Loading...
DIR-2008-22b CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Ave11ue, Cupertino, California 95014 (408) 777-3308 Mayor and City COUl1cil n1embers .Chairn1all and Plalu1ll1g COlnmissio11ers . W .' C. .l-'(: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development4' ~. Prepared by: Leslie Gross, Assistant Planner To: From: Date: August 25, 2008 Subject: Director's Minor Modificatio11 (DIR-2008-22) of Use Permit (U-2007-09) to allow the remoyal of six trees located at 10900 N. Ta11tau Avenue U1 the P(MP) zoning district. C11apter 19.132.of the Cupertino MUllicipal Code allovvs for adrninistrative approval of minor cl1a11ges ll1 a project. T11e Director reports l1is decision to t11e City COUl1cil a11d Plalming Commission in tilne to allo\v an appeal of the decisiol1 within fourteen calel1dar days. BACKGROUND: On Jar1uary 8, 2008, the City COUl1cil approved Use Permit (U-2007-09) and Arc11itectural and Site Approval to C011struct a r1e\v 100,000 square foot, two- story office buildu1g, wi th b addi tio11al c011di ti011S of approval pertall1ll1g to tree 1- :.. plan ti11g a11d green buildir1g requirernents. City Council also approved t11e Tree Removal Permit (TR-2007-06) to removal 37 trees to accomn1odate the 11ew developme11t. Tl1e project site is a 6.6-acre property located on tl1e east side of N. Tantau Ave11ue, sout11 of HOlnestead Road a11d Forge Drive. DIR-2008-22 10900 North Tantau Avenue Page 2 DISCUSSION: The applicant is proposing the removal of one Modesto Ash Evergreen Ash with a 24- inch diameter trunk base, and two American Sweet Gum with a 16, and 18-inch diameter trunk base. The three trees are identified on the attached plan as (Tree #88/89 (joined), and 699). Upon further review of the site conditions, three of the original trees proposed for removal (#1023, 1098, and 93) were found to be savable with minor development modifications. However, one additional tree was found to be located within a new parking area, which would require extensive grading that would severely damage the roots of the tree. The additional tree proposed for removal is an American Sweet Gum with a 16-inch diameter truck base and identified on site as # 88. The joined tree was also found to identified on site as #89, rather then #88/89, as shown on the attached plans. The reason for the tree removal request is that the site plan for this project site has recently changed, and efforts to preserve the trees would be too difficult due to the existing health, location, and/ or root structure of the trees. The original arborist report, dated September 12,2007, rated the health of three of the trees as moderate, stating that these trees are worthy of retention but not at the expense of major design revisions. Another arborist report was also prepared dated May 6, 2008 in response to the revised plans, and stated that the preservation suitability of the trees was fair to poor. The Director believes the amount of construction work required around trees #88 and 89/90 would significantly impact the health and survival of the trees. In addition, the City's arborist states in the report that these trees may not survive the construction due to their location, and/ or root structure. . The Director has determined that tree #699 shall be retained, and has provided recommended development modifications to preserve the tree to the maximum extent possible. Recommended development modifications include insetting portions of the parking strip along the nQrtheast perimeter, and providing compactparking spaces. The modifications are intended to allow emergency vehicle access around the tree while providing an acceptable setback around trunk, thereby not impacting the root system and general health of the tree. The applicant has informed the Director that they will provide drawings to determine if the recommended development modifications would allow the tree to survive, while allowing emergency vehicle access. APPROV AL: The Director approves the removal of trees #88 and 89/90 with the following conditions: 1. TREE REPLACEMENTS The applicant is required to plant a minimum six 36-inch box replacement tree(s) for each tree removed on the property in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. All replacement trees shall be native species of trees. The DIR-2008-22 10900 North Tantau Avenue Page 3 applicant shall provide a landscape plan showIng the location and species of tree(s) to be planted on the property to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. The replacement trees shall be required to be planted prior to final inspection. 