Loading...
CC 2014-09-09_11.a. Appeal Tree Removal Tanner Lane MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: GEOFF ENGLISH, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO DENIED REQUEST TO REMOVE A TREE AT 465 TANNER LANE DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council adopt a Resolution upholding the Parks and Recreation Commission’s denial of an appeal from Steven L. Andrews to remove a mature Coastal Live Oak tree located at 465 Tanner Lane. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: No fiscal impact to the City of Arroyo Grande. Expenses for removal of the tree would be covered by the resident if the tree removal request is approved. Minor City staff time has been necessary to process the tree removal request . BACKGROUND: Following is a timeline regarding the status of the Tree Removal Permit application submitted by Steven L. Andrews.  April 21, 2014- Tree Removal Permit application submitted to remove a 24”dbh Coastal Live Oak (Quercus agifolia) tree located on his property at 465 Tanner Lane (Attachment # 1), accompanied with a letter and attachments explaining the purpose for the request. (Attachment # 2)  April 25, 2014- City Arborist and Public Works Department employee Peter McClure conducted an evaluation of the tree in question. (Attachment #3)  May 15, 2014- A letter from Public Works Director, Geoff English, denying the tree removal request was mailed to the applicant. (Attachment #4)  May 20, 2014- The applicant, Steven L. Andrews, submitted a letter requesting an appeal of the denial. (Attachment #5)  June 11, 2014- The Parks and Recreation Commission denied the appeal by Mr. Andrews. (Attachment #6)  August 11, 2014- Steven D. Andrews submitted a letter requesting the removal of the tree to City Manager, Steve Adams. (Attachment #7) The applicant requested that the appeal review by the City Council be postponed for consideration until September 9, 2014. Item 11.a. - Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO DENIED REQUEST TO REMOVE A TREE AT 465 TANNER SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE2 The applicant had previously submitted a tree removal request form for the same tree in 2013. This previous Tree Removal application was also denied. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The Community Tree Ordinance (Arroyo Grande Municipal Code 12.16), adopted by the Arroyo Grande City Council, is a comprehensive tree protection program that promotes: A. The preservation, maintenance, and regeneration of all trees; B. A beautiful and aesthetically pleasing community; C. Trees or groves of unique or historical value and wildlife habitat; D. Educational programs that address the importance of trees in the environment and their Joie in purifying the air, providing shade, controlling erosion, and maintaining the rural, small town atmosphere; E. Improved communication between the Parks and Recreation Commission, Architectural Review Committee and the Planning Commission regarding tree-related issues and concerns. In addition, the Community Tree Ordinance establishes policies, regulations and specifications necessary to govern installation, maintenance and preservation of trees to accomplish the goals stated above. The Community Tree Program also establishes the definition of "Regulated Tree" as follows: "Regulated tree" means any tree located on properties in commercial, multifamily or mixed use zones; coastal live oak trees (Quercus agrifolia) on properties in single- family residential zones that measure twelve (12) inches in diameter when measured four feet and six inches from the base; and any trees located in the public right-of-way adjacent to the street on properties in single-family residential zones, · whether city or privately owned. Below is the determination of the tree remova! request based on City staff's evaluation of the tree and compliance with the City of Arroyo Grande Community Tree Ordinance: ~: Coastal Live Oak (Quercus agifolia) Dbh: 24" Location: 465 Tanner Lane, Arroyo Grande Tree Status: Regulated under the City of Arroyo Grande Community Tree Program Ordinance as it is a Coastal Live Oak that measures at least twelve (12) inches diameter at breast height. Removal Determination: Denied for the following reasons: This tree is regulated under the City's Tree Ordinance which lists specific reasons that quali'fy for tree removal authorization. In City staff's opinion, the reasons stated in the request did not meet the established conditions for the following reasons: 1. The tree is in fair to good condition despite some leaf loss and die-back due to the oak moth worms; moreover, the conditions of the tree may improve with period pesticide spraying for oak moth worm. Oak moth worm infestation has been wide-spread in Arroyo Grande for the past three years, affecting a Item 11.a. - Page 2 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO DENIED REQUEST TO REMOVE A TREE AT 465 TANNER SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE3 significant population of the Coastal Live Oak trees. Most of the affected trees successfully recover and re-foliate from the temporary impacts. 2. We are 'extremely sensitive to your health concerns and claim of allergies to Oak trees, however, there is a Coastal Live Oak tree in the yard of the property adjacent to yours and there are multiple Coastal Live Oak trees in your neighborhood. In addition, there is a significant oak tree grove on the hillside less than 400 feet from your home. Removal of this particular tree will not eliminate the presence of oak pollens and other oak tree related impacts on your property. 3. Allergic reaction to a specific tree type has not been used previously as a justification for the approval of a Tree Removal Permit by the City of Arroyo Grande. Oak pollens also are only released for a one to two month period yearly. For the reasons stated above the removal request for this specific tree has been denied. Tree removal requests for regulated trees are not approved unless the tree meets one or more of the following conditions listed in the City of Arroyo Grande Community Tree Program Ordinance: 1. The condition of the tree regarding its general health, location to utilities or structures, or status as a public nuisance; 2. The necessity of the requested action to allow construction of improvements or otherwise allow economic or other reasonable enjoyment of property; 3. The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal on erosion and water retention; 4. The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect of the tree removal on scenic beauty, historic values, fire safety and the general welfare of the city; 5. Good forestry practices in general. The Public Works Director, by action of the City Council, has been designated with authority to determine if requests for tree removals meet any of the above listed conditions. Following review of the Coastal Live Oak tree located at 465 Tanner, it was determined that the tree is a regulated tree and does not meet the conditions in the Community Tree Program for tree removals and as such recommends denial of the appeal. City of Arroyo Grande Community Tree Ordinance includes a provision for applicants to appeal decisions on tree removal permits by the Director to the -Parks and Recreation Commission. Arroyo Grande Municipal Code 12.16. 070 G. Appeals: Appeals regarding decisions on tree removal permits by the Director are to be submitted in writing to the Parks and Recreation Commission within fourteen (14) days of the Item 11.a. - Page 3 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO DENIED REQUEST TO REMOVE A TREE AT 465 TANNER SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE4 Director's decision. Actions of the Parks and Recreation Commission are final unless appealed to the City Council. On June 11, 2014, the Parks and Recreation Commission denied the appeal by Mr. Andrews on a three to zero vote, with one abstention. The minutes from the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting are attached. The applicant has again requested a reconsideration of the denial of the tree removal request and will be in attendance to speak to this matter. A letter from the Arroyo Grande Tree Guild, supporting the denial of this tree removal request is attached. ADVANTAGES: Denying the appeal preserves a mature oak tree, which provides benefits of a tree canopy, such as shade and preservation of wildlife habitat. In addition, denial of the appeal is consistent with the City's Community Tree Ordinance. DISADVANTAGES: Upholding the appeal and allowing the removal of this tree for the reasons stated may establish precedent for removal of trees based on allergic reactions by property owners. Allergic reaction to a specific tree type has not been used previously as a justification for the approval of a Tree Removal Permit and is not listed within the guidelines proscribed in the Community Tree Ordinance. In addition, Oak moth worm infestation has been widespread in Arroyo Grande for the past three years, affecting a significant population of Arroyo Grande's Coastal Live Oak trees. A large majority of the affected trees successfully recover and re-foliate following the temporary effects of the Oak Moth worm. Staff is also concerned that approving the removal of this tree based on tree litter from Oak Moth worms could be precedent setting as well. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Commission's consideration: • Adopt a Resolution denying the appeal from Steven L. Andrews to remove a mature Coastal Live Oak tree located at 465 Tanner Lane; • Uphold the appeal of the denied tree removal request, allowing for removal with tree planting mitigation requirements; or • Provide direction to staff. