Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/05/2005 - PB&R CommissionAPRIL 5, 2005 APPROVED PB &R COMMISSION MINUTES City of Newport Beach Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission Tuesday, April 5,2005 - 7pm— City Council Chambers 46RDER AND ROLL CALL AGENDA DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS • Director Knight • Director Niederhaus SPECIAL PRESENTATION PUBLIC COMMENTS Members of the public are invited to comment on non - agenda items of public interest. Speakers are limited to three minutes. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar (1 -3) are considered by the Commission to be routine and will all be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. The Commission Members have received detailed staff reports on each of the items recommending approval. There will be no separate discussion of these items prior to the time the Commission votes on the motion unless members of the Commission, staff, or the public request a specific item to be discussed and /or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. The City provides a yellow sign -in card for those wishing to address the Commission to assist in the preparation of the minutes. Speakers are not required to submit a card as a condition to addressing the Commission. If you do fill out the card please place it in the box at the podium. As a courtesy, please turn cellphones and pagers off or set them in the silent mode. Members of the public who wish to discuss a Consent Calendar item should come forward to the lectern upon invitation by the Chair, state their name and Consent Calendar item number. Speakers are limited to three minutes on all agenda items. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the March 1, 2005 regular meeting. Waive reading of subject minutes, approve as written and order filed. Park and Tree Division Activity Report. Receive /file monthly Activity Report for activities and upcoming projects. 3. Recreation Et Senior Services Activity Report. Receive /file monthly Activity Report for activities and upcoming projects. CONTINUING BUSINESS 4. Reconsideration of Reforestation Approval. Continuation of discussion of reconsideration of reforestation approval for six City trees located at 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue. Action: Reconsider and rescind November 16, 2004 approval of reforestation request for 6 River She Oak parkway trees (Stenocarpus sinatus). NEW BUSINESS 5. Special Tree Report - Review/ Discussion of Special Tree List submitted by Special Tree Committee Action: Approve / Deny / Amend — Special Tree List and forward to the City Council for their approval. COMMITTEE REPORTS • Finance — Garrett & Skoro • Park Development — Skoro, Allen & Brown • Rec ft open Space Element — Garrett • Recreation Activities — £nglebrecht, Ruzicko& Tobin • Seniors — Tobin, Allen & Skoro • Beach — Garrett, Skoro & Tobin • Ad Hoc — Community Service Award - Garrett, Ruzicka & Tobin — Special Tree Committee - Allen, Ruzicka & Skoro — Youth Sports Liaison — Ruzicka — Donation— Brown, Ruzicka, Skoro FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Matters which Commissioners may wish to place on a future agenda or raise for discussion. 6DJOURNED CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH d4 I nJ I C)S� Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005- 7pm Convened 7:02pm ROLL CALL Present: Debra Allen O0 Tim Brown Roy Englebrecht Bill Garrett r_ Greg Ruzicka Val Skoro Tom Tobin Staff: Marie Knight, Recreation li Senior Services Director David Niederhaus, General Services Director DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS Director Knight stated that on March 2 there will be a meeting at the Friends Meeting Room to discuss fundraising efforts for the Newport Village Park and several people have been invited and with representatives from the Library Foundation, neighborhood associations and a few others. She went on to say that construction has begun at Mariners Library, and that the first part of the construction was to take down the two tennis courts and that demolition has occurred and should be rebuilt in its new locations over towards the fire station within two months. She went on to say that • staff has relocated Newport Harbor Baseball team to Ensign and once the library construction is complete then the plan is that the existing library building will be coming down and that all the fields will be reconfigured and the park will be redone. She reminded the Commission that the next event is the Flashlight Egg Hunt on March 18 at Bonita Creek Park at 5:30pm and remember to bring a flashlight. PUBLIC COMMENTS None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Item pulled by a member of the public. 2. Item pulled from the Commissioner Englebrecht. 3. Item pulled from the Commissioner Englebrecht. 1. Minutes of the January 13, 2005 regular meeting. Mary Singleton stated that the minutes included her letter but did not include the addendum with 6 photos and comments and one color photo of a She Oak tree that had been trimmed and asked that they be enclosed. Ms. Singleton noted that the minutes state that Director Niederhaus said "that he is always open to the possibility of mistakes and that is why City staff offered to complete a petition by the 21' of this month, and if there was no change, then staff would remove the trees as directed on November 16," Ms. Singleton said that it should state that it had been offered to the "Singleton's." She questioned the sentence where it states that the trees had been posted for removal, but she commented that they had been marked with white X's. Chair Tobin thanked Ms. Singleton for her comments. I1 U Parks, Beaches tt Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 2 2. Parks 8 Tree Division Activity Report. Commissioner Englebrecht questioned Director Niederhaus on the vandalism discussed at Ensign View Park and Irvine Terrace Park and asked if this was an isolated event or if there is more vandalism. Director Niederhaus stated that he has seen people driving onto the park; tree and grass vandalized, but noted that this incident included cement benches being picked and thrown down the hill and knocked down the street light and the railing and that there is a continued pattern down there such as skateboarding. He went on to say that at Irvine Terrace a lot of work has been done but that there continues to be a problem with 4- wheelers spinning out on the grass and staff is seriously considering treating that park like Galaxy View where tasteful fencing has been installed but of course would come back to the Commission for your thoughts but vandalism and graffiti is on the rise. Commissioner Ruzicka asked if there were bogus surveillance cameras installed did he think that would dissuade people. Director Niederhas stated that he did not think so because these vandals like to see themselves photographed but it could never completely stop it. Commissioner Skoro questioned if barricades were to be put up that he would recommend contacting the HOA first. Director Niederhaus stated that of course that would be done. Commissioner Brown asked if the increase in vandalism was occurring in all parks or just certain one. Director Niederhaus stated that it was mostly parks on the west side of town but that Irvine Terrace just seems to be a random park on that side of the town. Jan Vandersloot questioned the reforestation section of the tree removal activity report and noticed that when adding up the numbers of problem trees and reforestation totals 219 trees that have been removed in a five month period and commented that is about as many trees removed in total over the past five years and hopes that the orgy of removing trees is complete and requested that the public be privy to the information why a tree is being called a problem tree before it is removed so that the data can be reviewed and that under the old G -1 the public was given that opportunity to scrutinize the validity of the claim and now 81 problem tree removals with no information given except for some data sent by Director Niederhaus after the fact and requested that the information should be included on the report. Director Niederhaus stated that Dr. Vandersloot is correct regarding the number of tree • removals and that you will see that a total of 427 trees were planted and that another 220 trees will be planted in March that will make it a 3 to 1 replacement ratio which is a tittle lower than last year. Dr. Vandersloot stated that while he appreciates the replanting of trees but that those trees are very small and are turning the urban forest into a pygmy forest and would like to see some I� U Parks, Beaches ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 3 effort to save the more stately trees especially when they are not causing problems. He stated that he agrees that if they are dying them agrees that they should be removed but hopes that the City will be able to retain more of the stately type trees. 3. Recreation t3 Senior Services Activity Report. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that he had pulled this item to prove that he does review the packets. He stated that it amazes him that that it takes almost a full page to report on the Park Patrol with all the rain how the officers have impacted the department and that it really says something about why this program was put into place. Director Knight stated that the rainy season seems to be the busiest season because youngsters Like to play out in the mud bowl and a lot of work has been done by the youth sports groups getting the fields ready for opening day and that when the rain comes it becomes difficult to keep people off them. Chair Tobin asked if the minions of the law have appropriate rain gear supplied to them Director Knight stated yes absolutely. Motion by Commissioner Allen to approve items 1 -3 of the Consent Calendar). Motion carried by acclamation. OLD BUSINESS 4. Reconsideration of Reforestation Request. Chair Tobin informed the public that the reforestation request was not approved because staff undertook a new polling of the 30 affected property owners and received 27 responses with the following results Reforestation Approval 16 53% Disapproval 10 33% Neutral 1 3% Total 27 He went on to say that since the request did not achieve a 60% approval rate as required by Council Policy G -1 that is cannot be approved by the Commission. He stated that unless there is other pertinent information that additional dialogue can be dispensed with. Director Niederhaus stated that at about fpm today he received two additional positive ballots and that staff must amend the report because the 60% has been attained and therefore the matter can be reconsidered and that now it does meet all the criteria for 41 approval. Commissioner Allen stated that when reviewing the staff report that it stated that it did not meet the minimum requirements for reforestation and therefore did not study the matter and U Parks, Beaches 8 Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 4 requested that the item be continued for at least another meeting to review the new material and does not feel that she could vote on it tonight fairly. Chair Tobin agreed. Commissioner Ruzicka asked if there is not some kind of an arbitrary cutoff time so that people cannot be coming to the meeting with ballots at the last minute. Director Niederhaus stated that there is no criteria for that and that a couple of property owners approached him today and asked if they could change their vote and were welcome to do that and submit literature and others conveyed that over the last couple of weeks that there has been a lot of division between the property owners to the point of name calling and people being disturbed late at night to change their vote or to vote and that by continuing this item it will only make matters worse for the community. He stated that the only change to the staff report is that now 60% approval rate has been achieved. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that the night is young and that others could run in and that is an absolute embarrassment to operate like that. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that he believes we should consider just based on tonight to potentially putting our heads together that if a meeting is held on Tuesday then the votes must be received by noon on Monday of something like that to be counted so that we are not put into this situation. He stated that also did not review the report. Director Niederhaus stated that in staff's defense that the two individuals that just submitted their vote had originally listed as a "no response ". He stated that letters were sent out at a minimum of three times to all 30 properties with the final one asking them to be aware of the meeting tonight. He stated that one was sent out noticing that it was being done; another was sent out by certified mail and that staff even made personal contact with them and that the two that voted late at least one had been out of the country and that staff has tried to get in touch with them and nothing could be done more than that and that he did not have the authority to tell them no as there was no cutoff date in the requirement and understands that anyone could change their vote tonight and could not see why that could not happen. Commissioner Allen pointed out that this was not a criticism to staff but is concerned and disturbed about the last minute nature of the voting and share Commissioner's Ruzicka's thought about setting up a cutoff date to vote. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that he believes that this action is a snow balling effect in the way that we are doing business with trees in the City and that this is such a flawed procedure that we are going through that if in fact last month we had not had two residents on Larkspur come to this Commission that those 30, 40 or 50 year old trees would have been removed just because we allowed the citizens do there own canvassing to get there 60% approval rating. He went on to say that subsequently a resident calls and that she had voted no but her response on the staff report had been listed as "no response" and had not been counted and in fact a flawed voting was done in the first go around and thank goodness those people showed up and gave us another month to consider this and to have City staff canvass the residents. He stated that in 2002 all those trees on one side had been done in the same • Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 5 flawed way by asking neighbor to neighbor to approve the reforest. Commissioner Englebrecht questioned how the Commission knows that the report back then was not flawed. He commented that a decision needs to be made tonight on whether we are going to keep those trees and keep some semblance of beauty in Corona del Mar or chop down those trees and put in little trees that will take 30.40 years for them to grow and provide the beauty. He stated that he was very concerned with the entire procedure in allowing last minute votes. Commissioner Skoro stated that he is totally adverse to people slipping in votes at the last minute and likes to have time to digest something and make the rational decision and does not think it is fair for the Commission to make a decision on the spur of the moment and agreed that the item should be continued and shutting off any additional voting until the week before the next meeting. Commissioner Englebrecht asked if we continue to get the decision that someone wants because not it was approved and so its continued because we don't want it approved and next month it will be disapproved and whup lets take another month to get it approved. Commissioner Garrett asked if we can make a motion to postpone this to give the Commission time to digest this but to also put some sort of timeframe to say that any additional votes after today must be received at some arbitrary date. . Commissioner Ruzicka stated that he believes that there should be some kind of policy that says that once you vote that you are done. Commissioner Englebrecht questioned that since the Commission has had this month to review this item and that all of us have visited Larkspur and have researched it and that staff did a good job of getting the packet out and asked what has happened tonight should make it easy to make a decision. Commissioner Garret agreed that votes made in the last five minutes should not be used. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that he believes that the Commission should vote on the staff report as written because these other votes are bogus. Commissioner Allen stated that the problem here is that the Commission is not the final decision maker here and that it can go to City Council because we only recommend action but actually the Council can call it up. But stated that the Commission is not doing their job if we are just going to pretend that the figures are different then they really are and cannot do it that way and we cannot pretend that the request does not meeting the criteria if in fact it does and would much rather continue the item and put a drop dead date to vote. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that we are continuing this item based on the fact that two people came in at the last minute to submit there vote and that all the work that staff did goes out the window because two people at the 11`h hour and stated that we cannot let that happen. Director Niederhaus stated that no one changed there vote at the last moment, the gentleman that stepped forward submitted his ballot. They were two of the three that staff 0 Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 6 has been unable to contact and never talked to them; he stated that they eventually must have gotten the mail or received the phone message of for whatever reason they have only done what they were requested to do by the staff letter and no cutoff date was listed and they had the right to vote as anyone else but it was only received after the staff report had been sent out. He stated that he only received them this morning and reiterated that no one changed there vote and noted that he has heard from people about how they have been coerced to change their vote and has not heard from anyone about wanting to change their vote and stated that he is not so sure that once someone submits their ballot that it should be something for the Commission to decide and second that staff is not making any recommendation and has never done so on any reforestation and it is there job to make sure that the Council policy is met which it is in this case and the only appeal process for reforestation is by two people by either a Council Member or the City Manager. Commissioner Ruzicka states that some sort of ancillary needs to be done on the voting process regardless of how the Commission decides on this particular issue tonight. Commissioner Brown asked how must latitude does the Commission have on if it meets the standard for removal of the tree does the Commission have an option on removing or keeping the tree. Director Knight stated no. Commissioner Brown stated that just like tonight this report stated that it did not meet the standard then the Commission agreed that it just would not consider this. He went on to say that he is not comfortable continuing with this without an accurate staff report when that is all that was made available to the Commission for their decision making process and would much rather have a staff report that has the actual number of votes received and so believes that this item should be continued as well. Commissioner Englebrecht stated so what is here is that people that were lazy or whatever did not want to vote but when they got word that in fact it is not going to go the way I want then I will rush in with a vote at the 11th hour. He asked Director Niederhaus what would happen if a truly anonymous vote was done how many would really want those trees removed, and asked if someone released how the voting went. Director Niederhaus stated that it is only in the staff report distributed this evening shows the schematic. He stated that two of the blue areas was one that was cut of the country and the other stepped forward and so the votes were counted. He apologized for it but believes that they have that right and noted that one has not even picked up their certified mail yet and noted that staff literally has spent hundreds of hours on this issue alone. He stated this is the worst reforestation issue ever because they are not represented by an association. He stated that staff tries to stay completely neutral and no one has had access to the ballots. He stated that he has been asked but since he has heard about people being approached to change their vote he did not believe it appropriate to give out that information. Parks, Beaches 8 Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 • Page 7 Commissioner Englebrecht stated that now that he have established the "Hatfields" and the "McCoys" in CdM that maybe now we do not want to publish something like this because it now lets everyone know how they voted and lets in animosity and intimidation. Director Niederhaus stated that there is one letter from a Mr. Seth Christiansen who called today and later received an email noting his concern in his own neighborhood because he voted no and feels very uncomfortable and asked what he could do. Director Niederhaus stated that he told him to come to the meeting tonight and voice his opinion but informed us that he would not be here and sent a letter instead. He went on to say that there is a lot of emotion regarding this issue. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that this is becoming more and more of a contentious issue and that a policy needs to be developed on vote deadline because the Commission relies on the staff report. Commissioner Englebrecht asked if the vote was to come back at 65% approval is the Commission required to approve the request or are they allowed to say that the trees should remain. Director Knight stated that she believes that if the reforestation request meets the requirements of the G -1 Policy then the Commission is bound. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that then we have no discretion. Director Niederhaus stated that the Commission is an advisory not an action body of the Council. Commissioner Englebrecht asked if they could make it mandatory for property owners to attend the meeting and raise their hand if they approve and so forth. Director Knight stated that the G -1 Policy is very clear about how the reforestation process and reminded them that a sub - committee was formed and met for many months and the process for reforestation is very clear on the requirements and steps that a petitioner must take and stated that if changes or additions need to be made then those are amendments to that policy which is a Council Policy and you would be recommending those changes to them. Commissioner Engtebrecht stated that Director Niederhaus makes a good point regarding that within all the community associations that there are very few problems but since this is public property then maybe the G -1 Policy in that area of polling needs to be changed such as requiring the homeowner to show up and vote instead of having staff canvassing the neighborhood and getting 11`h hour votes. 40 Commissioner Allen stated that the sub - committee spent approximately 80 hours of public hearings developing the G -1 Policy and with all due respect that if Commissioner Englebrecht would like to come up with a different way to handle the problem then suggests that he ask that the sub - committee be reconvened and that he chair it. Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 • Page 8 Commissioner Brown stated that he believes that a motion should be entertained as to what should be done with this particular issue and deal with the others later. Director Knight clarified that once a motion has been made and seconded then it will be opened for public discussion. Commissioner Skoro asked if the item is continued does the public discussion need to be done. Commissioner Allen stated that if the motion is whether to continue the item then the public discussion is whether is should be continued or not and not how the Commission should vote on the issue. Director Knight stated correct. Motion by Commissioner Englebrecht to accept the staff report as written and disapprove the reforestation request of property owners of 300,302, 304, 310, 311 and 312 Larkspur Avenue since it has not received the 60% approval required. Seconded by Commissioner Ruzicka. Substitute motion made by Commissioner Skoro to continue item until the April Commission meeting and have a cutoff date for voting if appropriate to allow the Commission the opportunity to digest all the factors. Amendment of substitute motion made by Commissioner Garrett to add a cutoff date of March 15`h to receive any additional votes which would be the absolute deadline. Motion seconded by Commissioner Ruzicka. Commissioner Skoro agreed to amendment. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that staff has received votes from 29 of the 30 affected homeowners. Director Niederhaus stated yes after hundreds of hours. Commissioner Brown asked if the substitute motion is asking staff to repoll the 30 affected homeowners. All said no. He went on to say then the votes would count as submitted and would be in the next staff report that way. Commissioner Allen asked if the substitute motion includes that should anyone have the notion to change their vote then any such change would have to be received by March 15`h but not that staff has to repoll and assumes that since we have 29 of the 30 and would Like to see a staff report that reflects that vote. fe Commissioner Englebrecht stated that now staff must contact all 30 of these property owners that they now have the option to change their vote up until March 15 h and cannot not tell them. Chair Tobin stated that is a lot of work. 0 Parks, Beaches It Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 9 Commissioner Englebrecht asked how you can give them a cutoff and not notify them. Director Knight clarified that the substitute motion by Commissioner Garrett is that the issue is continued until the April meeting with a cutoff date of March 15`h and that cutoff date would be for those that staff has not received ballots from which would be just one ballot. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that if we are waiting on just one vote then it would not change the percentage and the issue can be voted on tonight. Commissioner Garrett stated that he was concerned that Commissioner Englebrecht received a call from someone stating that their vote was reflected incorrectly. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that he received that call from the first vote taken. Commissioner Garrett asked if anyone else has received those types of calls and that frankly there seems to be enough people represented from the street that repolling would not need to be done and that if people want to change their vote they have until the 151h. Director Knight stated that the motion does not include the issue of changing votes. • Commissioner Englebrecht asked if that should be included on the motion. Commissioner Garrett stated yes. Director Knight stated that the public comment is on the issue on the motion to continue the discussion of the reforestation request until the April meeting and to allow anyone that has not yet cast a vote to do so by March 15`h and that public comment is not open on the discussion of the reforestation request itself. Dr Vandersloot questioned the ruling since the agenda states discussion of the reforestation request and believes that public comments are allowed. Commissioner Allen stated that if this issue is going to be discussed at the April meeting she suggests that it seemed ilt advised to discuss something that is not going to be voted on tonight and suggests that the comments be on the discussion at hand to have them considered. Dr. Vandersloot continued to talk off mike. Chair Tobin stated that he was very embarrassed because he told some folks that this issue would probably not need much discussion based on the staff report. 41 Chair Tobin opened the public discussion. Walter Eck, property owner on Larkspur stated that he believed that he is one of the people that voted late and stated that he was out of the state and requested the post office to deliver the letter to the vestibule of their home but it never appeared. He went i-1 U Parks, Beaches it Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 10 on to say that he got hold of one of the ballots and signed it and appreciates the fact that Commissioner Englebrecht has some significant issue with the request at hand but stated that he is not dishonest and stated that late voters are and objects to comments made and that being said that he and his wife are tree huggers and stated that no none has planted more trees on their property then they have; he went on to say that a tree was planted in the front yard and was told by one of the neighbors that it was obstructing their view and would they please cut it down; even though they liked the tree they went ahead and cut if down to be a good neighbor. He stated that on one side the new trees have been planted and on the other side has all the old trees and believes that Larkspur would look much better if those people are allowed to put in the smaller size trees and would make it more uniform and those at the other end of the street can decide what they want to do. Karen O'Connell, property owner on Larkspur stated that the four people are here tonight to speak about the reforestation request. She stated that she wanted to show the Commission what happened back in 2002 and pointed out how the G -1 Policy was not followed back at that time and how they are trying to prevent it from happening again, She stated that she believes that the G -1 Policy is not being followed only this time there are six trees in jeopardy and do not feel that it is a fair process and leaves a lot of room for intimidation and for bias among the neighbors. She stated that in 2002, two trees were removed from 301 via an encroachment permit and later that year was asked to sign a petition from another neighbor and signed it because she was confronted and wanted to be a nice neighbor because of the sap and leaves following in their car and tried to be nice but did not believe that they would be able to get the 60% needed. She stated that when she signed the petition she thought it was for one tree and when she returned home a couple of days later three trees were gone. Ms. O'Connell stated that the neighbors then began to talk about the significant errors in compliance with the G -1 Policy and stated that they did not have 60% as they needed 24 signature and they received only 15. She stated that some of the signatures were from renters and the petition contained information that was false and misleading and displayed examples. She stated that the trees appeared diseased and after talking to the Urban Forester he stated that the trees were actually in fair condition. She stated that the second signature on the page was from a renter and was counted in the petition. She stated that the real reason for the request is because of the debris on the cars. She stated that after the trees were removed three families wrote to staff regarding the compliance and met with Director Niederhaus who promised that it would not happen again and provided input to improve the G -1 Policy. She stated that this was all done after the trees were removed. She displayed an example of the letter that went to Council. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that he is a tad offensive about the idea about not getting paid for this so is the Commission they do not get paid and put a lot of personal time into talking and reviewing the reports provided and stated that he is inferring that Ms. is O'Connell doesn't believe that issues are taken seriously. Ms. O'Connell stated that she appreciates that. Jim O'Connell displayed the last picture of the street with the old and the new trees. He stated that the petition from November 2004 had several errors included and that the 60% Parks, Beaches ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 11 requirement was never met; 23 of the 39 property owners approved it which is 58.9 %. He stated that the approval rate is really 51% because three of the votes were completely invalid since the petition only included one tree and the request was for six trees. He went on to say that the maximum of 30 properties was not complied with since the City went to 39 properties and so staff was not following the G -1 Policy again. He noted that the petition did not appear to be approved by staff since there were five different versions of the petition. He reviewed the packet that was presented to the Commission and which stated that 95% of the property owners were notified and that is not the case and were not even made aware of the November 161" meeting. He displayed the last page of the report which shows 41 owners but the City could not verify one of them as being a valid owner and the City counted one person twice and in addition there were three petitions that were for one tree only and so when you subtract those out it leaves you with a total of 20 out of 39 which is where the 51% comes from. Mr. O'Connell stated that in his letter it was answered with some errors specifically the number of 24 approved which was really only 23 and stated that 311 Larkspur should have been excluded but was left in the count. He stated that the G -1 Policy says 15 properties in each direction. He went on to say that they believe that the petition themselves are inaccurate as they did not list the number of trees and reason and noted that it was a pine tree and many of the people felt as though they had been mislead. He stated that there was no consistency in the petitions used and finally the criteria for removal was not met since there was no hardscape or view problem not were they declining in health or the wrong species. Bill Singleton stated that when he purchased his home there was a canopy of 14 large beautiful She Oak trees until 2002. He stated that tree lined streets enhance the beauty of CdM and enhance the home values. Mr. Singleton stated that there are plenty of streets without trees and those are listed in the G -3 Policy; he stated that home values go down when large trees are removed even the Newport Beach City web site states that trees increase the value of residential property by as much as 20 %. He stated that River She Oaks are perfectly suited for the coastal environment and they are wind tolerant and drought resistant and do not drip sap like Pine trees. He went on to say that they are also still being planted by several local cities such as Santa Monica, Pasadena and Los Angeles. He stated that the reasons listed for reforestation was messiness. He stated that messiness is not a criteria for removal and that any 50 -70 foot tall tree will drop leaves and several cities still plant them. He noted that the only trees that do not drop leaves are plastic. He stated that some mentioned that it would uniform the block but the non - uniformity would still exist if these trees were removed but would make it uneven on the other side. He stated that the replacement Firewheel tree have mites and require pesticide treatment and all those accompanying problems and are already blocking blue water views because they only grow to 30 feet. He stated that they are so small and slog growing that Sunset Western Garden book states that they are popular as an indoor potted plant. He went on to say that the City replaced section of the sidewalk on both sides last month and asked if sidewalk placement was a way to document tree damage and to justify future tree removals as problem trees because per the G -1 Policy problem trees can be removed for sidewalk damage and do not require the approval of the Commission. He stated that they want to go on record tonight to say that they do not think that those sidewalks should have been replaced. He went on to say the She Oaks are fast growing and grow to 70 feet as opposed to slow growth of 20 feet of the replacement Firewall tree. Mr. Singleton stated that tall trees can be trimmed to frame and enhance views where 0 Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 12 shorter and mature trees tent to block views of adjacent properties. He stated that the River She Oaks are shabby as they have not been trimmed in 4 years and read from the G- 1 Policy that stated that the City will endeavor to fund the urban forest to the highest Level possible through the efficient use of regular tree trimming and root pruning, etc. and the goal is every three years which has not been done on Larkspur. He stated that supplemental tree trimming is also available at only $39 a tree. Mary Singleton stated that Jean Capute from 319 thought that she had voted to keep the trees so her vote will need to be changed since she thought the mailing was confusing and thought she was approving keeping the trees on the block. She went on to say that on advice from Director Niederhaus and Commissioner Allen that they did a petition and is here to give the results of the counter petition. She displayed the map of the original petition and petitioned exactly the same neighbors. The results were dramatically different. She stated that 10 neighbors that signed for reforestation changed there minds once they understood that the trees were not Pine trees and were well suited to the area and that 6 trees were going to be removed and not just one tree. She went on to say that the replacement Firewheel tree is innately small and a patio type tree and even when full grown would look like dwarfs next to the existing She Oaks. She stated that they provides space for people to write personal comments on the petition which are very interesting and that many of the neighbors felt that there was a disconnect between the City government and its citizens and that many City officials get mired into the City agenda rather than listening to the people that actually pay their salary. She stated that all are frustrated on how the General Services Department handles tree issues and the G -1 Policy is written so that it is confusing to everyone and for example the neighbors that did the original petition could not follow the confusing process of using the first and foremost option of tree trimming rather then removing and believes that it was not even offered to them. She stated that in their frustrating efforts to save the trees and get answers from the General Services Department, that they were given the proverbial run -a -round or the administrators of the process were as confused about the written inconsistencies as the rest. She noted that they finally resorted to trimming the trees on their own nickel because the General Services Department would not do it even though it was long over due and the primary reason that the neighbors had such a shabby mess to contend with. She noted that hopefully now that more than 50% of the branches have been trimmed that it will have reduced the majority of the mess so that the healthy mature She Oak that caused it can not be enjoyed by all. She displayed one last picture of a fully grown She Oak and the replacement Firewheel tree in scale and asked if this is what we want in the neighborhood. Phyllis Speek stated that she has a lot of information on the She Oak and the Firewheel tree and the existing tree can go from 5 to 120 feet and is very tall and cannot tell you about the hours spent on getting the petitions and stated that the Firewheel Tree will grow to 30 feet and that in Australia it is an spectacular tree. She went on to say it has a Is blossoms that is spectacular and believes that the choice for the replacement tree was good. Commissioner Ruzicka states that at this juncture the discussion can only be about the merits of postponing the meeting and should not be going into the substantive merits of whether we should remove the trees or not. 0 Parks, Beaches Ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 13 Director Knight stated that the Roberts Rules of Order state that the public discussion is on the issue of the motion. Jan Vandersloot stated that the issue should be continued and submitting some photographs to see the difference between the She Oak and the Firewheel tree and asked them to notice that the Firewheel tree is blocking the view of the residents up the street and that the Commission should address this dynamic and that this is not a tree that is blocking the view from above but rather sideways out to the ocean and that if a little Firewheel tree is planted then you are substituting a tree that is actually blocking the view and requested that the Commission took at that and also the criteria. Commissioner Skoro stated that the issue should be brought back to the Commission and that there is no reason to belabor if the issue will be coming back to in April. Bill Singleton ( ? ?) stated that since our poll is so much different that they would like the Commission to direct staff to let them have access to that data so that the data can be compared and willing to give the signed petitions in exchange since the last two reforestations have had errors. • Commissioner Ruzicka asked Commissioner Garrett to clarify the motion. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that we have had three surveys and there have been errors and again suggested that live bodies come to the chamber and vote since there is so much difference. Commissioner Brown asked that we get through public comments. Jeff Antrillo stated that in regards to postponement of the issue does not understand why there would be any question whatsoever since Director Niederhaus has done an excellent job in seeing that everything has been done in compliance with the policy. He stated that they actually waited over a year and a half because of the changes being done to the G -1. He stated that they have done there best to abide by the Policy and now we have a 60% agreement for the reforestation and tonight is the appropriate time to conclude this item because 29 of the 30 ballots have been counted and everything is in agreement and does not see why this cannot be concluded tonight. Tom Goble stated that he is one of the petitioners requesting the reforestation. He asked that the Commission listen and asked that his time be stopped until all Commissioners are Listening to what he has to say. Commissioner Englebrecht left the dias. Mr. Goble urged the Commission to take action tonight either one way or the other as this was literally tearing the street of Larkspur apart. He stated the property owners had did everything that they had been asked to do the General Services Department. He stated that when the first petition had come back and were told it was flawed, they had accepted that and put the entire matter into the hands of the City and now they are told LI Parks, Beaches l3 Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 14 it is flawed again. He stated that in the meantime the property owners have paid the City the cost to have the tree removed and replaced since and that they continue to hold these funds. He went on to say that the folks that do not want the reforestation do not have these trees adjacent to there property. He stated that one gentlemen mentioned democracy and that he is simply asking that the Commission approved the removal of these trees and reforest them with the replacement tree as approved; he stated that no one here tonight has this tree overhanging their property. Mr. Goble stated that he has a bag of needles that he can show the Commission that he sweeps up continuously. He stated that people can minimize this but he has never once seen any of these people to come out and help clean the needles from these trees. He stated that tonight is the night to make the decision. Commissioner Englebrecht returned. Jay Rifkin stated that he too feels that this issue is tearing the neighborhood apart. He stated that he spoke with Council Member Nichols who stated that it would be intimidating if he was to attend. He stated that one of his concerns was the fact that these trees after being trimmed by the Singletons is that one of the views would be from someone from the other side of the Coast Highways and are now seeing this particular tree and pointed out. He went on to say that there has been some consideration that trees not be any higher then anyone building the particular community and as a resident and living on that corner but would love to see some symmetry as well. Commissioner Ruzicka reiterated the rules of Robert's Rules of Order. Commissioner Englebrecht asked if the Commission could meet on Wednesday April 6 instead. Director Knight stated that she would poll the Comrnissioners for their availability and the room. She stated that she would like to clarify the motion if it was amended to allow people to change there votes or just those votes not yet received. Commissioner Garrett stated that it has not been officially been amended but that it is something he would like to do. Commissioner Skoro stated that Director Niederhaus would be the official ballot keeper. Director Knight confirmed the wording of the amendment to the amended substitute motion by Commissioner Skoro to continue the reforestation request of 300,302,304,311 and 312 Larkspur Avenue until April 5, 2005; that a March 15`h deadline has been set either to receive votes that have not been cast or to change votes by contacting Director Niederhaus. 0 Commissioner Allen clarified that Director Niederhaus does not repoll anybody. Motion carried. • Parks, Beaches it Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 15 Commissioner Brown commented that he understands the difficulty and believes that is the reason why the Commission is looking at this issue again next month. The Commissioner is concerned about the neighborhood and that they are trying to the the right thing for all. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that CdM is unique and that the fact it is very special community and are only as strong as the community as if part of the community is injured then it affects the entire community and the vote is taken on what is best for CdM and Newport Beach. Director Niederhaus asked if he is supposed to notify all 30 of the property owners by letter of what happened tonight. Commissioner Allen stated that he is to do nothing. Director Knight confirmed that should a property owner wish to change their vote then they must contact Director Niederhaus by the close of business of the 15`h of March. NEW BUSINESS 5. City Street Tree Designation Change - Request from the Irvine Terrace Homeowners Association to change the El Paseo median street tree from the Olive tree to the Golden Medallion tree. 6. Reforestation Request - Request from the Irvine Terrace Homeowners Association to reforest 9 city parkway Olive trees in the El Paseo median to the Golden Medallion tree. Director Niederhaus stated that this may be the first step in a less cantankerous reforestation process but stated that items 5 and 6 are linked together and should the Commission elect not to approve the Golden Medallion tree at the designated street tree for El Paseo Median then the Commission would not need to discuss item 6 which again is predicated on the Commission's approval. He pointed out the attached street tree designation list and stated that the reason for this request is the that the Olive Trees (Olea europaea) on El Paseo median are rapidly declining as noted in the photographs attached to the staff report. He went on to say that currently five of the nine Olive trees are severely infected with verticillium wilt, and have been confirmed by staff. He suggested that there are good examples for the Golden Medallion tree along Bayside Drive and Gateway Park. Motion by Commissioner Englebrecht to approve the City Street Designation Change and the Request for Reforestation submitted by the Irvine Terrace Homeowners Association. Chair Tobin opened the public discussion. Ray Kennedy, Irvine Terrace Homeowners Association President stated that they have about 385 homes in the community and is urging support of the designation change as well as the request for reforestation. He went on to say that they have been working with staff for the last six months and have been great to work with. He stated that they are basically just requesting that the Golden Medallion tree replace the Olive trees that are dying and that the HOA will bear all costs and pointed Parks, Beaches It Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 16 out that this replacement of trees does fit in nicely with Bayside and Jamboree which was replaced not too long ago. Jan Vandersloot stated that there are nine trees being reforested but only five of them have the fungus and so where is the rationale for the other four and noted that obviously... Director Knight stopped him by saying that this item is only for the redesignation of the street tree not the reforestation. Director Allen stated that the motion was to approve both. Jan Vandersloot stated that the motion was to reforest 9 city parkway trees and the report states that five of the trees are sick and the other four are not so he asked what is the rational for the removal of those four healthy trees and what hardscape damage are they causing, or view problems, or are they sick, dead or dying. He stated that he gathers that the HOA wants El Paseo to took uniform although he hopes that is not the case. Mr. Vandersloot stated that he hated to see whole blocks of trees being reforested because a couple of them are sick and asked if the City is putting a death sentence on all Olive trees. He stated that if you go back to the Larkspur issue you will notice that those Firewheel trees are getting sick and have some kind of disease on a leaf and asked if the City should get rid of all Firewheel trees and replace them with something else. He stated that his point is that the Commission should not be approving the reforestation of nine trees when only five are sick. Commissioner Brown stated that he believed that the motion is not to take out 9 trees that the motion is to redesignate a tree on that street and that we have information that five of the nine trees are diseased but that the motion is simply to designate. Commissioner Allen stated no, the motion is to both redesignate and reforest which are items 5 and 6. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that the two had been blended together. Commissioner Brown stated that he stands corrected. Chair Tobin closed the public discussion Motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Allen, Brown, Englebrecht, Garrett, Ruzicka, Tobin Commissioner Skoro recused himself as he is a member of the Irvine Terrace Homeowners Association Board. 7. Eagle Scout Project at Castaways Park -Director Niederhaus introduced Max Moosmann who will be making a presentation on his Eagle Scout project and that the Castaways Park is nearing the start of the maintenance with all the new native plants and it is badly in need of information for the public and so it seems that this type of project would fit in well. • Parks, Beaches £t Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 17 Chair Tobin opened the public discussion. Mr. Moosmann stated that his project for becoming an Eagle Scout is to build a information kiosk in Castaways Park. He stated that he has designed it and will be built out of pressure treated wood and will really help the visitors learn more about the flora and fauna of Newport and the natural wildlife in California and basically enjoyed designing the project and urged approval by the Commission. He also stated that he would be responsible for looking over the site every two weeks to check on the information and the landscaping to make sure that it does not deteriorate or vandalized. Director Niederhaus stated that this project would serve as one of the requirement for the Coastal Commission grant. Commissioner Englebrecht asked this was a precedent by having a resident build something on park land. Director Niederhaus stated no and noted that it is the Commission's function to accept the donation and location and what is being offered; he stated that it was done most recently on the Newport Balboa pier by another Eagle Scout who did the fish species display and at Galaxy View Park redid the landscaping. So there is definitely a history of that type of occurrence going on. Jan Vandersloot urged approval of the project noting that he had been working on Castaways Park for over 10 years. He went on to say that the location of the kiosk was where the sycamore tree had been removed and suggested that it be replaced also. Chair Tobin closed the public discussion. Motion by Commissioner Ruzicka to approve the Eagle Scout project of building a kiosk at Castaways Park by Max Moosman. Motion carried by acclamation. COMMITTEE REPORTS • Finance - Nothing to report. • Park Development - Nothing to report. • Rec ft Open Space Element - Nothing to report. • Recreation Activities - Commissioner Englebrecht stated that a meeting would be scheduled to discuss the criteria and responsibilities for youth sports commission organizations. • Seniors - Director Knight invited the Commissioners to the OASIS Senior Center Casino Night on March 19 and included a complimentary admission for each and hopes that you will bring friends and stated that for the past years of so staff has been working with the Friends of OASIS on a cooperative agreement and a consensus has been reached and will be bringing it to the subcommittee for their review and will go to City Council within the next month or so. • Beach Activities - Nothing to report. • Ad Hoc Community Service Award - Commissioner Garrett asked Director Knight to put something in the papers requesting nominations. Commissioner Ruzicka suggested Max Moosman. Youth Sports Liaison - Nothing to report • Parks, Beaches It Recreation Commission Regular Meeting March 1, 2005 Page 18 - Special Tree Committee - Commissioner Allen stated a meeting will be held March 15 at 7pm to discuss trees on the Special Tree List and will take nominations from the public and anticipates that a vote will be taken soon on which trees should be added to the list. He reminded the Commission that should a tree be taken off the list it does not mean that it can be arbitrarily taken down. - Youth Sports Liaison - Nothing to report. Donation - Director Knight stated that staff would be calling a meeting when the bench and donation list has been completed. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS • Formulating policy on taking a poll from residents, etc. Commissioner Garrett commented about noticing and possibly review the noticing process for the public. • Irvine Park Encroachment by Commissioner Skoro • Presentation to Marcelino Lomeli at April meeting • To extend an invitation to Huntington Beach and or Laguna Beach for a joint meeting by Commissioner Ruzicka ADJOURNMENT- 8:58pm Submitted by: 0 Teri Craig, Admin Assistant is • F PB &R Commission Agenda Item No. '�' April 5, 2005 TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission FROM: Parks and Trees Maintenance Superintendent SUBJECT: March Parks and Trees Maintenance Divisions Activities Report Parks Maintenance Division Activities 1. The Coast Highway Median Project has been approved by the Council and the work has commenced with anticipated completion of work by this summer. The project will include the installation of new medians, extension of existing medians, hardscape installation, and the installation of new landscape and irrigation. The Public Works iDepartment will be coordinating this work with the Parks Maintenance Division staff. 2. Many replacement plantings were completed at Castaways Park this past month, as required by the Revegetation Project. 3. The Parks Maintenance Division staff provided traffic control for the Spirit Run on March 13th, which drew over 7,500 participants. This race is a major fundraiser for local schools. 4. The City will be assuming the maintenance of an additional 95 acres of medians, roadsides, and open space areas in Newport Coast on April 1, 2005, as required by the pre - annexation agreement. 5. The Parks Maintenance Division staff is coordinating with the Recreation and Public Works Departments regarding the new library and tennis courts for Mainers Park. 6. The entry planters of West Newport Park at Prospect and Orange Avenue were replanted by Parks Maintenance Division staff. The plant palette included specimens that are drought tolerant, low maintenance, and colorful. 7. The City Employees Awards Breakfast was held on March 3rd, Bob Martinez, Park Maintenance Crew Chief, received an award for 25 years of service and Greg Lewis, Pest Control Technician, received an award for 30 years of service. These employees have been very valuable resources to the Parks Maintenance Division. 8. Parks Maintenance Division staff is coordinating with the Recreation and Public Works Departments on the renovation of the play area at Begonia Park. • Upcoming Activities for April 1. The planting of replacement shrubs and ground covers will continue Citywide. 2. Parks Maintenance Division staff will continue coordinating the control of rodents with contract services. Trees Division Activities During the month of March, 805 trees were trimmed, 3 trees were removed as a result of a claim, and 2 problem trees were removed by approval of the City Manager , 117 trees were planted, 23 trees were root pruned, and 8 emergency tree calls were responded to. The City's tree trimming contractor, West Coast Arborists, continues to grid trim trees within the Corona Del Mar, Balboa Island and Irvine Terrace area. 2. Since July 2004, under City Council direction and funding, staff has undertaken an extensive root pruning effort. Combined efforts of the Field Maintenance and Tree Maintenance Divisions and West Coast Arborists staff, have resulted in the root pruning of 481 trees to date. This effort will mitigate any potential property damage as a result of City tree roots, and also provide for tree longevity in the Urban Forest. The extensive work included root pruning, root barrier installation, • and hardscape repairs at each tree site. 3. The attached Tree Activity Report summarizes requests and field activities performed during the past month. Beach Maintenance Activities See attached General Services Department, Activities Report for February 2005. r res ctfully, Marcelino G. Lomeli Parks and Trees Maintenance Superintendent Attachments: (A) Tree Activity Report 2004- 2005 (B) General Services Department December Activities Report n LJ 0 � � .� E � 0 /\ 1410 0/ a N o 0 o 2 7 � $ �# ƒ � �¥ & � 2 �z c � \ $ NI \ /\ m \ a �wa ge a o ® 0 § 0 o n ƒ � a N o 0 o 2 7 m g � 0 0 0 0 o n o \ 0 0 0 0 o n o 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n o 0 0 0 o c/ o o 0 0 o 0 o n § g 0 0 Co W) 0 0 co g o 0 0 0 0 o 0 = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 § � a § I< § % ) = ; E § % k ® C � - \ n§ ) § I . 0 ® ° E ; § e ) 7 K J e q k § 0 § § § § e) / w a I) E i / o § 2EL § CLAIM REMOVALS • Fiscal Year 2004- 2005 MONTH TREE # LOCATION July -04 NONE August -0 4 1 2443 Bamboo Street 1 2315 Pacific Drive 1 San Joaquin Hills Rd & Jamboree Rd 3 440 Heliotrope Ave September -04 2 225 Via Koran October -04 3 501 Riverside Av. 1 1301 Balboa Blvd. 1 1223 Balboa Blvd. November -04 NONE December -04 1 Buckingham Ln. 1 1827 Buttonshell Ln. 1 425 Carnation Ave. 1 1616 Lincoln Ln. 1 2900 Fifth Ave. 1 307 Iris Ave. . 1 310 Iris Ave. 1 1214 Nottingham Rd, 1 2930 Seaview Ave. Total 9 January -05 NONE February -05 4 508 Evening Star Lane 1 1715 Antiqua Way 1 1406 Lincoln Lane March -05 1 2323 Private Road 1 4627 Tremont Lane 1 2919 Paper Lane • PROBLEM TREE REMOVALS Fiscal Year 2004 -2005 �J MONTH TREE # LOCATION July -04 NONE 512 Avocado Av August -0 4 2 1535 Monrovia Ave 120 Bay Av E 1 3363 Via Lido 1 2 131 Via Genoa on Piazza Lido 514 Bay Av W 1 522 South Bay Front on Topaz Ave 1 1 880 Irvine Ave 617 Begonia Av 1 1500 Ruth Ln on Marian Ln 2 1 1227 Marian Ln 409 Dahlia Av 500 Dahlia Av 1 1136 Highland Dr 1 1 1100 Essex Ln on Oxford Ln 922 Goldenrod Av 1 1607 Highland Dr 1 1706 Highland Dr 1 1627 Anita Ln 1 1530 Anita Ln 2 1501 Anita Ln 1 1231 Nottingham Rd 1 1400 Lincoln Ln 1 1626 Lincoln Ln 2 1550 Crown Dr . 1 1 2500 Lighthouse Ln 4530 Roxbury Rd 1 219 Evening Star Ln 1 1636 Anita Ln 1 1838 Westcliff Dr on Rutland Rd 1 1345 Sussex Ln 3 223 Evening Star Ln Total 31 September -04 NONE October -04 NONE November -04 1 507 Avocado Av 1 512 Avocado Av 1 100 Bay Av E 1 120 Bay Av E 1 302 Bay Av E 1 311 Bay Av E 1 514 Bay Av W 1 503 Begonia Av 1 611 Begonia Av 1 617 Begonia Av 1 700 Begonia Av 2 703 Begonia Av 1 1 409 Dahlia Av 500 Dahlia Av 1 506 Dahlia Av 1 600 Gary PI 1 922 Goldenrod Av 1 PROBLEM TREE REMOVALS Fiscal Year 2004 -2005 0 MONTH TREE # LOCATION November -04 1 614 Heliotrope Av (Continued) 1 702 Iris Av 1 707 Iris Av 1 714 Iris Av 1 705 Iris Av 1 713 Iris Av 1 309 Marigold Av 1 411 Marigold Av 1 310 Montero Av 1 313 Montero Av 1 521 Orchid Av 3 2345 Pacific Coast Hwy E 3 2711 Pacific Coast Hwy E 3 3500 Pacific Coast Hwy E 1 3636 Pacific Coast Hwy E 3 3653 Pacific Coast Hwy E 1 328 Poinsettia Av 2 418 Poinsettia Av 1 421 Poinsettia Av 1 1 617 Poinsettia Av 401 Seaward Rd Total 50 December -04 NONE January -05 NONE February -05 NONE March -05 2 1738 Miramar Dr. • 2 • • • GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT ACTIVITIES REPORT February -05 This This Month Total to Date Total to Date Month Last Year Fiscal Year Last Fiscal Year FIELD. MAINTENANCE Dlifl$ION 3130 Street Name Signs Added & Replaced Street Patching: Tons of Blacktop 709 316 2,910 3,328 Misc. Cement (cu. ft.) Footings, Meter Posts, etc 0 0 221 996 Curbing Lineal Feet) 176 322 2,294 2,081 Sidewalk (Square Feet ) 4" Thick 3,135 3,386 28,834 36,707 Concrete (cu ds) Sidewalk & Curb Replacement 53 82 590 794 Sidewalk Grinding Lineal Feet 152 648 7,044 5,160 Tree Roots Pruned by Staff 28 6 314 170 Sidewalks Ramped Lineal Feet 232 344 3,288 4,424 Sidewalks (sq ft 4" thick Replaced by Contractor 0 19,671 15,336 19,671 Wheelchair Rams Installed by Contractor 0 0 0 0 Curb & Gutter (lin ft Replaced by Contractor 0 375 0 375 Tree Roots Pruned by Contractor 0 205 1 170 205 Maintenance Debris Tons Street Sweeping, Beach Cleaning, Demo 556 531 E4,646 3,399 As halt & Concrete Rec cled 129 274 46 3,507 Signs & Street Markings 85 Street Name Signs Added & Replaced 2 13 110 495 Traffic Signs Added & Replaced 152 282 1,477 1,288 Special Purpose Signs Installed 15 49 252 226 Beach Signs Installed 3 6 183 91 Street Striping lin ft Total Added & Replaced 56,134 62,574 501,110 112,138 Pavement Markings (Messages) 6 70 412 511 Parking Stalls 2 80 718 1,208 Curb Painting Lineal Feet 26,310 250 70,591 47,814 Reflective Pavement Markers Included in Above 0 0 100 155 Thermoplastic 69 15 1,447 3,482 Sign Posts Installed 76 46 600 437 Graffiti - Incidents Removed by Staff 107 1 247 1,444 1,507 OPFFJiATlCINS SUPPORT DIVISION11 40 oeacn rviaulaeuance Beach Area Refuse (Tons) 85 826 Beach Debris (Tons) 898 802 Gutter Miles Swept (Large &Small Total 3,413 j371 V 36,817 Sweepings Picked U Cubic Yards 345 4,190 Hand Swee ers Cubic Yards 57 584 Storm Drain Debris Cubic Yards 21 29 328 IV-Ditch/Structures (Tons) 0 - 42 • • GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT ACTIVITIES REPORT February -05 This This Month Total to Date Total to Date Month Last Year Fiscal Year Last Fiscal Year Refuse Collection Residential (tons) 26,725 26,616 Recyclables (tons) 7,640 _ Total Residential 2,836 1 2,765 26,725 26,698 Man Hours/Ton 1.15 I! 1.10 1.13 1.08 Tons/Man Hour 0.87 0.91 0.88 0.92 Tons/Man Day 6.93 7.30 7.06 7.39 7.39 Total Miles Traveled 8,830 8,420 82,056 98 M843 PACKER COMPARISONS - One Man Man HourwTon 0.87 0.85 0.67 0.74 Tons/Man Hour 1.14 1.18 1.20 1.17 Tons/Man Day 9.15 9.40 9.60 9.36 Total Miles Traveled 4,442 3,962 43,904 _43,908 PACKER COMPARISONS - Two Man Man Hours/Ton 1.47 1.36 1.20 1.17 Tons/Man Hour 0.68 0.-74 0-67 0.74 Tons/Man Day 5.45 5.88 5.40 5.93 Total Miles Traveled 4,388 4,458 38,152 41,075 REFUSE TRANSFER - Transfer Trailer. '*-' - - Man Hours 500 519 4,432 4,438 Loads Hauled 125 136 1,174 1,153 Tons Hauled i 2,589 14,346 2,577 23,990 23,181 Work Da Average Trailer Loads er:; 5.67 5.81 5.62 Work Da Average Tons per Wo y 112.56 107.39 1 118.76 113.08 Total Miles Traveled 4,557 1 40,882 41 529 PARKS ON 3170!3180 Trees Trimmed by Staff 73 50 916 702 Trimmed by Contractor 788 593 8,455 7,551 Removed 0 9 197 26 Planted 112 2 341 135 Root pruned 42 103 485 172 Requests 228 160 1 1,768 900 EQIUIP.MENT MAINTiNAt4iC*;t)MSlOf4:4.1110. Number of Vehicles Disposed 7 Number of Repair Actions 310 296 2,360 2,436 (Item 3 ) April 5, 2005 WECREATION & SENIOR SERVICES DEPARTMEN J 1St Choice for People, Play Et Programs To: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission From: Marie Knight, Recreation Et Senior Services Director Re: Recreation and Senior Services Division Monthty Activities Report The following are reports on the activities of the Recreation and Senior Services Department. 0 • Monthly Activities Report (Item 3) Page 2 April 5, 2005 RECREATION SERVICES • To: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission From: Andrea McGuire, Recreation Superintendent Re: Recreation Division Monthly Activities Report ADULT SPORTS Spring Softball - The month of March has been relatively dry, which allowed the 68 Adult Slo -Pitch Softball teams to play all scheduled games. February saw the rain -out of 37 games, with all games rescheduled to the end of April and beginning of May. The start of daylight savings time on April 3 will reduce light and electricity use at all City fields. Summer Softball - Requests for registration have been coming in for the summer adult softball leagues, the most popular league of the year. A majority (95 %) of all registration information is now being e- mailed to interested managers. Deadline to register for the popular program is April 20, with all information out by April 1. Approximately 130 teams are expected to register with league play beginning the week of May 16. Winter Basketball - All 80 teams wrapped up play on March 28 with 13 league champions crowned, . and receiving 25oz glass "Sport mugs ". Spring Basketball - Eighty teams will begin the week of April 4 at Eastbluff Boys and Girls Club, Ensign, West Newport and Lincoln gyms. YOUTH SPORTS Winter Hoops 2005 - Another successful season Youth Winter Basketball has come to a close. On March 19, league championship teams in Division A, Division B and Division C will travel to the Southern California Municipal Athletic Federation - Orange County Basketball Tournament. 401h Annual Youth Track and Field Meet - On April 15, boys and girls age 6 through 15 will compete at the Youth Track and Field Meet at Newport Harbor High School. The meet is co- sponsored by Recreation Services and the Newport- Balboa Rotary Club and includes individual running, throwing and jumping events. All participants receive a t -shirt and medals or awards based on place finished. TEEN PROGRAMS Youth Council - Youth Council hosted an outstanding Challenge Day on March 5 at the OASIS Senior Center with 15 Newport Harbor, 7 Sage Hill and 29 Corona del Mar High School students as well as 16 adult facilitators. The day focused on breaking down oppression and • separation in our schools and community. Challenge Day's are powerful, positive personal and community changing programs that are lead by Challenge Day staff. For more information on Challenge Day visit www.chattengeday.org. The Youth Council volunteered at the Spring Egg Hunt by operating the snack bar and assisting with arts and crafts. Money raised from the food sales will go to support the funding of Challenge Day. • Monthly Activities Report Page 3 KidScene Friday Fun Night - March 11 was the second annual Friday Fun Night at the WNCC KidScene with 16 children signed up for the event. The site was open from 7.11:30pm to give parents an opportunity for a night out. The evening was entitled The Night of the `P' and participants enjoyed food and activities beginning with the letter "p ". Pajamas, pillows, pizza, pretzels, popcorn, were only part of the fun! (Item 3) April 5, 2005 Food ft Fitness Week - During the week of March 21, KidScene participants focused on nutrition and exercise during Food ft Fitness Week. The children made healthy snacks which included ants on a log, fruit kabobs, and banana racecars and enjoyed a variety of physical activity. Some activities included taebo, aerobics, and Pilates. Participants were given a food ti exercise log to keep track of their activities and culminated with a healthy potluck and smoothie party! Day Camps - The Presidents' Recess Camp was a great success with 48 campers although the weather was too cold for the beach field trips, but campers had a blast nonetheless! Rain kept the kids and staff indoors for much of the camp, but enjoyed a variety of sports, games, and Presidents' Recess themed crafts. CONTRACT CLASSES Instructor Highlight Of The Month - Do you ever feel your house or yard needs a makeover or a change? There are so many options one could chose to do in order to redecorate, but often at( it takes it a minor change that can brighten up a room or section of the garden. For instance stained glass in a window or a mosaic stepping stone can transmit a whole new look. One may think it is much too expensive to purchase all new stepping stones or to replace a current window with stained glass, but look no further than the Newport Navigator. We have our very own stained glass and mosaic instructor right here in the City of Newport Beach. Rob Masters, as some of you may already know him, has been teaching all levels of mosaic and stained glass classes in the community for years. Whether it is Introductory to Mosaic Construction or Stained Glass, Rob's students go through step by step instructions learning how to safely cut, place and set the glass, ceramic or tiles pieces. He emphasizes each participant's creativity and style choices all while focusing on each participant so they truly get one on one time during class. Rob's passion and enthusiasm truly makes the classes strive to learn more and create new projects. During his lessons, he uses many of his own pieces of fine art as examples and also shows pieces that are sold in galleries. Students then get a good feet for what lies ahead of them if they continue taking classes. Rob's ability to teach the beautiful art formations make the lessons seem so easy; as if all the participants have the natural ability to be as talented as he is. However, as we all know stained glass pieces and mosaic Monthly Activities Report (Item 3) Page 4 April 5, 2005 art pieces are not cheap to buy because it is not an easy form of art. But with Rob, the class flies by and before you know it, a newly completed window hanging or fireplace mantle piece sits in front of you. For the past 15 years of service in the Public Works Department, but all his hours dedicated to the community while sharing his stained glass and mosaic tile skills. If you haven't taken one of his classes to see what he can do and teach, you can see and get a feel for Rob's talents by visiting Cliff Drive Park playground area wall. AQUATICS Looking For Pool Lifeguards Et Swim Instructors Everywhere - Swim instructors and pool lifeguards for the summer 2005 aquatic programs are now being recruited. The positions are posted at high school pools for the water polo and swim teams and at colleges and universities. Hiring for aquatics is often very competitive because of the private swim clubs and other aquatic programs needing staff. Therefore, staff is taking the extra step this year and seeking applicants by leaving no stone unturned instead of waiting for them to knock on our door. Revenue and Participation for February 2005 Aquatics Classes Revenue Participants Lap Swim (Cash participants) $ 3,725 241 Annual Pass 210 4 NBAC Swim 2,475 11 NBAC Jr. Polo 16,255 82 TOTAL $22,665 338 0 RECREATION SPECIAL EVENTS Egg Hunting in the Rain! - The spring Flashlight Egg Hunt was held March 18, 2005 at Bonita Creek Park even with the rain. Over 500 children and parents lit up the Bonita Creek ballfields in the dark with their flashlights to search for plastic eggs. After the egg hunt they participated in arts and crafts and bouncers. Staff plans on making this an annual event and hopefully the weather will be on our side next year! Celebrate Trees! - The annual Arbor Day event will be held on April 29 at 9:30am at Andersen Elementary. This annual event gives students the opportunity to learn about the importance of trees in an urban city environment and will include a presentation of the City's proclamation, tree planting and a tour of the school campus. This event is a cooperative effort with Recreation Services, Parks and Trees Division, and the California State Forest Service. To RSVP for this event, please contact Teri Craig at 644 -3158. Monthly Activities Report Page 5 Special Olympics March Madness Basketball - The City and the Orange County Special Olympics hosted the 15`" Annual Orange County Special Olympics Basketball Tournament on March 19 at Corona del Mar High School with 16 teams. Events included a basketball tournament and a hoop shoot competition hosted by the Newport- Harbor Elks Lodge #1767. This year's tournament included an all -girls teams, a first in history of the OC Tournament! All participants received t- shirts and medals for their participation. FACILITIES USE AND REPAIRS (Item 3) April 5, 2005 Irvine Terrace Park Toddler Playground - The playground opened March 7, 2005. Staff is still waiting for the delivery of the Mayflower spring ship which was donated by the Irvine Terrace Community and should be installed in April, along with additional sand. Staff is planning a small ceremony in late April. Also, as part of the project, the Carpenter Shop is adding an additional picnic shelter next to the playground. Begonia Park Playground - The contractor expects to be finished by April 7 and will finally have an ADA accessible playground. Staff is also trying a new surface called Grubble that won't compact and will not migrate downhill and makes for a nice soft landing for children. This playground will also feature rubber curbing as an added safety feature. The equipment for ages 5 -12 offers some unique pieces that are not available at any other playgrounds and was funded in part by Proposition 12, Bond Act of 2000 funds. West Newport Community Center - The painting project was completed with oyster with sea glass as the paint scheme. The spruced up classrooms will be enjoyed by the hundreds of class and community group members who utilize the facility weekly. Facility Rentals During_ the period of February 16 2004 - March 15 2005 there were: • 13 Picnic/Park Area Rentals • 31 Room Rentals 20 Field Rentals • 11 Gym Rentals There was (1) wedding reservation for this period: Galaxy View Park -Sat, Feb, 26, 2005 Attendance: 90 PARK PATROL Requested calls are assigned visits by staff or schedule or phone requests. Customer Contacts are the number of times they stopped and spoke to customers other than requested calls. Due to the timing of the meeting, these monthly summaries will be two months behind (i.e. in June you will receive April summary) During the month of February Park Patrol had the following contacts: 1. Requested Calls • 105 with Youth Sports Groups Monthly Activities Report (Item 3) Page 6 April 5, 2005 • 112 Field related issues /checks- some examples are: reminded AYSO Club Soccer teams that they need to obtain a permit for club team use at Lincoln Field, monitored Grant . Howald Field for reports of a woman who frequently interrupts the adult softball games by walking her dog across the field while games are in progress, checked