2. TREE PRESERVATION Tree #699 shall be retained. If the recommended development modifications do not allow the tree to be retained, and emergency vehicle access cannot be achieved, the applicant may provide drawings showing the site restrictions and tree preservation constraints on the property to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 3. IN-LIEU TREE REPLACEMENT FEE In the event any of the replacement trees cannot be planted on the property as determined by the Director of Community Development, the applicant may pay an in-lieu tree replacement fee based upon the purchase and installation cost of the replacement tree(s) in compliance with the City's Protected Trees ordinance. 4. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount 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 may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. Enclosure: Plan Set . ਍㬭਍䥁਍൭洊਍䥁਍൭縊਍⤨਍഼⤊ാ爊਍ⴭ൵爊਍㸩਍ൺഊഊഊഊഊ䤊䤠਍਍⸡縠⹾⸮⸺⸺‾⸾㸧‾㸾›㨮㨭㨭㸮਍›㨭ⴠ❇张⸮⸮⸺㨠⸰⸮‮㨭㨮㨭㨭ⴠ›㨭㨮㨮਍⸭‮‮⸮⸮⸮⸮മ㰊㸭〠㨠㨭〠㰠㰼㰼㰼਍⸮⸮⸮⸠⸠⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮മ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മഊ⸊縠縿㸾㱾⤩繪਍਍⹚മഊ縊਍൚樊℻਍ൣഊ縊਍湲਍਍⁉മ漊䰠⸠縬㨺㨺਍䩬繲⸮਍㨺㩬㩾਍⁉ⴺ㩫൬✊✱䑃䤠਍⁉ⴺ✮㩃਍⁉笼❮൬䌊ㄧ䌧ㄺ਍‭昼❾റ㨊昭㨺椺樺਍呦✡਍縮㩉䤨✩൉㨊楉✠㨺繬ㄺ਍㩉›‮ㄨ✩റ䤊㨠䤺縺ㄺ਍⁉⹉‧昧⅔ധ㰊㩩❺൬䤊∠✱㬭Ⱗ਍⁉㨺㩻ⰺ਍⁉㨺㩻椺਍椼ⴺⴺ൉䤊㬺㭩㬺✺਍਍਍മഊ搊਍਍但䝒⁅剄噉൅ഊഊ爊‭⸭⵲ⴠⴠ⸮Ⱞ਍਍ൾഊ⠊ഩ⸊渮਍⤨਍⤨਍ൾ娊਍ൾ挊ഺഊ⸊਍਍਍മഊ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮琠⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮‮⹴⸮琠⸮⸮⸮Ⱞ⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮മ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮‮⸮਍⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮渮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮മഊ㨊㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺⸺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨮㨮㨮㨮㨭ㄺ㨱㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺㨺਍縺㩾✮✮✮✮✮✮㨮繾㩟縡繾❾✮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮縮畟⸮繨繾繾縭⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸠⸠⸠⸮⸠਍䔱楁㍬‧⁎尡ㄧ‧㐲‧㔢•⁅㐴⹾ㄧ✲䔠䕌潃剔⡉䄻⁌䅅䕓䕍呎਍਍⁥縪繾繾繾ൾഊ琊䨻✠‫⸮⸠⸮‮⤨਍繾爠縠縠繧വ堊⁾✭ㄭൾ笊䤩❓ⴠ笧娩਍␻‮〱⠠屪਍繑㨠繾਍⁷⸮縮൭ⴊ⁉堢卉ധ⠊
㤢ാ縊縸਍਍਍䕒潃偉䥒⹵⁌剄奉❡ⵖ⁙䅅䕓䕍呎਍਍睯张਍਍മഊഊഊ㨊㨺⹲縧⸺਍‮‮‮‮⁾മ⸊⹣⸮縮⹲਍㨮縭ⴺⴺ㨠ഭⴊ㰺㨭‮㨺⸺㨮㨺⹾਍縮⹾㨠繽⹾਍‮⸮⸠⹉縮⸠⸠മ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മ㬊㬭ⴭ※⸮⸮‮㜧爻഻⸊⸮⸮⸮⸱⸮ⴱ⸺⸮⸮മ㬊㜧∻≾•✺✷ഺ⸊⸠⸠⸠⸠⸠⸮⸠⸠⸠਍⸮縮∠䔧≾਍⸮‮‮⸮മ⸊⸮‮⹣挠⸮മℊ縧⹁⸧⸠礡⸱ൾ∊⸠ㄠㄧ•മ⸊Ⱐ㬮㩾
愼縻⸺Ⱞധ⸊Ⱜㄧㄧ∧਍Ⱞ㬮⹾㨬㨭⸮㩾⸮⸬਍⸮縮‮⹲⸮਍‮‮•嬢⸠⸠⸠਍⸮‮‮⸮മ⸊⸮⴮⴮⸠⸠ⴠⴭ਍⸮‮‮⸮〠਍Ⱞ㬮㩾⸮⸺⸻㩾⸮⸬਍⸮⸠ㄠ⸠⸠⸠⸠⸠਍‮⸮⸮㨮❊⸮⹾⸮⸮മ⸊縠㩱㬺㨭㩬‭›∱㨺ⴻ㨺ധ挊挠‮‮‮⹣਍✻㬷•⸧‧❲✻㬷਍‮•‮昢‮‮‮മ⸊⸮⸠⸠⸮਍⸮⸮⸠⸰⸮⸮⸮⸮弮਍‮Ᵽ⸠挠ഢ⸊繾⸺⸺縺⹾਍縧✺✺㩉㨺ぴ縮ധ⸊⸮繪⸮∮⸮⸮⸮മℊ⸮∮ⴧ✭•✮✠≛ⴧ✭ⴢ✭਍‮‮‮‮⹣⸠਍⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊⸮⸠⸠⸮਍⸮⸮挠弮彟਍Ⱞ‮‮⸮മ⸊⸮⸠⸱⸮⸮മ⸊⸠✠䨮✮䰮✺•മ⸊‮⸮⸮⸮മഊഊഊ✊弭彟ⵟㄭ਍਍ൾഊ䤊൉ഊഊ⸊⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊㬺✺楾਍⸮縮⸮⸬⸮മ㨊㩾㨻ㄺ㩾›昺縺㨺㨧㨻ഺ⸊⸮⸠⸠⸮਍⸰⸮⸮⸮‮മⴊⴭ⸠ⴠ⸮⸮ഭ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮⸠਍⸮‮‮⸮മ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮⸠਍‮㨺ⴺ㨺〭⸧›縮ⴺ㨮㨺മ⸊⸮ⴠ㨭⸮⹾⸮਍‮㨭❾❾≉✠❉❾❾❾਍縺㨺㨧縺ㄧ㨺㨠㩦㩾✺縺ഺ⸊⸮⸠⸠⸮਍⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮‮‮⸭⸮⴮਍〮⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊⸮⸠⸠⸮਍⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊㨠㨺㨭ⴻⰮ㨮⸠⹲ⴺ㨮㨻മ⸊⸮⹾縮⸮⸠਍‮㨭❾❾≉✠❉❾㭾✢਍⸮⸮⸮⹾⸮⸢⸮⸮മ⸊✢ⴻ⴮縮⸮縮縮⴮縮മ⸊⸮⸠⸠⸮਍⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മⴊⴭ⸠⸠⸮ⴭ਍⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊㨺⸺㨮ㄮ㬧⸠⹉⸺㨮⹾਍‮‮‮✮‮爮‮‮‮മ⸊⸮⸮笮⸮縮⸮⸮⸮਍›㩾㨭㨺❾㨺㨠ㄱ✺ⴺ㨺㨺ഺⴊⴭ⸠ⴠ⸮⸮ഭ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮⸠਍⸮‮‮⸮മ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸮⸠਍縮ⴺ㨮‮㨮爮㬻⸭⸺㨭മ⸊⸠强弮ㄮ⸮⸠⸱⹟❟⸭਍⸮✠∱⹾⸧਍⸮⸮⸮⹾⸮㩡⸮⸮⸮਍‮㩾㨭㨺汪㨺㨠㩦㨧ⴺ㨺ⴺ㨺਍ⴭ‭‮ⴭഭ⸊⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊⸮⸠⸠⸮਍⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊㨠㨰⸭⸺⸠ⴺ✱㨻⸭⸺㨭മ⸊⸠强弮ㄮ⸮⸠⸱⸫❟⸭਍⸮⸮⸮⹾⸮⵲⸮⸮⸮਍∺ⴺⴺⴻㄧ›琼愺㨮㨭㨭ⴭഺ⸊⸮⸠⸠⸮਍⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മⴊ⸮⸮‭‮ⴭ⸮മ⸊⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊⸮⸠⸠⸮਍⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മ縊ⴺ㨮䤻㨭⸠⸮ⴺ㨮縮മ⸊⸠⸮⸺㨮ㄮ⸬ㄮ㨮⸮⸺›മ⸊⸮⸮⸮⸠਍਍਍⸮਍ഭഊ朊਍繾਍❩硬਍繾਍≭ബ⸊ㄮ縠ൾ㨊ㄺ縠縠਍㨻㨻⁛ൾ⸊⸮椮縠਍਍഻⸊ബ⸊⸮椮਍⸮⸮റ⸊⸠ഺ⸊‮റⴊ›㨭ഺഊഊ⸊✠൩⸊⸮ㄮ਍✺⸻റ㨊㨺椺਍㨮㨮൩ഊഊ䤊਍⸧‧ഡ⸊⸮ㄮ਍⸮⸮ഡ⸊‮ബ⸊⸺㄰਍਍മഊഊ㨊㨺樠਍⸧‧ൾ⸊⸮ㄮ਍ⴺ›ൊഊഊ⸊✠൬㨊㨠റ㨊ⴠ›൪ഊഊ㨊㨺റ《㨭䨠਍਍਍਍㨺ㄺ਍਍਍਍㨺ㄺ਍਍മഊ⸊⸰⸮⸰਍⸮⸮⸮⸠਍〮〮⸮⸠਍〰⸮⸮⸠਍⸮⸮⸮⸠਍⸮〮〰ര⸊⸮‮‰⹯਍⸮⸮⸮⸠਍⸮⸰〰഻⸊⸮⸰‮മ⸊‮⹣⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮ബ《⸮⸮⸮〮⸮⸮⸮⸮〰〮〰⸮⸮⸠਍⸮〰‮⸰⸮⸮⸮⸮〰⸮〮⸮⸮⸮⸮਍⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮‮മ⸊〰〮⸮⸮〰〮〮⸰⸮〠〠⸮〰⸮⸮਍⸰⸰〮〮⸮⸮〰〰〰⸰⸮⸰⸮⸰਍⸮挠⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮਍⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸰⸮⸮⸮⸮〮਍⸮⸮⸰⸮⸮⸮〮⸰〠⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮⸮਍彾縮繾䱟℮⴮⸱✹繬繃䰠繾彟彟ⵟⴭ⹌弮ⴱ彟彟彟ⴭ琮弮਍਍⸮⸮⸠਍⸮⸮⸠਍਍⸮⸠਍⸮‮മ⸊‮മ⸊⸮⸠਍⸮‮മഊ - - Minta Clara County Clerk- Recorder's Office itato of California Document No.: 16119 County of Santa Clara �,�\ O; �T o NumbFiled er of Fated On: 10/10/2008 Office of the County Clerk -Recorder �+ Business Division * , '-1L 901340 Through: 11/16/2000 CRO Order Number: 141622 County Government Center ylTq c ¢��� Fee Total: 60.00 70 West Hedding Street, E. Wing, 1" Floor REGINA ALCOMENDRA9, County Clerk- Record San Jose, California 95110 (408) 299-5665 by Vanessa Ortiz, Deputy Clerk- Recorder, CEQA DOCUMENT DECLARATION -- ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE RECEIPT PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: 1. LEAD AGENCY: City of Cupertino 2. PROJECT TITLE: DIR-2008-22 3. APPLICANT NAME: Sylvester Ramirez PHONE: 408.777.3308 4. APPLICANT ADDRESS: 10900 North Tantau Avenue 5. PROJECT APPLICANT IS A: ❑ Local Public Agency ❑ School District ❑ Other Special District ❑ State Agency O Private Entity 6. NOTICE TO BE POSTED FOR 30 DAYS. 7. CLASSIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT a. PROJECT THAT IS SUBJECT TO DFG FEES ❑ 1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE §21152) $ 2,606.75 $ 0.00 ❑ 2. NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE §21080(C) $ 1,876.75 $ 0.00 ❑ 3. APPLICATION FEE WATER DIVERSION (STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD ONLY) $ 886.25 $ 0.00 ❑ 4. PROJECTS SUBJECT TO CERTIFIED REGULATORY PROGRAMS $ 886.25 $ 0.00 ❑ 5. COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE FEE (REQUIRED FOR a_1 THROUGH as=4 ABOVE) $ 50.00 $ 0.00 Fish & Game Code §711.4(e) b. PROJECT THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DFG FEES O 1. NOTICE OF EXEMPTION ($50.00 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE FEE REQUIRED) $ 50.00 $ 50.00 E-12. A COMPLETED "CEQA FILING FEE NO EFFECT DETERMINATION FORM" FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME, DOCUMENTING THE DFG'S DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT WILL HAVE NO EFFECT ON FISH, WILDLIFE AND HABITAT, OR AN OFFICIAL, DATED RECEIPT / PROOF OF PAYMENT SHOWING PREVIOUS PAYMENT OF THE DFG FILING FEE FOR THE *SAME PROJECT IS ATTACHED ($50.00 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE FEE REQUIRED) DOCUMENT TYPE: ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT' ❑ NEGATIVE DECLARATION $ 50.00 $ 0.00 c. FILING THAT IS NOT SUBJECT TO DFG OR COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE FEES • ❑ NOTICE OF PREPARATION 8. OTHER: FEE (IF APPLICABLE): $ 9. TOTAL RECEIVED......................................................................................................................................... $ 50.00 *NOTE: ,"SAME PROJECT' MEANS NO CHANGES. IF THE DOCUMENT SUBMITTED IS NOT THE SAME (OTHER THAN DATES), A "NO EFFECT DETERMINATION" LETTER FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME FOR THE SUBSEQUENT FILING OR THE APPROPRIATE FEES ARE REQUIRED. THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND ATTACHED TO THE FRONT OF ALL CEQA DOCUMENTS LISTED ABOVE (INCLUDING COPIES) SUBMITTED FOR FILING. WE WILL NEED AN ORIGINAL (WET SIGNATURE) AND TWO COPIES. INCLUDE THIRD COPY IF YOU REQUIRE AN ENDORSED COPY FOR YOUR RECORDS. CHECKS FOR ALL FEES SHOULD BE MADE PAYABLE TO: SANTA CLARA COUNTY CLERK -RECORDER PLEASE NOTE: FEES ARE ANNUALLY ADJUSTED (Fish & Game Code §711.4(b); PLEASE CHECK WITH THIS OFFICE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME FOR THE LATEST FEE INFORMATION. . NO PROJECT SHALL BE OPERATIVE, VESTED, OR FINAL, NOR SHALL LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERMITS FOR THE PROJECT BE VALID, UNTIL THE FILING FEES REQUIRED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION ARE PAID." Fish & Game Code §711.4(c)(3) 09.09-2008 City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Notice of Exemption To: County Clerk -Recorder 70W. Hedding Street, Vt Floor East Wing—Business Division San Jose, CA 95110 Project Title: DIR-2008-22 Project Location - (be specific): 10900 North