.02 TR-2006-16Yuh Jiuan Lin
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Application:
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Property Location:
TR-2006-16 Agenda Date: November 14, 2006
YuhJiuan Un
YuhJiuan Un
10740 Brookwell Drive, APN: 369-21-040
Application Summary:
Tree removal and replacement of a deodar cedar.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1. Approve the tree removal and require replacement tree(s) consisting of one 84-
inch box deodar cedar tree, or two 72-inch box deodar cedar trees, or three 48..-
inch box oak trees, or one field grown oak tree, with an appraised value
equivalent to the removed deodar cedar tree as determined by the City Arborist,
and in accordance with the model resolution:
BACKGROUND:
In February of 2006, the City received a complaint that an existing, mature deodar cedar
tree was being removed from the front yard of a single-family residential property
located at 10740 Brookwell Drive. The City's Code Enforcement Division responded to
the complaint and issued a stop work order on the remaining removal of the tree. The
case was then referred to the Planning Division, which required the preparation of an
arborist report to determine the health of the remaining portion of the tree.
On March 16,2006, the City Arborist conducted a site visit and prepared a report (See
Exhibit B). The City Arborist's report found that all of the branches of the tree had been
stub-cut to within 12-18 inches of the trunk of the tree, leaving no foliage or branches on
the tree. Additionally, the tree was stub-cut to 12 inches in diameter at 22 feet above
grade. The City Arborist determined that the tree was in good health and was not
suffering from significant pests prior to removal of the branches and foliage. However,
because of the severe pruning of the tree and removal of all branches and foliage, the
City Arborist found the tree to be a total loss and recommended its removal. The City
Arborist cited the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) guidelines that state that
if more than 50% of the leaf surface or wood of the tree is removed, it should be
considered a total loss.
). ---I
TR-2006-16
Page 2
November 14, 2006
DISCUSSION:
The property owner is requesting approval to remove the remaining portion of the
deodar cedar tree, and submitted a site plan with reasons for requesting the tree
removal (See Exhibit A), which are:
D Its falling leaves clogged the gutter and downspout on the residence
D It was leaning and the owners worried the tree would fall and cause
damage on the property
D It blocked natural sunlight into the residence
The City's Heritage and Specimen Trees Ordinance, Chapter 14.18 of the Cupertino
Municipal Code, lists deodar cedars with trunk diameters over 12 inches as protected
trees. The subject tree was measured to have a 28-inch trunk diameter at breast height (4
1/2 feet above grade) and is, therefore, a protected tree under the ordinance.
Additionally, the ordinance cites that "the destruction (in a twelve month period) of
twenty-five percent or more, as determined by the Community Development Director,
of any heritage or specimen tree by cutting, retarding, girdling or applying chemicals"
is considered a tree removal. Therefore, in accordance with the City's tree ordinance,
the subject tree was effectively removed without approval of a tree removal permit. The
applicant is requesting approval of a retroactive tree removal permit to complete the
removal of the tree. Pictures of the existing tree (See Exhibit C) show the condition of
the tree.
The City Arborist stated that there was no apparent reason to have caused this much
damage to the tree, as it was determined to be a healthy tree. Only one large limb over
the garage was unbalancing the tree, which could have been mitigated through end-
weight reduction or removal of that one limb. Staff believes that the property owner's
reasons for removing the tree did not warrant the removal of the tree, based upon the
City Arborist's report. However, since the City Arborist has determined that the tree
cannot be saved, staff concurs with the arborist's recommendation to remove it.
The. City Arborist prepared a tree appraisal of the deodar cedar, which was calculated
to be $15,100. The City Arborist states that the purchase cost, installation and warrantee
of one 84-inch or two 72-inch box replacement trees will be equivalent to the appraised
value of the tree.
Staff has reviewed the site and concurs with the City Arborist's replacement
recommendation, but also recommends that additional options be provided to the
applicant as replacement trees in the event that it is not possible for the property owner
to find an 84-inch box or 72-inch box trees. Therefore, staff recommends that the
Planning Commission consider allowing the following options to satisfy the tree
replacement requirements that is equivalent to the appraised value of the tree to be
removed:
t2~)
TR-2006-16
Page 3
~overnber14,2006
One 84- inch box deodar cedar tree, or
. Two 72-inch box deodar cedar trees, or
· Three 48-inch box oak trees, or
· One field grown oak tree
Staff also recommends that the replacements occur within the front yard of the
property, as it appears that the rear yard of the property is already planted with pine
trees that canopy over the rear yard.
