Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/15/2003 - Agenda PacketMAY 159 2003 APPROVED PB &R AD HOC TREE MEETING AGENDA Li CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission AD Hoc Tree Committee Thursday, May 15, 2003 – 7:00- 9:OOPM City Council Chambers 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach AGENDA 1. Call to Order – Chair Allen 2. Public Comments on non - agenda items within the limited subject matter jurisdiction of the Ad Hoc Committee. Comments are limited to 2 minutes per person. 3. Minutes of the meetings of April 10, and April 24, 2003. Waive reading of subject minutes, approve as written, and order filed. 4. Reports: a. Report from the General Services Director regarding the consolidation, evaluation, and staff recommendations for the various suggested changes, additions, or deletions to the G -1 Policy. b. Report from the General Services Director regarding revisions to staff suggested changes to the G -1 Policy. 5. Public testimony regarding the general areas or specific issues the Committee should consider during its review of Council Policy G -1 and Chapter 13.08 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Testimony is limited to 3 minutes per person subject to extensions granted by the Chair for persons who represent, and are speaking on behalf of every member of a group 6. Committee direction to staff regarding preparation of the final report on the G -1 Policy and Ordinance 13.08 to the PB &R Commission. 7. Consideration of additional Tree Committee Meeting — May 29, 2003 8. Adjourn • IAUSERSMSWNLiodemmV00 y2 3\wff reports agendas HOC Tree COm twe Ageo Wa .dcc CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • Ad Hoc Tree Committee of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission April 10, 2003- 7pm 1. Called to order at 7pm ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Allen, Skoro, Tobin Staff: Marie Knight, Recreation Et Senior Services Director David Niederhaus, General Services Director Robin Clauson, Deputy City Attorney John Conway, Urban Forester Teri Craig, Administrative Assistant Public Present: Barry Allen Alan Beek Jane Brown, SCE Linda Grant (BAS) Virginia Herberts Tess Lier (Cameo Shores HOA) Diane Meyer (Harbor View Hills HOA) John Orr Larry Porter Mark Tamura (Harbor View Hills HOA) Jan Vandersloot (BAS /SPON) 2. REPORTS a. Report from Deputy Citv Attornev reeardine the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement with the Balboa Arbor Society that are relevant to the duties and responsibilities of the Committee Deputy City Attorney Clauson read the following memo from City Attorney Burnham into the minutes: TO: Debra Allen; Val Skoro; Tom Tobin FROM: Robert Burnham RE: Balboa Arbor Society Settlement Agreement Ad Hoc Committee Duties DATE: April 9, 2003 As you know, the City of Newport Beach and the Balboa Arbor Society (BAS) were involved in litigation regarding the removal of the Ficus trees on Main Street in Balboa. This litigation was resolved pursuant to a Settlement Agreement that among other things, obligates the City to appoint a committee to commence a public process for the systematic review of the City's G -1 Policy with respect to the preservation and removal of trees within the City." The City also committed to consider in a timely manner the adoption of a city Tree Ordinance that would make removal of trees the city identifies as protected trees a violation of the City Municipal • Code. On March 11, 2003, the City Council decided that the committee identified in the Settlement Agreement should consist of three members of, and selected by, the Parks Beaches & Recreation Commission. The Settlement Agreement does not define relevant terms but we believe the Committee would conduct a "systematic review" (and comply with the request of the City Council) if it evaluated • Ad Hoc Tree Committee April 10, 2003 Page 2 each major element of Council Policy G -1, received input from all interested parties, discussed each element in light of comments from staff and the public and forwarded recommendations to the City Council. The Committee should also receive public and staff input regarding the adoption of a city tree ordinance and make a recommendation as to whether the City Council should consider amendments of the existing ordinance or consider the adoption of a new ordinance. We encourage the Committee to consider the initial meeting as a fact- finding session that will, hopefully, allow interested parties such as BAS to clearly articulate the specific changes to G -1 and the components of an a tree ordinance that they believe are in the best interests of the City of Newport Beach. b. Report from General Services Director regarding Council Policy G -1 and Chapter 13.08 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code Director Niederhaus introduced Urban Forester John Conway and noted that Parks ft Trees Superintendent Marcelino Lomeli was unable to make the meeting because of a family emergency but would be attending the next meeting. Director Niederhaus reviewed Council Policy G -1, Municipal Code Ordinance 13.08, tree removals from the last 10 years, and noted that the City of Newport Beach will be recognized as a Tree City USA for the 13th consecutive year and presented a special growth award at the Council meeting on April 22. • 3. Introductory Comments by Chair Allen Chair Allen introduced herself and stated that meetings had been also scheduled for April 24 and May 15 of the Ad Hoc Committee. The Committee will hear the public as they voice their concerns regarding tree policies and will give direction to staff. After the Committee has heard from the public and concluded their deliberations, they will present their findings to the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission and will forward a report to the City Council. 4. Committee Member Discussion Commissioner Skoro stated that he had been part of the previous 18 -month discussion of the G -1 Policy and hoped that it would not take that long this time. He noted that the G -1 could be improved and hoped that everyone would listen, so that recommendations could be made and move forward. Commission Tobin stated that he has an open mind and willing to hear all issues. 5. Public Testimony regarding the General Area of Specific Issues the Committee should consider during its review Larry Porter stated that there seems to be problems with enforcement of the G -1 Policy and that it could be enforced more easily if it was an ordinance. He noted that he does not want to see another Main Street Ficus fiasco. • Barry Allen stated that views are extremely important to homeowners and the • homeowners association CCBR's. He stated that the G -1 Policy has worked well in the past and would be concerned with changes. He stated that the tree trimming does not always work with the sporadic growth of trees and that by planting such small trees as replacements that homeowners will experience removal problems in the future. Mr. Allen stated that if the Balboa Arbor Society (BAS) has a problem • Ad Hoc Tree Committee April 10, 2003 Page 3 with the G -1 Policy then they should submit what changes they feel should be made and the Committee and the public could start from there. • John Orr thanked Urban Forester John Conway for his professionalism and expertise. He stated that he echo's Mr. Allen's comments. He reinforced the fact that views are extremely important for the homeowners, the association but also for property values. Tess Lier from Cameo Highlands stated that she also worked on the G -1 Policy and that a good compromise was reached for a view City. She stated that she appreciates the trim cycle. She asked that BAS or Dr. Vandersloot submit their suggestions for change of the policy. She stated that the G -1 is there to protect the trees and views. • Alan Beek commented that the City's replacement numbers of tree removals is much too high. He noted his surprise that the trimming cycle was ok with the last witness. He stated that there really is no protection of the private view and that once a tree is named special it becomes a "holy" tree. Mr. Beek stated that taking out 42 trees and planting 487 is just too high. He stated that the City should worry more about the poor homeowners than the trees. • Jan Vandersloot, BAS /SPON stated that the City should have public members on the committee and it was a condition of the settlement with BAS. He stated that BAS does not want to change anything in the G -1 Policy having to do with views. The major concern is reforestation. He stated that when a tree is reforested it should not be replaced with a toothpick of a tree. Chair Allen asked Mr. Vandersloot's thoughts on tree trimming for views. Mr. Vandersloot stated that trees should be trimmed in accordance with the Arborist Society, trees should not be topped off. He also noted that trees should become part of a view for residents. Mr. Vandersloot asked for more time. Chair Allen stated if there was more time after everyone else had spoke he would be allowed more time. Virginia Herberts stated that she was part of the committee that first applied for the City to become Tree City USA. She also stated that the Special Tree List began when she was part of the Commission and that they started this list as a response to the community when a specific tree lent a certain kind of ambience to the neighborhood. She also noted that some trees that are planted do not respond well to the Newport Beach climate and suggested that more study be done before a tree is selected. • Mark Truman thanked the Commission for the G -1 Policy. He stated that he lives in a view community and that he does not want someone to tell him what his view should be. . Lynn Miller, BAS stated that the G -1 Policy was not observed in the removal of the Main Street Ficus trees. She stated that those fcus trees were "Special" and should never have been removed. Chair Allen asked Ms. Miller if she believes that the problem with the G -1 is that the rules are not always followed. Ms. Miller stated yes. Ad Hoc Tree Committee April 10, 2003 . Page 4 Linda Grant, BAS, stated that Mr. Porter had just handed her a card displaying the Main Street ficus trees and that it just makes her want to cry. She stated that we need an ordinance to protect City trees. She stated that she