05. MCA-2006-02 Trees
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Application:
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Property Location:
MCA-2006-02
City of Cupertino
Various
Citywide
Agenda Date: September 26, 2006
Summary: Municipal Code Amendment of Chapter 14.18 (Heritage and Specimen
Trees)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss and provide direction on
Chapter 14.18 (Heritage and Specimen Trees) of the Cupertino Municipal Code and
continue this item to the October 24, 2006 meeting. The Planning Commission is
requested to provide specific suggestions on possible amendments to include in the
ordinance.
BACKGROUND
On August 15, 2006, the Oty Council conducted a preliminary study session on the
City's Heritage and Specimen Trees Ordinance and provided comments to the
Planning Commission to address additional tree protection measures for possible
incorporation into the ordinance. The Council reviewed a model tree protection
ordinance that was drafted to stimulate discussion of possible amendments to the
ordinance.
DISCUSSION
The City Council provided the following comments to the Planning Commission based
on the following topics:
Tree Protection
1. Confer with the City Arborist and City Naturalist for recommendations of other
trees to be included within the protected tree list.
2. Review the current protected tree list to decide if existing trees on the list should
be retained.
3. Exempt unsafe and dead trees from the ordinance, but provide direction on
how to determine if a tree is unsafe or dead (e.g., consider involving the City
Arborist to make the determination).
4. Address circumstances that may lead to the demise of protected trees (e.g.,
whether a sick tree is considered an unsafe tree and whether neglect by a
property owner may lead to the demise of the tree).
s-\
MCA-2006-02 - Heritage and Specimen Trees, Ch. 14,18
September 26, 2006
Page 2
Approval Authority
1. Allow tree removal permit approvals at staff level, unless a retroactive tree
removal permit is requested.
2. Have Planning Commission review and determine retroactive tree removal
permit applications.
Penalties
1. Require more stringent penalties for tree removals without a permit.
2. Consider tree replacement and fines for removals without a permit.
3. Compare penalties of other surrounding cities.
4. Consider increasing penalties for subsequent offenses.
5. Allow the City Council to review and determine retroactive tree removal permit
applications with the ability to place additional conditions for the illegal tree
removal.
6. Allow the City Council to modify the penalty on an appeal.
7. Hold all pending applications on a property until a retroactive tree removal
permit is obtained for illegal tree removals.
8. Consider the location, size and replacement time frames when considering
replacement trees.
Noticing
1. Consider maintaining a 300-foot noticing for tree removal permit applications.
2. Consider placing notices on trees for tree removal permit applications.
Solar Panels
1. Request that no amendments be made on this issue.
Other Council comments include recommendations to consider whether the ordinance
should provide tree protection measures during construction and the possibility of
transplanting trees from mature landscaped areas to tree deficient areas in the City.
Staff has received input from both the City Arborist and City Naturalist regarding their
recommendations for additional trees to be considered for the protected tree list.
Recoriunendations for Additional Protected Trees
The City Arborist and City Naturalist recommend that the City consider adding the
following trees on the protected tree list:
Coast Redwood
Incense Cedar
Western S camore
California Ba Laurel
> 15 inches
> 12 inches
4 inches or
10 inches or
eater
eater
BC
BC
BB
BB
5--~
MCA-2006-02 - Heritage and Specimen Trees, Ch. 14.18
September 26, 2006
Page 3
Black Cottonwood
White Alder
Box Elder Acer
10 inches or
10 inches or
10 inches or
BC = Barrie Coate, City Arborist
BB = Barbara Banfield, City Naturalist
The City Arborist also provided more stringent minimum tree size requirements for
the following Oak trees:
Coast Live Oak
Valle Oak
Blue Oak
Black Oak
Can on Live Oak
> 8 inches
> 8 inches
> 6 inches
> 6 inches
> 6 inches
Penalties in Other Cities
The City Council also asked the Planning Commission to review and compare
penalties imposed by other surrounding cities for trees that have been removed
without a tree removal permit approval. The following is a list of penalties imposed
by the cities of Cupertino, Campbell, Los Gatos, Los Altos, Saratoga, Morgan Hill and
Palo Alto.
Cupertino X
Carn bell
Los Gatos X X X X
Los Altos X
Saratoga X
Morgan
Hill
Palo Alto X
X (Temp X
moratorium
5..3
MCA-2006-02 - Heritage and Specimen Trees, Ch, 14.18
September 26, 2006
Page 4
Cupertino
2x replacement ratio Cash payment to
Campbell for single-family res. tree fund, or
4x replacement ratio combination of tree
for all other replacement & cash
properties. payment based on
appraisal value of
removed trees.
Not to exceed Cash payment to Maintenance
Los Gatos $5,000jviolation, tree fund or agreement for length
unless replacement replacement tree(s), of time as
value is greater. based on appraisal determined by the
Where town prevails value of removed Town.
in court, violator trees.
shall pay all costs for
trial preparation &
fees.
Replacement tree(s) Cash payment to Maintenance bond
Los Altos with equal aesthetic tree fund, or may be required.
quality of combination of tree
unlawfully removed replacement & cash
tree(s). payment based on
appraisal value of
removed trees.
Notto exceed Replacement tree for Cash payment to Maintenance
Saratoga $5,OOOjviolation, each tree removed. tree fund, or agreement for a
unless replacement combination of tree minimum of 5 years.
value is greater. replacement & cash
payment based on
appraisal value of
removed trees.
City Council may
Morgan Hill commence action or
proceedings for
abatement that may
involve courts.
Not to exceed Replacement trees in
Palo Alto $5,000 j violation, accordance with
unless replacement City tree manual.
value is greater. Replacement ratio
Where City prevails shall be greater for
in court, violator unlawfully removed
shall pay all costs for trees.
trial preparation &
fees.
5'4"
MCA-2006-02 - Heritage and Specimen Trees, Ch, 14.18
September 26, 2006
Page 5
Public Comments
At the August 15th City Council meeting, the Council heard from three members of the
public. One person requested that consideration be given to remove trees when they
block use of solar energy panels. Another p~rson requested that PG&E use special
insulated wires that would reduce the amount of pruning of trees. One member of the
public recommended support for protection of trees, including during construction.