Prepared by: Aki Honda, Senior Planner ~ n
Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Community Development Direct~
Enclosures:
Model Resolution
Exhibit A: Applicant's site plan and reasons for removing the tree
Exhibit B: Arborist Report from Barrie D. Coate & Associates dated March 16, 2006
Exhibit C: Photos of the tree
G: \ Planning \ PDREPORT\pcTRreporls \ 2006 \ TR-2006-16.doc
/)r3
TR-2006-16
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
MODEL RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING
THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF ONE DEODAR CEDAR TREE LOCATED
ON PROPERTY AT 10740 BROOKWELL DRIVE
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
TR-2006-16
Yuh Jiuan Un
10740 Brookwell Drive
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application
to approve the removal of a 28-inch diameter at breast height deodar cedar tree; and
WHEREAS, the deodar cedar tree is a specimen protected tree subject to Chapter 14.18
of the Municipal Code, pertaining to Heritage and Specimen Trees; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the
Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held
one or more public hearings on this matter; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, application for Tree Removal is hereby approved and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this
Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning
Application TR-2006-16, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission
Meeting of November 14, 2006 are incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1. APPROV AL ACTION
Approval is granted for the removal of a 28-inch diameter at breast height deodar
cedar tree within the front yard of property located at 10740 Brookwell Drive.
J-4
Model Resolution
Page 2
TR-2006-16
~ovenrrber14,2006
2. TREE REPLACEMENT
One 84-inch box deodar cedar tree, or two 72-inch box deodar cedar trees, or three
48-inch box oak trees, or one field grown oak tree shall be planted within the front
yard of the subject property as replacenrrel)t for the tree to be renrroved. The tree(s)
shall be planted within 60 days of this approval date, unless circunrrstances prevent
replanting within 60 days, such as availability of trees or weather conditions, as
determined by the Director of Comnrrunity Development. The property owner shall
be responsible for the purchase cost, installation and warrantee of the replacement
tree(s).
3. TREE COVENANT
A covenant shall be recorded that identifies the replacenrrent tree(s) as protected
tree(s). Prior to recordation, the covenant shall be reviewed and approved by the
Director of Conrrmunity Developnrrent.
4. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein nrray include certain fees,
dedication requirenrrents, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to
Governnrrent Code Section 66020( d) (1)1 these Conditions constitute written notice of
a statement of the anrrount of such fees, and a description of the dedications,
reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day
approval period in which you nrray protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and
other exactions, pursuant to Governnrrent Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you
fail to file a protest within this 90-day period conrrplying with all of the requirenrrents
of Section 66020, you will be legally barred fronrr later challenging such exactions.
PASSED A~D ADOPTED this 14th day of ~ovenrrber 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the
Planning Conrrmission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
~OES:
ABST AI~:
ABSE~T:
COMMISSIO~ERS:
COMMISSIO~ERS:
COMMISSIO~ERS:
COMMISSIO~ERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Conrrmunity Development
Marty Miller, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Conrrnrrission
G:\Planning\PDREPORT\RES\2006\ TR-2006-15 res.doc
J-5
t'-lGv-o-2~,1I2J6 02: 27P FROr1: BHRRIE COHTE
:7773333
Exhibit B
AN ANALYSIS OF DAMAGE TO A CEDAR TREE
AT 10740 BROOKWELL DRIVE IN CUPERTINO.
Prepared at the Request of:
Gary Chao
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Site Visit by:
Barrie D. Coate
Consulting Arborist
March 16, 2006
Job #03-06-055
P.l
'r(\~..,~ ?~l:i'~ ,I,;W
\ '\r\ o.,,5~ f ".... (..I,t;'",
'p., dHJ
['.1,'.,;"
;ml
j;;tl
li"n"ii
1~~!