believes in trees. She stated that John Conway should be on the Ad Hoc Committee. She stated that our town has been destroyed. She stated that she sued the City because she had to. She stated that she is not going away and that the City will need to get used to that. Diane Meyer commented that it would be helpful to know just exactly what BAS wants. She stated that she loves trees, views and John Conway. She stated that a reforested tree should not be replanted if it is going to cause a problem with views. She suggested that more funds are needed for more frequent trimmings. • Bill Simons stated that he lives in Jasmine Creek which does not have City trees adjacent to the community but he appreciates the G -1 Policy as it protects their views and that all associations should adhere to the view policy. Discussion ensued regarding the settlement. Assistant City Attorney Clauson stated that the City won at the Superior Court level but it was appealed; a settlement was reached rather than continuing with the lawsuit. • Jan Vandersloot began to discuss the BAS lawsuit Ms. Clauson stated that instead of rehashing the settlement, why doesn't the BAS put in writing what they feel should be changed. • Mr. Vandersloot comments are as follows: City needs a more effective Tree Care Ordinance that deals with retention and removal so that enforcement can be done There should be better mitigation of tree values and functions. City should review Costa Mesa's 3 to 1 tree replacement policy for possible adoption. G -1 needs better reforestation criteria (he brought up the Singleton's letters that were never answered); should only be done when there is repeated damage - Too much trimming defaces the tree. Better maintenance procedures are needed before removals are done (maintenance suggestions for the Main Street trees by the SPON Arborist were ignored) . Special City Trees should be protected forever and never removed for any reason. City needs to establish a Tree Committee as the Parks, Beaches and . Recreation Commission do not necessarily always like trees. He again commented that the City should not be receiving the Tree City USA award. He noted that BAS members would like to be part of the Tree Committee. Ad Hoc Tree Committee April 10, 2003 Page 5 Chair Allen stated that this committee has waited for 6 weeks for the BAS to put their comments in writing and suggested that the Committee would like to see it earlier rather than later. 6. Public Comments on Non - Agenda Items • Virginia Herberts stated that she has concerns about Council Policy G -6 — Maintenance and Planting of Parkway Trees as she believes that tree maintenance should not have been privatized. She noted that City trees would have a better chance if they were cared for by people that care about them and planted in the correct manner. • Alan Beek noted that he believes that little trees are far more interesting than big trees. Barry Allen asked the Commission how the City of Newport Beach had been selected as Tree City USA. Director Niederhaus stated that the City applies for the tree award and has been designated on an annual basis with the approval of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission. • Linda Grant stated that trees make this City better. She again stated that she sued • the City to save the trees. She noted that she is tired of people badgering her and the committee because of their love for their trees. She stated that she is aware that the Council has made jokes of them but the bottom line is she and the Balboa Arbor Society are not going away. • John Orr asked what are the benefits of being know as Tree City USA. Director Niederhaus stated that roadway signage is provided with a plaque and a flag that is flown. The distinction of Tree City USA is not so much an award as it fosters urban forest care and growth. • Jan Vandersloot stated that he supports the City being Tree City USA and reminded people that don't like trees that they were initially planted to help rid cities of smog. He commented that Newport Beach should not be a City of pygmy trees. • Tess Lier asked what is being done for the Eucalyptus trees on Balboa Boulevard near Main Street. Urban Forester John Conway stated that those trees were being treated for lerps and that injections should cure the problem. 7. Committee Direction to Staff Chair Allen stated that she has learned from the public that John Conway does a wonderful job and that most of the problems with the G -1 policy are enforcement • concerns and not the language. Chair Allen stated that the enforcement issue is basically because of the Main Street Removals and believes that it was an isolated incident. She asked staff to confer with the City of Costa Mesa regarding their 3 to 1 replacement policy. She also stated that this Committee is not ready to discuss Special Trees and does not believe that is a item that should be discussed by this Committee. Ad Hoc Tree Committee April 10, 2003 Page 6 Chair Allen asked staff to return with a staff report on how well the City mitigates the maintenance of trees re: their health; and a report from staff regarding any issues or concerns they may have with the G -1 policy. Director Niederhaus commented that the Council had augmented the tree maintenance budget in FY 2002/03 for funding of tree root barriers, root pruning and annual trimmings. Commissioner Skoro stated that he also would like to see a written statement from the Balboa Arbor Society outlining their concerns and would like staff to review the monetary aspects of more care and tree trimmings but reminded the public that the City does not have an infinite source of money and like all things money is an issue. Commissioner Tobin stated that he also would like to see something in writing from the Balboa Arbor Society. ADJOURNMENT - 8:45pm Submitted by: • Teri Craig, Admin Assistant U CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • Ad Hoc Tree Committee of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission April 24, 2003- 7pm 1. Called to order at 7pm ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Allen, Skoro, Tobin Staff: Marie Knight, Recreation & Senior Services Director David Niederhaus, General Services Director Robin Clauson, Deputy City Attorney John Conway, Urban Forester Teri Craig, Administrative Assistant Public Present: Barry Allen Alan Beek Linda Grant (BAS) Virginia Herberts Yvonne Houseels Iris Kimmel (HVH) Tess Lier (Cameo Shores HOA) Diane Meyer (Harbor View Hills HOA) Mark Truman Jan Vandersloot (BAS /SPON) 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS - None. 3. MINUTES - APRIL 10, 2003 Continued to next meeting of May 15, 2003. 4. REPORTS a. Report from Deputy Citv Attornev regarding history of illegal tree removals and the apDlicabilit of Ordinance 13.08 Assistant City Attorney Ohl commented on the history of prosecuting illegal tree removals with the court system as well as pursuing them through the small claims court process. b. Report from General Services Director regarding current tree replacement Dolicies and an update on the City of Costa Mesa tree replacement program Director Niederhaus reviewed the Costa Mesa policy as noted in the staff report. Urban Forester Conway reviewed the survey of the cities of Irvine, Costa Mesa, Laguna Beach and Huntington Beach. C. Report from General Services Director regarding increased tree maintenance activities including annual trimming and root pruning and root barrier programs. Director Niederhaus reviewed current budget and policy for the annual trimming, root pruning and root barriers. . d. Report from General Services Director regarding staff suggested changes to the G -1 Policy. Director Niederhaus reviewed the staff report with the Committee. He stated that even with tree removals that many more trees have been planted than removed. Some of the reasons for removals have been because of the wrong species being planted years ago. Ad Hoc Tree Committee April 24, 2003 Page 2 5. Public Testimonv reeardine the General Area of Specific Issues the Committee should consider during its review • Linda Grant thanked Director Niederhaus and Urban Forrester John Conway for their education and stated that she would like to give her time to Jan Vandersloot. • Jan Vandersloot distributed a memo and commented that changes made by staff to the G -1 Policy were not too bad, but that a Tree Ordinance is needed to enforce the policy and to have more certainty to what will happen to a tree. He commented on the Costa Mesa 3 to 1 replacement policy of two 24" boxed and one 15' box tree is certainly better than one 36" tree, since that size tree is so hard to find. He asked the Committee to remember that a small tree should not reforest a large canopy tree. He stated that the Costa Mesa replacement policy is much more effective. Mr. Vandersloot also commented that the notices for removal should be at eye level when affixed to the tree. Mr. Conway stated that they have had to move the notices higher as people remove them on a frequent basis. Jan Vandersloot also noted that special treatments to a tree must be done before a Special Tree is ever removed. Commissioner Skoro asked if Mr. Vandersloot's memo was a consensus from the 50 members of the Balboa Arbor Society. Mr. Vandersloot stated that the BAS had not had a meeting yet and that the memo was actually his personal comments. • Barry Allen stated that views are the most important issue to any homeowners with a view. Any tree that blocks a view should be removed without discussion. He commented that Newport Beach is a view city and not a tree city. The policy should make it easier for homeowners to remove trees, this would cut down on funds used by the City. Chair Allen asked Mr. Allen to put his comments in writing and submit them to Teri Craig, which he agreed to do. • Virginia Herberts stated that she totally disagrees with Mr. Allen and reminded the Committee that trees actually enhance views. • Kathy Young, Cameo Shores Association, stated that the tree policy we have would be more appropriate for eastern cities not for Newport Beach. When people think of Newport Beach they think of views of the water, not trees. She commented that most of the trees planted in the City are not natural. She recommended that nothing over 8 feet be planted. The City should encourage views of the