The City also received two emails. One email requests that redwoods, sycamores and
black cottonwood trees be considered for placement on the protected tree list. The
other email expressed the opinion that tree removal fees are excessive.
Model Ordinance
As previously mentioned, the City Council reviewed a model ordinance that was
drafted to stimulate discussion. The draft model ordinance includes the following
revisions:
1. The title of the ordinance has been amended to read "Protected Trees."
2. All references to "specimen" trees have been changed to "protected" trees for
clearer identification.
3. Section 14.18.035 has been added to clearly list the protected trees.
4. Section 14.18.025 has been added to clearly state it is unlawful to remove,
damage or kill any protected tree in the City.
5. Sections 14.18.150, 14.18.170 & 14.18.180 have been renamed and address the
application approval authority, application requirements, and review and
determination processes for tree removal permits.
6. Repetitive sections have been removed.
7. Section 14.18.175 has been added to address noticing requirements.
8. A definition for "Development application" has been added.
9. Section 14.18.070 addresses recordation requirements for "protected" trees.
10. Section 14.18.140 has been amended to allow the Community Development
Director, or any member of the sheriff or fire department, to deem a protected
tree unsafe and allow removal of the tree. This section also allows the
Community Development Director to deem a tree dead and allow removal of
the tree.
11. Section 14.18.185 has been added to address tree replacement requirements.
12. Expanded definition has been added for "Tree removal."
13. Findings have been added to Section 14.18.180(A)(3) that allow for the removal
of trees where protected tree(s) are a detriment to the subject property due to
overplanting or overcrowding of trees on a site and whose removal would not
result in a density of tree coverage inconsistent with the neighborhood. This
would essentially allow a thinning out of protected trees to allow the trees to
better thrive and encourage appropriate canopy coverage on site. An example is
the recent retroactive tree removal application for the removal of six coast
redwood trees that were planted in small and narrow planter areas between
5-5
MCA-2006-02 - Heritage and Specimen Trees, Ch. 14.18
September 26, 2006
Page 6
townhouse units at the Joseph Circle townhouse complex off of Vista Drive. In
this particular case, the trees were overgrown and crowding into a planter area
causing damage to the adjacent townhouse walls and fence. Also, overcrowding
could affect adjacent properties where tree canopies may encroach onto
neighboring properties, thereby affecting and possibly prohibiting a
homeowner's use of his/her property to plant in a yard without sufficient
sunlight.
Prepared by:
Approved by:
AId Honda, Senior Planner ~
Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developmen~
Attachments
Exhibit A - Draft Model Resolution
Exhibit B -- Emails from residents
Exhibit C -- City Council Minutes of August 15, 2006
Exhibit D- Council Report of August 15, 2006, including all attachments
G:\Planning\PDREPORT\pcMCAreports\ Tree Ordinance, Sept 26 PC Mtg.doc
5'0
MCA-2006-02
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
MODEL RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND CHAPTER 14,18 OF THE
CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO PROTECTED TREES
-----------------------------------------------------------
----------------~-----------------------------------~------
Recommendation of approval is based on Exhibit A.
---------------------------------------------------------~-
-----------------------------------------------------------
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26th day August 2006 at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
Marty Miller, Chairperson
Planning Commission
G :\Planning\PD REPORl\RES\2006\MCA-2006-02, Trees.doc
S~l-
14.18.130 Enforcing authority.
14.18.140 Exemptions.
14.18.150 Application and Approval Authority for Tree Removal permit.
14.18.160 Director to inspect.
14.18.170 Rev-iew-ef-aApplication Requirements.
14.18.175 Noticing
14.18.180 Review and determination of application standards.
14.18.185 Tree Replacement.
14.18.190 Protection during conservation.
14.18.200 Protection plan before permit granted.
14.18.210 ^pplicant to guarantee protection.
14.18.220 Notice of action on permit-Appeal.
14.18.230 Penalty.
14.18.010 Purpose.
In enacting this chapter, the City of Cupertino recognizes the substantial
economic, environmental and aesthetic importance of its tree population. The
City finds that the preservation of specimen protected and heritnge trees on
private and public property, and the protection of all trees during construction, is
necessary for the best interests of the City and of the citizens and public thereof,
in order to:
2
S ,OJ
A. Protect property values;
B. Assure the continuance of quality development;
C. Protect aesthetic and scenic beauty;
D. Assist in the absorption of rain waters, thereby preventing erosion of top
soil, protecting against flood hazards and the risk of landslides;
E. Counteract air pollutants by protecting the known capacity of trees to
produce pure oxygen from carbon dioxide;
F. Maintain the climatic balance (e.g., provide shade);
G. Help decrease potential damage from wind velocities;
H. Preserve protected Protect specimen and heritage 001<: trees. For the
above reasons, the City finds it is in the public interest, convenience and
necessity to enact regulations controlling the care and removal of protected
specimen and heritage trees within the City in order to retain as many trees as
possible, consistent with the individual rights to develop, maintain and enjoy
private and public property to the fullest possible extent.
Protected Specimen and heritoge trees are considered a valuable asset to the
community. The protection of such trees in all zoning districts including
residential zones is intended to preserve this valuable asset. (Ord. 1573, 9 2,
1991; Ord. 1543, ~ 2,1991)
14.18.020 Definitions.
Unless otherwise stated, the following definitions pertain to this chapter.
A. "City" means the City of Cupertino situated in the County of Santa Clara,
California.
3
5-10
B. B. "Developed residential" means any legal lot of record, zoned
single-family, duplex, agricultural residential and residential hillside, with
any structure (principal or accessory) constructed thereon.
C. "Development application" means an application for land alteration or
development, including but not limited to subdivision of property,
rezoning, architectural and site approval, two-story residential per~t
minor 1^8sidential permit, planned unit development,~ vCl!iance, at~u i~~_~
permit.
DG. "Heritage tree" means any tree or grove of trees which, because of
factors including, but not limited to, its historic value, unique quality, girth, height
or species, has been found by the Planning Commission ^rchitcctural ond Site
Approval Committee to have a special significance to the community.