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Guidelines Section _ 15301 (c). PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The agenda was posted at City Hall on Thursday, September 4, 2014. The agenda and staff report was posted on the City's website on Friday, September 5, 2013. The appellant, Mr. Steven Andrews was provided notice regarding the meeting and a copy of the staff report in advance. Item 11.a. - Page 4 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO DENIED REQUEST TO REMOVE A TREE AT 465 TANNER SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 PAGE 5· Attachments: 1. Tree Removal Permit application 2. Correspondence from Steven L. Andrews 3. Staff Tree Evaluation form 4. City response letter to applicant 5. Appeal request by applicant 6. Tree Site Map and photograph 7. Parks and Recreation Commission minutes 8. Tree Guild Correspondence-June 2, 2014 Item 11.a. - Page 5 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING AN APPEAL TO REMOVE A COASTAL LIVE OAK TREE AT 465 TANNER LANE WHEREAS, on April 21, 2014, a Tree Removal Permit form was submitted to the Director of Public Works, requesting permission to remove a 24”dbh Coastal Live Oak tree located at 465 Tanner Lane; and WHEREAS, the applicant’s primary reason for requesting permission to remove the tree is because of allergic reactions to pollen and tree debris; and WHEREAS, on May 15, 2014, the Director of Public Works determined that the tree is a regulated tree and the reasons stated for the tree removal do not meet the conditions in the Community Tree Program for tree removals and as such denied the tree removal request; and WHEREAS, the applicant, Steven L. Andrews, submitted a letter appealing the decision of the Director of Public Works; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2014, the Parks and Recreation Commission denied the appeal; and WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a letter to City Manager, appealing the decision of the Parks and Recreation Commission; and NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby finds that none of the conditions required to remove a tree exist based on the evidence presented, and therefore, denies the appeal of the denied request to remove a mature Coastal Live Oak tree located at 465 Tanner Lane. On motion of Council Member __________, seconded by Council Member__________ and on the following roll call vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing Ordinance was adopted this_ day of ______ , 2014. Item 11.a. - Page 6 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 _______________________________ TONY FERRARA, MAYOR ATTEST: _______________________________ KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: _______________________________ STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY Item 11.a. - Page 7 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TREE REMOVAL PERMIT LOCATION OF TREE s TO BE REMOVED: I~ Ir-L LIN e_. Property Address: ~ -rJ '/{/ c/-Z... .r} Pr~pertyOwner:Sref/13/V ~-/l!vl>REti/5 Date: 7-3/,--/ ~ Mailing Address: /!6£ 77f/VJI/ £/Z.. /_/\I " City/bf<ti ~ '(pgftNP£, C/! Zip Code: /3 }L-.2CJ Contact Pe~on: ~ zz;J/£ Avj);<£f!}5 Phonff:S ff'/-:-g5 ,,.Zt:J TREE INFORMATION: 11 ,, /. Number of Trees: l/}J;,/.e, . Ctt:Jll~I .?1Ve Species/Type: '\ ~ k /I ......-/)I Approx. Height: ?l/ Diameter of trunk at 4' 6" above ground: ___ _ -rr<..t:e 1 :5 ~o L-.//AJ--€-- REASON FOR REMOVAL: ~AMAGING PRIVATE/ PUBLIC PROPERTY 0 fiLEAR SITE FOR PERMITED CONSTRUCTION llf'" EMINENT RISK TO PUBLIC SAFETY 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED COMMENTS: ----------------------- TO BE REMOVED BY: 0 CITY 0 OWNER 0 OTHER---------- SIGNATURE -CITY APPROVAL DATE White Copy-Property Owner/Applicant Yellow Copy-Tree Removal Company Pink Copy-City of Arroyo Grande ATTACHMENT 1 Item 11.a. - Page 8 Steven L. Andrews 465 Tanner Ln. Arroyo Grande; CA. 93420 August 111h, 2014. Monday !! ! To: City of A"oyo Grande, CA. 300 E. Branch Street A"oyo Grande, CA. 93420 473-5400 Attention : Mr. Steven D. Adams, City Manager Re: request to remove Tree Dear Steve; This letter is very important, I am requesting removal of Oak tree in front yard. Please see attached request dated 7131114. I believe this to be our fourth request To receive a '' Tree Removal permit ". The main reason for the request is a health matter for myself, I have a very weakened Respiratory system. The Tree with its pollen and debris causes myself to have a Allergi.c reaction, which goes from sneezing to asthma, from that point I am in· danger With emphysema, bronchitis, and up the scale to deadly Pneumonia. The episodes per year average three ( 3 ), each time puts me down for 4 to 6 weeks. Other reasons for removal (I believe) are present, however my health is the priority. I called Parks and Recreation, asked Geoff English director of public works to please Come over to the house. On 8105114 Geoff came over for a visit. He mentioned that he would of never believed the impact on the house without the visit. Driving by the property doesn't tell the story. We discussed the last go around, where I was denied removal on my appeal, the reason being no tree had been removed due to health reasons. It could set a precede.,,t. Our front yard is small, the tree hangs over house, and Neighbors yard at 453. The tree rains down with constant debris, this debris due to the low sloping roof Stays on the Roof, a small gust of wind and now our Back yard area is covered. The other day I was in back yard, a gust of wind and I was covered in hair I shoulders/ Neck I face I with the debris. I would like to work with the-City, and have this a-quiet.matter~ ·fi~d a-resolution. Please call Mr. Geoff English and discuss, also, · if it is at all possible give me a phone Call and come by the house to see actual situation for request. ATTACHMENT 2 Item 11.a. - Page 9 City of Arroyo Grande Department of Public Works TREE REMOVAL REQUEST-STAFF EVALUATION FORM Name of App Ii cant: ~5-\-: e._v e~ AwJ....., e._ vJs Date of Eva lu~tion: 'ii ;L;.