ocean as trees do not benefit from this environment. She commented that this is not a tree city and that the committee should rethink the whole reason to even have a tree policy. • Tess Lier also commented that Newport Beach is not a tree city but a view city. Land values are based on ocean views not tree views. She also questioned the • wisdom of replacing one tree with 2 or 3 when the replacement is being done because of a problem. She commented that planting two 24" box trees is just ridiculous. Ms. Lier stated that the City should allow the immediate areas to decide what they want. Neighborhood association's should be the ones that determine what should and should not be planted. She also noted that the homeowner should be considered not the tree. Ad Hoc Tree Committee April 24, 2003 Page 3 • Diane Meyer, Harbor View Hills South, stated that she represents a view community. She stated that Laguna Beach and Huntington Beach have a one to one replacement policy with using a 15 gallon replacement tree. She commented that it is not always practical to replace a tree. She also stated that these decisions should be left up to the homeowners association. The homeowner should want the tree if they are going to be responsible for it. She stated that there should be a different set of tree rules for view communities. • Iris Kimmel, Harbor View Hills Homeowners Association commented that the homeowners association should control the trimming cycle. She commented that they would not presume to select the type of trees to be planted, but should be allowed to know when trimming is needed. She commented that the City can't come into our community and tell us what we want. She commented that the Association would bear the cost for supplemental tree trimming. Yvonne Houssels, stated that she is speaking for 150 homes that are concerned about views. She stated that if we are going to have a tree ordinance then a view ordinance is necessary. . She stated that staff should look at the tree ordinances of Palos Verdes and Laguna Beach. She commented that trees must be pruned when they obstruct views. • Allen Beek reminded the Committee that the City seal does not include trees, only water and sails. He commented that people should be able to decide if they even want a tree planted in their parkway. He stated that public views must be protected. Mark Truman, Harbor View Hills, commented that he has a view property and why should he be forced to take care of trees that he does not even want. • Jan Vandersloot stated that he has nothing against the view communities but that types of trees should be considered before planting them. He commented that the City has made the decision that they value trees. He commented that it is intriguing to think that HOA's might be responsible for supplemental trimming thus some of the costs could be shifted from the City. He stated that some of the problems with the G -1 is that Roto Rooter costs should not be considered damage as it is just normal wear and tear on sewer lines. He stated that the appeals process should be reviewed and that the City should have more trees, as trees add value to the overall look of the City. • Tess Lier stated that the G -1 Policy is not being undermined if there are only 2 -4 illegal removals a year. Views must be protected. Stringent rules cause more problems. 6. Public Comments on Non- Aeenda Items None 7. Committee Direction to Staff Chair Allen stated asked staff to categorize the comments presented tonight into a • report for the next meeting on May 15, 2003. The Committee requested that the BAS submit to the Committee their formal response outlining their concerns and issues with the current G1 policy by May 6, 2003 in order to provide the Committee sufficient time to review their comments prior to the May 15`h meeting. ADJOURNMENT- 8:45pm • • Ad Hoc Tree Committee April 24, 2003 Page 4 Submitted by: Teri Craig, Admin Assistant • • • Q NEWPORT O T u i 4 Cg4c00.��F Agenda Item No. 4.a. May 15, 2003 TO: FROM: Ad Hoc Tree Committee PB &R Commission General Services Director SUBJECT: Summary of Suggested G -1 Revisions Recommendation Review the suggested changes to the G -1 Policy. Background Staff provided the Ad Hoc Tree Committee with an overview of the City tree removal and replacement policy (G -1) and Ordinance 13.08 (Planting) at the initial meeting of the Committee on April 10. At the April 24 meeting of the Committee, staff provided a further report on Ordinance 13.08 and the history of illegal tree removals. In addition, reports regarding the City increase in tree maintenance activities, current City tree replacement policies and that of adjacent cities, and suggested changes to the G -1 Policy were presented. A significant amount of public comments, as well as some written correspondence, was received at the April 24 meeting. After a review of all of the input and at the direction of Committee Chair, staff has prepared two reports regarding the G -1 Policy for the final meeting of the Committee. The first report (Item 4.a.) is the consolidation, evaluation, and staff recommendations related to the various suggested changes to the G -1 Policy that have been submitted or stated by various entities. The attached matrix provides a comprehensive view of the spectrum of changes to the G -1 Policy. The final column of the spreadsheet provides for a space where the Committee can note their decision on the various issues. • The second report of the agenda (Item 4.b.) incorporates the final staff revisions to the G- 1 Policy and reflects the results of a staff review of all input received as contained in the matrix. Very respectfully, David E. Niederhaus Attachment: Matrix of Suggested Changes to G -1 Policy • • • • T R T U_ O d c E R 5 L N 2 d O Z 0 o N N N m w� W 0 yZ N N d cv a m `m n m a c c c c > a a a >>> > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E E E E n n a a a n n n n n n a n o 0 0 0 z° z° z° z° c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c O O O O O Y Y Y Y Y Y Y x Z C X C Y C Y C Y C Y C Y C Y C C C c C C C C M C M 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 c 0 c 0 c 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Q o o `oa 2 c c c c x c c x c c n n D Q Q Q Q m R Vl R R R R R 000 O fn t/J fA 4J m Cl) U) Vl f%1 S 2 S 2 m M N M m N A N A N C= C�j cb N M y N O m M N N C7 N M M C C G m m _ m (M� J J J J J J J J J C G J C p3 p93 � J J m m L O Ll. m m m m m m m m m m m m `a3 m m N N R R N R N N A R R tl R Q Q Q ao_aa a a.aa ao_a R a a a lz zz R a y 'F-C NN y L y O m U m U R O N m d E _a s d�o 3 � n O C C m "° _y Q 'o c 3 B O m -o g 6i S Z m ❑ M E o M C 'E C (n O S N L_ Q RJ � L 'C E C m O S O E ^ O O O U O. C 0 S Ci N 0 Q N Q Q 0 Q N S S Q W (n (7 N a ci "o T R T U_ O d c E R 5 L N 2 d O Z 0 o N N N m w� W 0 yZ N N d cv a m `m n m a • • E CIF O N m m (7 a N W a U R d N ry1 W W N W W rn� W U R W c m Q Z Q U W t C ,pW c o o l a N O a V d my m o C W C p1 i N .0 E CIF O N m m (7 a N W N ry1 W W N W W W W W W W W W W W O 2 m o h h � .0 a m 0 0 0 ry N 3 >d 3 3 E c o 0 0 a o o Y c Y c Y c Y c Y c Y c Y Z Z Z Y Y Z Y Z y Z C C C C C C C N C C C d O1 m t[l N N E CIF O N m m (7 a N W W N W W W W W W W W W W W 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 o 0 0 0 o o Y c Y c Y c Y c Y c Y c Y Z Z Z Y Y Z Y Z y Z C C C C C C C C C C C s o ss °° s ss s so s N N 2 ° o ° _ ° o o M ° N N N W N T NN R R R W R W R R R fn R fn W R R a am 0 0 0 a 00 coo 0 g 0 0 0 m Q N M C? N L D M N M' 0 N M W N ON [ y N W Wy N 61 C C y N N y M W V N W y � 41 C C W W C y 61 N (n 61 .9 J j ° c c 66 W WW > > > > z H > > > i 10 0 k\ )� | ); /w ) 2 _ 2 \ ;2 ((� m /T2 \ - «a2 ƒI -�\ o eee �k\ / \`2 -R .2 - 6 c k ■; ■ ■» k z \ \ \\\ \ } \} \ \ \\\ }}\ {0 f= § - !! ,§ ) §)tKM k@ §{klta !a)2G��o' �O - r ;;)■® ) \] \��$&ik R ©O0 } `°�k E � -a°; k #2 /j® 05 LM §(§ - k{] ■`$ \ /aa&2 � } \))) ■ /) /k(�� \} \ \ k\ )� | a N m Q m N y 2 � m 0 m m a S� D D T N A D O ➢ D D C7 �7 O C1 -� :� �� K= O� N N p m o m S O S J tD =. K C 0 O to a pj o m m m m 3 v o o m,: m v d m y y y O= O y .' O O O ._.. N N m O O' N 3 p N !D a. fa �� doves O D� _t C'I °O�m and ➢='Pao m mmm °ym- S N Ci D O O a_ R o 0 ,gV m. O f d m �nmm o o a m m m m n d o O o m m o w m m_ �_ m m n" _ = m O y � _ d R sz N = m m x Q w w 0 p d m y m m n pG N w y d a m w y O d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d m m m m m m m m m m m Vl m fn m (ll m (!J m T m m T T m m T m m O O O r X X i CC 0 O . _ fp ( .d- �•. %D � N N m m m S o = J m m= m m m m N m w W N w J w y m m m m w w m w w w w A T W W N O N N p (WD A W W N W CT W 6� N ppW W W A N— N W T Q7 N O 3 N GI d N N d N d N N N N N N 91 61 91 w. 2 O O W C C O O 0= O � _ O = o o = o p O o 0 0 o O o O o 0 0 0 o O w O VY m' ➢➢ D D D D ➢D D➢ D D D ➢➢ D Do -1 a a a a a a a s a C s G a K a G a G a G O S a G a K G G K G K< G K a d 0,. p:. li O 3 a, m: o' ar, M N m Q 'm m m o iv a O j W W W N N N N N N N N N N -+ N � O CD Q] V Q7 U• A W N O lD W DD D D m ern D �3° mp -N A � aO m 0 X m ' o o p O m 0 0 oA 0 ; ;6 EF N N w w y N mo [D C] 3 3 0 0 0 d a w CD Z a H 3 � c O 51 N. w ° N 3 N fD N fU N (O o m m o c G7 ti m a d o m 3 _ m 3 2= n 0 MD -< d Nw J p d _ w IIIIIF Z d d d d d N d d d N d d d d d d d d m m m m m m p m m m m m m m m m m m T Z Z Z T T T r 0. 0 M M M m d 3 w J [D [D w w W w 0 j N y Vdl N W p VI V N j w w w A m a m d � m m aCi u�i 2 'w 0 O O O O O O S J F = _F _F _F O = O O O O O 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 O J D D D ➢ D D D � O> j O > j � n y F a ,T F v a 0£ 0, a s a a a p a 0 f Sa D D w o 0 a O fU (D d ro CB C n (0 O O (T D D D D D D ➢ 'o d O m a C d 0 W J ^a n � w O d J n t0 N mm 2 a O N O a 0 _ m � n ni 3' 2 iv Oc w O� J' W N N (N_n 2 2 � N _ o N a O � A A A A A W W W W A W N O (O V Ql (T A W J a a D ➢a D D;0 ➢mA -� m a O m ivy a o m n o' Q y r A - F m Z N d J Ji v �° n m N a 3 v >•.t B d x c m � m s: 0 O J J � (�1 H a y d d ... S d (D Z N N ry O m y N m' •-• � = V 0 0 d 6� W 6 J d N Y d ^+ f N J + 3 O Fb O n a �- � n_ � Cdi N � d• j ? N CJS E= d v d d v d d v v d d v d v m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m cn " � m [n d� v> W co o: y.. J m J W O U1 A W W LJ O' < < < < C 3' m m m m m m m m m m m m O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O J O J O O O O O O O O O O J O J 00 O D O N O O O O- y m N N N Vl N 4! O' 0 m ➢ D ➢ D D D D D➢ D➢ D 'y a a a a a a a a s a a a a a a a a a a s a s a K K t < K t m t m K m K m << m m <» m H m m m m m O 3 m m N o m n o o m< y T m fi/ y O^ J^ n o d J [O m O 0 6 N m � m y � y O- p. 