TR-2013-38b OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE•CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
C U P E RT i N p (408) 777-3308• FAX(408)777-3333•elanning.(a�cupertino.orq
September 30, 2013
Rachel Hwang
10009 Oakleaf Pl
Cupertino, CA 95014
SUBJECT: TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ACTION LETTER—TR-2013-38:
This letter confirms the decision of the Director of Community Development, given on September 30,
2013, approving a tree removal permit to allow the removal and replacement of a Coast Live Oak tree,
located at 10009 Oakleaf Pl. This removal is approved with the following conditions:
1. APPROVED PROJECT
This approval is based on the arborist report prepared by Michael Bench (Certified Arborist #WE-
1897A),received August 27, 2013, consisting of three pages, except as may be amended by conditions
in this resolution.
2. TREE REPLACEMENTS
The applicant is required to plant two 24-inch box replacement Coast Live Oak trees in accordance
with the Protected Tree Ordinance and approved tree replacement plan. Modifications to the tree
species and location may be made to the approved replacement plan pending staff approval. The
replacement trees shall be planted within 30 days of the effective approval date of this tree removal
permit.
3. 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.
Staff has made the findings necessary to grant the tree removal permit in accordance with Section
14.18.180 of the Protected Trees Ordinance.
Please note, however, that an appeal of this decision can be made within 14 calendar days from
the date of this decision. If this happens, you will be notified of a public hearing, which will be
scheduled before the Planning Commission and the tree cannot be removed until a final decision
on the appeal has been made. If no appeal is made within the appeal period, the tree(s) may be
removed after Wednesday,October 16,2013.
Sincerely,
a,
��.�
Di ancholi
Assistant Planner
(408) 777-3319
diana�@cu�ertino.or�
��
�
�,�.r--- Michael L.Bench �:'��"�'���L `��Q�-,�,�,t j� —�
� / Consulting Arborist �.ti�ra �,"t;r�lbor
C � (831) 594-5151 _ l � �
�,,--� _".. ..%��z,�..�.,a.��
\�� 7327 Langley Canyon Road
Prunedale,California 93907 �� ,, .. '�:�:. �'�
�..``"�� ....:._.. ......_.
'�/ _ �._ .__...,
A Review of an Oak Tree
Rachel Hwang Residence
10009 Oakleaf Place
Cupertino, California
Assignment
I was asked by Diana Pancholi, Assistant Planner, to inspect an oak tree at 10009 Oakleaf
Place, Cupertino, California. The owner, Ms. Rachel Huang, describes the oak tree as a
hazard to the house and requests immediate attention.
Observations
I inspected the oak tree on August 21, 2013.
`� The subject tree is a Coast Live Oak
"�'�. � (QzceYCUS agrifolia) located in the back yard
,��
.�' ` '�,.,�. �`
�;� �°" w°� ` � on a sloped area. I estilnate the trunk
p#, � � y�� �'. ,:,� •,.
'� �����" � '�y.,�'°�. '� ' diameter to be approximately 30 inches at 54
°�'�� `''"'��. j � ;* � ` `��
..,� �w� �,,��. �� '�� -� -�� � ��:��r. �����.� - =��. inches above grade. The overall height ls
� .�... ; -.���� �� ���,a,�'�,��� � ����-�� �=�� approximately 50 feet and the canopy spread
� '�"��£ � � ' �� � ��r^�`�'_� is approximately 50-60 feet. This canopy is
��`� .�� .x,����,.
�� -�, .. . A
��' .
— dense throughout. The tree is shown in the
�� �4R.
�u���=;,� �'��� � �-..,i�. this photo taken from the south. The trunk is
- �. _
�' � . �;�;1 obscured by shadows.
_
o -.� � *��.- � ��
� � S���t:� ,aa:`'� a� �.a. � >��M
� � ' �"'y''� There is a verV larRLe cavitV on the west side
; x4. ra ,,�^�'� �14� J V ./
��; � �� - � �m,�` � }���:��� ;���`�r�s�` of the trunk at about 5 feet above grade. The
� �e�,,,�:��� �,.��� „ _ . . . .
� ,�� ������ _ � �. .���� � cavity opening is approximately 2 feet
x -��"�';, ., �r' � ��, „s�,_ •
`� � � � , v e rt i c a l b y a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 8 i n c h e s
�� � . .
` . `����� ���� horizontal.