""U
I ~ "n
I'
i.,
In!
kb
I:' ,"
r~li
[?fj
~,:, i':
I'iiit
.;1';;":
m~;
i:..:..:
!}'fi
Hi}:
I:').,
[u~
~'i. ~
I,;; ~,
Hit
IIII!
If:): i;
.-,:" ~. !
i~: ~
rH.
r;l)~j
~m;
r:;.~!
',:.~:(
;2-'7
NOV-6-2006 02:27P FROM:BRRRIE CORTE
408 3531238
TO: 7773333
.__..-- .-.. --- -- -
AN ANAl.VSIS OF DAMA.GE TO A CEDAR TREE AT 10740 BROCKWEll. DRIVE IN CUPERTINO
Assignment .' .
Mr. Chao asked me to inspect a cedar tree in the front yard of 10740 Brookwell Drive In Cupertino.
The impetuS for die inspection ;s1l1e fact diet 011 of 1I1e branches had beeO stub-cut to wRhin 12.\8 inches
of the trunk of the tree leaving no foliage or branches.
Observations.
The tree is. deodar cedor (Cedrus deodara) of 27.9-inch DBH (diameter at 4.5 feet above grade) aod
remaining height of 22 feet.
The tree was stub-cut to approximately 12 inches in diameter at 22 feet above grade.
An inspection of1l1e vascular tlssue oldie tree __ diet it was in good heal1l1 aod is DOt suffering
from significant pests.
Discussion
The International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) guide dictates that if more than 50% of the leaf surface
or wood is removed from the tree it should be considered a total loss.
This case certainly qualifies for that definition.
Deodar cedars which are pruned this severely will certainly produces masses of watersprouts all up and
down the trunk and from the remaining branch stubs, but those will never be branches and will always
remain vulnerable to breaking off at thc parent limb.
Thcre is no apparent reason to have caused this much damage to this tree as was done.
There is evidence that one large diameter limb was suspended directly over the garage however it would
have been possible to either do endweigbt reduction from that limb or to completely remove that limb if
necessary but the structure of the tree could have been improved without removing other limbs.
At this point I would suggest that the tree be removed but since the tree had considerable value its
replacement or compensation are certainly appropriate.
Using ~e Trunk F~nnula Method for Calculation of Value of Trees, this tree is worth $15.100. This is
approXimately eqUIvalent to the cost of purchase, installation and warrantee of one 84 inch or two 72 inch
boxed trees.
Note that one 14 inch diameter limb pointed directly over the garage and may have resulted in dropping
small ~~ches or parts over the house but that problem could have been solved by pruning that limb or
removmg It rather than stub-cutting the tree.
~~~
Barrie D. Coate
BDClsl
Ene.:
T~nk Formula Method Calculation Sheet
PICtureS'
PREPARED BY: BARRIE D. CQt.TE. CONSULTlNGARBORIST
MARCH 16. 2006
P.2
I. LI
[1:+:
I.i/.'.'
::;'i
.
I.'i
I,:
i: ~I
I: :,;~
t'j-;."
\":>-!
I. -
i.'.' d
['<'
", i
t,,-,
,.
Il..'
i';'
n:.:~:\
I
,
r ~-. ~ :
i" ;-;
r::
UH;
,:'
l,,'~j
~. ; - ,: ,
k' ,
I
,
l:,.:
L:'",
t,'J
I' ~,~' ~
I" ~
I
i
I' .,
1:. !
~. '
I ~ ,', i-: I
I'.';
~'i!~~
f',I
j.
h::'.,
h;-,~::
i:
, I
I
I
!'n';
L"'
I~'. :~
I'
I'
["
~[;!1
[1,,,.
H,.;,
V:~:
rl;t~
1T.\.
1<:
li: :
r::
I,.,
!:;,
I."