'K A p y � _.•. n - = n VO—i N 3 ^ m m � 3: 3, a, O, IOP. A m d a ti N N N 2, H d O N w � CT V U1 0I pf V1 (P A cT W Vt N CT (T O A [O A W A V A QJ A CT a° N n O O N QJ O J 41 t m (n A T L N N 3 n 3 [D D 0 m O n p m 3 p d y d O w /i O S N p O d J O Q O J ti N T T T T T T Z w V L7 w w V T w d d d d cp �p d d tp a d W's (p m fp � (p d d d �c m d d d 0 d fD (U (U (U cD (G lD [D (0 (D N N N N (D d N N m m VI -1 d d O Z m K ° S tp N S D S (D O 0 ° r y r m c .d.. W N W W A W p t0 (p D m o v � W W W W W D D D W D W W 0 M (D za N (D [4 N (D (U (U (D (D fD O 2 O � F F O O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O O O O` S C C C C C C C C D C C C y n W ° p o° °° o. o- a 0 0 0 Er o p 0 o n Z3 z3 m 3 J N 9 O N tIi 2 d O_- °_ y O fD (a cD _ 3 J d � [D 9 c O p] d p J J y m ° m m ID N .'° n d at 3 9 R ry p p E U o a o K a 0 ? � d O d 1 N ° Q `C n a N' W O. N fD' \ { \ \ ) \ \ ( ( \ 3 § ) \ } \\ ƒ ƒ \ (�\ S- \ SD f ;0 z A §g� j} 2 (} $ / \ \ 7 }\ } U¢ SEW POR � �. • P l�FOR�� Agenda Item No. 4.b. May 15, 2003 TO: Ad Hoc Tree Committee PB &R Commission FROM: General Services Director SUBJECT: Council Policy G -1 Amendments Recommendation Review Council Policy G -1 amendments as proposed by staff and approve /dis- approve /amend as necessary. • Background The City Council directed the review of the G -1 Policy by an Ad Hoc Tree Committee comprised of Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commissioners appointed by the PB &R Chairperson, Debra Allen. Ms. Allen appointed Commissioners Val Skoro and Tom Tobin to the Ad Hoc Tree Committee. Staff was directed to prepare initial reports on the G -1 Policy and Ordinance 13.08 (Plantings) for the first Ad Hoc Meeting of April 10. Public input was also received at that time. The Commissioners particularly asked for any input from the Balboa Arbor Society (BAS) representatives. The second meeting of the Committee was April 24 where the Committee members reviewed staff reports on Ordinance 13.08 and the history of illegal tree removals, tree replacement policies, City tree maintenance activities, and initial staff recommendations to revise the G -1 Policy. Various homeowners' associations spoke or provided written recommendations. At least two BAS representatives were present at the second meeting. One, Dr. Vandersloot, presented verbal and written comments, but in answer to Chair Allen's question, admitted the material was his own and not that of BAS. Chair Allen . invited any BAS input for the final Committee meeting of May 15. . In the previous report (Item 4.a.), staff has attempted to identify all issues related to the study of the G -1 Policy, evaluate each as compared with present practice, and provide recommendations. The staff recommendations from Item 4.a. are incorporated in the attached amended G -1 Policy. Staff is prepared to submit an agenda item or provide material for an oral report for the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission meeting of June 4 that reflects the final recommendation(s) of the Tree Subcommittee. As noted earlier, Ordinance 13.08 (Plantings) was reviewed by staff and the Committee at the first two Tree Subcommittee meetings. No staff changes are recommended at this time. Very respectfully, David E. Niederhaus Attachment: Council Policy G -1 (Proposed Changes) r1 U • . May 12, 2003 Draft G -1 1 2 RETENTION OR REMOVAL OF CITY TREES 3 4 The purpose of this policy is to establish definitive standards for the retention, removal, 5 maintenance, reforestation, tree trimming standards, and supplemental trimming of 6 City trees. City trees are an important part of the character and charm of the entire 7 City. Regular care, trimming, root pruning, maintenance, and programmed 8 replacement are necessary to preserve this charm while at the same time protecting 9 views and public and private property. 10 11 The City classifies public trees in one of two categories: Special Trees and All Other 12 Trees. 13 14 SPECIAL CITY TREES 15 16 It is the City's policy to retain City trees categorized as Landmark, Dedicated, or 17 Neighborhood trees, which have historical significance, and /or contribute to and give 18 character to a location or to an entire neighborhood. Landmark, Dedicated, and 19 Neighborhood trees are individually identified on by Attachment 1, and shall • 20 hereinafter be referred to as Special Trees. Trees within these categories shall be 21 identified established, mapped, recorded and administered by staff for the Parks, 22 Beaches & Recreation Commission ( "Commission'). 23 24 Landmark Trees are identified as those individual Special Trees that possess historical 25 significance by virtue of their size, age, location, or species. 26 27 Dedicated Trees are 5pecial Trees donated for or in the memory of specific individuals 28 or organizations. 29 30 Neighborhood Trees are Special Trees that by their unusual size, number, species, or 31 location lend a special character to a residential commercial or business area. 32 33 Special Trees shall be retained, unless there are overriding problems, such as death, 34 disease, or the creation of a hazardous situation, which require their removal. Prior to 35 consideration for aaU removal of a Special Treea the General Services Director, or 36 designee, shall prepare a report identifying and implementing specific treatment to 37 retain the tree(s). If specific treatment is unsuccessful or impractical in retaining a 38 tree(s) then a full staff report shall be made to the Commission before any further action 39 considering removal is taken. Prior to any removal of Special Tree "s the City must •40 comply with the noticing provisions of the Removal of City Trees section set forth in 1 • May 12, 2003 Draft G -1 1 this Policy, unless a tree Special Tree is considered hazardous that necessitates an 2 emergency removal. Any such removal must be recommended by the General Services 3 Director and the Risk Manager and approved by requires the ^~ ~ ~ ^ ^ ^' of the City 4 Manager. 5 6 During normal sidewalk, curb, and street repair activity requiring root pruning, all 7 steps shall be taken to retain Special Trees. If tree roots are to be pruned in association 8 with sidewalk, curb, and gutter improvements, sufficient timing in advance must be 9 planned to ensure that pruning will not destabilize or kill the tree. If both sides of a 10 Special Tree's roots are to be pruned, one side should be pruned 6 months to a year in 11 advance of the other side depending upon the species and other related factors. If root 12 pruning methods are not practical and /or critical to the health of the tree, then alternate 13 or special hardscape improvements should be considered by the City 14 in order to retain the tree providing that costs are reasonable. All proposed root 15 pruning or other tree treatment shall be assessed coordinated by the Urban Forester. 16 17 ALL OTHER CITY TREES 18 19 A City tree which is not designated as a S1ecial Tree is designated as an "All Other 020 Tree ". It is the City's policy to retain All Other Qty Trees unless removal is necessary 21 for one of the following reasons: 22 23 A. The City tree has had a proven and repeated history (defined as two or more 24 occurrences within a 12 I-8-month period) of damaging public or private sewers, 25 water mains, roadways, sidewalks, curbs, walls, fences, underground utilities, or 26 foundations based on City records or other competent and reliable authority 27 despite specific treatment by the City to alleviate repeated damage. Water or 28 sewer stoppage that results from tree roots and causes significant documented 29 private property damage (greater than $500) shall be sufficient criterion for tree 30 removal. Regular drain or pipe clearing shall not constitute such damage, nor 31 shall damage attributed to a failure by the property owner to perform such 32 preventive maintenance. 33 34 B. The City tree has had a repeated history (defined as two or more occurrences 35 within an 121$ -month period) of significant interference with street or sidewalk 36 drainage, despite specific treatment by the City to alleviate repeated damage. 37 Prior to tree removal mitigation measures such as root pruning and /or 38 concrete / asphalt grinding should be considered to resolve any street or sidewalk 39 drainage problem. •40 2 • May 12, 2003 Draft G -1 1 C. The City tree is dead, diseased, dying, or hazardous, and presents a significant 2 liability to the City. A dead tree is one that has been assessed by the Urban 3 Forester and found to have deceased. Diseased trees are defined as those trees 4 that cannot be cured by current arboricultural methods, are in an advanced state 5 of decline, and have no prospect of recovery. Dying trees are those that have no 6 prospect of recovery. Hazardous trees are defined as those that are defective, 7 have an imminent potential to fail, and would cause damage to persons and 8 property upon failure. The Urban Forester will perform a hazard assessment 9 whenever a tree is identified as hazardous. The assessment will identify: 10 structural defects of the tree, parts of the tree most likely to fail, targets where 11 imminent personal injury or property damage may result with tree failure, and 12 procedures or actions necessary to abate the hazard. After assessment, the Urban 13 Forester will convey his written findings and recommendations to the Risk 14 Manager for evaluation. 15 16 D. The tree(s) have been requested to be removed in conjunction with a City 17 Council- approved City, commercial, neighborhood, or community association 18 beautification program. 19 020 E. The City Manager, upon the advice of the General Services Director, City 21 Attorney, Risk Manager or the Traffic Engineer, shall have the authority to 22 remove individual All Other Trees trees to resolve claims or safety issues. 23 24 REMOVAL OF CITY TREES 25 26 The initiation to remove any City tree (Special or All Other) may be made by the staff of 27 the General Services Depar-tine , and/or Public Works Departments a legally 28 established community association, or a private property owner by making application 29 to the General Services Director, utilizing the City tree removal form. The provisions 30 and procedures of this section of the policy do not apply to the Reforestation process, 31 which is described in a subsequent section. 