fields during rain to prevent damage and ensure safety of the public, reported broken sprinklers at San Miguel and Channel Place Parks, turned on /off field lights at various locations, informed and removed various youth sport teams from closed fields at Peninsula and Bonita Creek Fields, (due to excessive rain) • 12 Picnic/ reservation issues /checks: Informed birthday party rental not to park vehicles on park sidewalk at Bonita Creek park • 189 Community Center issues /checks • 31 Playground checks - checked all playgrounds for safety issues and vandalism, stopped skateboarders from skating on equipment at Cliff Drive Park • 9 other- continued to monitor and report limo's illegally parked at Arroyo Park, stopped illegal disabled parking at various park parking lots, stopped a person from drinking alcohol at Cliff Drive Park, responded to resident complaints regarding numerous youth skateboarding at Ensign View Park, informed an individual not to hide in the bushes at Channel Place Park, removed advertisement signs at Begonia Park, advised park visitor at Irvine Terrace not to let dog run loose in the tennis courts, stopped basketball game after dark at Arroyo Park, stopped youths from skim boarding on flooded grass at Mariners Park. 1 Pre -event check • 1 Post -event check 2. Public Contacts • 36 education • 2 alcohol- at Cliff Drive Park 17 dog related Additional Info: During February, there was large amounts of rain, resulting in the temporary closure of some of athletic fields. Park Patrol did a great job of monitoring and preventing use on the fields that were too wet to safely be used. One Administrative Citation was issued to an individual at Arroyo Park who refused to keep his dog on a leash after being asked to comply several times, this individual actually asked the Park Patrol Officer to issue him a citation. Park Patrol received complaints from residents near Ensign View Park regarding skateboarders in the park, they responded numerous times and issued several verbal warnings to various youths. Written Warnings Issued - 3 (1 - dog off leash; 1 - tennis flyers posted at West Newport Park, and 1 - illegally parked vehicle at City Hall) Citations Issued - 1 - for a dog off leash at Arroyo Park. SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS As of March 15, 2005, there were 53 Special Event Permits processed and issued for the year. Those of note are: NSSA Surf Contest - 56"' Street, March 5 -6, annual event with 175 participants Newport Beach Little League Opening Day - Lincoln Fields, March 5, with 1000 people. Monthly Activities Report Page 7 (Item 3) April 5, 2005 Newport Harbor Baseball Association Opening Day - Ensign School Field, March 5, annual event. Spirit Run - Fashion Island area, March 13, annual event with 7500 participants Other Training - Recreation Coordinator Jim Gubser and , Recreation Manager Matthew Lohr attended the California Parks and Recreation Society (CPRS) conference in Sacramento March 10 - 12. This annual conference gives recreation professionals an opportunity to keep up with trends, network with other professionals and cities, and visit vendors who provide equipment to the profession. Recruitment - Staff conducted interviews for part -time Recreation Clerks for the front desk. It is expected to have staff in place before mid April to be trained before the summer rush. 41 Monthly Activities Report (Item 3) Page 8 April 5, 2005 RECREATION SERVICES • To: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission From: Celeste Jardine -Haug, Senior Services Manager Re: Senior Services Division Monthly Activities Report Rainy Days at OASIS - During this past month, the roof leaked in the women's lobby restroom and the travel office. Orange Coast roofing came to repair both areas. There have continuously been problem areas because of the way the roof is constructed. When the rainy season ends, the roofer will come to inspect and repair other problem areas. A Night At The Tables - The first annual Casino Night was March 19. This event is a joint venture planned by City staff and the Friends of OASIS. Each participant received $100 worth of chips, a drink and food for $20. The Friends secured items for a raffle which were used as a fundraiser. Another Set Of Wheels On The Road - Thanks to a donation from the Friends of OASIS, the transportation program will increase to 4 vehicles and 4 drivers. The Friends have agreed to donate $50,000 a year in order to hire a new driver and pay for the additional gas needed to put a fourth van out on the road. The position has been advertised and many applications were received. Interviews will take place in two weeks. Happy 100th! - Staff had the pleasure of celebrating Sid Leonard's 1001" birthday this past week. Sid, a long time resident of Corona del Mar and an avid dancer. He lives alone and enjoys the monthly dances at OASIS. Human Services Coordinator Vicki Chin, made sure that he received a birthday card from President Bush. Egypt, Land of the Pharaohs - On March 31, a docent from Bowers Museum made a presentation on Egypt, Land of the Pharaohs. Staff is very fortunate to be able to provide this and other information to OASIS members. 40 Monthly Activities Report Page 9 PARTICIPANTS ATTENDING (Item 3) April 5, 2005 8,061 CUSTOMERS RECREATIONAL CLASSES Kitchen Ft Home Front Office 3,204 CUSTOMERS PERSONALIZED SERVICES PROVIDED Library Instructors 1,581 CUSTOMERS Includes: Vice President Bookkeeper Taxes Blood Pressure 41 Information/ Referral 1,060 Braille 15 Legal Assistance 6 Counseling - persons 50 Senior Assessment(hrs) 30 Etdercare 7 Telephone Reassurance 280 Employment 25 Visual Screening 3 HICAP 5 Transportation 14 Housing counseling 45 0 • SENIORS RECEIVING TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Care -A- Van/ Shuttle 982 CUSTOMERS RECEIVING NOON MEALS AT THE CENTER VOLUNTEER HRS. OF SERVICES PROVIDED AT THE CENTEI Includes: Kitchen Ft Home Front Office Travel Office Gift Shop Library Instructors President Treasurer Vice President Bookkeeper Taxes PARTICIPANTS IN FRIENDS OF OASIS TRAVEL PROGRAMS Day Trips Midway Magic 44 0 Regan Library 42 SPECIAL ACTIVITIES Pankcake Breakfast 167 Computer Friends 65 Movie - DeLovely 85 Mardi Gras 150 982 CUSTOMERS 1,582 CUSTOMERS 1,442.50 HOURS (`equiv. to 9 full -time employees) Lane Trios OASIS Golfers Sunday Movies - The American President The King & 1 Dave King Arthur 86 CUSTOMERS 626 CUSTOMERS 80 22 12 30 15 dEWPORr Cy �P G�F00.N PB &R Co fission Agenda Item No. April 5, 2005 TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission FROM: General Services Director SUBJECT: Reconsideration ofReforestation Approval Recommendation To reconsider a reforestation request for six City trees located at 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue. History The attached staff reports to the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission (PB &R) dated November 16, 2004 and March 1, 2005 provide the background regarding the original reforestation request and subsequent reconsideration. The minutes of the November 16, 2004, January 13, 2005, and March 1, 2005 PB &R meetings are also attached to provide further background information. At the March 1, 2005 PB &R meeting, the Commission continued the reconsideration of the reforestation request to their April 5 meeting. They also instructed staff to accept any changes to ballots cast by Larkspur Avenue residents through March 15. Discussion As directed, staff reviewed all ballots cast by Larkspur Avenue property owners for correctness. Several discrepancies were discovered. In addition, one property owner, Mr. Ray Dieckman (224 Larkspur Avenue) changed his vote from approval to disapproval prior to the March 15 deadline set by the Commission. As of March 16, the Larkspur Avenue reforestation request no longer meets one of the minimum requirements of the G -1 Policy in that there is not a 60% approval rate by the 30 affected property owners. Commission Authority over Reforestation Requests • As a matter of clarification, staff obtained a City Attorney's opinion on the Commission's authority to approve or disapprove reforestation requests. The Commission can act on a reforestation request only if the minimum criteria is achieved for review as per the GA Policy. The Commission can either approve or disapprove reforestation requests, such as the Larkspur Avenue reforestation, as long as the minimum requirements of the G -1 Policy are met. A reforestation decision by the Commission can only be appealed by the City Manager or a Councilperson. Ballot Discrepancies As noted earlier in this report, staff discovered the following inconsistencies in the ballots cast for the Larkspur Avenue reforestation: a) 220 Larkspur Avenue The ballot was signed by "Raymond Stockwell ". City property records indicate that "Randolph B. Stockwell" is the registered property owner. b) 221 Larksnur Avenue The ballot was not dated. c) 222 Larkspur Avenue The ballot was erroneously dated "12/24/05 ". d) 307 Larkspur Avenue The ballot was executed by Ronald and Lesley Gore. City property records indicate that the "Ngorme Trust" is the property owner. • e) 315 Larkspur Avenue The ballot was signed by "W. L. Lankford ". City property records indicate that "Jet L. Lankford" is the property owner. f) 319 Larkspur Avenue The ballot was signed by "Joseph Cupate ", but the registered property owner is "Joseph Caputi ". Besides the name being spelled wrong by whoever signed it, the ballot appears to have been altered as well. Mrs. Jean Caputi indicated in recent correspondence to the City that she is the owner of the property and opposes the reforestation proposed. The City property records indicate the property owner is the "Joseph Caputi Trust ". Mrs. Caputi has verified with the City Attorney that her husband, Mr. Caputi, is deceased. Summary Since the Larkspur Avenue reforestation request no longer meets the minimum requirements of the G -1 Policy, staff is recommending that the Commission's approval of November 16, 2004 be rescinded by the Commission and the reforestation request be disapproved. Very respectfully, David E. Niederhaus Attachments: (A) PB &R Commission Agenda Item 10 of November 16, 2004 (B) PB &R Commission Agenda Item 4 of March 1, 2005 (C) Minutes of PB &R Commission meeting of November 16, 2004 (D) Minutes of PB &R Commission meeting of January 13, 2005 (E) Minutes of PB &R Commission meeting of March 1, 2005 (available in Commission agenda packet) • SEW PART Y/ t: n u ya z °4waa�'P TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission FROM: General Services Director SUBJECT: Reforestation Request Recommendation PB &R Commission Agenda Item No. t) November 16, 2004 To consider a reforestation request for 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue. History Jay D. Rifkin, Marilyn Clark, Phyllis Joy Speck, and George Broughton, property owners of 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue, have submitted the attached Tree • Reforestation Request forms pursuant to Council Policy G -1 requesting the reforestation of five River She -Oak parkway trees that are planted adjacent to their residences. The replacement tree will be a Stenocarpus sinuatus (Firewheel Tree). Staff has attached Tree Inspection Reports, Tree Appraisals, and photographs related to the request. Discussion The applicants have requested the tree removals under the Reforestation guidelines of the G -1 Policy. The applicants submitted the attached tree removal applications dated, August 20, September 3, September 29 and October 6, 2004. The applicants have provided a list of signatures of 60% of the adjoining property owners, including the applicants, as required by the G -1 Policy criteria and 95% of the property owners were notified of the petition. Please see the attached Petition Response List and map which indicates property owner's responses. Additionally, the applicants have agreed to incur the total cost of the tree removals and replacements which is $1,872. It should be noted that the current appraised value of the five trees is $13,000.43. is The four property owners are attempting to follow -up as a second phase of reforestation for the east side of the street. The west side of the street was reforested in June 2002 when three River She -Oak trees were removed. F'.CSERS GSCSkueJ'Paks ]CUS:P'ars, Beaches JnE Recreation CommissionuumemFer 2GJJ•R:CU^ = uksPvrwceAeioresiationReyuen Riskin $Peck Clark Brouehmnl 1160) hoc All requirements of the Council Policy G -1 have been met and staff is forwarding the request to the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission to consider. • The applicants and the President of the Corona del Mar Residents Associations have received a copy of this report and a notice of the November 16`h Commission meeting. All affected adjacent property owners have been noticed of the proposed tree removals. Very respectfully, David E. Niederhaus Attachments: (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) 0 • Tree Removal Request Application Tree Inspection and Tree Appraisal Report Agreement to incur Cost (Petition Letter dated August 20, 2004) Reforestation Petition Letter dated October 23, 2004 from applicants Photo of City Designated Street Tree (Firewheel Tree) Photos Petition Response List and Map F USERS' GSC Sh.M Pales N04? rks. Bcacnns and Rrr:uion Commssion`�orembcr :304 Rcpoa LarkspurArc. RciortsndanR:qucsr.Ri lin Spr_k. Clwk. Broughsm. 1 11604 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH General Services Department Tree Removal or Reforestation Application Per City Council Policy G -I (Retention or Removal of City Trees), I am requesting a tree removal(s) to be reviewed by staff and submitted to either the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission for consideration at a future meeting or the appropriate City approving authority. Commission meetings are held on the first Tuesday of each month (expect for holidays) at 7PM at the Council Chambers. Indicate the number and specie(s),(if known) of tree(s). Located at: � (� t, 2�SPt�r �'J �i lL 1 CO26N� DCl "VU{ Q! q-_[ as Please be as specific as possible Requestor Property Owner Community Association Other Address/ Phone (Daytime) / Email Ce� N ba- M42 Calk Signature: Date: -C 1 Print Name: �. RtiC;N If this is a reforestation request proceed to the reverse side of this form Section A. For Tree Removal Requests Only is Removal Criteria (Check one or more Please provide copies of photos, bills, documents or any other related material that will verify the checked items. Proven and repeated history of damaging public or *private, sewers, water mains, roadways, sidewalks, curbs, walls, fences, underground utilities or foundations. ( *Greater than $500) Repeated history of significant interference with street or sidewalk drainage. Dying Has no prospect of recovery. Diseased Cannot be cured by current arboricultural methods. In advanced state of decline with no prospect of recovery. Hazardous Beautification Project Defective, potential to fail, could cause damage to persons /property upon failure. Assessment by Urban Forester will identify structural defects, parts likely to fail, targets -if fails, procedures and actions to abate. In conjunction with a City Council - approved City, commercial, neighborhood, or community association beautification program. kemsed 042004 Section B. For Reforestation Requests Only Reforestation is the concept of systematically replacing Problem or All Other Trees which are creating hardscape and/or view problems and cannot be properly trimmed, pruned or modified to alleviate the problem(s) they create, or those which have reached their full life, and are declining in health, or are simply the wrong species of tree(s) for the planted location. As initiated by: Property Owner Community Association Other Check all items applicable: Tree(s) causing curb, gutter, sidewalk or underground utilities damage. Wrong tree species for location View encroachment Area has clearly defined contiguous boundaries that include the tree(s) proposed. Residential communities, neighborhoods, or business organizations who apply for reforestation must submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of the property owners within the area defined. =Areas represented by a legally established community association, may submit a resolution of the Board of Directors formally requesting a reforestation. Individual property owners must submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of a maximum of 30 private property owners (up to 15 contiguous private properties on both sides of the street . up to 500' in either direction from the location of the proposed reforestation site) as well as the endorsement of the appropriate homeowners' association, if applicable. *A request for reforestation requires a written agreement submitted to the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission by the petitioning sponsor (Individual private property owner(s) or 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 using the City tree maintenance contractor. *There shall be a minimum of a one - for -one replacement of all trees removed in reforestation projects. Replacement trees shall be a minimum size of 24" boxed trees and cost $195 per tree, unless the parkway space will not accommodate a 24" boxed tree or a tree cannot be planted due to planting restrictions contained in City Council Policy G -6. This form does not replace the requirements of any of the City tree policies. Its use is intended to expedite the tree removal or reforestation requests and to ensure compliance with all City requirements. Please refer to individual City Council Policy G-1 for additional information. Requestor Comments: ,. P.�= fLZL-J�'�uu� 1•J Cs:,= .�"L,t.:t;�r�J �...stita ei= 3c 30 '�:�tt \i�2ri�� 1kkr -S� P ^.�:p.�2Tdc�. "8'ctt_ ti+N� iEi SW`1� S•�Ci�S Li 1``�w:�fL �rti G�K 1444 C"ZVVV L F::o6to,S Removals, except eunergeuey, will be subject to the notification processes, tune frames and authority as specified in the Citv Council G -1 polio. - Rev.sed 06:2 0e4 0 UUKLM DEL f W LH FaX : 949- r13 -1b51 UCt Ub U4 [i;[,) r.Ul CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH General Services Department Tree Removal or Reforestation Application Per City Council Policy 6•1 (Retention or Removal of City Trees), I am renuesti at? a tree removals) to be reviewed by staff and submitted to either the Parks. Beaches, and Recreation Commission for consideration at a future meeting or the appropriate City approving authority. Commission meetings are held on the first Tuesday of each month (expect for holidays) at 7PM at the Council the Amber and sperie(s),(if known) of tree(s). Located at: C, q;k'G -A, Please be as spec(iic as possible Requestor Property Owner Community Association tther Address/ Phone (Daytime) / Email •Signature: Date: Print Name: i ytlkS Sol< S If this is reforestation r atest roceed to the reverse side of this form Section A. For Tree Removal Requests Only Removal Criteria (Check one or mores Please provide copies of photos, bills, documents or any other related material that will verily the checked Items. =Proven and repeated history of damaging public or "private, sewers, water maims, roadways, sidewalks, curbs, walls, fences, underground utilities or foundations. (" Greorer than $500) Repeated history of sIgnificant Interference with street or sidewalk drainage. Dying Has no prospect of rccovery. Diseased Cannot be cured by current arboricultural methods. In advanced state of decline with no prospect of recovery. =Hazardous Defective, potential to fail, could cause damage to personstproperty upon failure. Assessment by Urban Forester will identify structural defects, parts likely to fail, targets -if fails, procedures and actions to abate. =Beautification In conjunction with a City Council- approved City, commercial, neighborhood, Project or community association beautification program. &Wwd daavo. CORDW DEL MPR CH Fax : 949 - 723 -1651 Oct 06 '04 21:23 P.02 Section R. For Reforestation RSquests Only Reforestation is the concept of systematically replacing Problem or All Other Trees which are creatin • hardscape and/or view problems and carmot be properly trimmed, primed or modified to alleviate the problem(s) they create, or those which have reached their full life, and are declining in health, or are simply the wrong species of trees) for the planted location, As initiated by: Property Owncr Commututy Assmiation other Check all items applicable: �A Tree(s) causing curb, gutter, sidewalk ur underground utilities damage. R Wrong tree species for location View encroachment Area has clearly defined contiguous boundaries that include the trees) proposed. Residential communities, neighborhoods, or business organizations who apply for reforestation must submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of the property owners within the area defined. =Areas represented by a legally established community association, may submit a resolution of the Board of Directors formally requesting a reforestation. ®individual property owners most submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of a maximum of 30 private property owners (up to 15 contiguous private properties on both sides of the street up to 500' in either direction from the location of the proposed reforestation site) as well as the • endorsement of the appropriate homeowner.4 association, if applicable. 'A request for reforestation requires a written agreement submitted to the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission by the petitioning sponsor (Individual private property owner(s) or group) to pay 1001% of the costs of the removal and replacement of the public trees) in advance of any removal activity. The actual removal and replanting will be coordinated by the General Services Department using the City tree maintcnance contractor. 'There shall be a minimum of a one -for -one replacement of ell trees removed in reforestation projects. Replacement trees shall be a minimum size of 24" boxed trees and cost $195 per tree, unless the parkway space will not accommodate a 24" boxed tree or a tree cannot be planted due to planting restrictions contained in City Council Policy G -6. This form does not replace the requirements of any of the City tree polkies. its use Is Intended to expedite the tree removal or reforestation requests and to ensure compliance with all City requirements. Please refer to Individual City Council Policy C -1 for additional Information. • Removals, except emergency, wit! be subject to the notification processes, dire frames and authority as speeljled in the City Council G -1 Policy. Renee adage• <iFOa CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH General Services Department Tree Removal or Reforestation Application Per City Council Policy G -1 (Retention or Removal of City Trees), I am requesting a tree removal(s) to be reviewed by staff and submitted to either the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission for consideration at a future meeting or the appropriate City approving authority. Commission meetings are held on the first Tuesday of each month (expect for holidays) at 7PM at the Council Chambers. Indicate the number and specie(s),(if known) of tree(s). Located at: 3r i{ d !