Tantau Avenue Project Location - (City):Cupertino _ Project Location - (County): Santa Clara Description of Project: Director's Minor Modification to allow the removal of six trees in a Planned Development zone Name of Public Agency approving project: City of Cupertino Name of Person or Agency carrying out project: Sylvester Ramirez Exempt Status: (check one) Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268); _ Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a)); —Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(li)(c)); x Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: 15304 _Statutory Exemption. State code number: Reasons why project is exempt: Minor alterations to the land Lead Agency Contact Person Leslie Gross Area code/teleph6ne number (408) 777-1356 Signature: 4-1-7 Date: August 21, 2008 Title: Assistant Planner G: I PlanninglERCI Exempt12008exemptl dir200822. doe `4 - Page 1 of 3 Leslie Gross From: Sylvester Ramirez [sramirez@devcon-const.com] Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 10:43 AM . To: Larry Wallerstein; Steve Piasecki; Leslie Gross; Aki Honda Cc: Ronald Tate; John Salera; Ralph Borelli; Dennis Regynski; Leonard Smith Subject: RE: Tree Issues Leslie, In response to Larry's e-mail and taking a closer look at the trees per your walk though of the project, we can work around saving the following trees: • Tree 93, 1098, 1023 The following trees will need to be removed: Tree 699: The issue with this tree is that root ball is above the finished grade and the new curb line is in line is at center of the trunk. The option proposed by Steve to relocate the curb line would require the curb to move out five feet to the north, impacting the parking stalls and the alignment of the drive aisle. If we were to off set the drive isle and parking curb line along Kern Ave, this would move the street side curb line into two of the street side trees creating the loss of trees 1113 & 11.11. So.to summarize in order to save one tree 699 we would lose two trees 1113 & 1111 as well as an offsetting the drive isles. • Tree 88 & 89/90: These trees sits in the parking stall and to work around it would create an unbalanced look to the south side of the parking area and the loss of 6 to 7 parking stalls. The root balls are also above finish grade and will cause a long term maintenance issue with the curbs, gutters and asphalt. YYYJ�J "' There are approximately 6 existing trees clustered to the west that are set in from the curb in the general area that will not be affected. I hope you can see that we are making every effort to work around trying to save as many trees as possible, and when it's all said and done and with all the trees that are planned to be added, this will be a very successful project for the City of Cupertino and the developer. Thank -you, Sylvester R. Ramirez, Assoc. AIA Deveon Construction Inc. 690 Gibraltar Drive Milpitas, CA 95035 Phone: 408-942-8200 Direct: 408-519-8372 Fax: 408-946-7713 Web: devcon-const.com The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Its contents (including any attachments) are confidential and may contain privileged information. If you are not an intended recipient you must not use, disclose, disseminate, copy or print its contents. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message. From: Larry Wallerstein[mailto:LWallerstein@TateDevelopment.com] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 2:34 PM To: Steve Piasecki; LeslieG@cupertino.org; Aki Honda Cc: Ronald Tate; John Salera; Ralph Borelli; Sylvester Ramirez; Dennis Regynski; Leonard Smith 8/18/2008 Page 2 of 3 Subject: Tree Issues Steve, Leslie and Aki: Sylvester will give you a more cogent explanation in his response, but speaking for our owner's group, we met today and discussed this further and would like to add owner comments. While we were on site, I think I heard Steve's concerns that new trees won't look like established trees "for ten years". We may have a solution to that, but we need far more consideration from the City on these tree removals than the initial walk through indicates, not to be impolite. Please understand that we have stepped up to the greatest degree possible to accommodate neighbors, the City, and State and Federal Agencies, while still trying to develop a site in an awful economic