32 33 After receipt of the application, a Tree Inspection Report shall be prepared by the City's 34 Urban Forester (Attachment 2) to determine if the tree(s) meets the criteria outlined in 35 the above All Other City Trees section for consideration for removal. Simultaneously, 36 the Urban Forester shall provide a notice of the proposed tree removal to the affected 37 property owner, the owners immediately adjacent to the applicant's property, and the 38 appropriate community association if applicable, (not applicable to the emergency 39 removal of hazardous trees with trees under Item C above nor to trees that meet the •40 criteria of Item E). The Urban Forester shall determine whether in his /her judgment 3 • May 12, 2003 Draft G -1 1 additional specific treatment can be initiated to retain the tree provided the costs are 2 reasonable. If a tree(s) is to be removed, the tree(s) will be posted at least 30 days prior 3 to the removal with a sign notifying the public that they have the right of appeal. The 4 sign shall also note a staff contact. Once a recommendation is made by the Urban 5 Forester and the Park and Tree Superintendent to the General Services Director and the 6 General Services Director or designee concurs, then the applicant, the adjoining owners, 7 owners within one block in either direction of the tree location and the—a legally 8 established community association, if applicable, shall be notified of the decision to 9 remove or retain the tree within 30 days of the proposed removal. A legally established 10 community association is responsible for notification of association members pursuant 11 to their established procedure. The General Services Director, or his a designee, shall 12 prepare a staff report for a regularly scheduled PB &R Commission meeting of all trees 13 recommended for removal. using the Trees Division AetWk4es Report-, except for those 14 trees categorized in Paragraph C. (dead, diseased, or dying; trees) or Paragraph E 15 (claims and safety issues) in the preceding section on All Other City Trees. An 16 applicant, an adjoining property owner, or any interested party may appeal the decision 17 of the General Services Director not to remove a tree to the Commission. The 18 Commission, in considering any appeal, shall determine whether the removal meets the 19 criteria outlined in this Policy, as well as any unique factors which may be pertinent to • 20 the removal or retention of tree(s). The decision of the Commission will be considered 21 final unless called up by at least one Councilmember or the City Manager. 22 23 The General Services Department will delay any tree removal(s) for at least 14 calendar 24 days following the date of the Commission decision in order to allow time for a 25 Councilmember or the City Manager to call the item. 26 27 The City will endeavor to replace all trees removed in accordance with the All Other 28 City Trees removal criteria on a two for one basis. Replacement trees will be a 29 minimum of a 24" boxed size. 30 31 REFORESTATION OF CITY TREES 32 33 The concept of systematically replacing Special or All Other Trees which are creating 34 significant hardscape and /or view problems and cannot be properly trimmed, pruned 35 or modified to alleviate the problem(sl they create, or those which have reached their 36 full life, and are declining in health, is referred to as reforestation. 37 38 It is recognized and acknowledged that City trees were planted many years ago and in 39 some cases locations were planted with specific species that when fully mature cause • 40 si ' icant damage to curb, gutter, sidewalk or underground utilities. In certain 4 • May 12, 2003 Draft G -1 1 neighborhoods, City street trees may encroach into blue water views from public and 2 private property depending on the length of time since the trees were last trimmed, or 3 the age and height of the trees. 4 5 Arborists continue to develop lists of tree species which will grow in restricted parkway 6 areas without causing significant damage to curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities or loss of 7 views. 8 9 As a City which understands the importance of trees and the beauty they bring to a 10 community, the City desires to continually improve the urban forest through 11 reforestation. In areas where City trees have been removed through City initiation, the 12 City sheer will expeditiously replace them with the appropriate designated City tree. 13 residents utilizing the process outikied below-. 14 15 Individual private property owners, as well as community associations, may apply for 16 single or multiple tree reforestation in their respective area by submitting a request to 17 the General Services Director for consideration by the Commission that meets the 18 following requirements: 19 • 20 A. The proposed area must have clearly defined contiguous boundaries that include 21 the tree(s) proposed for removal and replacement, street address(es), block 22 number(s), or other geographical information. This section applies to individual 23 and group requests. The proposed area shall be no less than one block in each 24 direction from the site of the proposed reforestation. 25 26 B. Residential communities, neighborhoods, or business organizations who apply 27 for reforestation must submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of the 28 property owners within the area defined for reforestation. A neighborhood is 29 defined for the purposes of this policy as ten or more homes in any given area of 30 the City. The petition content must be improved by City staff prior to 31 distribution by the petitioner. The staff - approved petition must be distributed 32 by the petitioner to all property owners within a one block distance in each 33 direction from the location of the proposed reforestation. Signatures by on- 34 property owners are not acceptable for petition purposes. All petition signatures 35 shall be verified by City staff to ensure validity and property owner status of the 36 person(s) signing the petition. As an alter .-itiv , areas -Areas represented by a 37 legally established community association R's may 38 submit a resolution of the Board of Directors formally requesting a reforestation 39 with a statement that all members of the community association having their •40 residential views affected, have been officially notified and given an appropriate 5 . May 12, 2003 Draft G -1 1 opportunity to respond before the Board voted on the request. Individual 2 private property owners living within a legally established community 3 association area empowered with CG& '- must petition for reforestation 4 through their respective association. 5 6 C. Individual private property owners not residing within a CC= p R based Dally 7 established community association area may submit individual requests for 8 single or multiple tree reforestation. The applicant must submit a petition signed 9 by a minimum of 60% of the private property owners residents residing on both 10 sides of the street within a one block distance in either direction from the 11 reforestation site as well as the endorsement of the appropriate homeowners' 12 association, if applicable. As noted earlier, the Retition content must be 13 approved by staff prior to distribution. All petition signatures shall be verified 14 by City staff to ensure validity and property owner status of the person(s) 15 signing the petition. 16 17 D. A written agreement must be submitted to the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation 18 Commission by the petitioning sponsor (individual private property owner(s) or 19 group) to pay 100% of the costs of the removal and replacement of the public 020 treeu in advance of any removal activity. The actual removal and replanting 21 will be coordinated by the General Services Department. The total costs shall 22 include only the contractors removal and replacement costs and be paid in 23 advance of any removal actions. 24 25 E. The replacement tree(s) for reforestation shall be the Designated Street Tree(s) as 26 prescribed by City Council Policy G -6, or the organization must request and 27 obtain approval from the Commission of the designation of a different tree 28 species prior to submitting any reforestation request for a tree species other than 29 the designated street tree. This section applies to individual or group requests. 30 31 F. There shall be a minimum of a two one for -one replacement of all trees removed 32 in reforestation projects. Replacement trees shall be a minimum size of 24 36" 33 boxed trees, unless the parkway space will only accommodate a single 24" boxed 34 tree. If there is not room for both of the replacement treed within a specific site 35 as prescribed by City Council Policy G -6, then the replacement trees) shall be 36 planted in a public area in the same neighborhood at the option of the petitioner. 37 This section applies to individual or group requests. 38 n • May 12, 2003 Draft G -1 1 G Reforestation requests must be completed and submitted in a timely manner by 2 the petitioner. Petitions that are dated more than 90 days in arrears will not be 3 forwarded to the PB &R Commission for consideration. 4 5 6 The decision of the Commission on reforestation requests will be considered final unless 7 called up by at least one Councilmember or the City Manager. 8 9 10 TREE MAINTENANCE 11 12 The City shall require the proper care and watering of replacement trees by the 13 reforestation petitioner to ensure their proper growth and development as outlined in 14 City Council Policy G-6. Furthermore, no person shall tamper with replaee� QjY 15 trees in violation of Section 13.08.040 of the Municipal Code. Further, the City will 16 endeavor to fund the care of the Urban Forest to the highest level possible through the 17 use of regular tree trimming, root pruning root barrier and pesticide programs. 