HomeMy WebLinkAboutN2000-0503SM1 Q\En .chlMa rAE?4 7-99 EP Form.As
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
(Please type or print legible. Ppass hard - makes 3 copies)
Permit # E.P._ ZO-Ic� —,�pf'V�
[1] APPLICATION FOR: qf CURB CUT ❑ SEWER CONNECTION
(CHECK ONE) ❑ STREET EXCAVATION ❑ WATER CONNECTION
Amount Fee Paid $ Zd Z'tv
❑ UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ❑ OTHER:
Receipt# - -7:3-74-
[2] ADDRESS OF WORK: fZ
[3] APPLICANT'S NAME - :ADjDRESS. -.- AREA CODE
,r
!«.. C1 PHONE: :5
-ty- -33--..-
[4] NAME: ;ADDRESS: :AREA CODE:
}OWNER'S
r
Ei PHONE' t
[5] CONTRACTOR'S NAME: ;ADDRESS.l ey:-%�FCj yAfmANA :Office Phone:7fl 5`'ff 1i(31
— Lt./_ Tff �12-7e Site Phone:
N :Job � . 19
[6] APPLICANT HEREBY MAKES APPLICATION T0:
1"Z'&L-L-
i J3;,r-1&;ee'--'—Z...�- i - 54
f 122 lffo-6,S _1 4_L I S 1- _ .A
s-- (o2 -L (SEE ATTACHED PLANS)
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL REQUIRED BY CITY:
❑ Locate and pothole exisfing City owned utilities (ie: water, sewer, or street lighting conduits) to verify locations prior to start of any work. Maintain a
one (1) foot clearance over or under existing City owned utilities. To arrange for inspection of all connections to City Utilities or if a conflict should occur
please contact of the Utilities Department, 48 hours prior to start of any work at (949) 644-3011. In add
when a sewer cleanout is required, V.C.P. or P.V.C. SDR35 shall be used with a 4TT box over the cleanout riser.
** ALL UNDERGROUND WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A LICENSED CONTRACTOR**
CONTACT "UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT°AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE
OF ANY EXCAVATION AT 1-800-422-4133
[7] CONTRACTOR'S CITY BUSINESS LICENSE NO. S'T7 & I Z27 05 [B] STATE LICENSE NO. -
19] WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE
-- CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE
(Section 3800 Labor Code)
❑ 1 certify that I have a Certificate of consent to self -insure, or Certificate of Worker's. Compensation Insurance or a Certified Copy thereof.
Policy No.: t� Company: irrl-s`E. tie (D Expiration,Date:
Date: )' 7 - Applicant: '.
(signature)
[10] CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION
_ (Section 3800 Labor Code)
❑ 1 certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the
Worker's Compensation laws of California. If, a- If, after signing this this certificate I become subject to the Workers Compensation provisions of
the State Labor Code, I must comply with the provisions of Section 3700, or this permit shall be deemed revoked.
Date: Applicant:
(signature)
Ell] CONTRACTOR LICENSE EXEMPTION
❑ 1 am exemptfrom hiring a Contractor as I am the OWNER of the property and am personally performing all work within the Public right-of-way.
Date: Applicant
(signature)
[32] HOLD HARMLESS STA EMENT
❑ 1 understand that I am locahig minor encroachments within the G(y right-of-way/easement It is my responsibility as the property owner to maintain the
encroachments. I will be responsiblefor replacing the improvements lithe City removes them for mantenance of utilities or other public need; and I, the
property owner shall indemnify and hold the City harmless for any liability associated with the minor encroachments.
Date: Owner Signature:
[13] «««< 24 HOUR ADVANCE NOTICE IS. REQUIRED FOR ALL INSPECTIONS »»»>
CALL(949)644-3311
The terms and conditions of this permit are printed on both sides of this form. Applicant hereby acknowledges that he has read
andsaaiid'1"ns and conditions and that he agrees to abide by them.