D. "001< tree" sholl include 011 trees of ook genus, including, but not limited
to, the Volley 001< (Quercus loboto) ond Colifornio Live Oak (Quercus ogrifolio).
E. "Owner" shall include the legal owner of real property within the City, and
any lessee of such owner.
F. "Person" shall il:lclude an individual, a firm, an association, a corporation,
a co-partnership, and the lessees, trustees, receivers, agents, servants and
employees of any such person.
G. "Private property" shall include all property not owned by the City or any
other public agency.
H. "Public property" includes all property owned by the City or any other
public agency.
I. "Protected Specimen tree" means any class of tree specified in Section
14.18.035.ony of the follmving:
4
S' \ \
1. ^ trcc described on the tElblc bclO'vv:
Measurement Single Trunk Multi Trunk
From Natural Diameterl Diameter!
Species Grade Circumference Circumference
Nat-ive--+fees-;
Oak trees 4-4f2.! 10" (31 ") ~6&i
California. 4-4R-' 10" (31") 20" (63")
Buckeye
Big Leaf Maple 4-4R-' 12" (38") 25" (7a")
Nonnative Trees:
Deodar Cedm 4-4R-' 12" (38") 25" (7a")
Blue Atla3 4-4R-' 12" (38") 25" (7a")
Cedar
2. A tree required to be protected as a part of a zoning, tentative map, use
permit, or privacy protection requirement in an R 1 zoning district.
J. "Tree removal" means any of the foll?wing: (1) Complete removal, such
as cutting to the ground or extraction, of a protected tree or (2) Severe pruning,
which means the removal of more than one-fourth of the functioning leaf and
stem area of a tree in any twelve-month period of a protected tree the destruction
(in a twdve month period) of t'#enty five percent or more, as determined by the
Community Development Director, of any heritage or specimen tree by cutting,
retarding, girdling or applying chemical3. (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1835,
(part), 1999; Ord. 1810, (part), 1999; Ord. 1715, (part), 1996; Ord. 1573,93,
1991; Ord. 1543,93,1991)
14.18.25 Actions Prohibited
5
5-1O"U
A. It is unlawful to remove or kill any protected tree; and
B. It is unlawful to remove any protected tree in any zoning district without
first obtaining a tree removal permit.
14.18.030 Retention Promoted.
Heritage and-Protected specimen trees are considered an asset to the
community and the pride of ownership and retention of these species shall be
promoted. The Director of Community Development shall conduct an annual
review of the status of heritage trees and report the findings to the Planning
Commission. (Ord. 1715, (part), 1996; Ord. 1543,94.1,1991)
14.18.035 Protected Trees.
Except as otherwise provided in Section 14.18.140, Exemptions, the
following trees shall not be removed from private property without first obtaining a
tree removal permit:
A. Heritage trees in all zoning districts.
B. All trees of the following species:
Measurement Single-Trunk Multi- Trunk
From Natural Diameter/ Diameter/
Species Grade Circumference Circumference
Native Trees:
Oak trees 4-1/2' 10" (31") 20" (63")
-
California 4-1/2' 10" (31") 20" (63")
-
Buckeye
6
5~1:'
Big Leaf Maple 4-1/2' 12" (38") 25" (79")
Nonnative Trees:
Deodar Cedar 4-1/2' 12" (38") 25" (79")
Blue Atlas 4-1/2' .,12" (38") 25" (79")
-
Cedar
__._n_..
C. Any tree required to be planted or retained as part of an approved
development application, building permit, tree removal permit or code
enforcement action in all zoning districts.
D. Approved privacy protection planting in R-1 zoning districts.
14.18.040 Design.ation.
The Planning Commission, may, by resolution, designate a tree or grove of
trees as a heritage tree( s).
Prior to adoption of such a resolution, not less than ten days written notice
shall be delivered to the owner. If the owner of the property protests the
designationl an appeal can be initiated. (Ord. 1715, (part), 1996; Ord. 1630,
(part), 1993; Ord. 1543,94.2,1991)
14.18.050 Heritage Tree List.
A heritage tree list shall be created and amended by resolution. The list shall
include the reason for designation, tree circumference, species name, common
name, location and heritage tree number. (Ord. 1543, 9 4.3, 1991)
14.18.060 Plan of Protection.
7
5-\+
A. The Planning Commission shall consider a plan of protection for
protected trees developed by the Community Development Department or a City-
retained certified arborist. The protection plan shall include information for
correct pruning, maintenance and fertilization methods.
B. It shall be the property owner(s) responsibility to protect the tree. -=RTe
p ~8-n -sA-a+I-.8'8" '1::1fC}V-tth:--;Q fo r t;+slh{~r u s-e-a-t--R+s/f~ef (j.f-s-'G-Fet~s--n---ift c~rt1ef---t(7--Gt: te i r~ t1~1 e
retention objection.
C. Privacy protection planting in R-1 zoning districts shall be maintained.
Landscape planting maintenance includes irrigation, fertilization and pruning as
necessary to yield a growth rate expected for a particular species. Where
privacy protection planting dies it must be replaced within thirty days with the
location, size and species described in Ordinance No. 1799 (privacy protection)
and its appendix. The affected property owner, with privacy protection planting
on his/her their own lot, is -Aet required to maintain the required planting and shall
be required to comply with Section 14.18.070. (Ord. 1810, (part), 1999; Ord.
1630, (part), 1993; Ord. 1543, ~~ 4.4, 4.5, 1991)
14.18.070 Recordation.
All protected Heritage and :::;pecimcn trees required to be retained as part of a
development application under Section 14.8 1.020 12 14.18.035, except for trees
on public property, shall have retention information placed on the property deed
via a conservation easement in favor of the City, private covenant, or other
method as deemed appropriate by the Director. The recordation shall be
completed by the property owner prior to final map or building permit issuance, or
at a time as designated by the Director of Community Development when not
associated with a final map or building permit issuance. at the time of u:::;e permit,
zoning, tentative mop or initial/new building permit i:::;suonce. (Ord. 1573, ~ 4.6,
1991; Ord. 1543, ~ 4.6, 1991)
8
S-\S
14.18.080 . Identification Tag.