18 19 ENCROACHMENT AND DEMOLITION PERMITS •20 21 All encroachment permits (permits for private property development which are has 22 proposed to encroached upon the City right of way) or demolition permits that involve 23 the removal or replacement of City trees,) must be specifically noticed by the property 24 owner to City staff prior to the building and /or demolition permit process whenever 25 possible. The proposed construction plans must indicate preservation of existing City 26 trees wherever possible (exempt: dead, dying, or in an advanced state of decline). If the 27 proposed development, as deemed by the General Services Director, requires the 28 removal of City trees, the property owner must inay submit arpf sreq* Ajon-tree request 29 to the General Services Director, and-shall pay all related tree removal and replacement 30 costs (one for one replacemen as indicated the previous par graphs and meet all 31 provisions of Council Policy L -2. Approval or disapproval of all rtree 32 removal/ replacement requests associated with encroachment and demolition permits 33 will be the responsibility of the General Services Director or his designee. 34 35 TREE TRIMMING STANDARDS /SUPPJ rP,40 9 r TRIMMING 36 37 The City Council has adopted tree trimming cycles for trees of different ages and 38 species. The rurren = Tree trimming cycles and trimming standards shall represent the 39 maximum feasible frequency and the extent of trimming given current fiscal conditions. 7 • May 12, 2003 Draft G -1 1 Except as provided in this - he Supplemental Trimming Section, trimming shall be in 2 accordance with the standards of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). 3 4 SUPPLEMENTAL TRIMMING 5 6 The City will consider, and as a general rule approve, requests to trim certain trees 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 •20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 41 more frequently or to trim trees consistent with practices applied prior to the adoption of ISA standards (to enhance public and private views, preserve required sight /distance standards, or other public purposes) which are submitted by affected residents property owners or the board of a legally established community association and the request is accompanied by a completed "Supplemental Tree Trimming Form" and full payment for the requested tree trimming. However, since these practices often require 'topping' or osp sible severe disfiguring of a tree( and are often aesthetically displeasing and injurious to a tree, reforestation shall 9.i& be considered eeee ;enema when supplemental tree trimming 44s pra- etice has proven unsuccessful within a period of 6 months. eeeuffed more than ti `hin period. The General Services Director shall establish procedures to implement the supplemental trimming provisions of this Policy. An approval must be obtained from a legally established association by the requestor of supplemental tree trimming in areas with an active homeowners' association if the requested trimming is to be undertaken within the association area. [Attachment 1- Preservation e Special Trees] [Attachment 2- Tree Inspection Report] Adopted - May 9,1966 Amended - August 14,1967 Amended - November 9,1976 Amended - November 12,1985 Amended - November 28,1988 Amended - March 14,1994 Formerly I -9 Amended -April 11, 1994 Amended - February 26,1996 Amended - July 14,1997 Amended (Administratively) - November 24,1997 Amended - August 10, 1998 Amended - February 22, 2000 • Notice of Investigation Regarding the Methane Gas Collection System at Newport Terrace The Newport Terrace area contains an old landfill that must be investigated to determine whether repairs are necessary to the methane gas collection system at the site. SCS Engineers (SCS) is working with the Newport Terrace Home Owner's Association (HOA) and the City of Newport Beach to assess the collection system. The anticipated construction effort for this investigation will include excavating and testing system components at 13 locations, and it will take approximately six weeks to complete. We are issuing this notice to the community to keep you informed about what is happening in your neighborhood. The Newport Terrace property contains a landfill where waste filled a small canyon — this is the landscaped area running through the center of the site. The property also contains an area known as the "Rubble Fill Area" where demolition wastes were disposed of, Walkabout Circle overlies this area. The decomposition of organic wastes buried in these areas generates methane, carbon dioxide and other trace organic gases. Methane gas can accumulate in confined spaces and become explosive, and therefore is of principle concern when structures are built on or near buried wastes. In 2001, the California Integrated Waste Management Board ( CIWMB) conducted an investigation of the site; which included the gas collection system. Results of the CIWMB investigation identified elevated methane concentrations in several deep monitoring probes. However, their work also showed that elevated concentrations of methane were not detected immediately under site structures. SCS' work plan will include: locating each excavation, excavating system pipes, inspecting and testing the pipes, backfilling, and clean up. Most work will be performed during normal work hours, i.e., •Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Prior to digging the first hole, SCS staff will be walking the property, marking excavations and utilities, and generally becoming familiar with the site to determine how best to stage the work activity to minimize disruption to residents. SCS will attempt to perform those activities that create the most noise and/or nuisance near the middle of the day, and not first thing in the morning; especially at locations close to site structures. However, many of the locations to be excavated are near at least one site structure. Most excavations will be in the landscaped area over the landfill. SCS Engineers will attempt to avoid impeding access during this construction effort, and will attempt to avoid unnecessary noise or inconvenience. SCS will make all reasonable efforts to minimize impacts to the community and provide reasonable caution signs, barricades, and fencing at approaches to each excavation. SCS hopes that Newport Terrace Condominium residents and their guests will assist SCS by making necessary accommodations for this work effort. SCS will keep the HOA notified of all planned work events and progress schedule. Comments, questions or concerns by residents should be addressed to the HOA and/or the condominium's management agency — Villageway Management, Inc. -- who will in turn forward the matter to SCS. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance. Newport Terrace Area Contact: SCS Engineers Contact: Villageway Management, Inc SCS Engineers Ms. Linda Allen Mr. Michael Geyer 22 Mauchy 3711 Long Beach Boulevard, 9`' Floor Irvine, California 92618 Long Beach, California 90807 • (949) 450 -1515 (562) 426 -9544 LEG FLOW RECORD — REVISION DATE: 5/12/03 USE MILITARY TIME ex. ip�13:00 TEM 9 0 • HEAT CURVE LOG - REVISION DATE: 5/12/03 USE MILITARY TIME ex. tpm =13:00 TEM • May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 2 RETENTION OR REMOVAL OF CITY TREES 3 4 The purpose of this policy is to establish definitive standards for the retention, removal, 5 maintenance, reforestation, tree trimming standards, and supplemental trimming of 6 City trees. City trees are an important part of the character and charm of the entire City 7 and provide environmental benefits as well. Regular care, trimming, root pruning, 8 maintenance, and programmed replacement are necessary to preserve this charm while 9 at the same time protectin vg iews and public and private property from damage. 10 11 The City classifies public trees in one of three categories: Special Trees, Problem Trees, 12 and All Other Trees. 13 14 SPECIAL CITY TREES 15 16 It is the City's policy to retain City trees categorized as Landmark, Dedicated, or 17 Neighborhood trees, which have historical significance, and /or contribute to and give 18 character to a location or to an entire neighborhood. Landmark, Dedicated, and 19 Neighborhood trees are individually identified on by Attachment 1, and shall �Z0 hereinafter be referred to as Special Trees. Trees within these categories shall be 21 identified established, mapped, recorded and administered by staff for the Parks, 22 Beaches & Recreation Commission ( "Commission'). The Commission shall have the 23 authority to designate all Special Trees as well as the authoritYto remove tree(s) from 24 the Special Tree listing_ 25 26 Landmark Trees are identified as those individual Special Trees that possess historical 27 significance by virtue of their size, age, location, or species. 28 29 Dedicated Trees are Special Trees donated for or in the memory of specific individuals 30 or organizations. 31 32 Neighborhood Trees are Special Trees that by their unusual size, number, species, or 33 location lend a special character to a residential commercial, or business area. 34 35 Special Trees shall be retained, unless there are overriding problems, such as death, 36 disease, or the creation of a hazardous situation, which require their removal. Prior to 37 consideration for a removal of a Special Tree Us the General Services Director, or 38 designee, shall prepare a report identifying and implementing specific treatment to 39 retain the tree(s). If specific treatment is unsuccessful or impractical in retaining a 0 40 tree(s) then a full staff report shall be made to the Commission before any further action • May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 1 considering removal is taken. Prior to any removal of Special Trees) the City must 2 comply with the noticing provisions of the Removal of City Trees section set forth in 3 this Policy, unless a tree Special Tree is considered hazardous that necessitates an 4 emergency removal. Any such removal must be recommended by the General Services 5 Director and the Risk Manager and approved by requjMes the ap ^ " ^ "'1 of the City 6 Manager. 8 During normal sidewalk, curb, and street repair activity requiring root pruning, all 9 steps shall be taken to retain Special Trees. If tree roots are to be pruned in association 10 with sidewalk, curb, and gutter improvements, sufficient timing in advance must be 11 planned to ensure that pruning will not destabilize or kill the tree. If both sides of a 12 Special Trees roots are to be pruned, one side should be pruned 6 months to a year in 13 advance of the other side depending upon the species and other related factors. If root 14 pruning methods are not practical and/or critical to the health of the tree, then alternate 15 or special hardscape improvements should be considered shall be installe by the City 16 in order to retain the tree providing that costs are reasonable. All proposed root 17 pruning or other tree treatment shall be assessed and approved by the Urban Forester. 