- Please be as specific as possible Requestor Property Owner Community Association Other G Signature: Print Name: Address/ Phone (Daytime) / Email ? ii c1 l '- 1 yc -� .o:, — 4- -e- ' Date: If this is a reforestation request proceed to the reverse side of this form Section A. For Tree Removal Requests Only • Removal Criteria (Check one or more} Please provide copies of photos, bills, documents or any other related material that will verify the checked items. Proven and repeated history of damaging public or *private, sewers, water mains, roadways, sidewalks, curbs, walls, fences, underground utilities or foundations. ( *Greater than $500) Repeated history of significant interference with street or sidewalk drainage. Dying Has no prospect of recovery. Diseased Cannot be cured by current arboricultural methods. In advanced state of decline with no prospect of recovery. = Hazardous OBeautification Project Defective, potential to fail, could cause damage to persons /property upon failure. Assessment by Urban Forester will identify structural defects, parts likely to fail, targets -if fails, procedures and actions to abate - In conjunction with a City Council- approved City, commercial, neighborhood, or community association beautification program. Re'Se oscoc< Section B. For Reforestation Requests Only Reforestation is the concept of systematically replacing Problem or All Other Trees which are creating • hardscape and/or view problems and cannot be properly trimmed, pruned or modified to alleviate the problem(s) they create, or those which have reached their full life, and are declining in health, or are simply the wrong species of tree(s) for the planted location. As initiated by: Property Owner Community Association Other Check all items applicable: causing curb, gutter, sidewalk or underground utilities damage. tree species for location View encroachment Area has clearly defined contiguous boundaries that include the tree(s) proposed. i Residential communities, neighborhoods, or business organizations who apply for reforestation ust submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of the property owners within the area defined. =Areas represented by a legally established community association, may submit a resolution of the Board of Directors formally requesting a reforestation. Individual property owners must submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of a maximum of 30 private property owners (up to 15 contiguous private properties on both sides of the street . up to 500' in either direction from the location of the proposed reforestation site) as well as the endorsement of the appropriate homeowners' association, if applicable. *A request for reforestation requires a written agreement submitted to the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission by the petitioning sponsor (Individual private property owner(s) or 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 using the City tree maintenance contractor. *There shall be a minimum of a one - for -one replacement of all trees removed in reforestation projects. Replacement trees shall be a minimum size of 24" boxed trees and cost $195 per tree, unless the parkway space will not accommodate a 24" boxed tree or a tree cannot be planted due to planting restrictions contained in City Council Policy G -6. This form does not replace the requirements of any of the City tree policies. Its use is intended to expedite the tree removal or reforestation requests and to ensure compliance with all City requirements. Please refer to individual City Council Policy G -1 for additional information. Requestor Comments: Removals, except emergency, will be subject to the notification processes, tine frames and authority as specified in the City Council G -1 Policy. Re,sM 052004 CIT17 Or NEWPORT LEACH ` General Services Department , Tree Removalo eforestation Application Per City Council Policy G -1 (Retention or Removal of City Trees), I am r cluuestin a tree removal(s) to be reviewed by staff and submitted to either the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission for consideration at a future meeting or the appropriate City approving authority. Commission meetings are held on the first Tuesday of each month (expect for holidays) at 7PNI at the Council ,/JChambers. -FPCC un S 1 I%KtUL�tL.S1J6f Itidi—cate the number and speeie(s),(ifkrrown) oftree(s). Located at: ID / © /,3!2 I-APKS-Puf-, AyE- l e°— CJt`Iat Dc/ -I ;'JA 2 t C 7� 5 Please be as specific• as possible Requestor Address/ Pltone (Daytime) It Email FR]Property Owner ( C Conimity Association ]Other k ; cr -C �- nature: ' i �`12L1 f �Fs _._ Date: Print Name: L If this i<a reforestation reques -oceed to the reverse side of this form-----z7 Section A. For Tree Removal Requests Oulu Removal Criteria (Check one or more Please provide copies of photos, bills, docnntents or any other related material that will verify the checked items. Proven and repeated history of damaging public or *private, sewers, water mains, roadways, sidewalks, curbs, walls, fences, underground utilities or foundations. ( *Greater that $500) Repeated history of significant interference with street or sidewalk drairta _ e. Dying Ilas no prospect of recovery. Diseased Cannot he cured by current arhnriculhual mctliods. In advanced state of d,Icline v: ilh no prospect of recovery. • E:1llazardous Defective, poumtial to Iail. c,uild cam duna;;e to persnns /property upon failtuc. h. t!il,:ln P!,rrcter %-. ill i- until-, diT wtural dciccts, parts likck t- fail. larl!i h: -O i..eik, pnrrJ!nec :tad :wlt nr: to abate �neaudlicatinn In c!a,j,incipm «ith:1 t'it ('1 „mril -apt nrrnl Cil';. I IITI- ill-rrial. 11e1 i1hborh0od, VI lect (11 :!gi!fq!!nii': ;l t:ia' -b4', Section B. For Reforestation Remfests Onh Reforestation is the concept of systematically replacing Problem or All Other Trees which are creating • hardscape and/or view problems and cannot be properly trimmed, pruned or modified to alleviate the problem(s) they create, or those which have reached their full life, and are declining in health, or are simply the wrong species of tree(s) Fur the planted location. As initiated by: Property Owner Community Association Other Check all items applicable: Tree(s) causing curb, gutter, sidewalk or underground utilities damage. Wrong tree species for location View encroachment Area has clearly defined contiguous boundaries that include the tree(s) proposed. Residential communities, neighborhoods, or business organizations who apply for reforestation must submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of the property owners within the area defined._' Areas represented by a legally established community association, may submit a resolution of the Board of Directors formally requesting a reforestation. Individual property owners must submit a petition signed by a minimum of 60% of a maximum of 30 private property owners (up to 15 contiguous private properties on both sides of the street up to 500' in either direction from the location of the proposed reforestation site) as well as the endorsement of the appropriate homeowners' association, if applicable. *A request for reforestation requires a written agreement submitted to the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission by the petitioning sponsor (Individual private property owncr(s) or 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 coordinate by the General Services Department using the City tree maintenance contractor. *There shall be a minimum of a one- for -one replacement of all trees removed in reforestation projects. Replacement trees'` shall be a minimum size of 24" boxed trees and cost $195 per tree, unless the parkway space will not accommodate a 24" boxed tree or a tree cannot be planted due to planting restrictions contained in City Council Policy G -6. This form does not replace the requirements of any of the City tree policies. Its use is intended to expedite the tree" removal or reforestation requests and to ensure compliance with all City requirements. Please refer to individual City Council Policy G -1 for additional information. Requestor Comments: �t U-! S5T %VC R6F"t7f 51 ATIO ^J MI C0AYT 1 CT1 op Removals, except r rner; >r nr_r, will he snhjcrt ti) tit#, nulifrrntinrr prnec csr:'c, lime frarrres and aratltorlr}' as specified in Ntr Cir_r Coaniil (: -1 Polio. P.,,M QS2004 TREE INSPECTION REPORT Name: Mr. Jay Rifkin Address: 300 Larkspur Avenue Phone Number: N/A Request: Submitted by the property owner to be placed on the Larkspur Avenue Reforestation Request for November 16, 2004, Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission meeting for consideration. Botanical Name: Casuarina cunninghamiana Common Name: River She -Oak Designated Street Tree: Firewheel Tree Estimated Tree Value: Damage: Parkway: N/A Concrete $2,924.81 Brick Turf (X)Other Comments: Mr. Rifkin is one of four property owners within the 300 block of Larkspur Avenue requesting reforestation. The four property owners are attempting to uniform the block, since the west side of the street has been planted with the new designated street tree as a result of a previous reforestation. 2L Inspected by: ' Date: October 19, 2004 Johfi Conway Recommendation: ToI consider the Reforestation Request and replant. Reviewed by: 14ty - at October 19, 2004 Marcelino G. Lomeli Crzr..c,--.n Reviewed by: \_� 1 , a �,, - Date: tt - zis F'E David E. Niederhaus Reforestation Costs: • Removal - $234.00 Replant - $195.00 TOTAL $429.00 c 4.. R 7 �7, CLL V� L O O N L a� M C i ' Qi • L r M �� cH L a� =r- M L J � o II •~ U O I I i i I i 0 I i i i > N r1i ier Q C N ai: LL� c 4.. R 7 �7, CLL V� L L a� M C i Qi • L O CD M �� cH y N =r- M L .' 00 00 00 00 W 7 N N J Gl O > N r1i ier J a o FQ- .J v N O z O N Q0 O J z O M co M � fl- � z U U 0 o h z O O o V �W-+ V rn LU LLt. Ln m¢ o � U W O O a m > (a) V � a m W z O z O Ln (`1 Q V y y UJ Y 1W - W QW M 0 A c m of ar W V C C Y W C o O � u r s C_ L U) M L > U TREE INSPECTION REPORT Name: Ms. Phyllis Joy Speek Address: 302 Larkspur Avenue Phone Number: N/A Request: Submitted by the property owner to be placed on the Larkspur Avenue Reforestation Request for November 16, 2004, Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission meeting for consideration. Botanical Name: Casuarina cunninghamiana Common Name: River She -Oak Designated Street Tree: Estimated Tree Value: Damage: Parkway: N/A Concrete Firewheel Tree $2,924.81 Brick Turf (X)Other Comments: Ms. Speek is one of four property owners within the 300 block of Larkspur Avenue requesting reforestation. The four property owners are attempting to uniform the block, since the west side of the street has been planted with the new designated street tree as a result of a previous reforestation. Inspected by: trM� ce � Date: October 19, 2004 Jolin Conway Recommendation: To consider the Reforestation Request and replant. Reviewed by:u1 ww1�i��� `✓� ' -bate: October 19, 2004 Mareelino G. Lomeli Reviewed by: _Date: 1J David E. Niederhaus Reforestation Costs: • Removal - $234.00 Replant- $195.00 TOTAL 5429.00 Ro I 1 co 0 i 0 CN co QI C) LU M U) CL COL. CD Cc cm- CCJ; V} 51 IL coo in cq • ca C) CO) nAC� Ro I 1 co co LU M -i V} ifl- cq 0 N Z Cl In 0 ch co V5 Z u 0 CD r" Z 0 C) C) ,L nu � C; 'D U " C) Lri LL 6w.. CA isr LA C) LO LU D C) q .i co > ca ui z = M u V) 2 0 Ln z LU LU y. LU uj to m m E ro -C ui E r- m W CL =5 u 9 th R (L) ca =3 > w U TREE INSPECTION REPORT Name: Ms. Marilyn Clark Address: 310/312 Larkspur Avenue Phone Number: N/A Request: Submitted by the property owner to be placed on the Larkspur Avenue Reforestation Request for November 16, 2004, Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission meeting for consideration. Botanical Name: Casuarina cunninghamiana Common Name: River She -Oak Designated Street Tree: Estimated Tree Value: Damage: • Parkway: N/A Concrete Firewheel Tree $4,226.00, (2) trees Brick Turf (X)Other Comments: Ms. Clark is one of four property owners within the 300 block of Larkspur Avenue requesting reforestation. The four property owners are attempting to uniform the block, since the west side of the street has been planted with the new designated street tree as a result of a previous reforestation. Inspected by: C _Date: October 19, 2004 John Conway Recommendation: To consider the Reforestation Request and replant. Reviewed by: "c ' t�� k � t' v + ` � ate: October 19, 2004 Marce ino G. Lomeli r Reviewedby: ���': ] .1 Date: iV David E. Niederhaus Reforestation Costs: Removal - $390.00 Replant - $195.00 TOTAL $585.00 0 r1 �J v 0 C) I N C) i r O T i I I i I i i 1 i i N_ L CL 'd++ C � ci r 1 L }� R U. U m c CL 0 ; � m I, > L C'; a C7; N �I Y J N_ cc: M C� r Cam. M JfJ CN y co rn o W a o a a) N > N yr v). i/r J Q cq F J V N O O F Z Qi M O N F +Ar a C o U O o � 0 � Z C) M in Co N W N W 05 I.Fr 2 U v� O o 0 V o 0 n n Z O Ln ui U LO w rn U W LL a -' vj iA- N +sr vi 0 0 W C) O p J a W 14 > OM M V w � Ln N Q Cf vA- 4j+ N W =mo o Z0F to M w C V N d"v LU Y W Z W a co D C C m m E E t L (A p 0 W C C_ U C Y C ^ Y W O O m v � m d � C In 4) TREE INSPECTION REPORT Name: Mr. George Gent Broughton Address: 304 Larkspur Avenue Pbone Number: N/A Request: Submitted by the property owner to be placed on the Larkspur Avenue Reforestation Request for November 16, 2004, Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission meeting for consideration. Botanical Name: Casuarina cunninghamiana Common Name: River She -Oak Designated Street Tree: Firewheel Tree Estimated Tree Value: Damage: . Parkway: N/A Concrete $2,924.81 Brick Turf (X)Other Comments: Mr. Broughton is one of four property owners within the 300 block of Larkspur Avenue requesting reforestation. The four property owners are attempting to uniform the block, since the west side of the street has been planted with the new designated street tree as a result of a previous reforestation. Inspected by: j� ) Date: October 19, 2004 Jo nh Conway Recommendation: To consider the Reforestation Request and replant. Reviewed by: a u— {��-� �1L` ate: October 19, 2004 Mar elino G. Lomeli Reviewed by: ,�� Date: 10 E. Niederhaus Reforestation Costs: . Removal - $234.00 Replant - $195.00 TOTAL $429.00 v CD O � N r i O r i i I I I i I i i i I i N i •� LL^ • CL i a I = L � CLI rl 0 i 01 L y': o �! d 6. Q cm L Y L C , O M 0�1 co co co co W a: v Q 0Ni QN N 7 N iPr tPr J Q CO F- J V N O Z rn O N v, v o O 0 Z M O r, N z J � lu�l Z U O o V o n Z O o o rn LUF U H C31 vi dr�"i -6-1 C) J Ln U W J O O 0] Q M > U M ~ m 2 (A G V N 7 w wd 0 Ln V N LU d Ln LU Y W Z W _ cc F- H 0 m C m E m y rn W c U � C _ Y W a O Vf m a) C: N m 7 � N U Jay Rifkin 300 Larkspur Avenue Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 August 20, 2004 Dear Property Owner: We the residents at 300, 302, 304, 310, and 312 Larkspur Avenue, are petitioning the City of Newport Beach to remove six City parkway street trees that are located adjacent to our residence. As required by the City Council Policy G -1, Retention or Removal of City Trees, under the reforestation criteria, we will pay 100% of the removal and replacement costs. The replacement parkway street trees will be Stenocarpus (Fire Wheel) tree(s), which will match the existing city trees that were put in last year directly across the street in front of the four houses on the 300 block. We are required to seek approval by petitioning at least 60% of my adjoining property owners per the attached petition. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jay Rifkin Phyllis Speek George Broughton Marilyn Clark 12 • Jay Rifkin 300 Larkspur Avenue Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 (949) 723 -1451 October 23. 2004 City of Newport Beach P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 RE: Reforestation petition for trees located at 300, 302, 304, 310, and 312 Larkspur Avenue, Corona del Mar, CA To Whom It May Concern: Enclosed please find petitions referencing the reforestation to trees at 300, 302, 304, 310 and 312 Larkspur Avenue, Corona del Mar. Please be advised that we are now ready to go forward with our petition and have followed all the guidelines of the G -1 policy. We received exactly 60% of our petitions back (including our own) and had only one property owner vote against the reforestation. If there is anything else we need to do, please do not hesitate to call us. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely, Jay Rifkin ` \� Phyllis Speek ' George Broughton Marilyn Clark 0 � e \\ �z { :) \ \% `- _ Ic t - ))%\f \ - - \\ \ _ /)f\ \\ \_- _ aa : §c : _\ �- ® \) ®� 0 0 0 0 0 � M -�� T?» � � < \d. \ Amw » a AOL : .22 [� / \\ §� ■ ° � � 's rn Ri `1 Sr Cy a a ' la i 4 Ct i F 's rn Ri `1 Sr Cy a a ' YT-A�$ lip� 4 p 9 ,LL U v = � � � s A � [ 1 i £ S lea a4 iF g �1 v_ t YT-A�$ lip� 4 p 9 ,LL U v = � � � s A � [ 1 i £ S lea a4 iF Ll U7 d 7 ^Cr W C O r R N d L O 0) N WJ d N C O Q N O C O r.+ r d a • L d 3 O i m Exxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx a a d E L W c p U m 0 m o m au m o N N N N N N N N N N N N @> > O O @ > O G O C N > > o > N o > > > > O C > > > O > N > > 0> O >> 0 0 >> 0 0> �? o 0 0_ n a n o o n o a o 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0- o Q Q o p- a o 0 0. C. o N N N N N N N N N N N N Q Q d d O O d O. O Q p fl. d d C N n n a a n a m d N p- d. O m a n N aJ Q y C� Q� a a o- > Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ° z z z z z z z zp z zp z z CL 3'. ❑ U y U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U Q U U U U U U U U U "L6 aJ N a) a) a) a) a) ai N ai ai ai m a1 (1) a) (D- Q) a)- ai ai a) a) a) O ai a) a1 N ai ai ai a) 61 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > o- > > > > > > > > > ¢IQ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢ 4 Q¢ Q¢ Q Q¢ s Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q D. N. a N. N. O. a Q d n. Q d ¢ N. N. d N. N. d 0_ �. d N d J O_ O. 'O_ N. Q O_ Q CL d Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YN Y Y� Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y (4 @ @ @ (0 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ (0 (6 @ @ (0 (6 @ @ @ @ W @ co @ W @ m @ @ (6 @ @ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J m O r N N N N N N N M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M O C N O p O 3 ° co Y ao v o E N @ > Y a o m w @ a = m Y O m Y @ O m Z� C N .@ O C 'L Q _N (n m C 0 @@ Y Y@ V Y a) Q C (D(D CL omv�a E� ua o @ o cC� UU� m m cUL i� ❑ @ m `m a� a a) -i ° @ >, a -' a> a� E U `y >. >. Y 'o n Y o c m E Y c a o E L U E_- -- o 0 o Y o d m M E m > o@ `@ s ao rn 6 @ gy m m` m S o@ mM> JUmY W owGJUQzM �a - co (D N��� �x3n.cn -'� L'1 CO N O (i1 O T N M V O n O O N N N N N N N N N N OM M M M M • N 41 7 N O w R N d L O N.. N J d N C O Q. N d C O w d a • xxxxxx x m v v H y n a 'o o' a o 4) L m Q' O. O x x O O a Q 0 O Z Z Z Z m 0 N co h 0 p 0 0 U Z O CO U U U N Z a) (i 0 > Q G Q a 0 N a) > > a '0o m'o mmco mU) mcm J J J N O 0- N M CO N O L E G T 9 Y _ Q) E m u (D i O w a) L O C Y O y w m m c E c N O L C L O Y m F -�i U Y 5; nCO (M C) y o v Larkspur Ave ,�J N Reforestation Request po Y � , - 315 L / ? b � s > ° O `9 J p�C A� y J �J9 140 �y> s �Je iii ° °° / ti 1 inch = 150 Feet lar VurA� r d -0 r r � �sq' y'Y' 3O9 Reforestation Request j Applicant Approve \ Disapprove No Response 9 - i • n L (4) TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission FROM: General Services Director SUBJECT: Reconsideration of Reforestation Approval Recommendation PB &R Commission Agenda Item No. March 1, 20 5 Do To reconsider a reforestation request for six City trees at 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue. History The attached staff report to the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission (PB &R) dated November 16, 2004 provides the background regarding the original reforestation request. The minutes of the November 16, 2004 and January 13, 2005 PB &R meetings are also attached to provide further background information. Discussion Staff undertook a new polling of the 30 property owners affected by the reforestation proposai. A copy of the staff letter of February 4, 2005 that was sent by certified mail to the affected property owners is also attached. Staff received 27 responses to the mailing. The following results are provided: Reforestation Approval 16 53% Disapproval 10 33% Neutral 1 3% Total 27 The reforestation request did not achieve a 60% approval rate as required by Council Policy G -1 and therefore cannot be approved by the Commission. 21 9 Very respectfully, David E. Niederhaus Attachments: (A) PB &R Commission Agenda Item 10 of November 16, 2004 (B) Minutes of PB &R Commission meeting of November 16, 2004 (C) Minutes of PB &R Commission meeting of January 13, 2005 (D) General Services Director letter dated February 4, 2005 0 2R' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • V7CGENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT , David E. Niederhaus, Director February 4, 2005 Subject: Reforestation of Six City Trees Located at 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue Dear Property Owner: Reforestation is a City process wherein property owners who own property adjacent to a City parkway tree may request the removal and replacement of the City tree with the understanding that they are responsible for the full costs of removal and replacement. I , It Cty -LfOfBStatlOn p011Cy require jJ10..'i::;" owner.I i�Urb:C "n�G ;aQr�t•rCjl: owners (up to 30 maximum) within 500' either direction of the reforestation location and submit their petitions (if they achieve a 60% approval rate) to City • staff for review and consideration by the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission (PB &R). The 300 block of Larkspur Avenue has been the location of an earlier reforestation in 2001. At that time, three City She Oak trees were approved for reforestation, by the PB &R Commission. The trees were subsequently removed from the west side of the street and were replaced by a new tree species, the Firewheel tree, which is the designated street tree for Larkspur Avenue. In the fall of 2004, four additional property owners located at 300, 302, 304, and 310 -312 respectively, requested the reforestation of a total of six River She Oak trees that are located on the east side of the Larkspur Avenue in front of their homes. The applicants confirmed their commitment to pay for the reforestation project. Their interest in requesting the reforestation was related to matching the previous reforestation effort of 2001 on the west side of the Larkspur Avenue and to promote uniformity in the City streetscape. The property owners requesting the reforestation were to provide a written petition to the property owners in designated portions of the 200 and 300 blocks of Larkspur Avenue. The petitioners submitted the results of their petition to City staff. City staff • reviewed the petition and the results and prepared a staff report for the PB &R Commission. Staff made no recommendation on the reforestation request. 3300 Newport Boulevard • Post Office Box 1768 - Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915 Telephone: (949) 644 -3055 Fax: (949) 650 -0747 • www.citv.newport- beach.ca.us ✓ .iJ • The reforestation of only five of the six River She Oak trees was subsequently approved by the PB &R Commission on November 2, 2004. The sixth tree was inadvertently overlooked by staff in the report to the Commission. Two Larkspur Avenue property owners appeared at the January 13, 2005 PB &R Commission meeting and objected to the reforestation approval. They also claimed they did not get notice of the November reforestation request and hearing. In response at their January 13, 2005 meeting, the PB &R Commission voted to reconsider their earlier approval of the Larkspur Avenue reforestation. The Commission asked for new polling of the adjacent property owners and set the matter for hearing at their March 1, 2005 meeting. A decision was made that staff be directed to poll the property owners who are qualified to vote by the G -1 tree policy requirements on the reforestation proposal. The results will be tallied by staff and presented in a staff report to the Commission for their March 1, 2005 meeting. Attached is a ballot for the reforestation of six River She Oaks at the addresses above. Please complete the ballot and return your vote to me no later than 2005 iii t;ie attached envelope. As a matter of information, ^e six trees slated for reforestation are marked with white "X "s.and photos of the trees are attached to assist you in locating the trees. If you are interested in attending the PB &R Commission meeting regarding this issue, it will be held at the Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Blvd. on March 1, 2005 at 7:00pm. If you have any questions related to the ballot or the reforestation project, please call John Conway, Urban Forester, at 644 -3083. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Sincerely, David E. Niederhaus, Director General Services Department DEN /mhl Attachments: (A) City Reforestation Ballot (B) Return envelope (C) Photos of River She Oak Trees cc: Distribution List • �%_ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92653 -3915 REFORESTATION BALLOT February 4, 2005 Six (6) City Parkway Street Trees - River She -Oak Trees are proposed for reforestation (removal and replacement) at the following addresses: 300 302 304 310 and 312 Larkspur Avenue Corona del friar The six River She -Oak trees would be replaced by 24" boxed Firewheel trees. All costs of removal and replacement would be at the expense of the property owners at 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue. 0 Property Owner: • Print Name: Address: Signature: Reforestation: Please check one Approve Disapprove Date: Please return this ballot in the enclosed envelope to the General Services Department, Admin. Division, 3300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92658, no later than February 15, 2005. If you are not the current property owner on Larkspur Avenue, please return the ballot. 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach 7�4 .: It JR j i. 3 w. lei" .- - � c i• � r lu1 �,* z T: re C f Parks, Beaches @ Recreation Commission Regular Meeting November 16, 2004 Page 7 R r McGonigal, Newport Balboa Rotary Club member stated that his purpose in attends this meeting was to support the suggestion of naming the park after the contributions Rotarians but after hearing that the City had received so many recommendations he has a new respect for the committee. Jan Vandersloot pointed out t he park is known as Bayview Landing Park and urged the Commission to forward that name to Council as well. Chair Tobin closed the public discussion Motion by Commissioner Ruzicka to forward Back Bay Vi Park; Jamboree Bluff Park; Rim of the Bay Park; and Upper Bayview Park as suggestions ity council their final decision. Discussion ensued regarding forwarding four names versus one name. Motion carried by acclamiet;r3n 10. Reforestation Request - Director Niederhaus stated that staff received a reforestation request from Jay D. Rifkin, Marilyn Clark, Phyllis Joy Speek, and George Broughton, property owners of 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue, have submitted Tree Reforestation Request forms pursuant to Council Policy G -1 requesting reforestation of five River She - Oak parkway trees that are planted adjacent to their residences and valued at $13,000. He stated that the property owners are committed to covering the full cost of removing and replacing the tree which will be a Stenocarpus sinuatus (Firewheel Tree). The four property owners are requesting this as a second phase of reforestation for the east side of the street. The west side was reforested in June 2002 when three River She -Oak trees were removed. The property owners have requested the tree removals under the Reforestation guidelines of the G -1 Policy and that they provided a petition with 60% of the adjoining property owners as required by the G -1 Policy criteria. Director Niederhaus stated that staff is asking the Commission to consider this request. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that he has some concerns about of the size of the replacement tree. Director Niederhaus stated that the tree would be a 24 inch boxed tree and that staff will select specimens. He stated that the replacement trees would not be as tall but that they will be colorful and ornamental and that within five years the trees should be approaching 18 to 20 feet in height. 41 Chair Tobin opened the public discussion. Dr. Jeff Antrillo stated that he was representing Marilyn Clark and wanted to let the Commission know that he was here to answer questions should there be any. �i Parks, Beaches It Recreation Commission Regular Meeting November 16, 2004 Page 8 Jan Vandersloot stated that he is the self- appointed tree protector and commented that these trees are not causing any problems and look good. He stated that the property owners want them removed only because of the needle droppings and that reason does not meet the criteria for tree removal in accordance with the G -1 Policy for reforestation. He went on to say that these trees are not the wrong type of tree or in the wrong location and questioned whether everyone is now going to ask for reforestation just because leaves are falling on the ground. He again stated that these trees look good and should not be removed with a little tree and noted that the trees that were reforested during phase one are still little trees. He urged the Commission to establish better criteria regarding reforestation. Director Niederhaus stated that there was a category added to the G-1 Policy entitling the removal of the wrong tree in the wrong spot and staff interprets that there would never be a She Oak tree planted in a parkway because it is too big and too messy. I-m^d�sioner Ruzicka asked if the property owners motivations to remove the tree is because it's to(, messy. Director Niederhaus stated that there is no mention of public or private damage in the request,' but the main reason is that She Oak trees are messy and would not normally be planted in a parkway because of its size and there are no other parkways in the City with She Oak as the designated tree. He went on to say that the other side of the street has been done at those property owners expense and that the current applicants are the ones that look at both sides of the street and are asking to have a more uniform look which is the goal of the Designated Street Tree list. Commissioner Allen stated that when the Tree Committee met regarding reforestation, one of the discussions that came up over and over again was that if the City were to plant trees in the parkways now, knowing how big trees grow, and what is more appropriate in each location that many of the trees would never have been planted in their locations. She went on to say that the idea behind reforestation was to allow the homeowner to cover the costs for removal as the City does not have the funds to remove inappropriate trees and replace them with the appropriate tree now. This gives the homeowner the opportunity to come to the City and pay for the substitution and not as a tree removal, and to have a more uniformed tree which is what the City Council actually approved within the Designated Street Tree list. Commissioner Brown stated that he understands this but that his emotional side does not like pulling up healthy trees that have been there for years not creating problems , and just because some folks decided that they did not like them anymore because they are messy wants them removed. He stated that most of the comments made from the homeowners did not address the • fact that the tree is messy. All that being said he noted that the only reason that he would agree with this request is because the other side has already been done. Chair Tobin stated that there is no uniformity there now. a Parks, Beaches Ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting • November 16, 2004 Page 9 Commissioner Ruzicka concurred with Commissioner Brown's observations. Tom Vogelman co -owner of 300 Larkspur stated that he takes issue with the Commission dismissing this request simply because these trees are messy. He stated that he is an avid gardener and takes great pride in the way his yard looks and it is very disheartening to spend hours in the garden simply to have the winds make it look as if nothing has been done at all. He stated that if he had known that there would be skepticism about how messy these trees are he would have brought a bag of pine needles for the Commission to look at versus a bag of leaves. He urged the Commission to approve the request. He stated that the people that are protesting the removal do not have gardens underneath these trees. Commissioner Ruzicka asked if the tree had been there when Mr. Vogelman purchased the property. Mr. Vogelman stated yes. Commissioner Skoro asked if l +!e needlr.sdrop,yeai^tcund. Mr. Vogelman stated that'the droppings are constant throughout the year. • Chair Tobin stated that it probably fills the drain too. Mr. Vogelman stated that as much as this request has been dismissed as a petty nuisance that this is really an issue and urged the Commission to come out and spend an afternoon sweeping up needles. Commissioner Skoro stated that if this is approved that there are still a couple of these trees on the street left and are they going to be requesting removal. Mr. Vogelman stated that there are a few but will be quite spotty and that those folks are content but had signed the petition to go along with the reforestation. Jeff Antrillo stated that it might have been an oversight but there had been hardscape damage in the past. Chair Tobin closed the public discussion. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that a lot of big nice trees have been removed from Corona del Mar just to put a 8000 sq ft house on a 3500 sq ft lot and that he does not like what he is seeing in the neighborhood. • Director Niederhaus stated that some of the pines in Corona de Mar are dying of canker and that 10 or 12 trees on Sea View are declining and will also need to be removed and that is one of the main reasons why numerous big trees are disappearing in Corona del Mar. 33 Parks, Beaches Ft Recreation Commission •Regular Meeting November 16, 2004 Page 10 Commissioenr Ruzicka asked if these trees have that disease. Director Niedehaus stated no. Motion by Commissioner Allen to approve the reforestation request from Jay D. Rifkin, Marilyn Clark, Phyllis Joy Speek, and George Broughton, property owners of 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue. Motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Allen, Brown, Garrett, Skoro, Tobin Noes: Ruzicka 11. Bench List - Director Niederhaus stated that staff would be coming back to the /thhe the premise that there is some interest at looking at new types of benches. He sreports displays the types of benches used in the past and the new type that is on and in Corona del Mar. He stated that staff has no recommendation, but wondere be sent to the Park Development Committee or another committee. Discussion ensued regarding benches and the need to have a /brochure complete array of benches for the Commission to review. Director Niederhaus stated that he would have staff to carger list of bench candidates for the Commission's review at a future meeting 12. West Jetty View Park - Director Niederhaus that in A3, City staff transplanted two large King Palms from the Corporation Yard to West e ty View Park. The palm plantings were done to replace several Canary Island Da Palms that had died at the site due to Fusarium, a palm tree fungus. He went o to say that in July 2004, a large Triangle Palm that had been dedicated to the late J Brooks, former Parks and Trees Superintendent, was also planted in the Park as a f rther enhancement. Director Niederhaus stated that staff received complaints from residents about the additional tree plantings and improvements (concrete cu planter) associated with the memorial tree. Staff then boxed and removed the ree palm trees on September 1. He stated that staff was contacted by Penim oint resident Mr. Bob St. John, who lives adjacent to West Jetty View Park, concerting the Park tree removals. After hearing the explanation, Mr. St. John volunteered to 6tition adjacent property owners to replant the three palm trees and forward the tition to staff. Staff brought this matter to the Commission in October but the matt was tabled to allow the Balboa Peninsula Point Association (BPPA) an opport ity to address the matter with their membership. He stated that they met on OZer 14 and recommended that the two King Palms be replanted in the Park realizing at they cannot be safely transplanted until spring 2005 and not to replant the large Triangle Palm. He stated that staff agrees with this recommendation. Chair Tobin opened the public discussion `J. Lt A++1-A-t h me CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Parks, Beaches li Recreation Commission Regular Meeting • January 13, 2005- 7pm Convened 7:02pm ROLL CALL Present: Debra Allen Tim Brown Roy Englebrecht Bill Garrett Greg Ruzicka Val Skoro Tom Tobin Staff: Marie Knight, Recreation It Senior Services Director David Niederhaus, General Services Director Teri Craig, Administrative Assistant Director Knight updated the Commission on the success of the Winter Wonderland carnival in December despite the snow falling at the wrong location. She stated how proud she was of the staff in moving everything over to Grant Howald Park on time and had twice as many participants than in years past. She went on to say that the Division C Flag Football Team will be honored at the Council • meeting on January 25 because they took second place in the City -wide tournament and took first place in the Orange County tournament and is the first team in Newport Beach history to place in the Southern California tournament where they took second place. She stated that these kids did an awesome job! She also stated that there will be an update presentation on the plans for Newport Village Park at the Council study session on January 25 at 4pm. Also Bernie Svalsted and members of the public will be making an offer to the Council that they convene a community member committee to fundraise for some of the costs of the park. Director Knight introduced Christine Stempleski, as the new Recreation Coordinator fulfilling the duties of overseeing the aquatics program, contract classes as well as working on special events. She comes from the City of Hawthorne with a great deal of experience. Christine Stempleski gave a brief overview of her experience and thanked the Commission for their time. Director Niederhaus stated that at the last Council meeting, a brief synopsis of the storm of January 6 -11 was discussed. He highlighted that the water went over the 8ft sea walls and that there was literally fish in the street, particularly at the Balboa Pavilion and substantial flooding occurred at Cannery Village. He stated that the good news was that there was no substantial private of public damage except that the beaches are now covered with residue from the storm. PUBLIC COMMENTS Evelyn Hart, Friends of OASIS liaison stated that all is going well at the Senior Center with over 3000 members. She stated that the OASIS Center will need to be rebuilt and asked that the Commission support that when it becomes to build and that there will be a major fundraiser in March. LJ • 0 0 Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting January 13, 2005 Page 2 Mary Singleton read the following letter. Yrr.Y d M iir w )M.YY.I YMr L9M I.r.:Mq )yV.brjN.YYq�Yd4rACY S.rY q�.i Nlgaldlr i.N rb.s..r YN.y Wq.o. W.gdr Ylii.. wI... M.n ievy:�ln.r.s .l.Y.i.M.ar.).r�Yl.r u.M.wrM W Ow rr� IOwR n.lr� Mw�s.l M. rra.n.mN Vrl.>.Yri AnW Yir A0.\.rYegrrwgis 0.P9gywd. YW eseGpN.i.., q.a�em W Nr w..t T.. w. N nrn.bl am.mi b namtlne. pr.M.awM,Ab�.YMry.:r r0. w.N Nr tlYm1 A(W+..r.nlNr{ge.hV 'rgl.ml uyr w wl Pn!4Y W .1*I.Nrw.rvisn rin+.vY V..n.b vam..W.nM4q.v.wy b elan M.A�+W,.+. ngoa. b Y •ry Ir svbMb...aF np..0 W.IMi..I MRgq W .e W W rs grNgPYwpb.r Wy it e.wryb r r:YfxW rnapNr ....4..Aa4.rm 'q � ).l.r b.Y4 re.. er N i(m)gtiee ae M) t�U.Alv..mis4nawpa )I IW) W.A0.wrinwn Mrx Cerrr MMe b.eri A .q v.I.. bn u sr..0 dpYi. rb. 1W.:.W aP YI�w11YYbeP.YI. Y.<M. prwuy l Y+M) On ava i w ra. N v b.. sx.N a w. lW M�.n.q..quq. NYN r Nwl 1 A ar Yn r.wnp.w. W.m.r...ywYa Wi�a. }.Wiwq.. Yf.Yrdq.s iw. W4t.4q M1. e.Ymrr�.gM '•iarW W Pm�N.ewn.rpm�ry file O.O.e Y. W Y.Ib.Y..M4.YYnl W F..w..bm...Nb u•r..Y.uY.np Yrvl4; rNw.nn.lwN W .Yggn.vd �wiwrs...r se:.4W r.. in. p4. S..IY..,gi.b. qr an A d 4. Ygy.n SI iiOe.r.lNU W. W rbn�n.rywnNa u.n u WY )I fio'rvµ Vern. esW .1 )M' W pr m Nwv uA n�,.sweL )1 Ty' W PIrpN n.. e.YYAdKN Deb. U nnq.nq.ner.lu I.ru wv M.v.t )I V.bYniPF.O .e'.Al.•b....nuw.a.4e.�s. pq Warws b1W... Va NU.reWla..e m.cM ..YU.ua ..6nd YbYle.lsgrM Wi'.q. Vr.0 e4ne .�..r.rWNera. )1 Ilr.g VwY• W...siW.W YWI e.ra.wa.`.°V ekm Yq.q.gap Y W u W min Ms MnN.e n Yw.YdwiWle.... w..r mi.wM.a.lw• W rnd +Yq,b� W vim..... sr[ra..We•r'.v.W�n•v. M +� rn M W PYYr.r V,.l W W n_.n.•.W w u.i nelp.ry.w.Y.,YY..b`Wn rWW WIYW M.qW GIp4•. tea. W.WY JYW ierYw.nxP .w4Y)Mw...fr... YsNw.�.w..ry.Mgp Y a.MY.WiY.m Y.. W rj.rY),I.•.rrbYY1.. W 0.4.. W )YIY.ldlnrb,.. Discussion ensued regarding the Brown Act Rules regarding discussion of items not listed on the agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Item pulled by Commissioner Englebrecht 2. Item pulled from the Commissioner Skoro. 3. Recreation ft Senior Services Activity Report. Receive /file monthly Activity Report for activities and upcoming projects. 4. Item pulled by Commissioner Garrett 1. Minutes of the November 16, 2004 regular meeting. Commissioner Engtebrecht asked if he could refer to the Larkspur Reforestation by pulling these minutes. Director Knight stated that the only discussion that could take place are corrections to the minutes but the November agenda item cannot be discussed. Commissioner Englebrecht asked if any trees would be removed between now and the February meeting? He went on to ask if specifically ask trees would be removed from Larkspur during that time frame. Director Niederhaus stated yes. Commissioner Englebrecht went on to ask if these trees are being removed because of the action taken on November 16 to have those trees removed. Director Niederhaus stated that these trees have been posted for removal for the required amount of time. Commissioner Englebrecht asked if the Commission and Director Niederhaus were satisfied within an ounce of understanding that this petition was completely 100% accurate and every IT' was dotted and "t" crossed on the removal of these trees for the reasons that were given? Director Niederhaus stated that he is always open that there are possibilities and that is why it was offered that City staff would complete a petition by the 21 ' of this month, and if there was no change to that then staff would remove the trees as directed on November 16. Discussion continued on staff checking for accuracy of petitions submitted by the public. Director Knight again reminded the Commission that the only issue that could be discussed under this item is corrections to the minutes and cannot engage in discussion if items not listed on this agenda. Commissioner Ruzicka asked if Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Regular Meeting January 13, 2005 Page 3 anything could be done regarding the reforestation. Director Niederhaus asked if staff could check on the action that can be taken and to discuss it at the end of the meeting. Everyone acquiesced. 2. Parks @ Tree Division Activity Report. Commissioner Skoro complimented staff on the monthly report and asked how much money was spent on tree maintenance? Director Niederhaus stated that Council was generous with this budget and stated that "problem trees" are causing $1.2 M annually on public utilities and infrastructure. He went on to say that almost 100 "problem trees" have been removed and so that figure will start to go down. He noted that 217 trees will be planted and that the 2 to 1 tree plantings are continuing. Director Niederhaus stated staff is saving more problem trees than removing and that he is quite proud of the tree and concrete division and that they spend about $110,000 on root pruning, etc., problem trees. 4. Donation of a Dog Nuisance Dispenser. Commissioner Garrett asked if all the dispensers within the City are privately funded. Director Niederhaus stated yes.and that they are monitored by the hand sweepers but are replenished by the vendors. Motion by Chair Tobin to approve items 1.4 of the Consent Calendar). Motion carried by acclamation. NEW BUSINESS 5. Proposed Council Policv B -17 (Accepting Donations to Recreation Et senior Services Proarams) and Revisions to Council Policy G -5 (Park £t Street Improvement Donations - Director Knight stated these policies with your amendments were forwarded to City Council and at that time staff received some input from Council Member Webb and we have been asked to bring this back to you for further consideration of some of his ideas and for further review of the policy and in addition to staff will be taking a look at the internal Council policies that may exist in other departments that relate to the acceptance of donations and how they are handled to be sure that we are consistent internally across the board. She went on to say that Council Member Webb's comments have been provided and that staff is requesting that an ad hoc sub - committee be appointed to review and to come back to the commission for your approval and then forward on to Council for their approval. Chair Tobin opened the public discussion- hearing none the public discussion was closed. Chair Tobin appointed Commissioner Brown, Ruzicka and Skoro. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that he is still concerned that this policy ties donations and plaques to amounts and that recognition should be discretionary. M Commissioner Garrett asked if this policy came out of the discussion of too many benches in the City. Director Knight stated that the Commission directed staff to look at other options for donations that could be suggested instead of benches and or trees. Discussion ensued regarding how other cities deal with donations of benches and or trees, etc. Parks, Beaches 8 Recreation Commission Regular Meeting January 13, 2005 Page 4 6. Joint Meeting with Costs Mesa Parks Et Recreation Commission - Director Knight stated she had received a request from Costa Mesa Commission to meet. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that he believed this would be a good time to meet with Costa Mesa to discuss skate board parks. Discussion ensued regarding the need to meet with them and it was suggested that cities such as Huntington Beach or Laguna Beach be contacted to discuss a joint meeting. Chair Tobin opened the public discussion: hearing none the public discussion was closed. Motion by Commissioner Ruzicka to decline the request by Costa Mesa with regrets. Motion carried as follows: Ayes: Allen, Brown, Garrett, Ruzicka, Skoro, Tobin Nay: Englebrecht CONTINUING BUSINESS 7. Park Bench Update - Director Niederhaus stated that the Commission had requested that staff research additional bench styles, manufacturers and costs. The attached bench list with photos represents 5 major manufacturers and 38 different styles. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that the Committee should review these and eliminate those that are not appropriate either because of style and or cost. Commissioner Skoro asked why the bench that had been selected for Castaways Parks was not listed. Director Niederhaus stated that his staff had not been included on that decision but that the order had been cancelled because of the price. He stated that all types had been included and asked that comfort not be judged until you have had the opportunity to sit on it because some look uncomfortable but are surprisingly comfortable. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that since there are so many listed that the selection be limited to 10 or 15. Director Niederhaus stated that the bench list that has been used in the past is attached and that possibly there need to be some additions and or deletions made. Commissioner Allen suggested that this issue be referred to the new ad hoc sub- committee. Chair Tobin agreed. Chair Tobin opened the public discussion; hearing none the public discussion was closed. Chair Tobin stated that he had a question regarding old business. He went on to say that it appeared from the August 3 Commission meeting regarding that the ums... Director Knight reminded Chair Tobin that this item is not on the agenda and cannot be discussed. Chair Tobin asked where it could be discussed. • Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting January 13, 2005 Page 5 Director Knight stated that it could be listed as an item for future discussion at the end of the meeting. Chair Tobin stated that Council had questions regarding this issue. Director Niederhaus stated that the ad hoc committee would meet to discuss the donation policy and the bench list and so two agendas would be done. • Finance - Nothing to report. • Park Development - Commissioner Skoro stated the Committee would meet January 18 and will discuss a plan for outreach to the community for Cal Trans West; he also stated that Newport Village will be updated at the Council Study Session on January 25. • Rec 6t Open Space Element - Nothing to report. • Recreation Activities - Nothing to report. • Seniors - Director Knight stated that things are going very well and that a cooperative agreement has been drafted by former City Attorney Burnham and that it will be forwarded to the Friends for their review within a week or two. • Beach Activities - Nothing to report but asked staff to set up a meeting within the next 60.90 . days. • Ad Hoc Community Service Award - Nothing to report. Youth Sports Liaison - Nothing to report Special Tree Committee - Commissioner Allen stated that meeting would be held on January 18 to listen to public comments on special trees. She also noted that a TV program had been done by Marilee Jackson on the cable access channel and that she had heard from many people. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Director Knight stated regarding the Larkspur Reforestation that she had reviewed the Council Policy and stated that a member may change his vote only if a timely request is done following the announcement of the vote and prior to the time that the next item in the order of business is taken up. She went on to state that a motion to reconsider a vote on any action taken at either this meeting or the previous meeting may only be done by a member that voted with the prevailing side. Motion by Commissioner Skoro to reconsider the vote of the Reforestation Request made by Jay D. Rifkin, Marilyn Clark, Phyllis Joy Speek, and George Broughton, property owners of 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue. Motion seconded by Commissioner Brown. Director Knight stated that the Commission is discussing only the reconsideration of the vote not the issue of the reforestation. MDirector Niederhaus recommended that the issue of the reforestation be discussed at a future meeting. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that he was only concerned that staff did not remove these trees until this issue is discussed in March. Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting January 13, 2005 Page 6 \_I Director Knight stated that the commission can vote to reconsider and then the issue can be placed on a future agenda. Motion carried to reconsider the vote. Motion by Commissioner EnRlebrecht to discuss the Reforestation Requests from Jay D. Rifkin, Marilyn Clark, Phyllis Joy Speech, and George Broughton, property owners of 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue at the March 1, 2005 meeting. Motion carried. Commissioner Allen asked staff to mail a postcard to everyone that was listed on the petition. Director Niederhaus stated that he would hand deliver them and that staff would go to great lengths to make sure that the issue is publicly noticed. Motion by Commissioner Allen that staff leave the trees on Larkspur as they are. Motion carried. • Irvine Park Encroachment by Commissioner Skoro • To extend an invitation to Huntington Beach and or Laguna Beach for a joint meeting by Commissioner Ruzicka • Director Knight stated that she realizes that commissioners can become frustrated that they are not allowed to discuss issues that are not on the agenda and reminded the commission that these meetings are taped and are public information and that staff must abide by these rules. • Urns/ Receptacles by Chair Tobin • Director Niederhaus reminded the Commission that when items are placed on future agendas that it needs three members to agree that it should be added; but is unclear why this item should be on the agenda. Commissioner Garrett suggested that Chair Tobin read the Council minutes from the meeting where the urns were discussed. Discussion ensued regarding the use and need of the urns. ADJOURNMENT- 8:43pm Submitted by: 0 Teri Craig, Admin Assistant • (1) ': -v (AEI. PB &R Commission Agenda Item No. S April 5, 2005 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission General Services Director Special Trees Recommendations To approve the amended Special Tree List and forward the list to the Council for approval and adoption. History • In October 2004, the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission (PB &R) designated a Special Tree Committee (STC), consisting of Chairperson Allen, and Commissioners Skoro and Ruzicka, to provide recommendations for additions and deletions to the Special Tree List (Attachment A) which is a component of the Council Policy G -1 (Retention and Removal of City Trees). The Special Tree List was adopted in 1966 and since that time has had no significant amendments. The List includes Landmark, Neighborhood, and Dedicated trees. The goal of the STC was to review the Landmark and Neighborhood List for any additions and/or deletions of City trees and provide a public outreach program for public nominations. Staff was tasked to do a separate review and update of the Dedicated Tree list. Subsequently, the STC held four meetings regarding a review and discussion of the list with the general public. The notes of the November 3, 2004, November 30, 2004, January 18, 2005 and March 15, 2005, STC meetings are enclosed (Attachments B -E) to provide background information. Additionally, the public was allowed to submit nominations to the Committee at a SPON presentation, as well as at the various STC meetings. Discussion 1� u i� At the March 15, 2005 STC meeting, the Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the attached matrix (Attachment F) regarding Landmark and Neighborhood Trees. The results of • • the voting are on the matrix. Included in the new list are staff amendments to the Dedicated Tree listing. If the PB & R approves the STC recommendations and the Dedicated Tree list, • • the Special Tree List will be forwarded to the City Council with these changes by staff. All interested parties have received a notice of the Commission meeting. Respectfully, David E. Niederhaus, Director General Services Department DEN /pr Attachments: (A) Special Tree List (B) Special Tree Committee Meeting Notes, November 3, 2004 (C) Special Tree Committee Meeting Notes, November 30, 2004 (D) Special Tree Committee Meeting Notes, January 18, 2005 (E) Special Tree Committee Meeting Notes, March 15, 2005 (F) Matrix of Recommended Changes to the G -1 Policy /Special Tree Listing • Is • • 0 LANDMARK TREES SPECIAL TREES Balboa Library Balboa Library West Jetty View Park (near Historical Marker) Dover Drive at Westcliff 400 Bleek Poinsettia Avenue Ocean Blvd. Corona del Mar Westcliff & Dover (Groves) Bike Trail Main Street (between Fast B ^ i� a-Rd Balboa-Blvd.4 Ci Hall Balboa Blvd Ensign View Park Lido Isle Medians Bob Henry Park • Castaways Park DEDICATED TREES No. Mariners Park (Marcie Schrouder) Mariners Park (Frank Tallman) No. City Hall grounds (Billy Covert) City Hall grounds (Walter Knott) City Hall grounds (Calif. Bicentennial) Las Arenas Park (Ed Healy) Mariners Park (Isy Pease) City Hall grounds (U.S. Bicentennial Freedom Tree) Buffalo Hills Park (Bahia Community Earth Day Celebration) Peninsula Park (Gray Lunde Tree) Cliff Drive Park (Gary Lovell) • G DRAFT -1 • Eucalyptus globulus(3) A;eeni;� canariensis (2) Phoenix canariensis (2) Liquidambar styraciflua(4) Phoneix canariensis(5) Eucalyptus globulus (134) Ficus microcarpa'Nitida'(1) Ficus microcarpa'Nitida'(2) Araucaria heterophhylla (1) EE thrina caffra (1) Pinus pinea (4) Ficus rubiginosa (1) • Phoenix canariensis (1) Pinus radiata Pinus radiata Ficus benjamina Pinus halepensis Pinus halepensis Melaleuca linarifolia Pinus halepensis Harpephyllum kaffrum Erythrina caffra Chamaerops humilis Quercus agrifolia Attachment 1• • DEDICATED TREES (contd.) Begonia Park (Cheryl Bailey Ringwald) Castaways Park (Jan Vandersloot) (Jean Watt) - ADD MORE - Peninsula Park (Don Perdue) Grant Howald Park DRAFT Prunus cerasifera Quercus agrifolia Ravenea rivularis? Metrosideros excelsus (Pete Munro) (Mark Munro) Quercus agrifolia Bob Henry Park(Add as Landmark Tree ?)Ficus rubiginosa (Bob Henry) (Bob & Susan Caustin) Cliff Drive Park Quercus agrifolia (Dr. Vandersloot) (Newport - Irvine Rotary Club) Veterans Park Lagenstroemia (Rosemary Rae Hill Hansen) indica faueri Mariners Park Stenocarpus (N. Beach Sunrise Rotary Club) sinuatus (Christopher & Marisha Thomposn) Pinus eldarica (Meghan & Camielle Thompson) Pinus eldarica West Newport Park Spathodea campanulata (Brownie Girl Scout Troop 2072) Buffalo Hills Park Stenocarpus sinuatus (N. Beach Sunrise Rotary Club) Castaways Park Quercus agrifolia (Nancy & Jack Skinner) (Bob & Susan Caustin) Bayside Park Pyrus calleryana (Newport - Irvine Rotary Club) Castaways Park Quercus agrifolia (Eva Victoria Najera) Begonia Park Bauhinia blakeana (Dr. Leo V. Turgeon) L Street Park Cassia leptophylla (Tim Van Ostenbridge) Castaways Park Platanus racemosa (John D. Woodruff) LID • 0 • • Attachment 1 NEIGHBORHOOD TREES Shorecliffs Entrance Erythrina caffra (51) • Marguerite Avenue Phoenix canariensis (109) G -1 0 0 Attachment 1• DRAFT DEDICATED TREES (contd.) Grant Howald Park Cassia leptophylla (Jean & Coalson Morris) Old School Park Cassia leptophylla (Jean & Coalson Morris) Mariners Park Bauhinia variegata (Sierra Beth) Cliff Drive Park Cassia leptophylla (Francis P. Hemenway) Grant Howald Park Hymenosporum flavum (Skipper Mark Howes) Castaways Park (Michael F. Gustin) Platanus racemosa (Yen Chu Kuo) Quercus agrifolia (Grover Stephens, PH.D.) Platanus racemosa (Logan David Burley) Quercus agrifolia (Sawyer Dean Burley) Quercus agrifolia (Virginia Najera) Quercus agrifolia (Toe Clarkson) Quercus agrifolia (Sawyer Dean Burly) Quercus agrifolia Eastbluff Park (Lucy Huntsman) IHymenosporum flavum Irvine Terrace Park (Dana Harmon) Liquidambar styraciflua (Sister City of Okazaki) Pinus nigra Bonita Canon Sports Park (Fern Pirkle) Melaleuca linariifolia Gateway Park ( Virgina Herberts) Cassia leptophylla West Coast Highway & Superior Ave City Parking Lot (Louise Greeley) Cassia leptophylla Bayview Park (Gene Atherton) Cinnamomum camphora West Newport Park (Russell Marc Beaumont) Ervthrina caffra (Teff Steven Reinker) hWhrina carra NEIGHBORHOOD TREES Shorecliffs Entrance Erythrina caffra (51) • Marguerite Avenue Phoenix canariensis (109) G -1 0 0 Attachment 1• Seaview Avenue (Corona del Mar) Poppy Avenue (Corona del Mar) Heliotrope Avenue (Corona del Mar) Candlestick Lane, etc. (Baycrest) Commodore Road Starlight Circle Glenwood Lane Sandalwood Lane Newport Center Drive Fourth Avenue • Clay Avenue (Irvine Avenue to St. Andrews Rd.) Leeward Lane L Street Park M Street Park West Newport Park Santa Ana Avenue Alta Vista Drive Eastbluff Park Vista Del Oro Median Rhine Wharf Park Mariners Drive Adopted - May 9,1 %6 Amended - November 9,1976 Amended - November 28,1988 Amended - October, 1993 Amended - July 14,1997 Amended - January 25,1999 Amended - February 22, 2002 Amended - April, 23, 2002 • Amended - April 27, 2004 Pinus radiata(19) Eucalyptus rudis(73) Pinus radiata(18) Eucalyptus citriodora(21) Eucalyptus citriodora(2) Eucalyptus citriodora(11) Eucalyptus citriodora(7) Eucalyptus citriodora(7) Washingtonia robusta (363) Eucalyptus globulus (48) Ficus microcarpa'Nitida' (21) • 0 Fraxinus uhdei "Tomlinson" (43) Quercus suber (39) Pinus pinea (1) Metrosideros excelsus(55) Eucalyptus robusta (33) Eucalyptus viminalis (1) Ficus macrophylla (1) Erythrina caffra (6) Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (12) lacaranda mimosifolia (52) Attachment 1 G -1 •NEIGHBORHOOD DRAFT TREES (contd.) Goldenrod Avenue Washingtonia robusta (144) Dover Drive (Mariners to Irvine) Eucalyptus globulus(3) 15th Street (Newport Heights) Eucalyptus cladocalyx (29) Irvine Avenue Median Eucalyptus globulus (130) Holiday between Irvine & Tustin Along Avon Avenue Eucalyptus globulus (18) EaLzalyptids - Via Lido Bridge glabokls(s) Eucalyptus globulus(14) Marine Avenue (Balboa Island) Eucalyptus (Various Species)(34) Seaview Avenue (Corona del Mar) Poppy Avenue (Corona del Mar) Heliotrope Avenue (Corona del Mar) Candlestick Lane, etc. (Baycrest) Commodore Road Starlight Circle Glenwood Lane Sandalwood Lane Newport Center Drive Fourth Avenue • Clay Avenue (Irvine Avenue to St. Andrews Rd.) Leeward Lane L Street Park M Street Park West Newport Park Santa Ana Avenue Alta Vista Drive Eastbluff Park Vista Del Oro Median Rhine Wharf Park Mariners Drive Adopted - May 9,1 %6 Amended - November 9,1976 Amended - November 28,1988 Amended - October, 1993 Amended - July 14,1997 Amended - January 25,1999 Amended - February 22, 2002 Amended - April, 23, 2002 • Amended - April 27, 2004 Pinus radiata(19) Eucalyptus rudis(73) Pinus radiata(18) Eucalyptus citriodora(21) Eucalyptus citriodora(2) Eucalyptus citriodora(11) Eucalyptus citriodora(7) Eucalyptus citriodora(7) Washingtonia robusta (363) Eucalyptus globulus (48) Ficus microcarpa'Nitida' (21) • 0 Fraxinus uhdei "Tomlinson" (43) Quercus suber (39) Pinus pinea (1) Metrosideros excelsus(55) Eucalyptus robusta (33) Eucalyptus viminalis (1) Ficus macrophylla (1) Erythrina caffra (6) Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (12) lacaranda mimosifolia (52) Attachment 1 i � 2EW ART • O 6 r Y U S C'Q /GO RH`P tcl FS-6,T13059 9 �e PB &R Commission Agenda Item No. �7 April 5, 2005 Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission General Services Director * j A SUBJECT: Special Trees Recommendations t To approve the amended Special Tree List and forward the list to the Council for approval and adoption. History • In October 2004, the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission (PB &R) designated a Special Tree Committee (STC), consisting of Chairperson Allen, and Commissioners Skoro and Ruzicka, to provide recommendations for additions and deletions to the Special Tree List (Attachment A) which is a component of the Council Policy G -1 (Retention and Removal of City Trees). The Special Tree List was adopted in 1966 and since that time has had no significant amendments. The List includes Landmark, Neighborhood, and Dedicated trees. The goal of the STC was to review the Landmark and Neighborhood List for any additions and/or deletions of City trees and provide a public outreach program for public nominations. Staff was tasked to do a separate review and update of the Dedicated Tree list. Subsequently, the STC held four meetings regarding a review and discussion of the list with the general public. The notes of the November 3, 2004, November 30, 2004, January 18, 2005 and March 15, 2005, STC meetings are enclosed (Attachments B -E) to provide background information. Additionally, the public was allowed to submit nominations to the Committee at a SPON presentation, as well as at the various STC meetings. Discussion At the March 15, 2005 STC meeting, the Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the attached matrix (Attachment F) regarding Landmark and Neighborhood Trees. The results of • -- the voting are on the matrix. Included in the new lisf are staff amendments to the Dedicated LANDMARK TREES SPECIAL TREES BE- M1 West Jetty View Park (near Historical Marker) Dover Drive at Westcliff ,inn ui,.,a, n,,...,;Ptti n.,,.fine Ocean Blvd. Corona del Mar Westcliff & Dover (Groves) Bike Trail Main Street (beAveei4 East Bay n . , and Balboa Blvd.j Cfty Hall Balboa Blvd Ensign View Park Lido Isle Medians . Bob Henry Park Castaways Park DEDICATED TREES No. Mariners Park (Marcie Schrouder) Mariners Park (Frank Tallman) No. City Hall grounds (Billy Covert) City Hall grounds (Walter Knott) City Hall grounds (Calif. Bicentennial) Las Arenas Park (Ed Healy) Mariners Park (Isy Pease) City Hall grounds (U.S. Bicentennial Freedom Tree) Buffalo Hills Park (Bahia G -1 DRAFT Eucalyptus globulus(3) nw,.,,..:. ,. iensis (2) Phoenix canariensis (2) Liquidambar styraciflua(4) Phoneix canariensis(5) Eucalyptus globulus (134) Ficus microcarpa 'Nitida'(1) Ficus microcarpa'Nitida'(2) Araucaria heterophylla (1) Erythrina caffra (1) Pinus pinea (4) Ficus rubiginosa (1) Phoenix canariensis (1) Pinus radiata Pinus radiata Ficus benjamina Pinus halepensis Pinus halepensis Melaleuca linarifolia Pinus halepensis Harpephyllum kaffrum Community Earth Day Celebration) Erythrina caffra Peninsula Park (Gray Lunde Tree) Cliff Drive Park (Gary Lovell) Chamaerops humilis Quercus agrifolia • Attachment 1 NEIGHBORHOOD TREES Shorecliffs Entrance Erythrina caffra (51) Marguerites Avenue Phoenix canariensis (109) G -1 F.rq 7U"Immmml DRAFT DEDICATED TREES (contd.) Grant Howald Park Cassia leptophylla (Jean & Coalson Morris) Old School Park Cassia leptophylla Qean & Coalson Morris) Mariners Park Bauhinia variegata (Sierra Beth) Cliff Drive Park Cassia leptophylla (Francis P. Hemenway) Grant Howald Park Hymenosporum flavum (Skipper Mark Howes) Castaways Park (Michael F. Gustin) Platanus racemosa (Yen Chu Kuo) Quercus agrifolia (Grover Stephens, PH.D.) Platanus racemosa (Logan David Burley) Ouercus agrifolia (Sawyer Dean Burley) Quercus agrifolia (Virginia Najera) Quercus agrifolia (Toe Clarkson Ouercus agrifolia (Sawyer Dean Burley) Quercus agrifolia Eastbluff Park (Lucy Huntsman) Hymenosporum flavum Irvine Terrace Park (Dana Harmon) Liquidambar styraciflua (Sister City of Okazaki) Pinus nigra Bonita Canyon Sports Park (Fern Pirkle) Melaleuca linariifolia Gateway Park (Vireina Herberts) Cassia lektophylla West Coast Highway & Superior Ave City Parking Lot (Louise Greeley) Cassia lepttophyIla Bayview Park (Gene Atherton) Cinnamomum camphora West Newport Park (Russell Marc Beaumont) Erythrina caffra (Teff Steven Reinker) Erythrina carra NEIGHBORHOOD TREES Shorecliffs Entrance Erythrina caffra (51) Marguerites Avenue Phoenix canariensis (109) G -1 F.rq 7U"Immmml PARKS, BEACHES AND RECREATION COMMISSION SPECIAL TREE COMMITTEE day, November 3 at 8:30AM Upper CONFERENCE ROOM Bldg "A" Corporation Yard NOTES 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Debra Allen, Chairman of the Special TreeCommittee at 8:36 am. Commissioners Present: Debra Allen Val Skoro Greg Ruzicka Staff Present: David E. Niederhaus John Conway Public Present: Dr. Jan Vandersloot Linda Grant 2. Public Comments Ms. Grant suggested that no additions or deletions be made to the Special Tree list, until later. Chairman Allen stated that her Ms. Grant suggested trees to be considered at the elementary school and Balboa tree. Commissioner Ruzicka agrees to add as a consideration to the Special Tree list. Chairman Allen indicated that Special Trees have a priority over Problem Trees. Dr. Jan Vandersloot states that Ficus trees can take abuse and be saved. New Newport Heights contact person. Good process and will volunteer on tour. Chairman Allen suggested that we will need more vans and transportation for the tour. Director Dave Niederhaus stated that there is limited transportation, and limited to 10 -12 people. He indicated that the tour will be held on Tuesday, November 30, 2004, from 7:30 am through approximately 11:00 am. He indicated that staff will develop a route for the tour. Director Dave Niederhaus makes an announcement regarding the meeting in December, the public follow up in January, and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission in February. Committee Members agree on plans and staff recommendations Chairman Allen explains Committees purpose and process. 5. Adjourn No further business, meeting was adjourned at 11:45 am. LI 3. Discussion of Special Tree List to Review Alternatives . Director Dave Niederhaus presented a draft Special Tree List. He indicated that this was the draft which was provided with staffs' recommendations, deletions and additions. Director Niederhaus stated that all present would tour the west side of the City to review the Landmark and Neighborhood trees. 4. Staff Presentation and van tour of Special Trees (G 1 Policy) All present departed the Corporation Yard in one van and toured the west side of the City and were able to tour the east side of the City as well. 5. Adjourn Chairman Allen along with the two other Commissioners directed staff to have a public meeting on January 18, 2005 at 7:00 pm, at City Hall in the Council Chambers. Staff is also directed to prepare a press release, notice of meeting to the public, and provide information regarding the Special Tree List on the City website. As part of the press release it will be noted that any public suggestions for nominated trees must include photographs and be provided to City staff by January 10, 2005. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45 am. i • DEDICATED TREES (contd.) 0 Begonia Park (Cheryl Bailey Ringwald) Castaways Park (Jan Vandersloot) (Jean Watt) - ADD MORE - Peninsula Park (Don Perdue) Grant Howald Park G -1 DRAFT Prunus cerasifera Quercus agrifolia Ravenea rivularis? Metrosideros excelsus (Pete Munro) (Mark Munro) Bob Henry Park(Add as Landmark Tree ?)Ficus rubiginosa (Bob Henry) Cliff Drive Park Quercus agrifolia (Dr. Vandersloot) Veterans Park Lagenstroemia (Rosemary Rae Hill Hansen) indica faueri Mariners Park Stenocarpus (N. Beach Sunrise Rotary Club) sinuatus (Christopher & Marisha Thomposn) Pinus eldarica (Meghan & Camielle Thompson) Pinus eldarica West Newport Park Spathodea campanulata (Brownie Girl Scout Troop 2072) Buffalo Hills Park Stenocarpus sinuatus (N. Beach Sunrise Rotary Club) Castaways Park (Nancy & Jack Skinner) (Bob & Susan Caustin) Bayside Park (Newport - Irvine Rotary Club) Castaways Park (Eva Victoria Najera) Begonia Park (Dr. Leo V. Turgeon) L Street Park (Tim Van Ostenbridge) Castaways Park (John D. Woodruff) Grant Howald Park Qean & Coalson_Morris) Quercus agrifolia Pyrus calleryana Quercus agrifolia Bauhinia blakeana Cassia leptophylla Platanus racemosa Cassia leptophylla 0 Attachment 1 G -1 • NEIGHBORHOOD DRAFT TREES (contd.) , Newport Center Drive _Washingtonia robusta Fourth Avenue Eucalyptus globulus Clay Avenue F_icus microcarpa'Nitida' (Irvine Avenue to St. Andrews Rd.) Leeward Lane Fraxinus uhdei "Tomlinson" L Street Park Quercus suber M Street Park Pinus pinea West Newport Park Metrosideros excelsus Santa Ana Avenue Eucalyptus robusta Alta Vista Drive Eucalyptus viminalis Adopted - May 9,1966 . Amended - November 9,1976 Amended - November 28,1988 Amended - October, 1993 Amended - July 14,1997 Amended - January 25,1999 Amended - February 22, 2002 Amended - April, 23, 2002 Amended - April 27, 2004 0 Attachment 1 2. Public Comments • Director Dave Niederhaus introduces staff. Dr. Jan Vandersloot disagrees with staff on the deletions from the Special Tree List. He indicated that the deletions should not be included or removed from the Special Tree List. He indicated that the Pepper trees along Riverside Ave, Scout House Tree should be added. Chairman Allen stated that the people on Cliff Drive should be noticed of the next Special Tree Committee meeting. Ms. Virginia Herberts expressed her support for the trees at Baycrest to remain on the Special Tree List. She also noted her tree nominations at the following locations: one Myoporum tree at the Wedge, Eucalyptus sideroxylon (Red Ironbark trees) on Bayside Drive and the new Eucalyptus trees on Main Street. Mr. Tony Khoury noted that at 1502 and 1508 Galaxy Drive, the trees were planted without authorization from the City. He stated that he does not want a variety of trees planted. Chairman Allen explains the City's Designated Street Tree List and directs staff to meet with Mr. Tony Khoury, to address his concerns. . Ms. Mary Singleton states that she does not understand staffs definition of Special Trees and recommended removing trees from the Special Tree List. Chairman Allen explains the definition of Special Trees. Commissioner Greg Ruzicka concurs with Chairman Allen's explanation of Special Trees definition. Mr. Don Beatty explains his Special Tree nomination. Chairman Allen notes that private trees cannot be considered for Special Trees. She also notes that private trees are not a part of Committee's jurisdiction. Mr. Jim O'Connell expressed his support for nomination of Special Trees for the River She -Oak trees on Larkspur Avenue. He indicated that the trees meet the definition under Special Trees, due to age, appearance, character and uniformity. Mr. O'Connell also noted that the City of Pasadena has this tree species listed under Special Trees, and the City of Santa Monica continues to plant this tree species. He added that the River She -Oak trees cause limited hardscape damage. Mr. O'Connell indicated that he has more flatterinyy- photos available of the-trees. PARKS, BEACHES AND RECREATION COMMISSION SPECIAL TREE COMMITTEE Tuesday, March 15, 2005 at 7:00 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOTES 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Debra Allen, Chairman of the Special Tree Committee at 7 PM. Commissioners Present: Debra Allen, Chairperson Special Tree Committee Val Skoro, Member Greg Ruzicka, Member Staff Present: David E. Niederhaus, General Services Director John Conway, Urban Forester Public Present: Don Williams Todd Roth John and Cindy Rogers Paul Rockley Virginia Herberts Jerry and Blythe Fair Mary Singleton Jim and Karen O'Connell Linda Grant 0 John Rogers, Corona Del Mar resident, recommended disapproval of Item Q. r Ms O'Connell, Larkspur Avenue resident, recommended adding 5 Brazilian Pepper trees on Larkspur Avenue to the Special Tree list. Jerry Fair, Corona Del Mar resident, recommended the Item Q tree be trimmed, but not designated a Special Tree. Blythe Fair, Corona Del Mar resident, also recommended the trimming of the Item Q, but not Special Tree designation. Ms. Singleton, Larkspur Avenue resident, recommended that the 6 She Oak trees and the 5 Pepper trees on the 300 block of Larkspur Avenue (Item G) be added to the Special Tree List. 6. Committee Review /Discussion /Voting regarding Special Tree Recommendations After discussion, the Committee opted to vote on the Landmark and Neighborhood Tree nominations. The results are noted on the attached matrix. Further public comments on the designations of the three additions to the list (Items V, W, & X) were heard by the Committee. The Committee voted on Items V, W, & X of the matrix. The results are noted on the attached matrix. 7. Staff Direction Staff was directed by the Committee to prepare the results of the review for a future Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission meeting. 8. Adjourn Chairperson Allen adjourned the meeting at 8:45 PM. 0 0 a U 'i fz F C C C fL L W z E 2� w° a n. •mow � N N � N N 'Dt y J J J J J J J N N N N :Zi N N N N N N N J N N _N -IIp N O O O O O D O- 0 0 0 J I a J 0 O a 00 .. +D n .O. O '2 : :.� � •� 22 Z II a a II a a a II II a II II a II II as II II a II Z II a a a a a a a o a K f; O N � # m ex`�Y E E a a a a a a a¢ a a a a a II a a a z a J c N N N N m N m '� t= •� � `m t= !t N d d m t _a rn m c`n to (n fn � �¢ to m in ,vo v] c�a cn m <'n m cn m in � 6q rn 6o c`n m m a -o aRi aRi m c "D ''a C •{—c C 'm C ,o C 'R C '� TO a a a a a a a a a a a z a a a¢ a r fit[ R R rt R R R r 'a � $'_ •C b '00 'OQ TOS P 7 z p `° aR, '� u u t1° U N O Om '+ G h � C � .'�� � � .V1 `� '3u v ixRi � � v � 7 U • V R � .�% x. sR. cRi m N E. U x 4 t= 3 � 1 v a O w x Q RO y ti° UO U O A N CR U R Q N N O 6 k UUcn(7cnZwJaa3cn�w��m'K�cnma��ro i' T :-. °mti �• "v'F. 1� m D7 O N M V ¢J (p I� O O N M 'a' 47 E 2� w° a Larkspur Reforestation April 5, 2005 0 FORGED BALLOTS IN CITY RUN POLL! Applicants for Reforestation: Jay Rifkin, Phyllis Speek, George Broughton,. and Marilyn Clark Addresses: 300, 302, 304, and 310/312 Larkspur Avenue When the city announced it would conduct the poll for reforestation, we expected the ballots would be handled in a fair, unbiased manner by General Services Staff. Unfortunately, GS Staff told the applicants which ballots had not been submitted. ► The applicants harassed one neighbor (see attached Christian letter). ► Then they forged the signatures of property owners (see attached Caputi and Stockwell ballots)! RECOMMENDATIONS 1. City Attorney Robin Clauson is investigating the forged city government documents. $15,000 worth of trees (city property) were almost killed because of this crime. If she has not already done so, the PB &R Commission should reauest charaes be filed and fines be levied against the perpetrators. 2. The PB &R Commission should ban all four applicants from the privilege of using the reforestation process. This abuse of the system wasted the time of city staff, citizens, and the commissioners. If the PB &R Commission does not take action, it sends a message that it condones this behavior. This will encourage more FRAUD in the future. 0 • • P. 03 CITY OF NT>. r Mr. Ca F�R�ERY! L.1� ha u _ for T Anti s be P.O. BOX 1768. NEWpop, ✓ r 11 Years! The n deceased h Ca ufi, not ✓ee correct s ellin9 A REFORESTATION BALLOT s h Ca utt February 4, 2005 Six (6) City Parkway Street Trees - River She -Oak Trees are proposed for reforestation (removal and replacement) at the following addresses: The six River She -Oak trees would be replaced by 24" boxed Firewheel trees. All costs of removal and replacement would be at the expense of the property owners at 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue. Property Owner: Print Name: �j 0 6 ..S` P A4 i Address: /Y 4,ARK5 (] Signature: Reforestation: � n��n�ckan� A rove Disa rove f (ae C�Vk & T r� Date: Please return this ballot in the enclosed envelope to the General Services Department, Admin. Division, 3300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92658, no later than February 15, 2005, ff you are not the current property owner on Larkspur Avenue, please return the ballot. 