market. We love the idea of turning a Superfund into a LEED Silver building, and are spending quite a bit more to do that than we anticipated. To date we have enjoyed working hand in glove with the City and have volunteered to do more than any Agency has mandated along the way. Having said that, there are certain economic realities both we, and the City, need to keep in mind. The logical tenant for this building is Kaiser Permanente. if we lose NO PARKING SPACES at all, and if the City gives us an exception from the medical office requirement on parking, and we use all of the planned alternate parking, we JUST make it to enough parking for a Kaiser office building. We cannot lose ANY parking spaces. We are also paying for a private Solar system installation where tree 1098 is, as well as a radius where one of the parking spaces on the West (Southern corner of West Side) parking is. That tree is also above grade including its rootball, and if we do save it, we will be causing ourselves a curb and asphalt repair problem for the future, and with that, public liability issues . We also have two parking spaces where tree 88 and tree 89 are. It is tree 89 that is double labeled as 89/90, but basically 88 and 89 have to go away. They cannot be worked around in any manner. There really is no question on these. Tree # 93, which frankly looks like it is going to die anyway, changes entry radius, and parking back up. However, if we are forced to, we could try to find ways to save the tree for what appears to be a fairly short life span it will continue to enjoy. We completely re-routed utilities and worked overtime and with great care to save tree # 1023. If it stays, we will also have to re -locate the bicycle storage, but we will do that. Tree 1023 can be saved. And we will do that. Tree 699 is a nightmare. We went out and checked the height of the rootball against finished grades, and it will sit far above finished grades. We could put a retaining wall around it, but even with compact parking, we can look forward to accidents as people back into the retaining wall. Reconfiguring landscape to make the entire back section of the project unbalanced to save this one tree makes no sense at all. And it interferes with the symmetry of the bioswales as well as the Forge fronted landscaping. It is just a nightmare to keep and needs to go away. If the City needs any of the requested trees for removal to stay, we suggest that you cause # 93 to stay, and tree number # 1023, and allow us to remove # 88, # 89, #699 and # 1098 in that order of priority, with the first three being absolutely necessary, and #1098 being hard and expensive to work around, but possible. In speaking with my guys, they tell me that it is possible at some nurseries to purchase a 48 inch box tree. We would be willing to buy two of those, and move the other two trees being removed from 24 inch boxes to 36 inch boxes, to make up for the fact we didn't realize when we first came in that we couldn't live with some of the trees. Keep in mind that we will still have mature perimeter trees, mature interior trees, something like 91 new trees coming in, and LOADS AND LOADS of landscaping on this site, before making your decision. There is no harm to the City's interests in granting our request. Thanks you, Larry I. Wallerstein Tantau Investments LLC 8/18/2008 Page 3 of 3 "Sylvester, To recap, 88/89:Remove (Report by Deborah Ellis only lists 88/89 -American Sweet Gum. No mention of 90 on the report, or the original tree survey plan). 699: Work with Staff to retain tree by decreasing the width of the landscape strip, and by providing compact spaces. 1023:To be remained, as utilities were re-routed. 