Heritage trees shall have on them an identification tag, purchased and placed
by the City, inscribed with the following information:
CITY OF CUPERTINO
HERITAGE TREE NO,
Please do not prune or cut
before contacting the City.
(Ord. 1543, S 4.7,1991)
14.18.090 "A..pplieatioB to Remove. (There are 3 sections that discuss the tree
removal application/permit process....l've eliminated the first nvo (14.18.090 and
14.18.120) and incorporated this information into one section, 14.18.150)
If an application for hcritagc tree remo'v'al is submitted, the request 3hall bc
forvvorded to the PIElnning Commission for revicw and appro'v'ElI. It i3 thc
applicant'3 rC3pon3ibility to providc supporting documcnt3 as requested by 3taft
or thc Planning Commi3sion. (Ord. 130, (part), 1aa3; Ord. 1543,54.8, 1aa1)
14.18.100 Notice List to l~1ceompaBj' .A..pplicatioB.
The applicant 3hall providc with the applicEltion a list of names of 011 persons
ovming and/or occupying rcal propcr}y located v..ithin three hundred feet of the
propcrty in'Jolvcd in thc application. Where a propcrty is a multifamily dwelling
with morc than four units, the namc of thc building manager 'vvill be supplied on
the list. Notice of the Planning Commbsion hcaring will be moiled to the nomcs
on the list. (Ord. 1630, (port), 1 aa3; Ord. 1543, 54.a, 1 aa1)
14.18.110 Appeal.
9
5- \ lo
An Dppcal of the PI8nning Commission's decision may be submittcd to the
City Council, in care of the City Clerk 'Nithin five vJorking days of thc decision. No
tree shall be remO\fed until the appeal process has been concluded. (Ord. 1630,
(part), 1003; Ord. 1573, ~ 4.10, 1001; Ord. 1543, ~4.1 0, 1001)
~,(},-,---I~q-u.-Hoed--fer....Re.meval.
Except as provided in Section 14.18.140, no person shall directly or indirectly
remO\fe or causc to be rcmoved any specimen or hcritagc trcc as herein dcfincd,
within thc City limits, 'Nithout first obtaining [) pcrmit to do so in accordancc with
the procedures set forth in this chapter. (Ord. 1543, ~ 5.1, 1 aa1)
14.18.130 Enforcing Authority.
The Director of Community Development, or his/her authorized
representative, shall be charged with the enforcement of this chapter. (Ord.
1543, S 6.1, 1991)
14.18.140 Exemptions.
The following removals do not require approval of a tree removal permit:+fTi.s
chapter docs not apply to the follmving:
A. Removal of a protected tree in case of emergency caused by the
hazardous or dangerous condition of a tree, requiring immediate action for the
safety of life or property (e.g., a tree about to topple onto a principle dwelling due
to heavy wind velocities, a tree deemed unsafe, or a tree having the potential to
damage existing or proposed essential structures), upon order of the Director of
Community Development, or any member of the sheriff or fire department.
However, ^ subsequent application for tree removal must be filed within five
'."lorking days os described in Sections 14.18.150 14.18.170 of this chapter.
10
5-\1-
B. Dead trees, in the opinion of the Director of Community Development..
Removal of all deciduous, fruit bearing trees.
C. ^n approval for thc removal of any tree granted by virtue of a zoning,
~rmit, vc:lrionGc, tcntc:lti\fc mop, or Planning Commission opplicatiorT
awrnvaJ.:.
D. Removal of any tree in a developed residential single family, residential
duplex, agricultural residential and re:Jidential hillside zoning district, except
heritage, specimen or trees planted to comply 'J.'ith privacy protection pursuant
to Chaptcr 10.28 (Single Family Rcsidcntial (R 1) Zoncs) cxcept those plantcd
on the affected property O'vvners lot.
E. Public utility actions, under the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities
Commission of the State of California; as may be necessary to comply with their
safety regulations, or to maintain the safe operation of their facilities. (Ord. 1835,
(part), 1999; Ord.1715, (part), 1996; Ord. 1630, (part), 1993; Ord. 1543,97.1,
1991 )
14.18.150 Application and Approval Authority for Tree Removal Permit.
A. l\'. No person shall directly or indirectly remove or cause to be
removed any protected tree without first obtaining a tree removal permit,
unless such tree removal is exempt per Section 14.18.140. Applications
for a tree removal permit specimen or heritage tree removol permits shall
be filed with the Department of Community Development on forms
prescribed by the Director of Community Development and shall state
the number and location of the trees to be removed, and the reason for
removal of each.
11
5-)0
B. B. Applications for protected hcrit<:lge tree removal shall be referred
to the Planning Commission for final review and determination <:lppro'v'ol
in accordance with Section~ 14.18.090, 14.18.1 00 o~d 14.18.110
Section 14.18.220 and Chapter 19.124:-. The Planning Commission may
approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a tree removal
permit. A tree re~lacement requirement may be required in conjunctioQ
with the treeJ~emov~ permit. The appl~.s:9.9Ie tree removal peml!t j~e s~~<?Ji
apply. Requests sholl be rC'v'iewed pursuont to Section 14.18.110.
C. When a development application is under consideration by the approval
authority concerning the same property as the affected tree removal
permit application, the determination on the tree removal permit shall be
made concurrently by the approval authority.-(Ord. 1630, (part), 1993;
Ord. 1573, ~8.1 (part), 1991; Ord. 1543, ~ 8.1 (part), 1991)
14.18.160 Director to Inspect.
Upon receipt of an application for removal of a protected specimen tree, the
Director of Community Development or his/her authorized representative will,
within fourteen days, inspect the premises and evaluate the request pursuant to
Section 14.18.180 of this chapter. Priority of inspection shall be given to those
requests based on hazard or danger of disease. The Director of Community
Development may refer any such application to another department or to the
Planning Commission or an appropriate committee of the City for a report and
recommendation. Where appropriate, the Director of Community Development
may also require the applicant, at his own expense, to furnish a report from a
staff-approved arborist, certified by the International Society of Arboriculture.
