DATE: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27, 2016 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR THE REMOVAL OF FIVE HERITAGE TREES AT 95 MERCEDES LANE (APN )

Similar documents
DATE: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2016

PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES. TOWN OF ATHERTON January 28, :00 P.M. TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 94 ASHFIELD ROAD

Planning Commission Staff Report February 19, 2009

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ MEMORANDUM. To: Don Bussey, Zoning Administrator From: Lawrence Kasparowitz, Project Planner

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G. 1 STAFF REPORT August 4, Staff Contact: Tricia Shortridge (707)

SECTION 39. Title V, Chapter 6, Article 2, added to the Zoning Code of Sacramento County shall read as follows: GREENBACK LANE SPECIAL PLANNING AREA

Planning Commission Staff Report June 5, 2008

ARTICLE II. LANDSCAPING

City of Placerville Planning Commission AGENDA REPORT ITEM 7

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SEPTEMBER 1, 2016

14825 Fruitvale Ave.

City of Sebastopol Tree Board Staff Report

City of Lafayette Study Session Staff Report Design Review Commission

TO: CITY COUNCIL DATE: MARCH 23,2009

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

Palmdale Municipal Code (Excerpts) Title 14: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Chapter 14.04: JOSHUA TREE AND NATIVE DESERT VEGETATION PRESERVATION

Town of Portola Valley General Plan. Nathhorst Triangle Area Plan

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (MASTER PLAN & UNIT PLAN)

City of Lafayette Study Session Staff Report Design Review Commission

Design Review Commission Report

CITY OF LOMPOC PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

ROLL CALL Member Anthony, Member Avdoulos, Member Greco, Member Lynch, Member Maday, Chair Pehrson

MONTECITO PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report for McKinley Appeal of Webb Single Family Dwelling

STAFF REPORT FOR STANDARD COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #CDP FEBRUARY 26, 2015 CPA - 1 PO BOX 238 APTOS, CA 94001

36.1. PURPOSE APPLICABILITY DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

ITEM 3.1. TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS February 5, 2015 Staff Report to the Planning Commission

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Coast Highway APN

1755 Le Roy Avenue (Tellefson Hall)

November 21, Planning Commission Charter Township of Lyon Grand River Ave. New Hudson, MI 48165

Front Yard Parking Appeal 91 Ashdale Avenue

Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Conservation Plan

Report to City Council

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report

CHAPTER 26 LANDSCAPING (Chapter added in its entirety 05-08)

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.3 STAFF REPORT August 18, 2015 Staff Contact: Peyman Behvand (707)

SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE TO DESIGNATE A LANDMARK DISTRICT OVERLAY FOR THE CRAWFORDS VISTA LANDMARK DISTRICT

Architectural and Site Control Commission March 12, 2010 Special Field Meeting, 330 and 340 Golden Hills Drive, Klope

CITY OF BERKELEY. Permit Service Center 2120 Milvia St Berkeley, CA 94704


City of Lafayette Study Session Project Data

Rootstown Township Zoning Resolution 8/26/99. CHAPTER 430 Landscaping And Screening Requirements

The petition proposes the development of five townhomes on a vacant parcel between Charlotte Latin School and Providence Presbyterian Church.

Block 130, Lot 4 on the Tax Map. Doug McCollister John Stokes William Polise Joyce Howell John Moscatelli Shawn McCanney Eugene Haag Stuart Harting

Staff Report to the Planning Commission Application Number:

City of Lafayette Staff Report

CHAPTER 14.18: PROTECTED TREES

PLANNING COMMISSION. Submitted

Front Yard Parking Appeal 103 Roslin Avenue

General Location Annex, Rezone & Preliminary Plat Lansdowne Addition, Unit Three

City of Surrey PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT. OCP Amendment of a portion from Suburban to Urban

Agenda Item # Action: x Agenda Title: Settler s Village Fourth Filing Minor Subdivision

Architectural Review Board Report

- INVITATION - COURTESY INFORMATIONAL MEETING

Planning Commission Report

ORDINANCE Underline: Additions to Ordinance Strike-through: Deleted Text from Existing Ordinance

EXHIBIT B PROJECT NARRATIVE POULSBO MEADOWS

Wake County Parcel Identification Number (PIN) (10-digit) Total Area 0.48

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH SAN MATEO COUNTY

SUBJECT: PREDEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW OF PROJECT LOCATED AT 2632 EAST WASHINGTON BOULEVARD ('ST. LUKE MEDICAL CENTER')

NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY (NOA) OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 2190 Shattuck Avenue Mixed-Use Project

NOTICE OF PREPARATION

Planning & Zoning Commission Planning & Development Department February 17, 2014

1. Request: The subject application is for approval of a gymnasium addition to an existing private school and church.

Environmental Protection Ordinances (Performance Zoning) Bedminster Township, Bucks County

TOWN OF ATHERTON CIVIC CENTER MASTER PLAN

CITY OF PORTSMOUTH PLANNING DEPARTMENT. MEMORANDUM To: From:

4030 COMMERCIAL (C AND CM)

ORDINANCE WHEREAS, this Ordinance is consistent with the City of Winter Garden Comprehensive Plan; and

MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES BUILDING

STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. Conduct Public Hearing to vacate certain public right of way adjacent to Sycamore Avenue and San Pablo Avenue

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT APRIL 7, 2016

Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, :30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL

CONCEPT PLAN APPLICATION

D E S I G N R E V I E W B OA R D

TOWN OF WINDSOR PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUMMARY. Tom Micheletti / Silverado Sonoma Vineyards LLC