1098:Work with Staff to retain tree. 93:Work with Staff to retain tree. Potentially provide compact spaces. Please add any comments. Larry I. Wallerstein Executive Vice President Tate Diversified Development, Inc. 22 South Santa Cruz Ave. Second Floor Los Gatos, CA. 95030 (408) 399-4950 ext. 2 (408) 313-7203 (cell) (408) 399-4960 (fax) LW al lersteinnTatedevelopment.com EJAI Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail 8/18/2008 CITY OF CUPERTINO- 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 (408) 777-3308 To: Mayor and City Council members Chairman and Planning Commissioners From: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development Prepared by: Leslie Gross, Assistant Planner Date: August 11, 2006 Subject: Director's Minor Modification (DIR-2008-22) of Use Permit (U-2007-09) to allow the removal of six trees located at 10900 N. Tantau Avenue in the P(MP) zoning district. Chapter 19.132 of the Cupertino Municipal Code allows for administrative approval of minor changes in a project. The Director reports his decision to the City Council and Planning Commission in time to allow an appeal of the decision within fourteen calendar days. BACKGROUND: On January' 8, 2008, the City Council approved Use Permit (U-2007-09) and Architectural and Site Approval to construct a new 100,000 square foot, two- story office building, with additional conditions of approval pertaining to tree planting and green building requirements. City Council also approved the Tree Removal Permit (TR -2007-06) to removal 37 trees to accommodate the new development. The project site is a 6.6, acre property located on the . east side of N. Tantau Avenue, south of Homestead Road and Forge Drive. DIR-2008-22 10900 North Tantau Avenue Pare 2 DISCUSSION: The applicant is proposing the removal of three Evergreen Ash with a 14, 28, and 40 - inch diameter trunk base, and one Modesto Ash Evergreen Ash with a 24 -inch diameter trunk base, and an American Sweet Gum with a 16 -inch diameter trunk base. The six trees are identified on the attached plan as (Tree #88/89, 93, 699, 1023, 1098). The reason for the tree removal request is that the site plan for this project site has recently changed, and efforts to preserve the trees would be too difficult due to the existing health, location, and/or root structure of the trees. The original arborist report, dated September 12, 2007, rated the health of five of the trees as moderate, stating that these trees are worthy of retention but not at the expense of major design revisions. The arborist rated the health of one tree as high, with a high potential of providing long- term contribution to the site, and should be retained and protected throughout the development. Another arborist report was also prepared dated May 6, 2008 in response to the revised plans, and stated that the preservation suitability of the trees was fair to poor. The following is a list of preservation issues for each tree: 0 Tree 88/89 — Moderate: o Tree has co -dominated leader, with the secondary tree being substantially weaker, and in poor health. The tree would be severely damaged with the extensive amount of grading required to meet the parking requirement. Tree 699 — Moderate: �1 • Falls in a curb line required of a drive aisle and the path for emergency vehicles. ® Fall in the catch basin of a grassy swale. �jJ e Root system falls in the location of the footings for the trash/recycling enclosure. Tr 1023 —Moderate: Per PG&E requirements for new transformers there is a 30 -foot vertical clearance r uirement for setting the transformer. ® Loca within the bike lockers footing and slab. ® Limits th onstruction of the building in the erection of the concrete panels and in the maneuverability of the crane that raise the panels. Tree 1098 — Moderate: ,p • Located in the curb line of the parking space similar to 88/89. • Limits the construction of the building in the erection of the concrete panels and in the maneuverability of the crane that raise the panels. Tree 93 — High: © Falls -in a curb line of the parking aisle in an effort to orient the building as close possible to the street (Tantau). O The tree would be severely damaged with the extensive amount of grading required to meet the parking requirement. DIR-2008-22 10900 North Tantau Avenue Page 3 Although the City Arborist originally stated that the trees were of moderate and high health, the trees proximity and the amount of construction work required around these trees would significantly impact the health and survival of the trees. In addition, the City's arborist states in the report that these trees may not survive the construction due to their location, and/or root structure. APPROVAL: The Director approves the parking lot reconfiguration plan with the following conditions: ➢ The applicant is required to plant a minimum six 36 -inch box replacement tree(s) for each tree removed on the property in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. All