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach - mere al proAarty owner Dear Mr. Niederhaus, wants the frees (Ms. Saved. I am the owner of the duplex at 319 Larkspur Ave. in Corona del Mar CA. The • Singletons live next "to our house. Mrs. Singleton called me and said that.the city had me listed as approving of removing six of our big old trees on Larkspur. Nothing could be further from the truth. I want to say exactly what I said when I signed the last petition. The trees give shade and charm to our neighborhood. Healthwise, they absorb the pollution the cars emit from PCH, furthermore they act as a great sound buffer too! Don't remove the trees, please .... Thankyou! Jean Caputi — owner of 319 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, California. Signed: Dated: U 0 • • Fram: Raymw:o Slcckwel To: Oar 4mederhous Date: 22712005 Time: 1:!9:56 PM Page 2 oft J v 4 `b V � o 1� 0 `j v 9 V 4 N, N� n6eavat 6~ 401"'KAL fZMrU 419934 VAMMO 3117 ya j j NE Wl FORGERY.r� ~`' Stockwell was out of the country this date. His name is Randolph, not Raymond. See his c signed omments written on the side. i Six (M Ow Fakww Sam Two - Riva Sbe-O* T"M am piap9..a Ar .56 tad, (rwMvw and MpreM4,19 st ffie a adieatet TM six Wvor ShwOok reset um" be spbnd by 24` bows Pb wWd ane4. AX cow of rtslovat ea3 sepierelaat 4q "best tie egMN of Ge fogw tt arses U30% % 302. 304.310-3121 at1v, Avmup. Prvporly ON= y�aN6YtOk� OU< CA t — Prlae ?4MM-. its ti ^104A �f oUlfJt7 /( A a2,v rK vclr AymAe Cow c6l /Grsr sib Daw. �! 0), � r ! rleam retrsa ekes bdla in sw ea¢39sed ewoWWo to Nr GwAmf service. D4permels. Aria DivraOm 3300 Newpon 82vd. NewpoR Barb. CA 9261!;. m bW 415 F*vo y 25, 2065. ff)tM ere mt tm aamela property v%iW an Ladup9e Avmm pksiwii:; [sacs ds bdlx 4 "l /// F 6C � ne real pro a �--_ p rtY owner wants the treav saves Stoc� ed. PETITION RE: "Petition to Remove City Street Pine Tree at: 300, 302, 304, 310 and 312 Larkspur Avenue, Corona Del Mar, CA" I have reconsidered my previous position r did not have the opportunity to vote ❑ on the removal of trees on the 300 Block of Larkspur. Property Print Nam Address: Lt� Signature: • Date: 1 E I DISAPPROVE of having 5 to 6 mature River She -Oaks trees removed from the city parkway of the 300 block of Larkspur Avenue. 4W ❑ I APPROVE of having 5 to 6 mature River She -Oaks trees removed from the city parkway of the 300 block of Larkspur Avenue. ❑ I WISH TO REMAIN NEUTRAL on the question of having 5 to 6 mature River She -Oaks trees removed from the city parkway of the 300 block of Larkspur Avenue. Comments: A- oR, 'i�R -C Gil t'J �► PETMON.doc Page 1 of 1 It 1112005 5:29 PM 0 • S harasse�� to� t t� esf Mr David E. Niederhaus General Services Director City of Newport Beach Re: Reforestation request for the 300 block of Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar Dear Mr. Niederhaus, Council Members and Neighbors, It is our understanding is that the trees in question are on community property and that all owners within a certain radius have a right to vote on this issue. We are happy to live peacefully with whatever popular decision our wonderful neighborhood reaches. Personally, we live in the middle of the trees in question and would prefer to have them remain. Older growth trees are part of the reason we purchased a home in this neighborhood. We believe it is part of the charm of our community and losing them would not only be unattractive but decrease our property value. That being said would we would never want to deny any individual property owners of their rights. We believe this issue has been misrepresented as potentially denying individual owner's rights to remove trees directly in front of their properties. However, our discussions with the city of Newport Beach revealed that this is not the case and that we all have the right to our opinion and vote on this issue. We believe that if a truly anonymous vote occurred there would be many more residents that would prefer to keep the older trees as they are. We believe many residents have been intimidated into voting to remove them or believe they are supporting their neighbor's individual property rights by doing so.. We personally have not lobbied any of our neighbors for their decision as we respect their individual opinions on this matter. We are particularly disappointed with the childish, intimidating and spiteful behavior of a select few of our neighbors over this issue. It is an embarrassment to witness which is why we are not in attendance at tonight's meeting. While our preference remains to keep the trees we will be happy to live with the popular decision of all of our beloved neighbors. Thank you for your consideration Sincerely, Zan Seth 0 air? !, ^.rh p;c Awenre ,..Am, ...... Mohi d. , 49 , 13, V: . , ' Iiome '19arlC..r = -0:W1 y? /i Al 5 Mary Singleton April 5, 2005 • There have been numerous incorrect statements made by Dave Niederhaus verbally at PB &R meetings and in letters, the city poll, recorded in meeting minutes (which he edited) and in staff reports (which he wrote). Because the issue of removing healthy mature trees in Newport Beach and specifically on our 300 block of Larkspur in Corona del Mar may come up again in the future we would like to site for the historical record some of these untrue statements and misconceptions perpetrated. According to what was told to us by the homeowner: The "encroachment permit" that Glen Salsbury was required to get for his building and improvements at 301 Larkspur in 2001 he was told by city staff that he would be required to have to remove the two River She oaks in front of his house and replant with city designated "Fireweel" tree in order to receive his permit. The petition to remove three additional River She Oaks in 2002 from in front of 303, 304 and 315 Larkspur did not follow the city's G -1 policy in place at the time. The name of at least one renter, Dana at 319, and a deceased woman at 302 Larkspur were just part of the non- compliance. The trees were not posted, neighbors not notified and the petitioners did not have the 60% approval required to "reforest" yet the trees were removed. This invalid petition and cutting down of healthy, mature trees that caused no damage what -so -ever has often been referred to by Dave Niederhaus as "phase one of the Larkspur reforestation ". He has never mentioned that the reforestation petition was illegal or invalid — only used it as an excuse to cut down more trees on our street. The original signed petitions for the 2005 removal of 6 additional River She Oaks were withheld for weeks when we requested them for the purpose of checking them for the type mistakes the . city made in 2002. When we finally received them it was immediately clear that the petitioners had not met the 60% approval requirement for reforestation yet Dave Niederhause had told the PB &R members at their 11/16/04 meeting that they had achieved the 60% and met all the G -1 criteria for reforestation — both of which were not true. The PB &R members approved the reforestation based on Dave's incorrect statements to them. Dave has since used this in misleading statements on the cover letter of his own city ballot. Dave Niederhaus supplied the petitioners for removal of the trees with the names of those home owners who had not responded to his city poll. This caused some very serious problems: #1 Petitioner Tom Vogel yelled at Seth Christian homeowner of 307 Larkspur, when Seth told Tom he had voted to retain the trees and Tom called Seth and his wife "assholes ". #2. Tom Vogel and Jay Rifkin, co- owners of 300 Larkspur and petitioners to remove the trees, had been told by Dave or his office staff who had not responded to the poll and who was out of the country . Two of these non - responders were pursued — one in person and the other signature was forged (incorrectly using the name "Raymond" rather than "Randolph" for the first name of the property owner. This was very easy for us to spot as forged when we later got copies of the signed ballots, but Dave counted it as a valid vote to remove the trees when he reported it to the PB &R.) Dave Neiderhaus reported these gentlemen as having "stepped forward" just that day of the meeting — March 1 St. This was not true the "last minute" votes had (according to the fax transmittals) been faxed in at least two days prior to the meeting on Tuesday. Mr. Niederhaus would not let those of us wanting to save the trees see copies of the ballots his • department received for his city run poll. We had to request copies via the freedom of Mimi s 3 minutes Apri1505.doc Page 1 of 2 4/5/05 6:13 PM information act through the city attorney. Upon seeing those ballots after the March 1st meeting, • we immediately spotted two obviously forged ballots in favor of removing the trees. He had reported to the PB &R members once again that he had the 60% approval he needed at the March 1st meeting and that the poll met all requirements of the G -1 policy - which was also not true. The forged signatures were not even spelled correctly and one of the men's names was of a man who had been dead for 11 years and both his first and last names had been misspelled. But Mr. Niederhaus had counted this obviously forged vote as a valid vote in his effort to have the trees removed, and misrepresented that the poll had met all the criteria needed for reforestation. Fortunately the PB &R members did not vote to remove the trees based on his statements. When asked by a member of the commission at the meeting on March 1, 2005 if there wasn't a deadline for the City Ballots Mr. Niederhaus twice stated that there was no deadline yet both the cover letter and the ballot to be signed, said "return to the city no later than February 15'h." Most people interpreted this as a deadline and a concerted push was being made by phone calls from his staff to get all votes in by this stated date. He instead accepted two "last minute" votes to remove the trees on Larkspur and told the commission there was no deadline. G.S. director Niederhaus' department has also made numerous sidewalk removals and re- cementing them just as they were on our 300 block of Larkspur. We have photos to prove the repairs were unneeded and do not want these bogus repairs used as excuses to remove healthy mature trees from our block in the future. We want to make sure that in the future no statements made by G.S. Director Dave Niederhaus, • in letters, reports, minutes of meetings or otherwise are not taken as truth. He had an obvious bias toward removing majestic healthy trees and replacing them with species of trees which will never grow to be large like the trees he so successfully removed from our city. He seemed to have no compunction about not telling the truth in his quest to get rid of large trees, and his words, "facts" and figures should not be taken as valid in future "reforestation" considerations. • Mimi's 3 minutes Apri1505.doc Page 2 of 2 4/5/05 6:13 PM V April 5, 2005 — Agenda Item #4 - - Reconsideration of Reforestation Request Included in your packet of information should have been a history of Reforestation on our block • that I submitted. I want to thank the PB &R for voting on January 13 to reconsider the current reforestation request for the 300 Block of Larkspur. The G -I criteria for reforestation was represented as being met by the staff report, but the criteria had not been met, when you approved it last November 16. Since then, two additional polls have also indicated that the G -1 criteria for reforestation was still not met. The first additional poll was ours and the second was the city's. Since the G -1 criteria has never been met, I request that the Commission's approval of November 16, 2004 be rescinded by the Commission and that the reforestation request be disapproved. Three other issues have come up as a result of the Commission's reconsideration that I think require corrective action. The first issue is inaccurate staff reports. Staff has presented inaccurate information on Larkspur reforestation agenda items at PB &R Commission meetings every single time since 2002. The first was on June 4, 2002 (60% criteria not met, renter's signature, etc.), the second was November 16, 2004 (60% criteria not met, five different petitions, etc.) and the third was on March 1, 2005 (60% criteria not met, at least two very obvious forged signatures, etc.). The staff report for tonight's meeting incorrectly states that "the Larkspur Avenue reforestation request no longer meets the minimum requirements of the G -1 Policy, ... ". The staff report should be corrected to state that "the Larkspur Avenue reforestation request never met the minimum requirements of the G -1 Policy, ... ". The PB &R should never have been asked to consider any reforestation request on the 300 block of Larkspur because not one has ever met the G -1 criteria. Staff reports are biased in favor of tree removals most likely due to a conflict of interest between • concrete and trees. With the changes in the General Services Department, this would be a perfect time to split off the Parks and Trees portion of General Services as a separate unit that reports directly to the Mayor & Council. The second issue is forged ballots which were part of the staff's arguments to have the Commission vote on the reforestation at the March 1 meeting (see attached). I think the commission should recommend to the City Attorney that the forged ballots be diligently investigated and that she turn over any information relating to the forged ballots to Law Enforcement. The third issue is concrete removal and replacement. Perfectly good sidewalks were replaced on our block in early February 2005. In our presentation on March 1, 2005 we showed you pictures of the sidewalks near the River She -Oaks and near the Pepper trees where sidewalks were replaced this year which showed no damage. When questioned at the November 16 meeting Dave Niederhaus mentioned no hardscape damage, but at the March I meeting he was passing out a report which claimed sidewalk damage. So now, we are in danger of losing our "Problem Trees ". I think the Commission should recommend to the City Manager that the city sidewalk repair data base be corrected to reflect that there was no hardscape damage caused by trees on the 300 block of Larkspur in February 2005. Thank you. Bill Singleton 317 Larkspur Avenue i PB &R April 2005 Bilrs 3 minutesAm Page t of 3 4/5/2005 FEF7 21 -2005 97:34 PM P.el y - CITY OF MEWF DIN BEACH V 2 P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH. CA 926588915 4:. t'4 [,�p pN�' REFORESTATION BALLOT February 4, 1.005 Six (6) City Parkway Street Trees • River She -Oak Trees are proposed for reforestation (removal and replacement) at the following addresses: 190.302, 304, 310 and 312 Larksour Avenue. Corona del Mar The six River She -Oak trees would be replaced by 24" boxed Firewheel trees. All costs of removal and replacement would be at the expense of the property owners at 300, 302, 304, 310 -312 Larkspur Avenue, Property Owner: Print Name: cJ 0 S P [� ,�j� V }1A t ((� • Address: 31? >;�i Signature: `_. Date: a iCSDS- . Reforestation: ri. A .2prove Disa ,rove Please return this ballot in the enclosed envelope to the General Services Department, Admin. Division, 3300 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92658, no Eater than February 15, 2005. If you are not the current property owner on Larkspur Avenue, please return the ballot. 3300 Newport Boukvard, Newport Beach 0 PB &R April 2005 Bill's 3 minutes.doc Page 2 of 3 4/5/2005 Frt ; ftym a � T.: Dav °'4eda . Daze: 2rz=05 nme: 1:49:59 PM ...r , � Y Omm OJIM6114 swig r.aOV047 s� • `� `i it JPaMnr74 � Smt (47 CW Putomy Sam Nate- Rivet 5b&Q* I1aa am ptov irwiinwatla (re4,a,.t�a�rwe�gat*0"on "dmrmem aF,ad.a�a..a ptprttg.mt,wala ee at tir aspens acstpgebess..a� r nag nag. p 7W, 31"112 LWkVW AvVmia, PWpQ1YOMa6 RC�CI�MRNItl O(AC CAX I - V M lhtW Name: o4 14n[yf.Ml( Dow I mein o� �a Please, mmm *a b@W fa Se mwalpm W amyl to So C.ment Sw"m DVww ma, \ V� A&ML Ilig'siea. me M"mt WM . Dlaopett mo t4 CA fm es ier *w 1TS6et� 15,100 3. ffyeaweMtmtwtll aRpwlpamwwmcmLmftwAvema .Pti~teaim$abdbt Boa blimp on Footageed. Dte p xt Bea& PGP2"2 PB &R April 2005 Bill's 3 miautes.doc Page 3 of 3 4/5/2005 • • 0 • • C� J 4 Ve" CJZo A {Qlland� rjj _�BIdVE((FR S COPY' COAST111GYiAYUq SfAWe1K1 A}{0 Jb, 1 n ✓ corcw ttrrw,cuenrn• � 1 Tract No. 1237 Declaration Concerning Restrictions and Improvements Recotded Mny 3, 1949, In Book 1837, Page 452 of OtBctef Records of Orange County, QJifarnis TIiIS DECLARATION, made this 2nd day of May,: 1949, by JENNIE S. CRUTCHER POUN- DATION, INC., a Corporntion dilly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of tftt State of Oklahoma, hereinafter called the "Declarant" WITNESSFTIir WHERFAS. Declarant Is the owner of the real property located In Corona del Mar, State of Call- forma, and more particularly described as: Lots One (1) to One Hundred- Ninety (190), both inclusive, in Corona Highlands. Tract No. 1277. City of Newpnre Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as recorded In Book 40. Pnges 19 G 20. Miscellaneous Maps, Records of said Orange County. WI IRREAS. Declarant, before said property is sold, desires to subject said property to covenant, conditions. restrictions, provisions, reservations and charges hereinafter set forth. for the benefit of said property and of the present and subsequent owners thereof. NOW. THEREFORE. DECLARANT DOES HERE DECLARE AND IMPOSE FOR THE BENEFIT OF (1) Declarant. Its successors. and assigns: and (2) all others hereafter acquiring title to said lots and each of them, as a general plan for the use. occupancy and Improvement of said lots and each of them, those condi- tions. provisions. covenants. restrictions, reservations and charges hereinafter expressed, which insofar as they nre made applicable to each of said lots (a) shall apply to and bind the Declarant as and while the owner of each or any of said lots and also each and every future owner of each, every end any of said lots, (b) shall Inure to the benefit of not only Declarant, but also of each and every future owner of each. every or any of said lots: (c) shall run with and be binding upon the land. and (d) may be enforced not only by Declarant, but also by any future owner of each, every or any of said lots: and said lots are and each of them shall be held and conveyed upon and subject to the conditions, provisions. covenants, restrictions. reservations and charges herein set forth. The word "Lot' or "Building Site." as used herein shall be deemed and construed to refer to any numbered parcel shown on said mnps of TRACT NO. 1237, or while held in the same ownership, shall be deemed and construed to refer to (a) two or more adjoining parcels having a common side or side lines. (b) all of one such parcel and a portion or portions of adjoining parcels having a common sideline or sidelines, and (c) contiguous portions of two parcels running on the same street and having a com- bined area equal to or greater than the original area of either of said parcels, and having a total front- age equal to or greater than the original frontage of either of said parcels. Said covenants, conditions, restrictions, provisions. reservations and charges now made applicable to saki lots are as follows, to -wit: L That no part of said realty or any lot or building site in said tract shall ever at any time be used said tract- Said corporation or association shall assume the duties of Declarant hereunder pertaining to the particular rights and powers so assigned. transferred, delegated and art over, and upon such corpo- ration or nasocintion evidencing its consent in writing to accept the some and to assume such duties It shall to the extent thereof have the same rights, powers and duties as are given Declarant herein. is 8. No foundation wall of a building erected on any lot shall be placed nearer the side lot line than five (5) feet except with the specific approval of the Architectural Committee hereinabove created, and except in cases where garage is separate from the residence and at the rear of the lot in which event garage may be placed nx close as one foot from side fine provided that proper drainage equipment is placed on it to carry off all water from roof, etc. so that it shall not fall nt any time on adjoining lot. 9. No advertising structures or signs. whether advertising said property for sale or for other pur- poses, shall be displayed anywhere on said property unless same shall have first been approved by the Architectural Committee. I0. Garbage and trash shall be kept in concealed. covered containers sad location of same shall e shown on plans submitted to the Architectural Committee. ( 11. No trees or shrubs shall be planted which, when fully grown, shall block or interfere with the ocean view of adjoining or othtf jlf0teties In said tract. Any trees planted shall not. when fnlfy down, exceed sixteen (16) feet in height. 12. A violation of nny restriction shall cause the particular property upon which the restriction is violated to revert to the Declnrant. Its successors or assigns. Said reversion. however. shall not preju- dice the rights or security of any mortgage or owner of liens or trust deed on premises, provided, how- ever, any purchaser at foreclosure sale shall be bound by these restrictions. 13. No noxious or offensive trade or activity shall be carried on upon the lots In said tract. House trailers, trailers, boats. business and commercial vehicles must be stored within private garages. 14. There shall be no drilling for or production of oil, gas or hydro - carbon substances on any lots In said tract. 15. No part of a residential lot shall be used for business. professional or mercantile purposes. 16. Nothing herein contained shall prevent the erection, maintenance and use by Declarant and its agents of tract offices upon any lot in said tract in connection with the marketing of the lots in said . tract. Lai One Hundred Seventy -Two (172) may be used for storage and shops during construction of homes on said tract. 17. That neither Dcclnrnnt nor the Irvine Company nor said Committee or any member thereof shall he responsible for structural or other defects of any kind or nature whatsoever in said plans or specificntions nor in any building or other structure erected in accordance therewith. IA. That no machinery. appliance or structure shall be placed, operated or maintained on any hnilding site except ns may be usual and customary In connection with the maintenance of a private residence- That no excavation for stone, sand gravel. rock or earth, or for any other purpose shall ever be made on any building site unless such excavation is necessary in connection with the erection of an nppraved structure thereon. That no stable. poultry house or ynrd. pigeon loft or house, beehive or rnhbit hutch or house. kennel or aviary shall he erected. constructed or maintained on any building site, nor shall horses. cattle. hogs, cows, goats, sheep, rabbits, or other animals, pigeons. pheasants. game birds, game or other birds, fowl or poultry be raised. except that dogs and cats may be kept thereon, provided they are not kept, bred or raised thereon for commercial purposes or in unreasonble numbers. it is understood, however, that birds or rabbits may be maintained on said premises as pets, not exceed- ing four of each nuinber, and that this restriction shall not be construed to prohibit ordinary household pets which do not constitute an annoyance or nuisance to neighbors. 19. Ali fences, buildings and walls, etc.. whether constructed at the time of the construction of the residence or in the future. shall be considered part and parcel of the residence and shall be approved by the Architectural Committee. 20. If, for any rensnn, there Is uncertainty as to the front, side, or rear lines of any building site or where the front of the structure is to face, the Architectural Committee shall, in nil cases. determine which are to be deemed such lines. and the decision of the Architectural Committee in respect thereto shall he final. 21. That the Interior walls and ceiling of any garage erected on or maintained on any building site in said trnct shall be plastered or finished in some other manner which is approved by the Archl- tectural Committee. —3— J • Severe View Encroachments to the WEST Severe View Encroachments to the EAST Severe View Encroachments to the SOUTH SAFTEY HAZARD TO CHILDREN FIRE TRUCK ACCESS RESTRICTION CANOPY WIDTH in excess of 50ft CANOPY Height in excess of 25ft CANOPY COVERS OVER HALF OF TWO STREETS - De Anza and Carbrillo Terrace PROVEN HISTORY OF ROAD AND CURB DAMAGE. DOES NOT COMPLY WITH ASSOCIATION REQUIREMENTS. 16 FT MAXIMUM HEIGHT EVERY OWNER IN FAVOR OF KEEPING THE TREE SIGNED THEM BEFORE BUYING THEIR HOME. L-. 0 • SOLUTIONS FOR THE CITY 1) REMOVE TREE - RESTORES VIEWS ELIMINATES THE HAZARDS LOWEST COST 2) TRIM TO 16ft RESTORES PARTIAL VIEWS REDUCES THE HAZARDS ONGOING COSTS AND RISK 3) REPLACEMENT TREE COST UNKNOWN = �1 hr, 1p W4 