neighbor have requested to be removed is considered a "Protected tree". "Protected tree" is defined as any Quercus agrifolia with a diameter of 11.5in. measured 4.5ft. above natural grade. Therefore, approval by the city must be met prior to any future tree services being implemented. On November 10±, 1999, at your request, Arbor Care examined the Coast Live 6ak (Quercus agrifolia) located on the eastern boundary of the front yard of 734 De Soto Dr.. An evaluation has been made in regard to the overall health and structure of this tree and its anticipated life-span. Observations have been recorded on the ’TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM’ published by the International Society of Arborieulture. This form has been provided by the city and is required as a part of the applieation process. To coincide with these findings I have included my professional opinion as follows: The subject of this report is to assess the aforementioned tree for removal. From my observations, the specimen appears to be extremely vigorous and healthy at this point in time. However, it does have apparent structural defects. These defects are in the form of eodominant branch unions with included bark, multiple attachments at the point of the scaffold and trunk union, as well as, additional branches throughout the canopy. Although the life expectancy for Quercus agrifolia can be well over a hundred years, it is in my professional opinion that this particular specimen may also thrive but, not without eventual failure. Without severe alteration overtime, to the existing canopy structure, the scaffold branches will fail. Although I see no immediate danger, the tree being located in dose proximity to both homes and in a moderately active area, it may prove beneficial to remove the specimen and replant in a better location. It is also recommended that the future planting be of a specimen with sound structure or of a young age that. may be Corrective pruning to avoid poor structure at maturity. Please note that I have attached photographs of the Coast Live Oak specimen to the ~d of this report (,pages 2-3). If yon have any further questions please call me at either the San Jose or San Carlos offices: 408-467-0643 ext.165 or 650-610-8494 ext.114. Sincerely, Arbor Care Lisa Arietta ISA Certified Arborist #WC-5055 a division of ENVIRONMENTAL CARE, INC. 590 B TAYLOR WAY, BELMONT, CA 94002 " www.envcare.com ’, TELEPHONE (650) 593-7623 ¯ FAX (650) 593-8393 EVALUATION OF HAZARD TRI~E~ A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Tr es in Urban Areas TREE HAZARD EVALUAtiON F ORM Map/Location: ~~- ~~ "~ ~’~ ¯ Owner:. public .....prk, ate’~ unknown other Date of last inspection1: ".~..~.~ ’ TREE CHARACTERISTICS.:r, eo ___..L_ Speo es:. .’S Form: ~ generally symmetric [] mlnor asymmetry [] major asymmetry []stump sprout [] stsg-heade~ Crown class: [] dominant ~ o-dominant r"] intermediate [] suppressed Live crown ratio: ~ % Age class: ~young I~ semi-mature [] mature [] over-mature/senescei Pmn!nghlstsry: I-I crown cleaned r"l excessively thinned []topped [] crown raised []pollarded i-lcrownreduc~ HAZARD RATING: Failure ÷ Si~e ÷ Target = HazardPotential of iart " Rating Rating ImmeLliate action needed ~ Need: further inspection ~ Dead tee [] flush cuts [] cabled/braced 1.,~,,~,~,("..~, ,~none r"l multiple pruning events Approx. dates: Special Value: [] specime~ [] heritage/historic [] wildlife [] unusual [] street tree [] screen [] shade [] indigenous ~protected by gov. agency TREE HEALTH Foliage colon I~ormal [] chlorotic [] necrotic Eplcormlcs? Y ~ Foliage density:. !~i~’normal [] sparse Leaf size: I~ normal [] small Annuai shoot growth: I~excellent []average []poor TwtgD[eback? Y Woundwood development: [] excellent []average [] poor O~j’none Vigor class: {~excallant [] average [] fair [] poor Major pests/diseases: ~~jze~eJ~ SITE CONDITIONS Growth obstructions: [] stakes [] signs [] cables [] curb/pavement uards [] woollanMorest’Site Characten I~sidence [] commercial [] industrial [] park [] open space " [] natural ¯Landscape type: [] parkway " [] raised bed [] container [] mound []lawn [~hrub border r-I wi d break. Irrigation: [] none I~dequate r"linadequate. J~ excessive [] trunk wattled Recant siredisturbance? (~N [] construction ~:soil disturbance [] grade change [] line cleating -1site clearing ¯ % ddpline paved:0%~ 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%Pavement lifted? (~ ~ N % ddpl]ne w/fill soil:,10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% % dripline grade lowered:10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: [] drainage ~ shallow [] compacted [] droughzv .