replacement trees shall be native species of . trees. The applicant shall provide a landscape plan showing the location and species of tree(s) to be planted on the property to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. The replacement trees shall be required to be planted prior to final inspection. Enclosure: Plan Set Exhibit A: Public Works Plan Review 10900 Ta nta u Dr Tree removal Planner: Leslie Gross Comments From Cheri Donnelly Environmental Programs Manager 7/23/2008' 1. When tree removal or landscape plans are being submitted, please review Cupertino's fact sheet, Landscape Design & Maintenance for Pesticide Reduction The landscape guidelines for pesticide reduction can be viewed and printed from Cupertino's website at: htto://www.cur)ertino.or,R/city Rovernment/departments and offices/environmental services index.as 2. No comments on the tree removal at this time 10900 Tantau Dr Page 1 PItOPEl21'Y MAVrENANCE FACT tel' Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program , Who should use this Fact Sheet? • Development Project Applicants • City/County Planners • Landscape Maintenance Personnel • Landscape Architects • Homeowners Landscape Maintenance Techniques for � es fultleducti'lon What is Integrated Pest Management? Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is. a decision-making process for managing pests that uses monitoring to determine pest -caused injury levels and determine the best methods for their control. IPM uses a combination of • biological controls (e.g., natural enemies or predators); • physical or mechanical controls (e.g., hand labor or mowing); • cultural controls (e.g., mulching, discing, or alternative plant type selection); and • reduced risk chemical controls (e.g., soaps or oils) ' in order to minimize pesticide usage. The IPM method uses the least hazardous pesticides only as a last resort for controlling pests. How Can Landscape Design and Maintenance Techniques Reduce Pesticide Usaue? Pesticides are often used in maintaining landscapes. The amount of pesticides entering our waters can be decreased by using alternative design and maintenance techniques that: • Reduce the potential for the pesticides to run off the landscape; • Reduce the amount of chemicals necessary to ensure healthy plants or eliminate the need for pesticide usage at all; or, • Decrease the need for landscape maintenance by designing landscapes that minimize pest infestation and create low maintenance environments. Refer to the back of this fact sheet for more design and maintenance tips. July 21, 2008 Dear Resident, Community Development Department 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 Phone (408) 777-3308 Fax (408) 777-3333 The City of Cupertino Planning Division received an application (file number DIR-2008- 22) for a Director's Minor Modification to allow the removal of six trees in a Planned Development zone, located at 10900 North Tantau Avenue. This application requires staff approval and adjacent neighbors are notified with the opportunity to comment on the project. Please contact me no later than Tuesday, August 5, 2008 if you have any questions or concerns that the City staff should take into consideration when making its final decision on Wednesday, August 6, 2008. Sincerely, Leslie Gross Assistant Planner (408) 777-31356 leslieg@cupertino.org Fnrincnrac 11x17 plan set 316 07 044 HEWLETT PACKARD CO PO BOX 105005 ATLANTA GA 30348 316 08 029 316 09 030 FORGE CUPERTINO LLC 8401 JACKSON RD SACRAMENTO CA 95826 316 08 027 i _1 316 08 028 316 09 028 316 09 029 TANTAU BUILDING ASSOCS LLC TANTAU INVESTMENTS LLC 2804 MISSION COLLEGE UNIT 120 22 S SANTA CRUZ AV 2ND FL SANTA CLARA CA 95054 LOS GATOS CA 95030 316 09 036 316 09 037 INLAND WESTERN CUPERTINO TANTA ISTAR CTL I LP PO BOX 9273 1 PO BOX 4900, DEPT 114 OAK BROOK IL 60522 SCOTTSDALE AZ 85261-4900 Junho Ja ;3869 len�Imaa Campbell3859 elody Ln 387 elody Ln nta Clara, CA 95051 nta Clara, CA 95051 anta Clara, CA 95051 f KaoMelody LnClara, CA 95051 Edwin & Laura Ba u er 670 Meado e Sant ara, CA 95051 Brian & Stana Oleary 1825 El D o Ave San se, CA 95126 Nicholas & Dia astagnolo 3858 Melo n Sant ara, CA 95051 Forge Cupertino Llc 8401Jackso Sacra o, CA 95826 Gregory & Mara Dumond 679 Meadow Ave Santa Clara, CA 95051 Marit Hans 660 ow