Loading...
12. Trees CITY OF CUPEIUINO City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3251 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department SUMMARY Agenda Item No. ~ Agenda Date: June 5, 2007 Application Applicant: MCA-2006-02 City of Cupertino Application Su~mary: Municipal Code Amendment of Chapter 14.18 (Heritage and Specimen Trees) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve amendments to Chapter 14.18, based on the Model Ordinance attached as Exhibit A. BACKGROUND: On May 1, 2007, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the draft protected trees ordinance. The Council recommended a number of amendments to the draft ordinance and continued this item to tonight's meeting to allow staff adequate time to incorporate these changes. DISCUSSION: The draft Protected Trees Ordinance has been modified to incorporate the changes that the Council recommended and is attached to this report as Exhibit A. The following is a list of the changes recommended by Council and staff's response to these recommendations: 1. List each species of trees in the protected tree list. Section 14.18.035 (Protected Trees) has been amended to include the scientific names of the particular species of trees that are specifically listed in this section. These trees include the California Buckeye (Aesculus californica), Big Leaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), Deodar Cedar (Cedrus deodara), Blue Atlas Cedar (Cedrus atlantic a 'Glauca'), Bay Laurel (Umbellularia californica) and otherwise known as the California Bay, Western Sycamore (Platanus racemosa). and the "native" oak trees. The specific species of 1/ native" oak trees included are the Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia), Valley Oak (Quercus lobata), Black Oak (Quercus keUoggii), Blue Oak (Quercus douglasii), and Interior Live Oak (Quercus wislizeni). These are the specifically identified species of oak trees that are considered "native" in the Cupertino area, according to the City Arborist. Although other species of oak trees have been recommended for the Council's consideration, the City Arborist has indicated that these trees may not be native to the Cupertino area. For example, the Canyon Live Oak and the Oregon White Oak are infrequently found in this arei2 _ 1 MCA-2006-02 Protected Trees Ordinance. Chapter 14.18 June 5, 2007 . Page 2 Appendix B has also been updated to include the scientific names of each tree and only those oak trees that are considered "native" according to the City Arborist. 2. Change references from "City-approved" arborist to "certified" arborist. Section 14.18.170(A)(3) has been amended to allow any arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture to submit an arborist report for review, rather than only the "City-approved" arborist.. Staff, however, would like to retain the ability. to refer tree removal applications to the City-approved arborist in cases where complex tree removal review is needed. These situations would involve tree removals proposed on non-single-family residential, commercial or industrial sites that may require multiple tree removals, or when a reasonable determination cannot be made on a particular tree in any land use designation. Staff recommends retaining the City-approved arborist's services for such cases as an unbiased certified arborist who can offer objective reviews and recommendations on tree removals. 3. Send an informational postcard or letter of the updated ordinance soon after the ordinance becomes effective to all posted addresses in the City. The updated protected trees ordinance will become effective 30 days from the second reading of the ordinance. Once the second reading is heard, staff will prepare a city informational postcard or letter to be sent to all residents in Cupertino to advise them of the newly adopted ordinance. 4. Amend the noticing section to require notices to be sent within a SOO-foot radius or two houses in each direction fro.m the exterior boundary of the subject property of the tree removal, whichever allows for a greater noticing of surrounding property owners. Section 14.18.175(B) has been modified to state the following: IiNotice 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. However, notice of such hearing shall be mailed to each owner of record of real property within five hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the property for which the application is sought or two properties in each direction from the exterior boundary of the property, whichever provides for a greater number of notices to surrounding property owners." 5. Modify language to allow staff to work in conjunction with an applicant/property owner to determine the location of replacement trees. Section 14.181.85 has been amended to clarify that "the approval authority shall work with the applicant! property owner of the tree removal permit to determine the location of the replacement tree(s)." 12 - 2 MCA-2006-02 Protected Trees Ordinance, Chapter 14.18 June 5, 2007 Page 3 6. In-lieu fees must be used for tree-related purposes and shall be spent/used within five years to install trees on public property. At the May 1st meeting, the Council felt that it would not be appropriate to incorporate this language into the draft ordinance, but to handle it separately as an administrative procedure that could be adopted by the Council at a later date. At such time, the Council would need to also establish an in-lieu tree replacement fee and City tree fund in which the in-lieu fees are to be deposited. The Council would also need to determine how to implement the use of the City- tree fund (e.g., if the Public Works Department will oversee the use of the fund, or if a subcommittee is needed to establish procedures for use of the fund). Staff recommends that this procedure commence soon after the adoption of the draft ordinance. Additional Action Items As mentioned during the May 1 sl meetin~ the Council will also need to address the following items if new fees are established. Although the establislunent of these fees is not a part of the amendments included in the draft ordinance, these fees will need to be considered so that the procedures to a~opt them can commence soon after the adoption of the draft ordinance. · Lower the tree removal permit fees to $150 for the first tree and $75 for