u oris
OWNERS ORA HORIZED AGENTS SIGNATURE (DAT
[14] * * * * * TREES WITHIN THE CITY'S RIGHT-OF-WAY * * * * *
NO TREES WITHIN THE CnYS RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE PLANTED, REMOVED OR RELOCATED WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM
- THE GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
SPACE BELOW THIS LINE FOR OFFICE USE
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL REQUIRED DATE SIGNATURE - TITLE
1
PERMIT ISSUED BY:
DATE ISSUED: _ voZ EXPIRATION DATE OF PERM:
PERMIT DENIED:
White -Permit Pink- Temporary Office Copy Yellow -Applicant
Rooks, Shari
From:
Niederhaus, Dave
Sent:
Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:43 AM
To:
Wong, Gilbert; Conway, John
Cc:
Arciniega, Patrick; Hoffstadt, Dick; Oyler, Shauna; Rooks, Shari; Medina, Paul; Waataja, Lisa;
- Wagner, Maryam; Lomeli, Marcy
Subject:
RE: 501 Orchid Avenue
----Original Message ---
From: Wong, Gilbert
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 20018:37 AM
To: Conway, John
Cc: Arciniega, Patrick; Hoffstadt, Dick; Oyler, Shauna; Rooks, Shari; Medina, Paul; Waataja, Lisa; Wagner, Maryann; Lomeli, Marcy;
Niederhaus, Dave
Subject: 501 Orchid Avenue
John
This one is a little complicated. Initially on September 10, 1999, the owner (Nazareth Cassis) applied for
Encroachment Permit EP99-366 to remove a City Tree (interfered with driveway approach) and to construct a
driveway approach, abandon the existing driveway approach, and replace curb & gutter/sidewalk. A General Services
Department condition of approval requires $813.88 for City tree removal/replacement (per September 22, 1999
General Services Department Condition of Appproval). The property owner had a problem paying the $813.88.
Hence, General Sevices (Dave Neiderhaus) lowered the tree removal/replacement cost to $345 ($150 for tree removal
and $195 for tree planting/replacement). The $345 was received and sent to General Services Department and the
encroachment permit EP99-366 was issued on October 27, 1999.
On December 27, 2000 the Contractor (K.O. Contracting) applied for another encroachment permit (Encroachment
Permit N2000-503) for installing a driveway approach, abandon the existing driveway approach, and replacing
curb/gutter/sidewalk (no tree involved). The latest encroachment permit (N2000-503, except no tree) was a duplicate
of EP99-366. On February 6, 2001, the owner request a refund and indicate the tree has already been removed.
Hence, Encroachment Permit EP99-366 was cancelled and the property owner was refunded a portion of the
encroachment permit fees. The work under encroachment permit N2000-503 was completed/inspected on March 13,
2001. It seems that the applicant/contractor did not call/communicate with General Services regarding the planting of
any new tree(s). Planting of any new tree(s) was not included in the work description of the encroachment permit. In
addition, the $195 paid by the applicant to the City was in lieu for the compensation of tree planting/replacement (per
General Services condition of approval, dated September 22, 1999). It appears the tree(s) were installed without
perm ission/approval.
Gilbert
July 12, 2000
TO: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: RESUBDIVISION NO. 1094
FINDINGS & CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FINDINGS:
1. That the design of the subdivision improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired liy
the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.
2. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal
Code and Section 66411 of the Subdivision Map Act.
CONDITIONS:
1. A parcel map shall be recorded. The parcel map shall be prepared on the California coordinate
system (NAD83) and that prior to recordation of the parcel map, the surveyor/engineer preparing
the map shall submit to the County Surveyor and the City of Newport Beach a digital -graphic file
of said map in a manner described in Section 7-9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County
Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18.
2. Prior to recordation of the parcel map, the surveyor/engineer preparing the map shall tie the
boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a
manner described in Section s 7-9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and
Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (one inch iron pipe with tag) shall
be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the Subdivision Engineer. Monuments
shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of construction project.
3. All improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works
Department.
4. Arrangements shall be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory
completion of the public improvements, if it. is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a building
permit prior to completion of the public improvements.
5. Each dwelling unit shall be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to
the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department
and the Building Department.
6� A 10 foot radius corner cutoff at the corner of Orchid Avenue and Second Avenue shall be
dedicated to the public.
C7-)Thatsidewalk be constructed along the Second Avenue frontage, that the unused drive
depression be removed along the Second Avenue frontage, that a curb access ramp be
constructed at the corner of Second Avenue and Orchid Avenue and that any displaced or
cracked sections of curb, gutter and sidewalk be reconstructed along the Orchid Avenue frontage.
All work shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works
Department.
8. All vehicular access to the property shall be from the adjacent alley unless otherwise approved by
the City Council.
9. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction
vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control
and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and
local requirements.
10. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in
accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code unless it is determined by the City
Engineer that such undergrounding is unreasonable or impractical.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915
May 9, 2001
Mrs. Nazareth Cassis
501 Orchid Avenue
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Subject: Illegal Tree Planting
Dear Mrs. Cassis,
This letter is in response to a conversation between your husband and John
Conway, Urban Forester on May 7, requesting an additional week to comply with
staff's request. Due to your absence from the country we will allow an extension
until May 23, 2001 for you to complete the removal of the illegally planted trees.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call John Conway, Urban
Forester at (949) 644-3083 or by e-mail at jconway(c4city newuort-beach ca us.