��� ��u��
> �
� k �
' � �� '.��� The cavity cannot be seen in this photo due to
� ���s�. �$,� � � ��- �' � the shadows.
.:, ,g � .� �, � �
�w�,'�rsJ. . 6.. "f' �3� .- ... :. , #?��"k�+1Nau�.., .
'41Z�f' t
Currently the tree is very healthy and vigorous. Although the cavity opening is quite
large, the new fonned wood around the cavity, called callus, is extremely strong, reported
to be stronger than typical healthy wood. I do not think there is an immediate risk of
failure.
Prepared by Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist August 21, 2013 1
10009 Oakleaf Place
Cupertino, CA
However, there is a large active Sulfur fungus (Laetiporus sulphureus) inside of the
cavity.
* j-�" �4 `�,� The callus wood or roll on the sides of
� a. -� � �•:
� .,� � �
� �•��f.= the cavity can be seen in this photo.
:� :a , ��.,, .
�� � ��IiR
i
f
,�:,�„� .�$ �.- p�� � To give perspective, the height of the
.A��F��,`• .
..
,:�
. ��.> �� *� '�' fruiting body of this fungus (the
�.�
�,�,; �,� � � � yellow wavy fans) are about 18 inches
,��� � ��� �
` t a l l a n d a b o u t 1 2 i n c h e s w i d e.
�� ��@`",�������` �<� � �3 xt °
�"�� ��� ^��''��° �� "�.�����\ w a,� „�'Lfisf.'� " .
�II� �,\\ .y�.
r
am s�s" w.w
� ��'���, N� � �" � � The size of the fruiting bodies of fungi
�� ,
�,�,��
' ' �`� of this type suggests the extent of
� � d,;
����� ��� ���
��
����� ��p� �� ��� ,�� � development and inaturity. This
� ,, ��,,� �� �a.,. . . .
-���.�� ,������, � ,,� � ,s, ��� �`�������,. fungus ls quite large and mature.
� - , ,,, � .
�' Mp t.. "'i�f ���\,w ...
`4k. '2
`' �\�,�, ? �`FS ... \H�,... .
•�,� � This fungus digests the interior lignin,
�- :, 4 which makes cell structures strong. In
{� ; ,, , time, the interior wood looses its
'� y ���'� strength. At such tiine, sufficient
�� _��` '
� ,,�x , interlor wood ls lost, the tree will
' �� break, probably at or below the cavity
Y 1
� .�� �.f k�{
` �M` opening, and fall.
r .. r �' . ��,a .
s'a
� �° � . . . � �`�. �
�j� _ There is no effective treatment for this
,� � ' . , .
disease. It is, thus, incurable by
current technology.
It is impossible to judge with today's technology how long the tree will continue to
remain upright. I have seen trees with this disease remain standing for several years.
There is technology that can a rough scan of the interior wood. It provides a rough
estimate of the decayed wood versus the healthy wood. This test is expensive (about
$2500-$3000) to have done. The test results inay provide a more accurate estimate of the
potential for failure, but any predictions are nevertheless an estimate.
Conclusions
It is safe to say that this tree will fall down at some point in the future. An accurate
assessinent of the timing cannot be predicted. Although this tree may have a few years of
service to provide, there is no way to judge the longevity accurately.
Prepared by Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist August 21, 2013 2
10009 Oakleaf Place
Cupertino, CA
Recommendations
In the interest of safety, I recommend to remove this tree at the earliest convenience of
the owner.
I also recommend that the stump be ground in order to reduce the risk of oak root fungus
infection on replacement trees.
Replacements
The removal of this tree will create a large open area in the back yard. There will be
plenty of space in this area for replacement trees. It would be difficult to plant
replacement trees larger than 24 inch boxed specimens because of the slope. This because
a 24 inch boxed specimen can be managed by 2 people, but a 36 inch boxed specimen
requires a tractor or a crane.
Because the supply of water is decreasing, especially for landscape usage, I recoinmend
that the replacement tree(s) be a low water consuming species. The following trees are
low water consuming species:
Coast live oak (Quercus agYifolia)
Interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii)
Valley oak (Quercus lobata)
Southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora)
Chinese pistache (Pistacia chinensis) can even
Carob (Ceratonia siliqua)
Fruitless olive(Olea europea `Swan Hill')
California pepper(Schinus molle)
Respectfully submitted,
. ��
Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist
International Society of Arboriculture Certification#WE 1897A
American Society of Consulting Arborists Member
Prepared by Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist August 21, 2013 3