J\pplication3 for tree removal may be gr::mted, denied, or gr<:lnted 'Nith conditions.
The Director of Community De'v'c1opment moy, os 0 condition of grunting a permit
for removal of 0 specimen tree, require the opplicont to replant or replace a tree
'.'lith more than one trec whcn jU3tified to replace 103t tree canopy. (Ord.
1573, ~8.1 (part), 1991; Ord. 1543, ~ 8.1 (part), 1991)
12
5"l ~
14.18.170 Review of Application Requirements.
A request for removal of any heritage or protected Sf7ecimen tree shall include
the following:
A. Application information. Application for a tree removal permit
~hall be available from andliled wi!.bJhe Communit~
Development Department and shall contain the follS?.'Ning
information, unless waived by the Director of Community
Development:
1. A written explanation of why the tree(s) should be removed;
2. Photograph(s) of the tree(s);
3. An arborist report from a staff-approved arborist, certified by the
International Society of Arboriculture, when required by the
Director of Community Development;
4. Signature of the property owner and homeowner's association
(when applicable) with proof of a vote of the homeowner's
association.
5. Replanting plan
6. Other information deemed necessary by the Director of
Community Development to evaluate the tree removal request;
7. Permit fee, where applicable;
8. Tree survey plan indicating the number, location(s), variety and
size (measured four and a half feet above grade) of tree(s) to be
removed.
protccted by a condition of approvol associated 'Nith a zoning,
tentative map, use permit, variance and architectural and site
approval application may be approved by the Director of
Community Development if deemed unsafe or disea:Jed or can
couse potential damage to existing or proposed essential
structures. The Director of Community Development moy also
13
s,ao
require the owlieont, at his own cxpcnsc, to furnish a report from 0
staff approved mborist, certified by the Internutionol Socicty of
Aborieulture. If removul is requested for any other reason, the
application shull be referred to the Planning Commission 'Nhich .
originated the condition. Notice of any public heming undcr this
ehopter shaH-Be given iA-the some manner os pF6V~A-apteF
~ th i s cO€i€, fGr~, /1 835, (p (] rit,-l99g.; Dl4:--i~,z +i3,--\'p-a1=f),
1906; amendcd during 12Ja3 supplement; Ord. 1630, (port), 1903;
Ord. 1543, ~8.1 (port), 1901)
14.18.175 Notice and Posting
Notice of any public hearing under this chapter shall be given in the same
manner as provided in Chapter 19.124 of the Cupertino Municipal Code.
14.18.180 Review and Determination of Application Standards.
~- The approval authority shall approve a tree removal permit only after
making at least one of the following findings:Each request for tree removal shall
be evaluated based upon the standards Ibted under subsections ^ and B belo'u.
Approval of 0 permit to remove a specimen or heritage tree may be granted if
onc or both of tho standards is met.
1. A:-- That the tree or trees are irreversibly diseased, are in
danger of falling, can cause potential damage to existing or proposed essential
structures, or interferes with private on-site utility services and cannot be
controlled or remedied through reasonable relocation or modification of the
structure or utility services;
2. B. That the location of the trees restricts the economic
enjoyment of the property by severely limiting the use of property in a manner not
14
5-a\
typically experienced by owners of similarly zoned and situated property, and the
applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the approval authority that there
are no reasonable alternatives to preserve the tree(s).
3. That the protected tree(s) are a detriment to the subject property
and cannot be adequately supported accorqing to good urban forestry practices
du~ !~cf_JJ~le___~)~y~rpl~rlti
(}r ()\/ercrc)\,vdino ()f trees en the subject !11,_)rc,oeriv
__ ._.__ ~._ _.._....~~_.____.___...._ .__._.... --=--- .......______._0/__
B. The approval authority may refer the application to another
department or commission for a report and recommendation.
C. The approval authority shall either approve, conditionally
approve or deny the application.
D. The approval authority may require a tree replacement
requirement in conjunction with a tree removal permit. (Ord.
1573,99.1,1991; Ord. 1543,99.1,1991)
Section 14.18.185 Tree Replacement
A. The approval authority may impose the following replacement
standards for approval of each tree to be removed in conjunction with an
approved tree removal permit, unless deemed unnecessary by the
approval authority:
1. Replacement trees, of a species and size as designated by the
approval authority and consistent with the replacement value of
each tree to be removed using the most recent edition of the
Guide for Plant Appraisal, published by the Council of Tree and
Landscape Appraisers, shall be planted on the subject property
on which the tree(s) are to be removed in the location(s) as
designated by the approval authority. Table A may be used as a
basis for this requirement. The person requesting the tree
15 5 -d;GL
removal permit shall pay the cost of purchasing and planting the
replacement trees.
a. If a tree cannot be reasonably planted on the subject
property, the value of the removed tree(s) shall be paid to
the City's tree fund (will we be establishing this???) to:
~ Add_or replac~ tre~s on public proPE:rtll0__the
vicinity of the subject property; or
II. Add trees or landscaping on other City property.
Replacement value of a tree shall be determined
using the most recent edition of the Guide for
Plant Appraisal, as prepared by the City Arborist.
Table A -- Tree Canopy-Replacement Ratio Standard
Canopy of Removed Replacement Tree Alternative Tree2
Tree (Maximum
Distance)1
4 feet to 9 feet Two 24-inch box size One 36-inch box size
(minimum)
10 feet to 27 feet Three 24-inch box size Two 36-inch box size
28 feet to 40 feet Four 24-inch box size Two 48-inch box size
40 feet to 56 feet Six 24-inch box size Two 36 inch size and
Two 48 inch box size
56 feet to 60 feet Two 24 inch box size Combination of both
and Two 36 inch box the Tree Canopy and
size the replacement value
-
as determined by the
approval authority
60+ feet Combination of both Combination of both
the Tree Canopy and the Tree Canopy and
the replacement value the replacement value
16
5-0.>3
as determined by the
approval authority
as determined by the
approval authority
1. To measure an asymmetrical canopy of a tree, the widest measurement
?hall be used to determine canopy size.