each additional tree requested to be removed from a property and include these fees in the fee schedule. The Council requested information on the basis for these proposed fees and how they compare to cost recovery of fees based upon review of tree removals for residential vs. commercial applications. The proposed fees were based upon a comparison of tree removal fees in other surrounding cities and to establish fees that would be incentives to apply for tree removal permits. The existing Director's Tree Removal application fee of $819 is based upon cost reco'very for a staff level review of a tree removal for simplified tree remo'vals, such as a tree removal proposed on a single-family residential property. The existing Planning Commission Tree Removal application of $2,536 is a cost recovery fee for more complex tree removal situations, including tree removals on non-single-family residential, commercial or industrial development sites t/wt require multiple tree removals. Establish a retroactive tree removal permit fee of $2,536 and include this fee in the fee schedule. · Establish a tree management plan fee of $992 and include this fee in the fee schedule. Public Comments The Council also heard from members of the public during the meeting who expressed the following concerns: · The requirement to retain rear yard trees is an invasion of property rights. Keeping track of removed trees would be difficult; therefore, the City should not allow for tree management plans or adding trees to the protected tree list. · The tree removal permit fees should be lowered to be more reasonable bef~u.ss MCA-2006-02 Protected Trees Ordinance, Chapter 14.18 June 5, 2007 Page 4 the existing fees are too high and encourage tree removals without permits. · Tree canopies in the City should be protected. · The Silicon Valley Association of Realtors expresses concerns regarding the proposed in-lieu fees and requirement to replace dead trees. On May 3 and May 13, 2007, the City also received emails (See Exhibit B) from Deborah Jamison concerning the draft ordinance. Ms. Jamison recommends that the Council consider adding trees to the protected tree list, particularly native species. Prepared by: Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner Approved by: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development 9x- David W. Knapp City Manager Attachments Exhibit A: Model Ordinance Exhibit B: Emails dated May 3 and May 13 from Deborah Jamison Exhibit C: Minutes of May 1, 2007 City Council Meeting Exhibit D: City Council Report of May I, 2007, including all previous reports and attachments (see weblink) 12 - 4 Exhibit A Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through . . MODEL ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO. AMENDING CHAPTER 14.18 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO PROTECTED TREES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Chapter 14.18 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows: CHAPTER 14.18: PROTECTED TREES Section 14.18.010 Purpose. 14.18.020 Definitions. 14.18.025 Actions Prohibited. 14.18.030 Retention promoted. 14.18.035 Protected trees. 14.18.040 Heritage tree ~esignation. 14.18.050 Heritage tree list. 14.18.060 Plan of protection. 14.18.070 Recordation. 14.18.080 Heritage Tree Identification tag. 11 - 4 14.18.090 Application to remove. 14.18.100 Notioe list to aooompany application. 14.18.110 Appeal 14.18.120 Permit required for removal 14.18.130 Enforcing authority. 14.18.140 Exemptions. 14.18.145 Tree Management Plan 14.18.150 Application and Approval Authority for Tree Removal permit. 14.18.160 Director to inspect. 14.18.170 RoviO'II of aApplication Requirements. 14.18.175 Noticing 14.18.180 Review and determination of application standards. 14.18.185 Tree Replacement. 14.18.188 Retroactive tree removal permit. 14.18.190 Protection during conservation. 14.18.200 Protection plan before permit granted. 14.18.210 Applioant to guarantee protection. 14.18.220 Notice of action on permit-Appeal. 1~ - 5 ,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. Protected trees are considered a valuable asset to the community. The protection of such trees in all zoning districts is intended to preserve this valuable asset. The City finds that the preservation of speoimen protected -aREl heritage 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: 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. Proteot speoimen and hcritoge ook 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 speoimen and heritage trees within the City in order to retain as many trees as possible, consistent with 11- 6 the individual rights to develop, maintain and enjoy private and public property to the fullest possible extent. Specimen and heritage trom; arc considcr-od a valuable asset to thc community. The protection of such tr-ces in all zoning districts including renidential zones is intended to preserve this valuable asset. (Ord. 1573, ~ 2, 1991; Ord. 1543, ~ 2,1991) 14.18.020 Def'mitions. 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. B. B. "Developed residential" means any legal Jot of record, zoned single-family, duplex, agricultural residential and residential hillside, with any structure (principal or accessory) con'structed 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 permit, minor residential permit, planned unit development, variance, and use permit. OS. "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 Architectural and Site Appro\'al Committee to have a special significance to the community. D. "Oak tree" shall include all tmcs of oak genus, including, but not limited to, the Valley Oak (Quercus lobata) and California Live Oak (Quereus agrifolia). 1~ - 7 E. "Owner" shall include the legal owner of real property within the City, and any lessee of such owner. F. "Person" shall include 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.any of the foll<Yl.'ing: 1. ^ tree deocribed on the table belm-..: Measurement Single Trunk Multi Trunk From Natural Diameter! Diameter! Spcoics Grade Circumferenoe Circumferenoe Native TreeD: Oak treeD ~ 10" (31") 20" (S3") California ~ 10" (31") 20" (S3") Buckeye Big Leaf Maple 4-4J2! 