-3 saline [~ alkaline r-I acidic [] small volume [] clay r-i expansive [] slope ~ = aspecz: ~,~o~, Obstruciions: [] lights [] signage [] line.of-sight r-lview [] overhead lines [] underground utilities [] tr Exposure to wind: l~ingle tree [] below canopy [] above canopy [] recently¯exposed ~. windward, canopy tdge E3 area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction:Occurrence of snow/ice storms ~never ~ seldom [] reguifly , TARGET Use Under Tree: I-I building ’]~)parking [] traffic ~pedestr~n [] recreation ~=tandscape ~)nardscape . p small features [] utility lines Can target be moved? YO Can usa be reztricted? @N ’ i Occupancy:. [] occasional use ~Pintermittent use [] frequent use [] constant use The’International Society of ,tu’bodculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived fror~ use of this form¯ Specimen: TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORlVl, l~age 1 L~ disease center [] history of fail ~ffic [] adjacent veg. [~~ EVALUATING TREE.FOR HAZA,,RD TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: .Suspect root rot: YC Exposed roots: I-’lseveJ Riot pruned: Restrlcted root area: f" LEAN: ~ deg. Decay In plane ol lean: Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indica DEFECT Poor taper Bow, sweep Codominants/forks , Multiple attachmentsIncluded bark Excessive end weight Cracks/splits Hangers Girdling Wounds/seam Decaycavity I Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleeding/sap flow ] Loose]cracked bark Nesting holu’bee hive Deadwood/stubs Borers/termites/ants Cankers/galls/burls- Previous failure HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fai Inspection period: ~ Failure Potential + Size of HAZARD ABATE]~ Prone: [] remove deft Mushroom/~onk/bracketpresent: Y (~ ID: l"lmoderate r-Ilowt~,;C~’Undermin’ed: l-lsevere ~tgnce from trunk Root area aflecled: ..=,~___% severe ,,J~]"moderate []iow. Potential Ior root failure: n’vertical ~ natural [] ~nnatural [] self.corrected ~ (~) Roots broken Y (~ Soil cracking: Y (~ ROOT CROWN r-l moderate []low ~oe,~Z Buttre~swounded: Y N When: 1"1severe I-Imoderate ,~low Sol!heavlng: Y ~) Lean severity: [] severe [] moderate ~1o~ ’ects and rate their severity (s. = severe, m = moderate, I = low) TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES ~ Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe;,t’~" Size of part: 1 - <5" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); B annual ~ biannual ~ other 3 - 18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm)~art + Target Rating = Hazard,~.Rating " Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 inter~ittent use; ~+~~3 -. frequent use; 4 - constant use ENT :rive part ~ reduce end weight 1"! crowq clean [] thin ¯ Remove tree: GN Effect on adjacent trees: Notification: I~owner[ COMMENTS I-t raise canopy I’i crown reduce [~restructure ~shape Inspect further: ~roctcrown []decay E-.’aeriol []mon=tor Replace? (~ N Move target: Y G ’Other:. - [~none [] evaluate Specimen: TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM, Page 2 Attachment D Attachment E ORDINANCE NO. 4362. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADDING CHAPTER 8.10 TO TITLE 8 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING TREE PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1.The City Council finds as follows: . (a) The City of Palo Alto is endowed and forested by native oaks and other heritage trees, which give the City a unique visual character and enhance property values. The vestiges of the original abundant oak forest so well adapted to much of this region, are increasingly threatened after more than a century of development, Preservation and maintenance of the remaining healthy native oaks and other heritage trees will retain their great historic, aesthetic, and environmental .value for the benefit of all residents. Preservation of these trees is important for the following reasons: of the City; To protect and conserve the aesthetic and scenic beauty (2) (3) . To encourage and assure quality development; To protect the environmen~ of the city; (4) To aid in the reduction of air pollution by protecting the known capacity of trees to produce oxygen and ingest carbon dioxide; (5)To help reduce potential damage from wind; (6)To provide shade; (7)To protect property values; (8)To act as a noise barrier; and (9)To assist in the absorption of rainwater into the ground, thereby protecting against potential damages from soil erosion and flooding, as well as reducing the cost of handling storm water by artificial means. (b) In order to promote.the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of the City, while recognizing the interests of the property owners in developing, maintaining, and enjoying their property, it is necessary to enact regulations for protection of .specified trees on private property within the City. Palo Alto Municipal Code, Chapter 8.10, Overview of Findings Tree Preservation and Management Regulations ORDINANCE NO~ 4568 ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADDING CHAPTER 8.10 TO TITLE 8 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING TREE PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS, The Council of the City of Paio Alto does ORDAIN as follows:- SECTION I. Chapter 8.10 of Title 8 (Trees and’ Vegetation) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: CHAPTER 8.10 TREE PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS 8.10.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to’~ promote the health, safety, welfare, and quality of life of the residents of the City through the protection of specified trees located on private property within the City, and the establishment of standards for removal, maintenance, and planting of trees. In establishing these procedures and standards, it is the City’s intent to encourage the preservation of trees. 8.10.