2" The City shall make the determination if the Alternative Tree standards
~- - --~--~--_. - -.---.....--...-.--..-------------- ---------- ._~--- ---..-..... -..
can be used,
14.18.190 Protection During Construction.
Protected Specimen, heritage trees and other trees/plantings required to be
retained by virtue of a development application, building permit, or tree removal
permit zoning, subdivi:Jion, u::;e permit, variance, or /\rehiteeturol and Site
Approvtll Committee application approval, and 011 trees protected by this chapter
shall be protected during demolition, grading and construction operations. The
applicant shall guarantee the protection of the existing tree(s) on the site through
a financial instrument acceptable to the Director of Planning and Development.
(Ord. 1543,9 10.1,1991)
14.18.200 Protection Plan Before Permit Granted.
A. A plan to protect trees described in Section 14.18.190 shall be submitted
to the Director of Public Works and to the Director of Community Development
prior to issuance of a demolition, grading or building permit. The plan shall be
prepared and signed by a licensed landscape architect or arborist certified by the
International Society of Arboriculture and shall be approved by the Director of
Community Development. The Director of Community Development shall
evaluate the tree protection plan based upon the tree protection standards
contained in Appendix A at the end of this chapter.
17
!?-d'T
B. The Director of Community Development may waive the requirement for
a tree protection plan both where the construction activity is determined to be
minor in nature (minor building or site modification in any zone) and where the
proposed activity will not significantly modify the ground area within the drip line
or the area immediately surrounding the drip, line of the tree. The Director of
Community Development shall determine whether the construction activity is
minor in nature and whether the activity will significantly modify the ground area
around the tree drip line. (Ord. 1543, ~ 10.2, 1991)
14.18.210 ~\pplieallt to Cual"antce Protection.
The applicant ::;hall guarantee the protcction of the exi::;ting tree(s) on thc ::>ite
through a financial in::;trument occeptoble to the Director of Planning and
De\/elopment. (Ord. 1543, ~ 10.3, 1Ga1)
14.18.220 Notice of Action on Permit-Appeal.
A. Notice of the decision on an application for a protected specimcn tree
removal permit by the Planning Commission Dircctor of Community De\/clopmcnt
or hi::> designated representotive, shall be mailed to the applicant.
B. Any decision made by the Planning Commission Dircctor of Plonning
ond DC'v'c1opment may be appealed to the City Council in accordance with
Chapter 19.136. Such decision may be appealed to the City Council by filing a
written notice of appeal with the City Clerk within ten working days after the
mailing of such notice.
D. C. The City Clerk shall notify the applicant of the date, time and
place for hearing the appeal. The City Council may affirm, reverse, or
modify the decision of the Planning Commission Director of Community
DC'v'clopment, and its decision shall be final. (Ord. 1573, ~ 11.1, 1991;
Ord. 1543, ~ 11.1,1991)
18
5-6)5
14.18.230 Penalty.
Violation of this chapter is deemed a misdemeanor unless otherwise
specified. Any person or property owners, or his agent or representative who
engages in tree cutting or removal without a valid tree removal permit is guilty of
a misdemeanor as outlined in Chapter 1.12 of this code and/or may be required
to comply with Sections 14.18.150, 14.18.170. Notwithstanding any other
provisions of this section, the unauthorized removal of a tree planted solely for
privacy protection purposes pursuant to Section 14.18.060 C shall constitute an
infraction. (Ord. 1810, (part), 1999; Ord. 1731, (part), 1996; Ord. 1543, ~ 12.1,
1991 )
APPENDIX A
STANDARDS FOR THE PROTECTION OF TREES DURING GRADING AND
CONSTRUCTION
OPERATIONS
The purpose of this appendix is to outline standards pertaining to the
protection of trees described in Section 14.18.200 of Chapter 14.18. The
standards are broad. A licensed landscape architect or International Society of
Arboriculture certified arborist shall be retained to certify the applicability of the
standards and develop additional standards as necessary to ensure the property
care, maintenance, and survival of trees designated for protection.
Standards
1. A plot plan shall be prepared describing the relationship of proposed
grading and utility trenching to the trees designated for preservation.
Construction and grading should not significantly raise or lower the ground level
beneath tree drip lines. If the ground level is proposed for modification beneath
19
5 "dLP
the drip line, the architecUarborist shall address and mitigate the impact to the
tree(s).
2. All trees to be preserved on the property and all trees adjacent to the
property shall be protected against damage during construction operations by
constructing a four-foot-high fence around the drip line, and armor as needed. \
The extent of fencing and armoring shall be determined by the landscape
architect. The tree protection shall be placed before any excavation or grading is
begun and shall be maintained in repair for the duration of the construction work.
3. No construction operations shall be carried on within the drip line area of
any tree designated to be saved except as is authorized by the Director of
Planning and Development.
4. If trenching is required to penetrate the protection barrier for the tree, the
section of trench in the drip line shall be hand dug so as to preclude the cutting of
roots. Prior to initiating any trenching within the barrier approval by staff with
consultation of an arborist shall be completed.
5. Trees which require any degree of fill around the natural grade shall be
guarded by recognized standards of tree protection and design of tree wells.
6. The area under the drip line of the tree shall be kept clean. No construction
materials nor chemical solvents shall be stored or dumped under a tree.
7. Fires for any reason shall not be made within fifty feet of any tree selected
to remain and shall be limited in size and kept under constant surveillance.
8. The general contractor shall use a tree service licensee, as defined by
California Business and Professional Code, to prune and cut off the branches
that must be removed during the grading or construction. No branches or roots
shall be cut unless at first reviewed by the landscape architecUarborist with
approval of staff.
20
5-J1-
9. Any damage to existing tree crowns or root systems shall be repaired
immediately by an approved tree surgeon.