12" (38") 25" (70") Nonnative Trees: Deodar Codar ~ 12" (38") 25" (70") 1~ - 8 I :: ~laS 14412' 112" (38") 126" (79") Codar 2. ^ tree required to be protected as a part of a zoning, tentat~'e map, use permit, or privacy proteotion requirement in an R 1 zoning district. J. "Tree removal" means any of the following: (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 protected tree in any twelve-month period the destruction (in a twelve month period) of twenty five percent or marc, as determined by the Community Development Director. of any heritage or specimen tree by outting, retarding. girdling or applying ohemioals. (Ord. 1886, (part). 2001; Ord. 1835, (part), 1999; Ord. 1810, (part), 1999; Ord. 1715, (part), 1996; Ord. 1573, ~ 3, 1991; Ord. 1543, ~ 3,1991) 14.18.25. Actions Prohibited 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 revie,# of the status of heritage trees and report the findings to the Planning Commission. (Ord. 1715, (part), 1996; Ord.1543, ~ 4.1,1991) 1~ - 9 14.18.035 Protected Trees. Except as otherwise provided in Section 14.18.140, Exemptions, the following trees shall not be removed from private or public property; including street trees subject to Chapter 14.12 of the Cupertino Municipal Code, without first obtaining a tree removal permit: A. Heritage trees in all zoning districts. B. All trees of .the following species (See Appendix B) that have a minimum single-trunk diameter of ten inches (31-inch circumference) or minimum . multi-trunk diameter of 20 inches (63-inch circumference) measured 4-1/2 feet from natural grade: 1. Quercus (native oak tree species), including: a. Quercus agrifolia (Coast Live Oak) b. Quercus lobata (Valley Oak) c. Quercus kelloggii (Black Oak) d. Quercus douglasii (Blue Oak) e. Quercus wislizeni (Interior Live Oak) 2. Aesculus californica (California Buckeye) 3. Acer macrophyllum (Big Leaf Maple) 4. Cedrus deodara (Deodar Cedar) 5. Cedrus atlantica 'Glauca' (Blue Atlas Cedar) 6. Umbellularia californica (Bay laurel or California Bay) 1211 0 7. Platanus racemosa (Western Sycamore) 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 Herita~e tree D!!esignation. Application for designation of a heritage tree may only be initiated by the owner of property on which the tree is located, unless the tree is located on public or quasi-public property. Any person may apply for designation of a heritage tree if the tree(s) are located on public or quasi-public property. An application for a heritage tree designation shall include: 1. Assessor's parcel number of the site; 2. Description detailing the proposed heritage tree's special aesthetic, cultural, or historical value of significance to the community; and 3. Photographs of the tree(s). Application for designation of a heritage tree shall be referred to the Planning Commission for review and determination in accordance with Section 19.124 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. The Planning Commission, may, by resolution, designate a tree or grove of trees as a heritage tree(s). Prior to adoption of suoh a reGolution, not lesG than ten days '.witlen notice shall be delivered to the O\'mer. If the o'lmer of the property protests the . ' designation an appeal con be initiated. (Ord. 1715, (part), 1996;, Ord. 1630, (part), 1993; Ord. 1543, ~ 4.2, 1991) 12811 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, ~ 4.3, 1991) 14.18.060 Plan of Protection. As part of a development application: A. The approval authority Planning Commission shall adopt considcr a maintenance plan of proteotion for protected trees.developed by the Community Development Department or a City retained certified orborist. The protection plan shall include information for correct pruning, maintenanoe and fertilization methods. It shall be the property owner's)' responsibility to protect the trees. B. It shall be the property owner's) responsibility to protect the tree. Thc plan shall be prm:ided for his/her use at his/her discretion in order to obtain tho retention objcotion. BG. 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 hislher their O'."in lot, is flat 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) 12912 14.18.070 Recordation. All protected Heritagc and specimen trees required to be retained as part of a development application under Section 14.8 1.020 12 14.18.035C, 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 timc of use permit, zoning, tentative map or initiaVnc'/" building permit issuance. (Ord. 1573, 9 4.6, 1991; Ord. 1543,94.6,1991) 14.18.080 Heritage Tree 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. _ is protected by the Protected Trees Ordinance. Please dDo not prune or cut before contacting the City Planning Department at (408) 777-3308. (Ord. 1543,94.7, 1991) 14.18.090 Applieatioll to R-emeve. If an application for heritage tree removal is submittcd, the request shall be fOl'\varded to the Planning Commission for review and appro'.'ol. It is the applioant's responsibility to 'provide supporting doeuments as requested by staff or the Planning Commission. (Ord. 130, (part), 1003; Ora. 1543, S 4.8, 1991) 11613 14.18.199 Notiee List te AecompftftY !Application. The applieant sholl provide with the application 0 list of names of 011 pemons o'.vning and/or ocoupying real property looated within three hundred feet of the property involved in the application. 'J'!heFe 0 property is 0 multifamily dwelling with more than four units, the name of the building manager will be supplied on the list. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing will be moiled to the nomos on the Iiot. (Ord. 1630, (port). 