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply: (a)"Building Area" means that area of a parcel: (I) Upon which, Under applicable zoning regulations, a structure may be built without a variance, design enhancement exception, or home improvement exception; or (2) Necessary for construction of primary access to structures located on or to be constructed on the parcel, where there exists no feasible means of access which would avoid protected trees. On single-family residential parcel~, the portion of the parcel deemed to be the building area under this paragraph (a) (2) shall not exceed ten feet in width. (b) "Building Footprint" means the two-dimensional configuration of a building’s perimeter boundaries as measured on a horizontal plane at-ground level. (c) "Dangerous" means an imminent hazard or threat to the safety of persons or property. (d) "Development" means any work upon any property in the City which requires a subdivision, planned community zone, variance, use permit, building permit, demolition permit, or other 990609 sdl 0052221 3., City approval or Which involves excavation, landscaping construction Within the dripline area of a protected tree. (e) "Director" means the directQr of planning community environment or his or her designee. or and (f) "Discretionary development approval" means planned community zone, subdivision, use permit, variance, home improvement exception,-design enhancement exception, or architectural review board approval. (g) "Dripline area" means the area within X distance from the trunk of a tree, measured from the center, where X equals a distance ten times the diameter of the trunk as measured four and one-half feet (fifty-four inches) above natural grade. (h) "Excessive pruning" means removal of more than one- fourth of the functioning leaf and stem area ~of a tree in any twelve-month period, or removal of foliage so as to cause the unbalancing of a tree. , (i) "Protected tree" means: (I) Any tree of the species Quercus agrifolia (Coast Live Oak) or Quercus lobata (Valley Oak) which is eleven and one,half inches in diameter (thirty-six inches in circumference) or more when measured four and one-half feet (fifty-four inches) above natural grade; and (2) A heritage tree designated by the City Council in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. (j) "Remove" means any of the following: (I) Complete removal, such as cutting to the ground or extraction, of a tree; (2) Taking any action foreseeably leading to the death of a tree or permanent damage to its health;including but not limited to excessive pruning, cutting, girdling, poisoning, overwatering, unauthorized relocation or transportation of a tree, or trenching, excavating, altering the grade, or paving within the dripline area of a tree. (k) "Tree" means~any woody plant which has a trunk four inches or more in diameter at four and one-half feet above natural grade level. (I) "Tree report" means a report prepared by an arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture or another nationally recognized tree research, care, and preservation organization. (m) "Tree Technical Manual" means the regulations issued by the City Manager to implement this Chapter. 990609 sdl 0052221 2 8.10o030 Tree Technical Manual. The City Manager, through the Departments of Public Works and Planning and Community Environment, shall issue regulations necessary for implementation of this Chapter, which shall be known as the Tree Technical Manual. The Tree Technical Manual wil! be made readily available to the public and shall include, but need not be limited to, standards and specifications regarding: (a) Protection of trees during construction; (b) Replacement of trees allowed to be removed pursuant to this Chapter; (c) Maintenance of protected trees (including but not limited to pruning, irrigation, and protection from disease); id) The format and content of tree reports required to be submitted to the City pursuant to this Chapter; (e) The~ criteria for determining whether a tree is dangerous within the meaning of this Chapter. trees. 8.10.040 Disclosure of information regarding existing (a) Any application for discretionary development approval, or for a building or demolition permit where no discretionary development approval is required, ~shall be accompanied by a statement by the property owner or authorized agent which discloses whether any protected trees exist on the property which is the subject of the application, and describing each such tree, its species, size, dripline area, and. location. This requirement shall be met by including the information on plans submitted in connection with the application. (b) In addition, the location of all other trees on the site and in the ’adjacent public right of way which are within thirty feet of the area proposed for development, and trees located on adjacent property with canopies overhanging the project site, shall be shown on the plans, identified by species. (c) The Director may require submittal of such other information as is necessary to further the purposes of this Chapter including but not limited to photographs. (d) Disclosure of information pursuant to this section shall not be required when the development for which the approval or permit is sought does not involve any change in Building Footprint nor any grading or paving. (e). "Knowingly or negligently providing false or misleading information in response to this disclosure requirement shall constitute a violation of this Chapter. 