Sincerely,
Gi(L- r,,,,
David E. Niederhaus, Director
General Services Department
cc: Parks and Trees Superintendent
Urban Forester > J
DEN/JC/pw
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PO. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915
May 3, 2001
Ms. Nazareth Cassis
501 Orchid Avenue
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Subject: Illegal Tree Planting
Dear Ms. Cassis,
This letter is to inform you that the trees located in the City parkway adjacent to
your property were not approved by the City of Newport Beach for planting.
The attached City Council Policy G-6 policy states the City has the responsibility
to:
1. Approve type, location and spacing of the proposed tree planting.
2. Furnish, install, stake and initially fertilize new trees.
3. Prune and spray as required.
In order to comply with the G-6 policy, you must remove the recently planted
trees in the parkway. Additionally, per Encroachment Permit #99-366 you were
permitted to remove one City tree to accommodate the construction of a new
driveway approach to your home, and one 24" box tree of the current designated
species (Eucalyptus cideroxylon, Red Ironbark) was to be planted along 2nd
Avenue when the construction was completed.
Unfortunately, you planted six small King Palm trees, two along Orchid Avenue
and four along 2"d Avenue which do not comply to the City's designated street tree
list. The list designates the Hong Kong Orchid tree for Orchid Avenue and the Red
Ironbark tree for 2"d Avenue.
Once you have removed the six King palms, the City will plant one 24" box Red
Ironbark tree along 2"d Avenue and two 24" box Hong Kong Orchid trees along
Orchid Avenue.
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
April 13, 2001
TO: General Services Director
FROM: Marcelino G. Lomeli
SUBJECT: Chronology of 501 Orchid Avenue Events
1. September 1999 — Ms. Nazareth Cassis, property owner of 501 Orchid Avenue, applies
for an Encroachment Permit (EP #99-366) requesting the removal of one City parkway
street tree due to her proposed installation of an alternate driveway approach.
2. The General Services Department (GSD) reviews the EP and lists conditions to allow the
tree removal provided a new 24" boxed tree be planted at a total cost of $813.88.
3. Ms. Cassis requests that the cost be reduced, staff complies and revises cost to reflect
$345 ($150 for tree removal and $195 for replacement tree). Ms. Cassis agrees to plant a
24" boxed tree of the current species at a later date.
4. EP# 99-366 was issued by the Public Works Department on October 27, 1999.
5. Ms. Cassis proceeds without contacting the GSD staff to coordinate the efforts, and
instead of following staff recommendations, plants 6 small King Palm trees ( 2 along
Orchid Avenue and 4 along 2"d Avenue).
6. Ron Yeo sends attached fax dated March 30, 2001 regarding City departments
coordination of projects that used the Cassis case as an example.
7. The designated street tree for 2"d Avenue is the Red Ironbark Eucalyptus and for Orchid
Avenue is the Hong Kong Orchid. There is ample room for 2 Hong Kong Orchid
parkway trees along the Orchid Avenue side of the property, however, there is insufficient
parkway dimensions along 2"d Avenue to plant any trees due to the approach of winding
sidewalk.
* Note: Items 1 — 3 above occurred prior to the implementation of the current version of
City Council G-1 Policy (Retention/Removal of City Trees) that became effective February
000, and the adoption of the current Designated Street Tree List (May, 2000).
Narceo G. omeli
MGL/pw
Attachment
April 13, 2001
TO: General Services Director
FROM: John Conway
SUBJECT: Chronology of Policy Regarding Property Development and City Trees
A. History
Several years ago it became evident that a policy was required to protect City trees in
coordination with property development. Previously property development occurred
without regard to the valuable City tree inventory asset. Lack of coordinating efforts
between City departments resulted in delays for residents in this process. It was not
uncommon to note that property owners were unaware of the Municipal Codes
applicable to specify tree planting requirements, often not until near completion of a
project. Subsequently required modifications caused delays for all involved. The
Building (Bldg), General Services (GS), Planning (Ping), and Public Works (PW)
Departments Dpts have worked cooperatively to develop and implement a policy to
facilitate the property development process while protecting both property owners and
City concerns.
In February of 2000, the City Council approved the City Council G-1 Policy,
"Retention or Removal of City Trees", which includes language addressing property
development and City trees.
In Summer 2000, GS staff advises the Ping and PW Dpts of the G-1 revisions and
resulting necessary adherence, violations being subject to accumulating fees. Copies
of the Policy were distributed to these departments.
In Fall 2000, the Plug and Bldg Dpts began developing an attachment to accompany
property development documents in addition to the City Council Policy G-1 to advise
of requirements regarding Street trees and property development. (see attached "notice
Attachment') The Notice was reviewed by all departments and implementation
advised.
B. Implementation
In Winter 2000, departments began the new steps for processing all property
development applications and plans.
The Urban Forester also began educating callers who were seeking advise and
assistance on street tree requirements.