Ave anta Clara, CA 95051 Hai & Phuon yen 3878 M y Ln a Clara, CA 95051 Aquila l artha Dell 18231 Emias Creek Dr gan Hill, CA 95037 =AFu Sivaramakrishna Tababa Sthanukrishna 659 Mea Ave S Clara, CA 95051 Carol Tho 3868 elody Ln nta Clara, CA 95051 Tantau s L Investm lc 22 S Sa ruz Ave atos, CA 95030 cifty" of CU pert�rIo Basemap Labels Abc Street Names — Freeway Basemap -- Easements Street Centerline County Freeways -------- County Major Roads Right -of -Way Parcels City Boundary 200 0 200 400 600 FEET http://gissvr/cupertinointranet/home/mapFile.aspx Friday, July 18, 2008 3:07 PM 690 Gibraltar Drive Milpitas, CA 95035 Phone (408) 942-8200 Fax (408) 946-7713 Lic. #399163 July 9, 2008 City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino CA 95014 Attn: Leslie Gross — Assistant Planner Regarding — Tree Removal permit for 6 trees at 10900 Tantau The following is a request to remove 6 trees from 10900 Tantau, the requested trees to be removed are listed as one good and the others five as moderate per an Arborist report dated September 12, 2007 prepared by David Babby, RCA for the City of Cupertino. Per the numbering system contained in the report prepared by Mr. Babby the trees that we are requesting to remove per this permit are trees'88/89, 1098, 1023, 699 & 93. The trees listed above are in addition to trees approved to be removed as part of permit U-2007-09. As a result of completing our construction drawing we found that the trees listed fall in area that would most likely not survive as a result of their location. The following is a break down of each tree and the issues that arise do to there location. S- Tree 88/89 —Moderate This tree has co -dominated leaders and this is the reason we are listing the tree as 88/89. This tree falls in the curb line is a result of trying to address comment from staff for placing the building as close to the street (Tantau) as possible and in conjunction with maintain the City of Cupertino parking requirement, the tree would be severely damaged with the extensive amount of grading required. Tree 1098 — Moderate This tree presents two issues, it lies in the curb line of the parking space similar to 88/89 but also interferes with the construction of the building in the erection of the concrete panels and in the maneuverability of the crane that raise the panels. ➢ 1023 — Moderate This tree presents many issues, but of all the trees that we are requesting to be removed there is a remote possibly with an extensive redesign of the area to save this tree. 1 - • The issues that surround this tree are as follows: ■ Per PG&E requirements for new transformers there is a 30 foot vertical clearance requirement for setting the transformer. ■ The bike lockers footing and slab to support the - lockers are also in conflict. DEVCON CONSTRUCTION Interferes with the construction of the building in the INCORPORATED ■ General Building Contractors erection of the concrete panels and in the maneuverability of the crane that raise the panels. 690 Gibraltar Drive Milpitas, CA 95035 ➢ 699 — Moderate Phone (408) 942-8200 The issues that surround this tree are as follows: Fax (408) 946-7713 Lic. #399163 • Falls in a curb line witch also conflicts with a drive isle and the path for emergency vehicles. • Fall in the catch basin of a grassy Swale. • Falls in the location of the trash/recycling enclosure the root system is in conflict with digging the footing for the enclosure wall. ➢ 93 — High The issues that surround this tree are as follows: Falls in a curb line of the parking isle which result of trying to address comment from staff for placing the building as close to the street (Tantau) as possible in conjunction with maintain. the City of Cupertino parking requirement, the trees proximity to the parking curb and extensive amount of grading would severely damage the tree. We agree with the City Arborist on his evaluation of the trees, but due to the trees proximity and the extent amount of work required around these trees they are not likely to survive. We strongly feel that the copious planting of new trees native to California, that are of greater interest to the City will strongly enhance this project even with the removal of these trees. If you have any ilueftion please fee free to contact me. SylvekRamireV-Associate Devcon Construction, Inc.