J-~€>
BARRI E D. COATE
and ASSOCIATES
Horticutural Consultants
23535 Summit Road
Los Gatos, CA 95033
408l35~ 1 052
Trunk Formula Method
9th Edition, Guide for Plant Appraisal
for Trees Less Than 30" diameter
I Owner of Property (tree): Lin
Location: 10740 Brookwell Drive, Cupertino
Date of Appraisal: March 16, 2006 I Date of Failure:
Appraisal Prepared for: Gary Chao, City of Cupertino
Appraisal Prepared by: Barrie D. Coate, Celiified Arborist #0586
Field Observations of Subiect Tree
1. Species: Deodar Cedar (Cedrus deodara)
2. Condition: Before Cutting 90%
3. Trunk Diameter (inches): 27.9
4. Location Value %
Site 85 %+ Contribution 90 %+ Placement 80 %= 255 +3= 88 %
>
Reeional Plant Appraisal Committee Information of Species
5. Species Rating 80 %
6. Replacement Tree Size (sq. inches)TAR 14.6 in.
7. Replacement Tree Cost $902.50
8. Installation Cost $902.50
9. Installed Tree Cost (#7 + #8) $1.805
10. Unit Tree Species Cost (per sq. inches) $37 per in2
Calculations UsillB2 Field and Re!!ional Committee Information
11. Appraised Trunk Area
Trunk Diameter, Squared (#3) x.785= 611 SQ. in.
12. Appraised Tree Trunk Increase (TAINCR) =
TAA ~in. (#11) - TAR 14.6 sq. in. (#6) = 596 sq. 111.
13. Basic Tree Cost
(TAINeR) (#12) ~ sq. in' x UTC (#10) $ 37 per sq. m.
+ Installed Tree Cost (#9) $1.805 = $23,875
14. Appraised Value =
Basic Tree Cost (#13) $23,875 .
x Species (#5) 80 % x Condition (#2) 90 %x Location (#4) 88 %= $15,127
15. Roun.d to nearest $100 ($5,000+) or $10 (less than $5000) = $15,100
JrCI
An Analysis of Damage to a Cedar Tree at 10740 BroobveIl Drive, Cupertino
:':.'f]' " /.-,. .-"~" .' }~- -, '~;, -~~~ -'-", '1~it,,;~ .,,: . """
. , " ,_." V;'" ," ,'" \~~,~~'_. . ,~,'''./''"~'
~ "';'\ . '. "1_ 3.. ." (. ~ ...
~r .4.\,- . I " r"" 'r ~, .
.1 ~t~:' I , .~.';' jj' '\ ~~;. ~"") ':.;1"" .~,-./r ' ~-
;V,-~I"'\f.:.' ~:' " ,~!';-'~L~' '~?iA~~"'\ "'. ..,:*~s,' ;<.::\ ~ ;\
i11 ~ .1":',:,::~;:"",,: i .~!;~'ti.' .~:/--- -- !,_.~:"'-.,~~~
....- ')~ .\>:; "'>\i;, ..l~.,o/~;>:,:/(~._....;>-;~,_~-:,i:\
d '~l~'!~k C " f/f''t..~", ...';]"-".....:. . ,...... , . :.'\':~
) . ";~~), ':'1~~' t/ :JjLfl;r_~;;~,~~\
J' ' -. , ".~ ~ ," '(Y':~'. . -t,: ~ '::!;.~t "~_I." i< ~~~~~~~':~~~~~i
~.)' .' :~:~;;2;,;. '.~ " ' J:iT': I~.,: J : "';"
~ " _,.J.,O...... .' 1-" ;\"."" ,. \.' \rj'F'. .--.-:1:;/.... . . :'~\" :' I,' .\
. "^'" ;tl:a."" .! '-,' l."- - ','10:'." :A~. ~ "',_ ~,.:.;, !.,ii.,:. ..' '-'~, "
, .\...~..~. '~f,. . ' .'. ."', t-! '- i ~ -
}, ~,k~~}~~ll : ~'~,' ,.:.'.' """"\ \ '~~~t .\,1\.'-
tr:# "J~ ); ~ ...'(l~:. "::-~i- . ,\ --''''~~,' .~~,- ... ( ~.
';: '~<'./ . 'l'~'i. .. '!! r -'J~;'" -ti;~~;~,~",
\-1. C;l ,. \. -., 'I' .'~ of. ,~.:-o---i L~ .,"~:. . If.i,;'',
t Photo 3 - Healthy, normal tissue,
Prepared By: Barrie D. Coate, Consulting Arborist
March 16, 2Q06
~-ID