1993; Ord. 1643. S4.0, 1001) 14.18.119 Appeal. An appeal of the Planning Commission's deoision may be submitted to the City Counoil, in care of tho City Clerk within five 'tJorking days of the deeision. No tree oholl bo removed until the appeal prooess has been oonoluded. (Ord. 1630, (port), 1093;Ord.1673, S4.10, 1091; Ord.1543, S4.10.1001) 14.18.129 Permit Required fer Removal. Exoept os provided in Seotion 14.18.140, no person sholl directly or indireotly remO\:e or oause to be removed any speoimen or heritage troe os heroin defined, within the City limits, .:..ithout first obtaining 0 permit to do so in aooordaAoe with the prooedures set forth in this ohapter. (Ord. 1643, S 6.1, 1991) 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, ~ 6.1,1991) 14.18.140 Exemptions. The following situations do not require a tree removal permit prior to removal:This chapter docs not apply to the follm...ing: 1ii 14 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,-A-~ subsequent application for tree removal must be filed within five working days as described in Sections 14.18.150-14.18.170 of this chapter. The Director of Community Development will approve the retroactive tree removal permit application and may require tree replacements in conjunction with the approval. No application fee or other approval process shall be required in this situation. B.S:--Dead trees, in the opinion of the Director of Community Development. However, a subsequent application for a tree removal must be filed within five working days as described in Section 14.18.150 -14.18.170 of this chapter. The Director of Community Development will approve the retroactive tree removal permit application and may require tree replacements in conjunction with the approval. No application fee or other approval process shall be required in this situation. Removal of all deoiduouo, fruit bearing trees. C. Thinning out/removing of trees in accordance with a recorded tree management plan that has been approved in accordance with Section 14.18.145. No tree removal permit is required. C. M approval for the remo'/al of any tree granted by 'Iirtue of a zoning, use permit, variance, tentative map, or Planning Commission application. approval. 1~215 D. Removal of any tree in a developed residential single family, residential duplex, agricultural residential and residential hillside zoning district, exoept heritage, speoimen or trees planted to comply with privaoy protection pursuant to Chapter 10.28 (Single Family Rcsidential (R 1) Zonea) exoept tAoGe planted on the affected property o\':ncrs lot. DE. 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) 14.18.145 Tree Management Plan A tree management plan may be approved for a property that includes criteria for the removal of certain trees in the future by anticipating the eventual . . growth of trees on the property and specifying a time frame in which the trees may require removal to prevent overcrowding of trees. The property owner shall have retention information placed on the property in accordance with Section 14.18.070, referring to the approved tree management plan. For a tree manager:nent plan associated with a development application, the tree management plan shall be approved in conjunction with the approval of a landscape plan on the subject property. The tree management plan shall include the following: A. A tree plan indicating all existing trees to be retained and all new trees to be planted that are part of the approved landscape plan. 1 ff 16 B. Labeling of the species, size in DBH at planting time or at time of tree management plan approval, location and eventual growth size of each tree on the plan. C. A written explanation of the specific tree(s) to be removed to prevent overcrowding, including the eventual growth size in DBH at which time the tree is to be removed, and a time frame in which the tree(s) will reach the eventual growth size. The tree management plan shall be approved by the authority approving the landscape plan prior to recordation of the tree management plan. The Director of Community Development shall review and approve the tree management plan where no landscape plan is required. Trees that are listed to be removed in the tree management plan may be removed within the specified time frame per the tree management plan without a tree removal permit, except for trees designated as heritage trees. No heritage trees shall be permitted to be removed in conjunction with an approved tree management plan. 14.18.150 Application and Approval Authority for Tree Removal Permit A. A. 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 removal 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. 11417 B. B. Applications for protected heritage tree removal shall be referred to the Director of Community Development Planning Commission for final review and determination opprO'/ol in accordance with Sections 14.18.000, 14.18.100 and 14.18.110 Section 14.18.220 and Chapter 19.124, except for heritage tree removals and tree removals in conjunction with development applications.':" The Director of Community Development may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a tree removal permit. A tree replacement requirement may be required in conjunction with the tree removal permit. The applicable tree removal permit fee shall apply. Requests sholl be revie':/ed pursuant to Scotion 14.18.110. C. Application for tree removals in conjunction with a development application shall be considered by the approval authority conceming the same property as the .affected tree removal permit application, and the determination on the tree removal permit shall be made concurrently by the approval authority.- D. Application for removal of a heritage tree shall be referred to the Planning Commission for final review and determination in accordance with Section 14.18.220 and Chapter 19.124.-{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 1f5" 18 may also require the applicant. at hislher own expense. to furnish a report from a!! stoff appro't~ed arborist. certified by the International Society of Arboriculture. .'\pplioations for tree removal may be granted. denied. or granted with conditions. The Director of Community De'w'elopment may, as a condition of granting 0 permit for remoyal of a speoimen tree. require the opplioant to replant or replace a tree . with more than one tree '.vhcn justified to replace lost tree canopy. (Ord. 1573. ~8.1 (part), 1991; Ord. 1543. ~ 8.1 (part), 1991) 14.18.170 Re-liew ef Application Requirements. A request for removal of any heritage or protected specimen tree shall include the following: A. Application information. Application for a tree removal permit shall be available from and filed with the Community Development Department and shall contain the following 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 an 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; 116 19 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. proteoted by a oondition of approval associated with a zoning, tentative map, use permit, variance and architeotural and site approval application may be approved by the DirectoF af Community Development if deemed unsafe or diseased or can couse potential damage to existing or proposed essential struotures. Thc Direotor of Community De'.:c1opment may also require the applicant, at his o'lIn expense, to furnish a report from a alaft approved arboriat, certified by the International Sooiety of J\boriculture. If removal is requested for any other reason, the application shall be referred to the Planning Commission whioh originated the oondition. Notioe of any publio hearing under this Qhapter shall be given in the same manner 00 provided in Chapter 10.116 ofthis code. COrd. 1835, (port), 1000; Ord.1715, (port), 1096; amended during 12193 oupplement; Ord. 1630, (part), 1993; Ord. 1543, S8.1 (part), 1901) 14.18.175 Notice and Posting A. Notice of any decision of the Director of Community Development and Design Review Committee shall be given in the same manner as provided in Section 19.28.100B. B. 