From Winter 2000 to Spring 2001, the Urban Forester continued to meet with property
owners and developers explaining the G-1 Policy and the City Council's intent as
follows;
1. To require Encroachment Permits in addition to other related permits
(Building, Demos, Grading, etc.) be reviewed by GS staff to ensure the
protection of City property under their administration, during the
constriction phase.
2. To emphasize protection of existing City trees by advising of the proper
distance of construction activity from City trees, overall tree value, and
alternative methods to ensure protection of City trees.
3. To emphasize and advise the continuing City street tree requirements after
the completion of property development, i.e., size, type, and quantity of
street trees and stated to ensure policy implementation.
4. In the event City tree(s) are required to be removed to accommodate
property development, ensure recovery of the tree(s) value. Notice of
recovery is sent to the GS Director to purchase replacement trees for
planting on site or elsewhere within City Parks, depending upon the
property development restrictions.
C. Improvement Needed
Unfortunately, implementation of these efforts has not been completely successful.
Property owners and developers continue to be unaware of the City's street tree
requirements prior to either the construction or demo phase of property development.
It is imperative that the cooperative efforts continue as the issue is a critical one for
property owners. Tree values can reach and sometime exceed $10,000, for a single
tree specimen. Tree planting costs ($700 each for a 36" box size tree) which are not
factored into the cost of property development, are additional. To ensure accurate
overall property development cost, protection of City trees, recovery for the value of
City trees destroyed, and street tree planting requirements, the following is suggested:
1. Mandatory "Notice" attachments to encroachment permits for property
development during all phases of permit applications processes. This
ensures City right-of-way encroachments have conditions noted prior to the
commencement of the construction and/or demo phase of property
development.
2. As outlined above, implementation of Item B, guidelines for the protection
of city trees, can be addressed in the EP's conditions, again, prior to
construction.
3. Item C, can be stated in the EP.
4, Item D, can be stated in the EP.
5. A checklist developed that will be initiated at Plug or PW Dpts at inception
of projects.
The impact of additional staff time to implement these steps at the beginning of the property
development process will be well spent compared to the resources used to intervene later after
work has begun, or in some cases completed. All participating Departments must agree upon
a step by step process, and each Departments staff s responsibility, to ensure successful
policy implementation and timely, accurate, response to the public.
k'A
J Conway
—
JC/pw
Attachment
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
NEW TREES REQUIRED IN PARKWAY
Per the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Section
13.09.010 street trees are required to be planted in the
City parkway adjacent to a building site if:
A new building is constructed or a building is moved onto
a vacant lot or if the area of a building is increased by
50%.
Such construction projects are required to provide street
trees in the parkway adjoining the site to the satisfaction
of the General Services Department, Urban Forester at
(949) 644-3083. Approval from General Services is
required on the building inspection card prior to final
inspection.
PROTECTION OF EXISTING TREES IN PARKWAY
It is required that you protect City parkway street trees
from damage during grading and construction. Removal
of any City trees requires prior approval from the General
Services Department. If construction is required adjacent
to the City parkway or the street trees within the parkway,
an Encroachment Permit must be obtained prior to
construction or grading. The permit can be obtained from
the Public Works Department at (949) 644-3311.
Date: September 22, 1999
To: Gil Wong, Public Works Department
Front: General Services Director
Subject: Nazareth Cassis, Encroachment Permit # 99-366
Staff has reviewed the attached encroachment permit regarding the removal of one
City Cajeput tree located at 501 Orchid Avenue and has the following comments as
conditional for approval of the permit:
1. Staff agrees that in order to accommodate the property development as indicated
by the encroachment permit, the City Cajeput tree (Melaleuca quinquenervia)
will need to be removed.
2. The removal is acceptable since the tree will be in conflict with the proposed
driveway approach. Additionally, the tree has an estimated value of $813.88
which the City will require restitution for so that another tree may be planted
elsewhere in the parkway (see attached Tree Appraisal report).
3. Staff recommends that the encroachment permit be approved and that the City
receives the estimated value as a condition of approval.
Please contact Marcelino G. Lomeli, Park and Trees Superintendent, at extension
3069 if you have any questions and once the funds have been received.
David E. Niederhaus
DEN/JC/pw
Attachment
U
Q
w
m
F—
O
a
s
W
z
LL
O
H
U
F—
z
LU
G
F—
Q
W
0
U)
W
U_
W
U)
J
LU
z
W
U
W
M
J
a
� �
Z
m
O
CO
U -J
O U
o
J
�—
z
O
o
N
OU
»
U
z
O
Wa
52
o
w LL
DL Fn
U)
a
J
V
V W�
0
of
N J
Qco Q
N
z
z
w
V'
W W
m
a°
C
U
J
w
w
U
= y zo
z ww
O0 N
V)
Y W
o
z F
7 C,
It Q
~ O
U
lV N —
v F
W
N
W
n
IL
N
v
U
v