18 019 Special Trees may be considered for removal in conjunction with a City Council 20 approved beautification project utilizing the Removal of City Trees procedures noted in 21 a subsequent section of the Policy. 22 23 PROBLEM TREES 24 25 A Problem Tree is defined as a tree that by virtue of its species causes excessive 26 hardscape or utili , damage due to its excessive root system. The following trees are 27 defined as problem trees: 28 29 0 Ficus nitida (Indian Laurel Fig) 30 o Ficus rubiginosa (Rusty Leaf Fig) 31 o Ficus ben jamina (Weeping Fig) 32 0 Erythrina caffra (Kaffirboom Coral Tree) 33 0 Fraxinus uhdei (Shamel Ash) 34 0 Cupaniopsis anacardioides (Carrotwood) 35 0 Liquidambar s , raciflua (American Sweet Gum) 36 37 Problem trees shall not be designated as parkway trees on the Designated Street Tree 38 List. 39 • 2 • May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 1 Problem trees that are not designated Special Trees may be removed for the following 2 reasons: 3 4 A. The City tree has had a proven and repeated history of damaging public or 5 private sewers water mains roadways sidewalks curbs, walls, fences, 6 underground utilities or foundations based on City records or other competent 7 and reliable authority. Water or sewer stoppage that results from tree roots and 8 causes significant documented private property damage (greater than $500) shall 9 be sufficient criterion for tree removal. 10 11 B. The City tree has had repeated history of significant interference with street or 12 sidewalk drainage despite specific treatment by the City to alleviate repeated 13 damage. 14 15 C. The City tree has created a view impediment that cannot be resolved by normal 16 nor alternative tree trimming procedures. 17 18 19 The authority to remove Problem Trees rests with the General Services Director or a W0 designee No more than 250 Problem Trees may be removed per year by staff under 21 this criteria without special approval of the Commission. Replacement trees of a 24- 22 inch box size may be planted if funding permits. Staff are responsible for notifying the 23 adjacent property owner and the legally established homeowners association if 24 applicable of the intent to remove the tree Either party has the right to appeal the 25 removal within 10 days of notification. The Urban Forester shall report the removal of 26 Problem Trees on a monthly basis to the Commission. The cost to remove and replace 27 Problem Trees will be the sole responsibility of the City. 28 29 ALL OTHER CITY TREES 30 31 A City tree which is not designated as a Special or Problem Tree is designated as an All 32 Other Tree. It is the City's policy to retain All Other C* Trees unless removal is 33 necessary for one of the following reasons: 34 35 A. The City tree has had a proven and repeated history (defined as twee or rnere 36 ecouFrences within a 18 menth period) of damaging public or private sewers, 37 water mains, roadways, sidewalks, curbs, walls, fences, underground utilities, or 38 foundations based on City records or other competent and reliable authority 39 despite specific treatment by the City to alleviate repeated damage. Water or •40 sewer stoppage that results from tree roots and causes significant documented 3 • May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 1 private property damage (greater than $500) shall be sufficient criterion for tree 2 removal. Reg- lar drat. , clearing shall net , nst date . ,e damage, a " pipe a 3 - damage to by the ta_ shall _g*ih ---d ' -failure property owner 4 . 5 6 B. The City tree has had a repeated history (defined as two or- more oeeiar-renEes 7 ..,ithi, an 18 month per-i d) of significant interference with street or sidewalk 8 drainage, despite specific treatment by the City to alleviate repeated damage. 9 10 C. The City tree is dead, diseased, dying, or hazardous, and presents a significant 11 liability to the City. A dead tree is one that has been assessed by the Urban 12 Forester and found to have deceased. Diseased trees are defined as those trees 13 that cannot be cured by current arboricultural methods, are in an advanced state 14 of decline, and have no prospect of recovery. Dying trees are those that have no 15 prospect of recovery. Hazardous trees are defined as those that are defective, 16 have a potential to fail, and would cause damage to persons and property upon 17 failure. The Urban Forester will perform a hazard assessment whenever a tree is 18 identified as hazardous. The assessment will identify: structural defects of the 19 tree, parts of the tree most likely to fail, targets where imminent personal injury 020 or property damage may result with tree failure, and procedures or actions 21 necessary to abate the hazard. After assessment the Urban Forester will 22 expeditiously convey his written findings and recommendations to the Risk 23 Manager for evaluation If the Risk Manager agrees with the Urban Forester 24 findings to remove a tree the hazardous tree will be removed without further 25 delay. 26 27 D. The tree(s) have been requested to be removed in conjunction with a City 28 Council- approved City, commercial, neighborhood, or community association 29 beautification program. 30 31 E. The City Manager, upon the advice of the General Services Director, City 32 Attorney, Risk Manager or the Traffic Engineer, shall have the authority to 33 remove individual All Other Trees gees to resolve claims or safety issues. 34 35 F. The Special or All Other Tree (s) has created a public or private view impediment 36 that cannot be resolved by normal nor alternative tree trimming procedures. 37 38 39 •40 4 • 2 REMOVAL OF CITY TREES 3 L May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 The initiation to remove (Special or All Other)any City treed may be made by the staff of the General Services Departme nt, and/or Public Works Departments, a legally established community association, or a private property owner by making application to the General Services Director utilizing the City tree removal form. The provisions 10 Policy. Special Trees may be considered for removal under the provisions of this 11 Section provided a special report bythe General Services Director is provided to the 12 Commission detailing the necessity of removal and any specific previous treatment of 13 the tree. 14 15 After receipt of the application, a Tree Inspection Report shall be prepared by the City's 16 Urban Forester (Attachment 2) to determine if the tree(s) meets the criteria outlined in 17 the above All Other City Trees section for consideration for removal. Simultaneously, 18 the Urban Forester shall provide a notice of the proposed tree removal to the af€eetecl 19 adjacent property owner (if not the applicant), the private property owners 00 immediately adjacent to the applicant's property, and the appropriate community 21 association if applicable, (not applicable to the emergency removal of hazardous trees 22 with under Item C above, nor to trees that meet the criteria of Item E). The Urban 23 Forester shall determine whether in his /her judgment additional specific treatment can 24 be initiated to retain the tree provided the costs are reasonable. If a tree(s) is to be 25 removed, the tree(s) will be posted at least 30 days prior to the removal with a sign 26 notifying the public that they have the right of appeal. The sign shall also note a staff 27 contact. Once a recommendation is made by the Urban Forester and the Park and Tree 28 Superintendent to the General Services Director and the General Services Director or 29 designee concurs, then the applicant, the adjoining owners, owners within one block in 30 either direction of the tree location and the a legally established community association, 31 if applicable, shall be notified of the decision to remove or retain the tree within 30 days 32 of the proposed removal. A legally established community association is responsible 33 for notification of association members pursuant to their established procedure. The 34 General Services Director, or his a designee, shall prepare a staff report for a regularly 35 scheduled PB &R Commission meeting of all trees recommended for removal. using the 36 Tees n:..;,, e n e fiyitie . n,,,- aFt except for those trees categorized in Paragraph C. 37 (dead, diseased, or dig trees) or. Paragraph E (claims and safety issues) in the 38 preceding section on All Other City Trees. Only Aan applicant, an adjoining property 39 owner, r a legally established community association may 0 40 appeal the decision of the General Services Director not to remove a tree to the • May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 1 Commission. The Commission, in considering any appeal, shall determine whether the 2 removal meets the criteria outlined in this Policy, as well as any unique factors which 3 may be pertinent to the removal or retention of tree(s). The decision of the Commission 4 will be considered final unless called up by at least one Councilmember or the City 5 Manager. 6 7 The General Services Department will delay any tree removal(s) for at least 14 calendar 8 days following the date of the Commission decision in order to allow time for a 9 Councilmember or the City Manager to call the item. 10 11 The City will endeavor to replace all trees removed in accordance with the All Other 12 City Trees removal criteria on a one for one basis. Replacement trees will be a 13 minimum of a 24" boxed size. The full costs of removal and replacement of Special or 14 All Other Tree(s) will be the sole reslonsibility of the Cit . 15 16 REFORESTATION OF CITY TREES 17 18 The concept of systematically replacing Special or All Other Trees which are creating 19 significant hardscape and /or view problems and cannot be properly trimmed, pruned •20 or modified to alleviate the problems they create, or those which have reached their 21 full life and are declining in health, is referred to as reforestation. 