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. . However, notice of such hearing shall be mailed to each owner of record of real property within five hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the 11120 property for which the application is sought or two properties in each direction from the exterior boundary of the property, whichever provides for a greater number of notices to surrounding property owners. C. A notice shall be posted on any tree or property on which the tree is located for which a tree removal application has been submitted. The notice shall be posted ten days prior to any public hearing considering the tree removal application or the decision of the Director of Community Development or Design Review Committee. D. Where approval of a tree removal permit is granted by the City, the property owner shall post the tree removal permit on site until the tree is removed or shall present proof of the tree removal permit upon request. 14.18.180 Review and Determination of Application Standards. A. -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. bo evaluated based upon the standards listed under subsections ^ and B below. Approval of a permit to remove a specimen or heritage tree may be granted if one or both of the 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; 1~8 21 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 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 according to good urban forestry practices due to the overplanting or overcrowding of trees on the subject property. B. The approval authority may ref~r 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, ~9.1,1991; Ord.1543, ~ 9.1,1991) 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 otherwise by the approval authority: Replacement trees, of a species and size as designated by the approval ~uthority and consistent with the replacement value of each tree to be removed, shall be planted on the subject property on which the tree(s) are to be removed. The approval authority shall work with the applicant/property owner of the tree removal permit to determine the location of the replacement tree(s). Table A may be used as a basis for 119 22 this requirement. The person requesting the tree removal permit shall pay the cost of purchasing, planting and maintaining the replacement trees. B. If a replacement tree for the removal of a non-heritage tree or tree with trunk size equal to or less than 36" cannot be reasonably planted on the subject property, an in-lieu tree replacement fee based upon the purchase and installation cost of the replacement tree as determined by the Director of Community Development shall be paid to the City's tree fund to: 1. Add or replace trees on public property in the vicinity of the subject property; or 2. Add trees or landscaping on other City property. C. For remoyal of a heritage tree or tree with a trunk size greater than a 36 inches, the in-lieu tree replacement fee shall be based upon the valuation of the removed tree by using the most recent edition of the ISA . Guide for Plant Appraisal published by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers. Table A - Replacement Tree Guidelines Trunk Size of Removed Tree Replacement Trees (Measured 4 % feet above grade) Up to 12 inches One 24" box tree Over 12 inches and up to 18 inches Two 24" box trees Over 18 inches and up to 36 inches Two 24" box trees or - One 36" box tree Over 36 inches One 36" box tree Heritage tree One 48" box tree 116 23 14.18.188 Retroactive Tree Removal An application for a retroactive tree removal shall be required for any protected tree removed prior to approval of a tree removal permit. The . application shall be filed with the Department of Community Development on forms prescribed by the Director of Community Development and shall be subject to the requirements of a tree removal permit. The application shall pay a retroactive tree removal permit fee. 14.18.190 Protection During Construction. Protected Spocimen, ho.ritage trees and other trees/plantings required to be retained by virtue of a development application, building permit, or tree removal permit zoning, subdivision, use permit, variance, or /\rchitectural and Site Approval Committee application approval, and all ~rces pr-otected 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 Community Development. (Ord. 1543, ~ 10.1,1991) 14.18.200 Protection Plan Before Permit Granted. A. A plan to protect trees described in Section 14.18.190 shaU 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 1~f 24 evaluate the tree protection plan based upon the tree protection standards contained in Appendix A at the end of this chapter. 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) 14.18.219 !...pplieaBt to ClIaraBtee Proteeti6ft. The applicont shall guarantee the protection of the existing tree(s) on the site through a financial instrument acceptable to the Direotor of Planning and Development. (Ord. 1643, S 10.3, 1001) 14.18.220 Notice of Action on Permit-Appeal. A. Notice of the decision on an application for a protected specimen tree removal permit by the approval authority Director of Community Development or his denignatcd rcprcsentati'.'c, shall be mailed to the applicant. B. Any decision made by the Director of Community Development or Design Review Committee Director of Planning and Dcvelopment may be appealed in accordance with Chapter 19.134. C. Any decision made by the Planning Commission 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. 