Disclaimer:
This Code of Ordinances and/or any other documents that appear on this site may not reflect the most current legislation
adopted by the Municipality, American Legal Publishing Corporation provides these documents for informational purposes
only, These documents should not be relied upon as the definitive authority for local legislation, Additionally, the
formatting and pagination of the posted documents varies from the fonnatting and pagination of the official copy, The
official printed copy of a Code of Ordinances should be consulted prior to any action being taken,
':.ill-, !ii(~'dS~~ OJ!
U Ie; 1\!jun!cif)3jl~'! ni, Ci ,ci~} 1)1 IJ,
r-\f;)l:ri{:;-~n LJ-;(y2! !)I
;'cl I'!! ihi:'
\i'thc;' ~[";f{)rn!;\ti()r\ It;~!;'J;(!ir1(j ~hr~ ~}ff!{'i~.:! \:'cr:~i():'l
@ 2005 American Legal Publishing Corporaiion
techsupportlalamleoal,com
1,800,445,5588,
21
5-;;>'0
Exhibit B
Aki Honda
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Kiersa Witt on behalf of City of Cupertino Planning Dept.
Thursday, September 14,20068:28 AM
Ciddy Wordell
Aki Honda
Subject: FW: tree ordinance
Regarding the Tree Ordinance
-----Original Message-----
From: Gail Bower [mailto:gbower@levanta,com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 5:31 PM
To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept.
Subject: tree ordinance
Hello,
I wanted to ask if we shouldn't put redwoods, sycamores and black cottonwoods on the list of protected trees?
These are all important habit trees and natives.
I hope these can be called out specifically on the tree ordinance information.
Thank you,
Gail Bower
Sr. Marketing Programs Manager
Levanta
gbower@levanta.com
650-403-7246
www.levanta.com
9/19/2006
5-84
AkiHonda
From: Kiersa Witt on behalf of City of Cupertino Planning Dept.
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 8:26 AM
To: Aki Honda
Subject: FW: Comments on Proposed "Heritage and Specimen Trees Ordinance" Change
-----Original Message-----
From: Yvonne Chen [mailto:ychen01@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 2:59 PM
To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept.
Subject: Comments on Proposed "Heritage and Specimen Trees Ordinance" Change
Dear Cupertino Planning Commission,
I would like to comment on the proposed "Heritage and Specimen Trees Ordinance" change.
I just moved to Cupertino last year after purchasing a property on a hillside with several California live
oak trees on my property. There is one tree that has exposed root system hanging over my garage in
danger of falling over. When I inquired about a pe~it to remove it, I was shocked at the fee required -
$819 for the "director" permit and $1000 for an arborist inspection. The fee was more than the cost to
actually remove the tree. I don't understand why the permit fee is so high and what does a $1000
arborist fee cover. They both seem so excessive. It would be cheaper for the tree to fall over and let my
homeowner insurance cover my losses since I just have to pay my $1000 deductible. It seems rather
ironic. So now I have a tree that hangs over my garage that I have decided not to remove for now.
I hope this gives you a view from a resident of Cupertino. I think the fees are excessive. And the permit
approval requires a public hearing which is even more hassle since not everyone is familiar with the
process. I think a tree permit should be like any other building permits (i.e. re-roof' permit) with
reasonable fees. And I hope planning commission will move us in the right direction.
Feel free to contact me if necessary. Thank you.
Yvonne Chen
Cupertino resident
APN 342-17-046
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired ofspam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail. yahoo. com
5-30
9/19/2006
Exhibit C
Provide direction to the Planning Commission regarding proposed amendments to
Chapter 14.18 of the Cupertino Municipal Code (Heritage and Specimen Trees).
City Planner Ciddy Wordell reviewed the staff report via a PowerPoint
presentation.
Donald Anderson said that it is the City's responsibility to deny a resident a
permit for a solar system if any trees are in the way of the solar system. He noted
that in his particular case, the City should have known there was a conflict of
interest with its desire to keep trees even if they were blocking his solar panels,
He read a proposed ordinance that he submitted to Council.
Jennifer Griffin said that the protection oftrees is important and most cities have
tree ordinances. She urged Council to make sure street trees and heritage trees are
protected by fencing when homes are constructed.
Julia Tien talked about the exemption of public utilities in pruning protected trees.
She showed a picture of a tree that had been pruned back quite a bit and urged
Council to add some language to the ordinance to minimize the clearance
requirements for protected trees. She suggested that PG&E could install power
pole extensions near protected trees to move the high voltage lines away from the
trees to minimize the amount of pruning required. She noted that this would allow
the trees to keep more of their natural form and look more aesthetic.
City Attorney Charles Kilian noted that the City has not jurisdiction to tell PG&E
what type of wire to use and where to put it. Mayor Lowenthal asked that staff
give Ms. Tien the contact information for the public service contact at PG&E, and
also that he would be happy to be present in the meeting as well.
Council made the following comments to staff regarding amendments to the
ordinance:
1. Tree Protection:
· Confer with the City arborist regarding recommended trees to add to the
list
· Confer with the City naturalist regarding indigenous trees
· Look at the makeup of the CitY and what trees we currently have to decide
what protected trees to keep on the list
· Add wording to make unsafe or dead trees exempt, but involve the arborist
in making that decision
· Add wording regarding other circumstances leading to the demise of the
tree
2. Approval Authoritv:
· The Planning Commission should hear issues regarding the illegal cutting
of trees
s-~Q,;
· Keep approvals at the staff level as much as possible, but do 300 foot
noticing
3. Penalties:
· For civil penalties, the person should replace the tree and pay a fine
· The City Council can modify the penalty on an appeal
· Compare penalties of other cities
· The penalty should increase as each offense occurs
· Anyone who removes a tree in violation would need to apply for an after
the fact pemlit and come before the Council for conditions to he placed on
the restitution
· After the fact permits are a violation and should cost more
· Any pending applications won't be finalized until there is an approval of
an after the fact permit
· The location, size, and how long one has to replace a tree is important
4. Noticing:
· 300 feet for staff or Planning Commission
· Put the notice on the tree itself during the appeal time
5. Solar panels:
· No amendment
Other Council comments included:
· Look into the idea of transplanting trees from mature landscape areas to
areas in the City that are tree deficient
· Look into whether the ordinance should outline tree protection during
construction
5/~3
Exhibit 0
IF
CITY OF
CUPEI\TINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
FAX (408) 777-3333
Community Development Department
SUMMARY
AGENDA NO. \-1
AGENDA DATE August 15,2006
SUMMARY:
Provide direction to the Planning Commission regarding proposed amendments
to Chapter 14.18 of the Cupertino Municipal Code (Heritage and Specimen
Trees).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council review and provide direction to the
Planning Commission on the proposed Draft Model Ordinance. This draft is in
the beginning stages and is only intended to stimulate discussion. A public
hearing will be scheduled for the September 26, 2006 Planning Commission
meeting.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council has requested that Chapter 14.18 (Heritage and Specimen
Trees) of the Cupertino Municipal Code be reviewed for proposed amendments.