22 23 It is recognized and acknowledged that City trees were planted many years ago and in 24 some cases were planted with specific species that when fully mature cause signific ant 25 damage to curb, gutter, sidewalk or underground utilities. In certain view 26 neighborhoods, City street trees may encroach into blue water views from public and 27 private property depending on the length of time since the trees were last trimmed, or 28 the age and height of the trees. 29 30 Arborists continue to develop lists of tree species which will grow in restricted parkway 31 areas without causing significant damage to curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities or loss of 32 views. The City Street Tree Designation List which specifies a species for each City 33 street reflects an effort by the City to prescribe appropriate tree species that will not 34 cause future problems. 35 36 As a City which understands the importance of trees and the beauty they bring to a 37 community, the City desires to continually improve the urban forest through 38 reforestation. In areas where City trees have been removed through City initiation, the 39 City should will expeditiously endeavor to replace them trees with the appropriate • 6 May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 1 designated City tree. -Re fe-re— atiRn ,. also be initiated—by residerAs utilizing o g the 2 proeess outlined below. 3 4 Individual private property owners, as well as legally established community 5 associations, may apply for single or multiple tree reforestation in their respective area 6 by submitting a request to the General Services Director for consideration by the 7 Commission that meets the following requirements: 8 9 A. The proposed area must have clearly defined contiguous boundaries that include 10 the tree(s) proposed for removal and replacement, street address(es), block 11 number(s), or other geographical information. This section applies to individual 12 and group requests. The proposed area shall be no less than one block in each 13 direction from the site of the proposed reforestation. 14 15 B. Residential communities, neighborhoods, or business organizations who apply 16 for reforestation must submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of the the 17 property owners within the area defined for reforestation. ^ neighbe -hoo s 18 defined for the purposes policy as ten or more homes in any given area of 19 the Gi to 4120 distribution by the petitioner. The staff - approved petition must be distributed 21 by the petitioner to all roperty owners within a one block distance in each 22 direction from the location of the proposed reforestation. Signatures by non- 23 property owners are not acceptable for petition purposes. All petition signatures 24 shall be verified by City staff to ensure validity and propeM owner status of the 25 person(s) signing the petition. As an alternative to the above requirements, areas 26 represented by a legally established community association empowered with CC 27 & R's may submit a resolution of the Board of Directors formally requesting a 28 reforestation with a statement that all members of the community association 29 having their residential views affected, have been officially notified and given an 30 appropriate opportunity to respond before the Board voted on the request. 31 Individual private property owners living within a legally established 32 community association area empowered with CC&Rls must petition for 33 reforestation through their respective association. 34 35 C. Individual private property owners not residing within a CC 'wed legally 36 established community association area may submit individual requests for 37 single or multiple tree reforestation. The applicant must submit a petition signed 38 by a minimum of 60% of the private property owners ^�,t; residing on both 39 sides of the street within a one block distance in either direction from the •40 reforestation site as well as the endorsement of the appropriate homeowners 7 • May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 1 association, if applicable. As noted earlier, the petition content must be 2 approved and dated by staff prior to distribution. All petition signatures shall be 3 verified by City staff to ensure validity and property owner status of the 4 person(s) signing the petition. Le 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 E. 15 16 17 18 19 •20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 A written agreement must be submitted to the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission by the petitioning sponsor (individual private property ownerjsor group) to pay 100% of the costs of the removal and replacement of the public tree(s) in advance of any removal activity. The actual removal and replanting will be coordinated by the General Services Department. The total costs shall include only the contractor's removal and replacement costs and be paid in advance of any removal actions. The replacement tree(s) for reforestation shall be the Designated Street Tree(1 as prescribed by City Council Policy G -6, or the organization must request and obtain approval from the Commission of the designation of a different tree species prior to submitting any reforestation request for a tree species other than the designated street tree. This section applies to individual or group requests. F. There shall be a rn;nimum of a one - for -one replacement of all trees removed in reforestation projects. Replacement trees shall be a minimum size of 24" 36" boxed trees, unless the parkway space will eP15 -not accommodate a 24" boxed tree. If there is not room for the replacement tree(1 Nvithki-at a specific site as prescribed by City Council Policy G -6, then the replacement tree(s) shall be planted in a public area in the same neighborhood at the option of the petitioner. This section applies to individual or group requests. G. Reforestation requests must be completed and submitted in a timely manner by the petitioner. Petitions that are dated more than 90 days in arrears from date stamped by staff before distribution will not be forwarded to the PB &R Commission for consideration. The decision of the Commission on reforestation requests will be considered final unless called up by at least one Councilmember or the City Manager. TREE MAINTENANCE 38 The City shall require the proper care and watering of replacement trees ly the 39 reforestation petitioner to ensure their proper growth and development as outlined in 940 City Council Policy G -6. Furthermore, no person shall tamper with -- „place ner`_ gity • May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 1 trees in violation of Section 13.08.040 of the Municipal Code. Further, the City will 2 endeavor to fund the care of the Urban Forest to the highest level possible through the 3 use of regular tree trimming root pruning root barrier and pesticide prrams. 4 5 ENCROACHMENT AND DEMOLITION PERMITS 6 7 All encroachment permits (permits for private property development which are has 8 proposed to encroached upon the City right of way) or demolition permits that involve 9 the removal or replacement of City trees) must be specifically noticed by the property 10 owner to City staff prior to the building and /or demolition permit process whenever 11 possible. The proposed construction plans must indicate preservation of existing City 12 trees wherever possible (exempt: dead, dying, or in an advanced state of decline). If the 13 proposed development, as deemed by the General Services Director, requires the 14 removal of City trees, the property owner must may submit a fe€eFestatien -tree removal 15 request to the General Services Director, aP1 -shall pay all related tree removal and 16 replacement costs (one for one replaceme Jas =.ie&cc b = and 17 meet all provisions of Council Policies L -2 and Lr6. Approval or disapproval of all tree 18 removal /replacement requests associated with encroachment and demolition permits 19 will be the responsibility of the General Services Director or a designee. 0 21 TREE TRIMMING STANDARDS/SUPPLENIENT-AL TRIMMING 22 23 The City Council has adopted tree trimming cycles for trees of different ages and 24 species. The earrenA Tree trimming cycles and trimming standards shall represent the 25 maximum feasible frequency given current fiscal conditions. 26 Except as provided in this the Supplemental Trimming Section below, trimming shall be 27 in accordance with the standards of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). 28 29 SUPPLEMENTAL TREE TRIMMING 30 31 The City will consider, and as a general rule approve, requests to trim certain trees 32 more frequently or to trim trees consistent with practices applied prior to the adoption 33 of ISA standards (to enhance public and private views, preserve required 34 sight /distance standards, or other public purposes) which are submitted by affected 35 es�ts property owners or the board of a legally established community association 36 and the request is accompanied by a completed "Supplemental Tree Trimming Form" 37 and full payment for the requested tree trimming. However, since these practices often 38 require `topping' or osp sible severe disfiguring of a treed and are often aesthetically 39 displeasing and injurious to a tree, reforestation shall o y be considered epee -when • 9 • 1 May 30, 2003 Draft G -1 supplemental tree trimming is impractical or infeasible. }? -sue^^ has eeeu= =ca more 2 than #Mee within period. 3 The General Services Director shall establish procedures to implement the supplemental 4 trimming provisions of this Policy. An approval must be obtained from a legally 5 established association by the requestor of supplemental tree trimming in areas with an 6 active homeowners' association if the requested trimming is to be undertaken within 7 the association area. 8 9 10 11 12 13 [Attachment 1- Preservation o Special Trees] 14 [Attachment 2- Tree Inspection Report] 15 16 Adopted - May 9,1966 Amended - April 11, 1994 17 Amended - August 14,1967 Amended - February 26,1996 18 Amended - November 9,1976 Amended - July 14,1997 19 Amended - November 12,1985 Amended (Administratively) - 020 Amended - November 28,1988 November 24,1997 21 Amended - March 14,1994 Amended - August 10, 1998 22 Amended - February 22, 2000 23 Formerly I -9 go 10