1 ~i 25 D. C. The City Clerk shall notify the applicant of the date, time and I. place for hearing the appeal. The City Council may affirm, reverse, or modify the decision of the Director of Community Development or Planning Commission Director of Community Development, and its decision shall be final. (Ord. 1573, ~ 11.1, 1991; Ord. 1543, ~ 11.1, 1991 ) 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, 14.1 R 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 cqnstitute an infraction. (Ord.1810, (part), 1999; Ord. 1731, (part), 1996; Ord. 1543, ~ 12.1, 1991) 113 26 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 the drip line, the architectlarborist 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 Community Planning and Development. 1 ~4 27 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 anarborist 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, '!Is 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 architectlarborist with approval of staff. ~ ~Any damage to existing tree crowns or root systems shall be repaired immediately by an approved tree surgeon. 10. No storage of construction materials or parking shall be permitted within the drip line area of any tree designated to be saved. 11. Tree protection regulations shall be posted on protective fencing around trees to be protected. 1 ~5 28 APPENDIX B REFERENCE PHOTOS OF SPECIMEN TREES PROTECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 14.18.035 EXAMPLES OF SOME OAK TREE VARIETIES 1--- ---- VALLEY OAK (Quercus lobata) COAST LIVE OAK (Quercus agrifolia) 122630 BLUE OAK (Quercus douf!lasii) .-.-"" ~" " ..,(, . ...~:f~ ~ ~..~~ ~ .." ,. .t. ~._ .' ~, ~. - BLACK OAK (Quercus kello2gii) INTERIOR LIVE OAK (Quercus wislizeni) . . . "1,/ ~4z,"'~r .~ i. " \, \ . " \\ .' ........ -- , . 1Il 121"'731 CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE (Aesculus califomica) BIG LEAF MAPLE (Acer macroph\'llum) ~. , 1"0'"" t.. . F;. ~\m.' ~~:[ 'f ,~ r 12.2~32 DEODAR CEDAR (Cedrus deodara) ~ '~ ~'.i 1 ,~~ I~ -1 't ')t~t. ,t .~ '...;oJ ,.i ~ ~1 ,. . 'iT M...t . , ~ '~6.~" . _ " tfo -31 ',', ....' .. t'{iC;",.,',. /. . .' \,'r "'_IT .,a;..,ot"....... ... :'.- ~"""fl5.>-' ,-'I :.i: . :'1'," .~~ ,'II:t - ;/iJ'..,-;....'.. ....! ':!. '. ~# ."1;'-,-:.1 ;:.. ~ ,Y',; .'-t!. '. .~{L>. ....' ';', ,~. ~.~. ,t:]. ", ,I>.. ,._ ., ~~ ..i ", ........ _~ ~.., '.L..l !\- t. '.. ". ".- ,...... .~,.-.,. ,. . .,,~ ~""I .~ ~ ,~.. " ',-",04" ~.' 'l~' BLUE ATLAS CEDAR (Cedrus atlantica 'Glauca ') - ---., I "~1!'~~~. .~ '. ~t.:- ""'" ' rlJ "... 07~i~"''''l'' . IJf. ,7;/' ~ '~~1@. .. ,,:t~ ~ ~ .,,'~~ 'jJ',,~, 'St.-'""" ~ 't.", ./ I'~ . ." ~ ~ ("['101M 121933 WESTERN SYCAMORE (Platanus racemosa) BAY LAUREL OR CAUFORNIA BAY (Umbellularia californica) 123034 Exhibit B Aki Honda From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Deborah Jamison [ddjamison@comcast.net] Thursday, May 03, 2007 9:32 PM City Council; Richard Lowenthal; Patrick Kwok; Orrin Mahoney; Dolly Sandoval; Kris Wang Ciddy Wordell; Aki Honda Protected Tree List: native oaks Dear Mayor and City Council members, I participated in the discussion in the Planning Commission regarding the revised Protected Tree Ordinance, and it was I that suggested that the protected tree list not just say "oaks. as it does now, but native oaks. As I explained to the planning commissioners, to list .oaks. is to list an entire genus consisting of at least SOO species. So the current protected tree list includes 4 tree species and one plant genus. It was very late and I went home, and did not have another opportunity to specify what I thought the geographical range of native should include. Actually, I don't have a strong preference, but here are the facts: There are 6 tree species of Quercus, the genus that comprises oak trees, that historically occurred in Cupertino and the adjacent foothills and Santa Cruz mountains: Valley Oak, Quercus lobata Blue Oak, Quercus douglasii Black Oak, Quercus kelloggii Coast Live oak, Quercus agrifolia Interior Live Oak, Quercus wislizenii Canyon Live Oak, Quercus chrysolepis Also, these species hybridize and and any hybrids of the above should be included on the list as well. FYI: There are 2 shrub species that may occur in the Santa Cruz Mtns. above Cupertino: California Scrub Oak, Quercus dumosa Leather Oak, Quercus durata There are 18 Quercus species. native to Calif., 9 of which are trees, and the rest shrubs. I suppose an argument could be made that all native Calif. oak trees should be included in the list. If so, the additional ones should include: Oregon Oak, Quercus garryana Engelman Oak, Quercus engelmannii Island Oak, Quercus tomentella I am very much in favor of special recognition, valueing, and protecting our native tree species both in the ordinance and in other ways as well, and will be writing to you separately on this subject. Thank you for your consideration, Deborah Jamison 1 12 - 29 Aki Honda From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Deborah Jamison [ddjamison@comcast.net] Sunday, May 13, 20079:31 PM City Council; Richard Lowenthal; Patrick Kwok; Orrin Mahoney; Dolly Sandoval; Kris Wang Lisa Giefer; Ciddy Wordell; Aki Honda Value of native trees and plant communities Dear Mayor Wang and City Council Members, I hope that you are in full support of (1) the addition of two additional native tree species to the protected tree list, (2) clarifying the protection of local native oak trees (as opposed to .oaks" which literally would mean all of the several hundred oak species in the world), and will consider (3) the addition of the following language in the tree protection ordinance: Add to 14.18.010 purpose: H. Provide habitat to native birds and other wildlife. I. Provide opportunties to better understand the natural and cultural history of CUpertino. As for adding Western Sycamore and Bay Laurel, there are no perfect trees for all conditions. Every tree species has some problem or some issue under particular circumstances, and none are suitable for every situtation. But these two species are some of our more easily recognized, admired, attractive, and valued native trees. It's not a comprehensive list by any means of our local native trees. I would also add Madrone and Western Redbud, and perhaps a few other of our native species. I also hope that the city will help to educate its residents about the special values of native plants in the landscape. The planning