990609 sdl 0052221 3 8.10.050 Prohibited acts. It shall be a violation Of this. Chapter for~anyone .to remove or cause to be-~emoved a protected tree, except as allowed .in this Section: (a) In the absence of development,protected trees shall not be removed unless determined by the Director of Planning and Community Environment, on.the basis of a tree report prepared by a certified arborist for the applicant and other relevant information, that the tree should be removed because it is dead, dangerous, or constitutes a nuisance under Section 8.04.050(2) of this Code. (b) In the case of development on a single family .residential lot, other than in connection with a subdivision: (i) Protected trees shall not be ~emoved unless the trunk of the protected tree is within the Building Footprint, or the Director of Planning and Community Environment has determined,on the basis of a tree report prepared by a certified arborist for the applicant and other relevant information, that the tree should be removed because it is dead, dangerous, or constitutes a nuisance under Section 8.04.050(2) of this Code. (2) If no Building Footprint exists, protected trees shall not be removed unless the trunk of the tree is located in the Building Area, or the Director" of Planning and Community Environment has determined, on the basis of a tree report prepared by a certified arborist for the applicant and other relevant information, that the tree should be removed because it is dead, dangerous, or constitutes a nuisance under Section 8.04.050(2) of this Code. (3) If removal is allowed because the tree is located in the Building Footprint or Building Area, or because the Director of Planning and Community Environment has determined that the tree is so close to the Building Area that construction would result in the death of the tree, the tree removed shall be replaced in accordance with the standards in the Tree Technical Manual. (c) In connection with a proposed subdivision of land into two or more parcels, no protected tree shall be removed unless removal is unavoidable due to restricted access to the property or deemed necessary to repair a geologic hazard (landslide,. repairs, etc.) The tree removed shall be replaced in accordance with the standards in the Tree Technical Manual. Tree preservation and protection measures for any lot that is created by a proposed subdivision of land shall comply with the regulations of this Chapter. 990609 sdl 0052221 4 (d) In all circumstances other than those described in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of this Section, protected trees sha~l. not be removed unless one of the following applies: (i) The Director of PlanKing and Community Environment has determined, on the basis of a tree report prepared by a certified arborist for the applicant and other relevant information that the tree should be removed because it is dead, dangerous or constitutes a nuisance under Section 8.04.050(2). In such cases, the dripline area of the removed tree, or an equivalent area on the site, shall be preserved from development of’any structure unless removal would have been permitted under paragraph (2),< and tree replacement in accordance with the standards in the Tree Technical Manual shall be required. (2) Removal is permitted as part of project approval under Chapter 16.48 of this code, because retention of the tree would result in reduction of the otherwise-permissible Building Area by more than twenty-five percent. In such a case, the approval shall be conditioned upon replacement in accordance with the standards in the Tree Technical Manual. 18. 8.10.060 No limitation of authority under Titles 16 and Nothing in this Chapter. limits or modifies the existing authority of the City under Chapter 16.48 of Title 16 (Architectural Review) and Title 18 (Zoning Ordinance) to require trees and other plants not covered by this Chapter to be identified, retained, protected, and/or planted as conditions of the approval of development. In the event of conflict between provisions of this Chapter and conditions of any permit or other approval ~granted pursuant to Title 16 or Title 18, the more protective requirements shall prevail. 8.10.070 Care of protected trees. (a) All owners of property containing protected trees shall follow the maintenance standards in the Tree Technical Manual. (b) The standards for protection of trees during construction contained in the Tree Technical Manual shall be followed during any development on property containing protected trees. 8.10.080 Development conditions. (a) Discretionary development approvals for proper£y containing protected trees will include appropriate conditions providing for the protection of such trees during construction and for maintenance of the trees thereafter. (b) It shall be a violation of this Chapter for any property owner or agent of the owner to fail to comply with any 990609 sd~ 0052221 5 development approval condition concerning preservation, protection, and maintenance of any tree, including but not limited ~o protected trees. 8.10.090 Designation of Heritage Tr~es. (a). Upon nomination by any person and with the written consent of the property owner(s), the City Council may designate a tree’or trees as a heritage tree. (b) A tree may be designated as a heritage tree upon a .