Staff requests direction from the City Council on the following questions related
to possible amendments:
1.
Tree Protection: Is the current protected tree list adequate, or should
additional trees be included, such as eucalyptus, redwood, pine and palm
trees?
Approval Authority: Should the Planning Commission be retained as the
approval authority for tree removal permits, or should staff be allowed to
make determinations in particular situations (e.g., tree removal permits
in conjunction with R-l privacy protection plans)?
Penalties: What type of penalties should be imposed if a protected tree is
removed without a permit? Should there be a monetary (civil) penalty?
Should there be a requirement for additional replacement trees (e.g., two
or three times the replacement ratio standard)? Should a combination of
replacement tree and monetary penalty be imposed?
Noticing: Should the noticing requirement for public hearings on h"ee
removal permits follow the minimum 300-foot radius noticing of
property owners for Use Permit and Variances? Should a smaller (e.g.
,neighboring properties) or larger (e,g., 500 foot) radius of notification be
required?
2.
3.
4.
s-~
Heritage and Specimen Tree Ordinance
Page 2
August 15,2006
5. Solar Panels: Should consideration be given to allow protected trees to be
removed for solar panel access?
DISCUSSION:
Staff has drafted a model ordinance incorporating proposed amendments to
address some of these questions. Tree ordinances from the Town of Los Gatos
and the cities of Campbell, Los Altos, Saratoga, Morgan Hill and Palo Alto were
reviewed as a basis for suggested amendments to the proposed format and
language of the model ordinance.
Questions
1. Tree Protection:
Is the current protected tree list adequate, or
should additional trees be included, such as
eucalyptus, redwood, pine and palm trees?
Staff Suggestions
All references to "specimen" trees have been changed to "protected"
trees for clearer identification.
New section has been added to clearly list "protected" trees. All
previously listed "Specimen" trees have been moved to the new
"protected trees" section.
New section has been added to clearly state that it is unlawful to
remove, damage or kill any protected tree in the City.
Removal of dead trees has been added as exempt from this chapter.
Staff requests Council direction if additional types of trees should be
included as "protected" trees.
2. Approval Authoritv:
Should the Planning Commission be retained as
the approval authority for tree removal permits,
or should staff be allowed to make
determinations in particular situations?
New language added to Section 14.18.150 and renamed to" Application
and Approval Authority for Tree Removal Permit" to provide the
review and approval process for trees.
New language added to 14.18.180 and renamed to "Review and
Determination of Application" to provide descriptions of the review and
determination process.
Definition added for "Development application" to identify types of
applications for which the retention or planting of trees may have been
required as part of the approved development application.
New section has been added providing replacement ratio requirements
for removed trees in conjunction with a tree removal permit
Language added in 14,18.140 (Exemptions) to explain that dead trees
may be removed upon order of the Director of Community
Development, sheriff or fire department, and that no tree removal fee
shall be charged. A city arborist review would not be necessary where
the Director of Community Development, sheriff or fire department
could make the determination.
Staff requests Council direction to determine if certain protected tree
removals may be determined at staff level by the Director of Community
Development (e.g., tree removal permits in conjunction with R-1 privacy
protection plans).
~-' 36
Heritage and Specimen Tree Ordinance
Page 3
August 15,2006
3. Penalties:
What type of penalties should be imposed if a
protected tree is removed without a permit?
Should there be a monetary (civil) penalty?
Should there be a requirement for additional
replacement trees (e.g., two or three times the
replacement ratio standard)? Should a
combination of replacement tree and monetary
penalty be imposed?
Staff has not recommended changes to the "penalty" section, pending
City Council direction. The Council may consider a monetary (civil)
penalty, a higher replacement ratio requirement or a combination of
both.
Council may also want to consider adding language that pending and
proposed applications and building permits not be approved until the
violation has been remedied,
~___________~~_____~ ._~____,_._~~_n__~_n __~____________'____m _ _~ ______n' ___
4. Noticing: New section added [0 addrpss noticing requirements to (allow Use
Should the noticing requirement for public Permit and Variance noticing requirements, including a minirnum 300
hearings on tree removal permits follow the foot radius notification of property owners.
minimum 300 foot radius noticing of property
owners for Use Permit and Variances? Should a
smaller (e.g. neighboring properties) or larger
(e,g., 500 foot) radius of notification be required?
5, Solar Panels: Staff requests Council direction on how to address this question.
Should consideration be given to allow protected
trees to be removed for solar panel access?
In addition to the above-referenced draft revisions, staff has added findings in
Section 14.18.180 to consider allowing the removal of trees where the protected
tree(s) are a detriment to the subject property due to overplanting or
overcrowding of trees on a site. An example is the recent retroactive tree removal
application for the removal of six coastal redwood trees that were planted in
small and narrow planter areas between townhouse units at the Joseph Circle
townhouse complex off of Vista Drive. In this particular case, the trees were
overgrown and crowding into the planter area causing damage to the adjacent
townhouse walls and fence.
Prepared by: Aki Honda, Senior Planner
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
~/W~
,
Ciddy Wordell
City Plam1er, Community Development
j)Y
David W. Knapp
City Manager
Enclosures:
Exhibit A: Draft Model Ordinance
G: Plannil1glPDREPORTlccl20061Tree Ordinance ReporllO Cc. Aug 15,2006
S--3(P