TR-2011-43b OFFI(:E OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
C U P E RT 1 N O (408) 777-33�8 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • alanninqCa�cupertino.org
September 22, 2011
Mary Ann Phillips
20378 Gillick Way
Cupertino, CA 95014
SUBJECT: TREE REMOVAL PEIZMTT ACTION LETTER - Application TR-2011-43:
This letter confirms the decision c�f the Director of Community Development, given on September 22,
2011, approving a Tree Removal:Permit to remove a 22-inch diameter Deodar Cedar tree at 20378
Gillick Way with the following conditions:
1. APPROVED PROTECT
The approval is based on tli�e arborist's report prepared by Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist,
entitled, "An Evaluation of Deodar Cedar Trees at the Phillips Residence, 20378 Gillick Way,
Cupertino, California, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution.
2. IN-LIEU TREE REPLACEMENT FEE
The property owner shall pay an in-lieu tree replacement fee based upon the purchase and
installation cost of two 24-�nch box replacement trees as deemed appropriate by the Director of
Community Development. 'FThe in-lieu replacement fee of $540 was paid on August 30, 2011.
3. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS� RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Projeclt Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requixements, 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 Goverrunent 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 lE�gally barred from later challenging such exactions.
Staff has made the findings nec�essary to grant the tree removal permit in accordance with Section
14.18.180 of the Protected Trees (�rdinance. Please note, however, that an appeal of this decision can
be made within 14 calendar day�s from the date of the mailing of this decision. If this happens, you
will be notified of a public hearing, which will be scheduled before the Planning Commission and
the trees cannot be removed until a final decision on the appeal has been made. If no appeal is made
within the appeal period, the tree may be removed after Thursday, October 6, 2011.
Sincerely,
George Schroeder
Assistant Planner
408-777-7601
georgesC�3cupertino.org
An Evaluation of Deodar Cedar Trees at the
Phillips Residence, 20378 Gillick Way, Cupertino, California
Assignment
I was asked by George Schroeder, Planner for City of Cupertino, to review the trees at 20378
Gillick Way, Cupertino, Califarnia. The owner has requested to remove two deodar cedar trees
in the front yard.
Observations
I visited the site on August 11, 2011. I met Mr. and Mrs. Phillips, who were very gracious to
show me their property.
Mr. and Mrs. Phillips told me that they had changed their mind and were requesting to remove
only one deodar cedar located nearest the northeast corner of the garage.
The subject tree is a deodar ceciar (Cedrus deodura). It has a trunk diameter of 22.2 inches at 4
feet above soil grade. The canc�py is approximately 70 feet tall and has a spread of approximately
35 feet. Although this tree has a canopy that is partially one-sided, it is healthy and its structural
integrity is excellent.
This tree is located on the edge� of a grove of deodar cedar trees and coast redwood (Sequoia
sempervirens) trees in the front yard. Several of these trees were originally planted 4 or 5 feet on
center, which is exceedingly close for deodar cedar. The front yard is effectively over planted
with deodar cedar trees.
This deodar cedar stands approximately 7-8 feet from the northeast corner of the garage. Roots
of this tree are lifting the paver• pathway adjacent to the garage. It does not appear that roots of
� this tree are currently lifting th�e corner of the gai•age, but it is likely that roots of this tree may
damage the footing of the garage the relatively near future (3-5 years estimated). For this reason,
the request to remove this tree is warranted, in my opinion.
There is side yard is very narraw and mostly paved. The back yard, which has raised beds on the
south side, is quite small. The area nearest the residence is a narrow strip of lawn.
Conclusions
The request to remove the deociar cedar tree nearest the garage is warranted. It will be essential
to grind the stump.
In my opinion, the front yard i�� over planted with trees, and the back yard is too small to plant
replacement trees effectively. I'lanting replacement trees in the back yard would shade out the
turf and many of the other plar�ts over time.
I can provide photos of the property upon request.
Recommendations
I recommend to approve the request to remove the deodar cedar tree located nearest the northeast
corner of the garage.
In my opinion, it would not be feasible to plant replacement trees on this property. The wholesale
cost of a 24 inch boxed replacement tree from Valley Crest Tree Company would be $165.
Shipping would cost approximately 20% or $ 30. Labor and materials to plant would be
approximately $ 75. Thus, total cost to plant a 24 inch boxed specimen is estimated to be
approximately $ 270.
Respectfully submitted,
.------ � ��
Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist
International Society of Arboriculture Certification # 1897
American Society of Consulting Arborists Member