~finding that it is unique and of importance, to thecommunity due to any of the following factors: (1)It is an outstanding specimen of a desirable species; (2)It is one of the largest or oldest trees in Palo Alto; (3) It possesses distinctive location, and/orhistorical significance. form, size, age, (c) After Council approval of a heritage tree designation, the City Clerk shall notify the property owner(s) in writing. A listing of trees so designated, including the specific locations thereof, shall be kept by the Departments of Public Works and Planning and Community Environment. (d) Once designated, a heritage tree shall be subject to the provisions of this Chapter unless removed from the list of heritage trees by action of the City Council. The City Council may remove a tree from the list upon its own motion or upon written request by the property owner. Request for such action~ must originate in the same manner as nomination for heritage tree designation. 8.10.100 ’Responsibility for enforcement. The following designated employee positions may enforce the provisions of this Chapter by the issuance of citations: Chief Building Official, Assistant Building Official, Code Enforcement Officer, Planning Arborist. 8.10.110 Enforcement ~ Remedies for Violation° In addition to all other remedies set forth in this code or otherwise provided by law, the following remedies shall be available to the City for violation of this Chapter: (a)Stop Work - Temporary Moratorium. (I) If a violati’on occurs during development, the City may issue a stop work order suspending and prohibiting further activity on the property pursuant to the grading, demolition,. and/or building permit(s) (including construction, inspection, and 990609 sd~ 005222 ~6 issuance of certificates of occupancy) until a mitigation plan has been filed with and approved by the Director, agreed to in writing by the property owner(s), and either implemented or guaranteed by the posting of adequate security. The mitigation plan shall include measures for protection of any remaining trees on the property, and shall provide for replacement of each tree removed on the property or at locations approved by the Director of Planning and Community and by the Director of Public Works, if replacement is to occur on public property. The replacement ratio shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in the Tree Technical Manual, and shall be at a greater ratio than that required where tree removal is permitted pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter. (£) If a violation occurs in the absence of development, or while an application for a building.permit or discretionary development approval for the lot upon which the tree is located is pending, the Director may issue a temporary moratorium on development of the subject property, not to exceed eighteen months from the date the violation occurred. The purpose of the moratorium is to provide the City an opportunity tO study and determine appropriate mitigation measures for the tree removal, and to ensure measures are incorporated into any future development approvals for the property. Mitigation measures as determined by the Director shall be imposed as a condition of any subsequent permits for development on the subject property. (b) Civil Penalties. (I) As part of a civil action brought by the City, a court may assess against any "person who commits, allows, or maintains a violation of any provision of this Chapter a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $5000 (five thousand dollars) per violation. (2) Where the violation has resulted in removal of a tree, the civil penalty shall be in an amount not to exceed $5000 (five thousand dollars) per tree unlawfully removed, or the replacement value of each such tree, whichever amount is higher. Such amount shall be payable to the City. Replacement value for the purposes of this Section shall be determined utilizing, the most recent edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal, published by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers. (c) Injunctive Relief. A civil action.may be commenced to abate, enjoin, or otherwise compel the cessation of such violation. (d) Costs. In any civil action brought pursuant to this Chapter in which the City prevails, the court shall award to the City all costs of investigation and preparation for trial, the costs of trial, reasonable expenses including overhead and administrative costs incurred in prosecuting the action, and reasonable attorney fees. 990609 sdl 0052221 7 8.10.120 Fees. Tree reports required to be .submitted to the City ~or review and evaluation, pursuant to this Chapter shall be accompanied" by the fee prescribed therefor in the municipal fee schedule. 8.10.130 severability. If any provision of this Chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this Chapter which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Chapter are declared to be severable. 8.10.140 Appeals. Any person seeking the Director’s approval to remove a protected tree pursuant to this Ordinance who "is aggrieved by a decision of the Director may appeal such decision in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 16.48.090 of Chapter 16.48 of the Municipal Code. SECTION 2,’ The City Council finds that this project is exempt from the provisions of the Environmental Quality Act (~CEQA") because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this project will have a significant effect on the environment~ INTRODUCED: May 15, 1999 PASSED:June 7, 1999 AYES: NOES: EAKINS, "FAZZINO, HUBER, KNISS, MOSSAR, OJAKIAN, ROSENBAUM, SCHNEIDER, WHEELER ABSTENTIONS : ABSENT ATTEST. - City Clerk y Director of Planning Community Environment 990609 sdl 0052221 8