commissioners spoke of several methods of informing residents about protecting trees in general such as publishing an educational pamphlet and informing residents in other city publications. My hope is that the city Parks and Recreation Dept. will offer adult classes through the naturalist program on native trees, shrubs, and native plants in general, both in nature and their uses in the garden. I think public education is as important, maybe more important, than any wording in the protected tree ordinance. Allover the country, native plant societies, landscape architects, and gardeners in general are promoting, urging, educating about the importance of retaining indigenous plants within our human environments. There is a national movement for using native plants in their natural geographical areas. Why? There are many reasons - environmental, aesthetic, and psychological. We have lost many native plant communities to development. Invasive exotic plants dominate our urban and even some of our natural landscapes. Native plants are specially adapted to our climate and soil conditions, and in general have lower maintenance requirements. Many non-natives require more pest control and water to thrive. Natives support local beneficial insects that are predators of the pests. Native plants provide the habitat that many of our native wild animals need to hang on, thus fighting the serious decline in biodiversity. So much of our retail, commercial, and residential developments have so homogenized our human environments that one place looks and feels much like another. Native plants give us a sense of place, and a connection to the natural and cultural history of where we live. Planting more native plant communities in both public and private landscapes is part of our efforts to strive towards sustainability. In a recent article published in USA Weekend (March 30-April1, 2007) entitled "Plant native species, Use indigenous plants to help preserve the environment": Our planet's biological systems have been stressed, 1 12 - 30 exploited and destroyed, and using natives helps address some of those problems. In an article by June Smith in the S.F. Bay National wildlife Refuge newsletter, she cites these examples of why natives are better: "Timing of bloom and fruiting is important to many wildlife species. Migrating butterflies and birds have been coming through our backyards for centuries. Some species stay for the season; others are just passing through. All rely on food sources being available when they fly through so they can rest and eat before continuing their journey. As we replace native plants with plants from other places, migrating species may not find flowers, fruit, seeds or shelter at their right time.... "Our native wildlife also depends on finding fruit, flowers, seeds, and leaves in the specific shapes and structures produced by native plants. For example, those lovely English roses smell wonderful but native bees can't find the nectaries under all those layered petals! The native California rose, on the other hand, has just five open petals, making it easy for nectar seekers to find the food they need. Not only does the California rose serve nectar seeders well, it provides food in the winter for seed eaters when the blooms mature into bright red rose hips which are loaded with seeds.R Hundreds of other examples of the interdependence of native wildlife on native plants have been the subject of much research. Just think how much native wildlife we could bring back, and how much better connected we would all be to our.wonderful Calfornia flora and fauna and the long history it tells if we had islands of native habitat throughout the city, in our city parks, in our new developments, and in our many front and backyards! You could play such an important leadership role in making this happen. Revising the tree ordinance to reflect our particular interest in protecting and promoting native trees is an important first step. Another important change in policy would be to use the experience and expertise of your paid staff, specifically the city naturalist, to advise you and all of the commissions in matters of conservation of our natural resources. park planning, redevelopment, sustainability, these are all areas that the knowledge of the city naturalist could be better used. I have often pointed to Creekside Park as development whose natural features and potential could have been so much better valued and utilized. She was sidelined by the department head during the planning commission's discussions after giving one report. Several of us residents took up the cause, but her 20 plus years of knowledge of local conditions, wildlife, and perspectives on residents' concerns and desires are second to no one. And what she doesn't know she is on the payroll and has the connections to find out. Thank you for considering these recommendations, Deborah Jamison 2 12-31 Exhibit c May I, 2007 Cupertino City Council Page 4 CONSENT CALENDAR Lowenthal/Sandoval moved and seconded to approve the items on the Consent Calendar as recommended. Ayes: Kwok (abstained on item 6), Lowenthal, Mahoney, Sandoval, and Wang. Noes: None. 6. Approve the minutes from the April 17 City Council meeting. 7. Adopt resolutions accepting Accounts Payable for April 13 and 20, Resolution Nos. 07- 070 and 07-071. 8. Adopt a resolution accepting Payroll for April 20, Resolution No. 07-072. 9. Adopt a resolution declaring brush growing on certain described properties to be a public nuisance and setting hearing for June 5 for objections to proposed removal, Resolution No. 07-073. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above) - None RECESS - the Council was in recess from 8:30 p.m. until 8:40 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS 10. Consider adopting a resolution approving housing mitigation fees. (Continued from April 3). Under Postponements, Mahoney/Lowenthal moved and seconded that this item be continued to June 5. The motion carried unanimously. 