-/t 1 Property Address: ~ Tc:ZV\..ld. ev-bQ""-e__ Tree Information ,, ( Species/ Type: Du e.rc\As 0 ~-. ~o\ta D.B.H.: 3 b Height: 46 Regulated Tree under the Community Tree Program Ordinance: Yes-~ No-D Multi-Family Residential Zoning-D Commercial Zoning-D Street Tree in ROW/ Easement-0 Coastal Live Oak-~ Genera.I Condition of Tree: J 5-o..'i 1 .\-o QC>cv, Is the tree damaging private or public property? Yes-D No-~ If yes, explain: ---------------------- Does the tree presents a risk to public health and safety? Yes-D No--~ If yes, explain: ---------------------- NAME OF EVALUATOR: EVALUATOR SIGNATURE: ATTACHMENT 3 Item 11.a. - Page 10 CITY OF A G _/-__ RROYQ, i· :_':RANCE May 15, 2014 Steven L. Andrews 465 Tanner Lane Arroyo Grande CA 93420 Dear Mr. Andrews: CALIF-ORN IA This correspondence regard the Tree Removal Permit dated April 21, 2014 requesting permission to remove a Coastal Live Oak tree located on your property at 465 Tanner Lane, Arroyo Grande. City staff reviewed the Tree Removal Permit application in question and determined the following: 'Dmft: Coastal Live Oak (Quercus agifo/ia) Dbh: 24" Location: 465 Tanner Lane, Arroyo Grande Tree Status: Regulated under the City of Arroyo Grande Community Tree Program Ordinance as it is a Coastal Live Oak that measures at least twelve (12) inch diameter at breast height. Removal Determination: Denied for the following reasons: This tree is regulated under the City's Tree Ordinance which lists specific reasons that qualify for tree removal authorization. In City staffs opinion, the reasons stated in your request do not meet conditions for the following reasons: 1. The tree is in fair to good condition despite some leaf loss and die-back due to due to the oak month worms however the tree may benefit from pesticide spraying for the oak moth worm. 2. We are extremely sensitive to your health concerns and claim of allergies to Oak trees, however, there ·is a Coastal Live Oak tree in the yard of property adjacent to yours and there are multiple Coastal Live Oak trees in your neighborhood. In addition, there is a significant oak tree grove on the hillside less than 400 feet from your home. Removal of this particular tree will not eliminate the presence of oak pollens and other oak tree related impacts on your property. 3. Allergic reaction to a specific tree type has not been used previously as a justification . for the approval of a Tree Removal Permit by the City of Arroyo Grande. For the reasons stated above the removal request for this specific tree has been denied. Typically, tree removal requests for regulated trees are not' approved unless the tree meets one or more of the following conditions listed in the City of Arroyo Grande Community Tree Program Ordinance: o The tree is dead or in poor general health without the potential to recover, o The tree is damaging private or public property o The tree prevents permitted construction or improvements on the property o The tree presents a risk to public health and safety PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT• 1375 Ash Street• Arroyo Grande, California 93420 Phnm~~ fROfi\ 47.~-fi41'iO •FAX: f805) 473-5462 •E-mail: a2citv@arrovo2rande.or2 •Website: www.arrovogrande.org ATTACHMENT 4 Item 11.a. - Page 11 We do however, recognize that you are experiencing some unique issues; therefore, the City does have an appeal process available. If you wish to appeal staff's decision, please submit a letter to the Director of Public Works, 300 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, CA 93420, within fourteen (14) days of this notice. Y~ur appeal will be forwarded to the Parks and Recreation Commission. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 473-5460. Sincerely, Geoff English Director of Public Works Attachments Item 11.a. - Page 12 Steven L. Andrews 465 Tanner Ln. Arroyo Grande, CA. 93420 (805) 489-8520 May 2o'h, 2014, Tuesday J J J To: City of Arroyo Grande % Director of Public Works 300 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, CA. 93420 Attention: Please forward to Parks and Recreation Commission. Re: Appeal process, removal of Oak Tree at above address. Dear Sirs; This. letter is in reference to denial determination, I wish to appeal. The large Oak Tree in our front yard puts out excessive pollen and debris, it is Overwhelming. Literally constantly rqining down upon house and yard I vehicles. This brings on my severe allergic reaction, and related health conditions. For myself it represents constant attack on respiratory, my immune system is weak • ' '1,, " ' . Note; in response, as for the smalf Oak tree "ih' ti.djacent ycird:;--t'ne debris and pollen Is not in significant amount. : ,\ · ' · ·-',~ · · Also, this being the same for the Oak tree -grove on hillside, distance is buffer zone. I absolutely need approval, my preference is to stay living on the property and enjoy. To be denied would force negative change, such as selling house and moving, so forth. This is not the direction I wish to ever consider. I respectjjtlly request this appeal to remove ~/-· ~ c.. Steven L. Andrews, ATTACHMENT 5 Item 11.a. - Page 13 465 Tanner: Tee Removal Request ATTACHMENT 6 Item 11.a. - Page 14 MINUTES CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11, 2014, 6:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS . 215 E. BRANCH STREET, ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 7c. Consideration of an Appeal to Denied Request to Remove a Tree at 465 Tanner Lane Director English presented the staff report stating that the City received a Tree Removal Permit application on April 21, 2014 to remove a Coastal Live Oak located in the front yard at 465 Tanner Lane. The applicant, Steven Andrews is present in the audience. Mr. Andrews had previously submitted a similar request in 2013, which was denied. Along with the current application was documentation from the applicant's physician. Director English stated that while being sensitive to the health issues of the applicant, there are many oak trees in the area, as well as one right next door. He felt that if this request is approved, a precedent will be set. Steven Andrews, applicant, 465 Tanner Lane, stated that he has resided at this location for 17 years, and every year the tree gets bigger and becomes more of a danger to his life. He stated that the oak moths are also a big problem. He said he would be happy to plant a different type of tree should he be allowed to remove the oak. As for setting a precedent, maybe some kind of waiver could be established. Commissioner Betita asked how about the age of the tree. Mr. Andrews stated that he understood that the tree was a seedling from the oak grove across the street and was planted by neighborhood children in 1970. He stated that the City planted the oak tree next door in 2004. He felt that planting this oak side-by-side with the oak in his yard is a nightmare waiting to happen. Commissioner Ekberg asked about recent pruning of the tree, to which Mr. Andrews stated that Cobb's Tree Service pruned the tree about 2 years ago. Commissioner Blethen asked if he had sprayed the tree for the oak moths. Mr. Andrews stated that spraying does not do much good. Commissioner Ekberg asked if Mr. Andrews cited allergies when he first applied for tree removal in 2013. Mr. Andrews answered that his request was denied but decided not appeal at the time. Things are a lot worse now. Commissioner Betita stated that the Commission has a difficult decision to make and that they do not take his health issues lightly. ACTION: Commissioner Betita moved to deny the appeal of the denial to remove the Coast Live Oak. Commissioner Blethen seconded the motion. Motion passes on roll call vote: Ayes: Betita/Blethen/King Noes: None Abstain: Ekberg ATTACHMENT 7 Item 11.a. - Page 15 465 Tanner Lane Applicant Request: Remove large Coast Live Oak Reasons for Objection: 1. This is a regulated tree. 2. Per the City Ordinance and evaluation: e The tree is not dead or in poor health. e The tree is not damaging private or public property. ~ The tree is not a risk to public health and safety. e The tree does not prevent permitted construction or improvements. 3. Adjacent property owner has a small oak tree which has the same potential to act as an allergen. 4. The residential development is adjacent to an existing oak woodland to the south and riparian corridor with trees to the north. 5. Street trees provide benefit to the neighborhood, community, and city as a whole. Summary: Although the Tree Guild sympathizes with the applicant's health condition, removal of regulated street trees due to individual's allergens does not meet the criteria for removal and sets an open ended opportunity for tree removal. App · ant Request: Remov o Eucalyptus. Reasons for · ection: 1. These ar egulated trees. 2. Per the City dinance and evaluation: ,,, The tree · not dead or in poor health. • The tree is n damaging private or public property. e The tree is not a · k to public health and safety. o The tree does not pr ent permitted construction or improvements. 3. Removal of a third tree in t · same location was permitted by th·e City for removal based on damaging privat ublic property per the City Ordinance. Summary: This regulated tree does not meet the criteria for rem Regards, ~~ Scott Dowlan Tree Guild of Arroyo Grande Vice President ATTACHMENT 8 Item 11.a. - Page 16