11. Consider a Municipal Code Amendment of Chapter 14.18 (Beritage and Specimen Trees), Application No. MCA-2006-02, City of Cupertino, Citywide. (Continued from April 3). Conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 07-2001: "An Ordinance of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 14.18 of the Municipal Code related to Protected Trees." The City Clerk distributed: (1) a letter dated May 1 from the Silicon Valley Association of Realtors regarding Heritage and Specimen Trees, offering suggestions for the proposed ordinance, and print-outs ofthe PowerPoint presentation by staff. Councilmember Lowenthal noted that he had trees on his property that could be affected by this ordinance and he questioned whether he had a conflict of interest. The City Attorney stated that there was an exception to the conflict of interest code that said if a Councilmember was in the same category as a large segment of the community it was not a conflict of interest. 12 - 32 May I, 2007 Cupertino City Council Page 5 Senior Planner Aki Snelling presented the staff report using a PowerPoint presentation. The principal concerns were: Trees removed without fIrst seeking permission; need to simplify the approval authority and process; evaluation of the list of protected trees; and noticing. Snelling reviewed the fundamental changes recommended by the Planning Commission, which included: Changes to the protected tree list; a prescriptive tree replacement table; in-lieu fees; tree removal permit authority given to the Community Development Director except for heritage trees or removals with development applications; a tree management plan and noticing requirements; retroactive tree removals and associated fees; and designation of heritage trees. Snelling also discussed the penalties that could be imposed, and summarized earlier public comments. Kathy Stakey, representing the Chamber of Commerce Legislative Action Committee; believed that rear yard tree removals were an intrusion of property rights. Ms. Stakey also did not agree with adding the Bay Laurel and the Western Sycamore trees to the protected tree list. In section 14.18.040 of the proposed ordinance it stated the Planning Commission may designate heritage trees and Ms. Stakey noted that she thought the Planning Commission was a recommending body to the Council. Regarding Section 14.18.170 Ms. Stakey suggested that it should refer to the Board of Directors of a homeowners association rather than the association, as votes of the entire association could be time-consuming and costly. In conclusion Ms. Stakey believed in-lieu fees were a disservice to the community. Sherry Fang questioned how the Council and staff would keep track of the removed trees. She was not in favor of the tree management plan or in adding to the protected tree list. James Welsh, Commercial Tree Care, said that residents often did not want to get the permits required for tree removal because of the costs, so they arranged to do the work without permits. Mr. Welsh recommended making the permit fees more reasonable arid educating the public. He stressed the damage that can be done when trees are improperly removed, trimmed or topped, and believed fines should be imposed for this action. Jennifer Griffin urged the Council to protect the trees in Cupertino since they were important for maintaining the green canopy in the city. She supported adding the Bay Laurel and Western Sycamore to the protected tree list; supported protecting oak trees and supported protecting trees in front and back yards. Ms. Griffin also encouraged Council to require stout fencing around construction sites to protect trees. Adam Montgomery, representing Silicon Valley Association of Realtors, commented on the in-lieu fees and the requirement to replace dead trees. He also recommended that owners be notified before a tree on their property was designated a heritage tree. 12 - 33 May 1, 2007 Cupertino City Council Page 6 Council concurred to continue this item for one month and to direct staff to make changes to the draft ordinance and return for first reading. The changes discussed at the meeting were as follows: . list each species specifically . change from city arborist to certified arborist . require whole city informational postcard or letter of the updated ordinance once the ordinance becomes effective . notice to be sent to 500 feet radius or two houses in every direction, whichever is farther . location of replacement trees determined by staff working in conjunction with property owner; that decision can be appealed to City Council . in-lieu fees must be used for tree-related purpose; money must be spent within five years. 12. Consider a zoning change, Application Nos. Z-2006-06 (EA-2006-20), Olivia Jang (Huang), 20916 and 20956 Homestead Road, APN Nos. 326-09-052 and -D61. (Continued from April 3). Applicant reauests a further continuance to June 5. (No documentation in packet). Under Postponements, Mahoney/Lowenthal moved and seconded that this item be continued to June 5. The motion carried unanimously. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS 13. Conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 07-2002: "An Ordinance of the Cupertino City Council amending Section 11.24.170 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Relating to Parking Limitations on Certain Streets, Torre Avenue Between a Point 725 Feet North of Pacifica Drive and a Point 680 Feet North of Pacifica Drive, and Between a Point 680 Feet North of Pacifica Drive and a Point 400 Feet North of Pacifica Drive to Provide for Two 20-minute Spaces and Twelve 2-Hour Spaces Between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday Through Friday." Ron Miller, Chair of Cupertino Library Commission, spoke in favor of this ordinance. The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Lowenthal/Sandoval moved and seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof Ayes: Kwok, Lowenthal, Mahoney, Sandoval, and Wang. Noes: None. 14. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute a third amendment to the City's existing agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District for the reconstruction of the bridge on Bollinger Road over Calabazas Creek in an amount not to exceed $156,000, Resolution No. 07-074. (Continued from March 20). 12 - 34 AlTACHMENT D can be accessed by a weblink that will be emailed to you on Thursday, May 31. This attachment is not included in the report due to the volume of this attachment. However, a copy can be made available to you upon request. Please call Aki in the Planning Department at x3313 if you would like a copy. A copy will also be available at the City Council meeting. 12 - 35