3.4 REL: Religious Use District

D1 September 11, 2013 Public Hearing APPLICANT:

2 Project Description

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 15, 2012

COUNTY OF EL DORADO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SPECIAL USE PERMIT

REPORT TO COUNCIL City of Sacramento

PRESENTED: April 15, 2008 FILE: DP No. 273/ Development Permit No Government Road Townhomes

A 3: Scoping Meeting Materials

The maximum amounts shown in the Engineer s Report for each of those categories for FY 2008/09 are as follows (per house/per year):

REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 6A AGENDA ITEM

CITY OF DEERFIELD BEACH Request for City Commission Agenda

Los Angeles Department of City Planning RECOMMENDATION REPORT

Tazewell Pike. Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Design Guidelines

Case Martin Luther King Drive and 212 and 216 North 6 th Street

PART I-D BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY

We have reviewed the proposed concept plans for Beehive Homes and have the following comments:

Aloha Tomorrow Study (2017)

Los Angeles Department of City Planning RECOMMENDATION REPORT

5.1.1 The streetscape along US Highway 64 (Brevard Road); and, The built environment within new residential developments; and,

ORDINANCE NUMBER DRAFT. An ordinance amending Title 21- Subdivision and Title 22- Planning and Zoning of the

Transcription:

DATE: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27, 2016 TO: FROM: THE PLANNING COMMISSION HALEIGH KING, ASSISTANT PLANNER SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR THE REMOVAL OF FIVE HERITAGE TREES AT 95 MERCEDES LANE (APN 070-230-150) RECOMMENDATION: For the reasons outlined in this staff report, Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct the public hearing and approve the Heritage Tree Removal Permit to allow for the removal of five Heritage Palm Trees at 95 Mercedes Lane based on the following finding; 1. The removal of the five palm trees would not be contrary to the purpose and intent of the Atherton General Plan. Basis for finding: The removal of the five heritage trees, Tree#14, #20, #21, and #22/ each 15 Mexican fan palms, and #23/25 Canary Island palm, in combination with a replanting plan and additional site landscaping, would not be contrary to the purpose and intent of the general plan due to the enhanced replanting requirements, maintenance of existing heritage trees on site, and long term benefit of establishing more native species on site. INTRODUCTION: The subject site at 95 Mercedes is an interior lot located at the end of the Mercedes Lane cul-desac with access off Atherton Avenue. The lot is approximately 44,641 square feet (1.02 acres) in area. The site is currently contains a one-story residence with construction plans to demolish the southern wing of the existing residence and rebuild that portion with a basement underneath. The property is surrounded by single-family residences and located within the R1-A zoning district. The subject property contains numerous palm trees located in front of the existing residence. The property also contains a variety of heritage trees including a Coast live oak grove near the western front property line.

April 27, 2016 Planning Commission Staff Report 95 Mercedes Lane Heritage Tree Removal Page 2 ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting Planning Commission consideration for the removal of five heritage trees. All five trees are located within the front yard area facing Mercedes Lane. The four 15 Mexican Fan Palm trees (Tree #14, #20, #21, #22) are requested for removal due to their location within the cut excavation area needed to construct the proposed new basement. Tree #23/ 25 Canary Island Palm is also requested for removal due to the potential impacts from the proposed site construction and the expensive cost of shoring. Four of the trees (Tree #20, 21, 22/15 Mexican Fan Palms and Tree #23/25 Canary Island Palm) are located ranging from 1 to 8 outside of the main building area on the southern side of the property. Tree #14/15 Mexican Fan Palm is located 8 outside of the main building area on the northwest side of the property. The applicant also indicates that options to protect the palms during construction were explored, however the proposed cost of shoring and protection for the trees was determined to be financially unfeasible. The applicant will be doing landscape improvements around the property and will be preserving the existing native oaks as well as introducing more landscape plantings around the site. In addition, the proposed remodel will be introducing more glass and thus landscaping with larger canopies and shade will help to shade the areas of the house with glass facades. Other tree removals on site include the removal of 5 Mexican Fan Palms within the buildable area of the lot. The applicant will be preserving and protecting 2 Mexican Fan Palms located at the front property line, in addition to 1 Live Oak. The proposed construction on the site is in conformance with all Municipal Code standards and regulations and will be required to comply with all applicable Building Code and Tree Protection regulations. Ms. Sally Bentz, Town Arborist, has visited the site and prepared a memo (Attachment 3) based on her review of the Heritage Tree Removal request, the applicant s submitted arborist report, as well as a site inspection. Based on her review, Ms. Bentz notes that neither the Mexican fan palm nor the Canary Island Palm are native species and that they do not provide the same benefits that broad-leaved trees provide. In addition, palms do not have a large tree canopy compared with other native species. Therefore, Ms. Bentz recommends approval for the removal of the five Heritage Trees. If the Commission approves removal of the five palm trees, the Town Arborist recommends that the replacement replanting following the standard replacement requirement of 1-36 box tree and 1-15 gallon tree per Palm removed for a total of 5-36 box trees and 5-15 gallon trees. The Town Arborist recommends that the replacement trees incorporate some native California species and that all replanting will be required prior to finalization of the building permit. The applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan (Attachment 5) showing multiple landscape improvements on the site and the planting of 5-36 Japanese Maple trees on the northwest side of the residence in front of the residence and 3-36 Japanese Maple trees on the southwest side of the residence, in approximately the same locations as the existing Palms requested for removal. The applicant will also be preserving and protecting many existing Heritage oaks and redwoods on the property. Additional landscaping on the site will include laurel shrubs around the perimeter, dogwoods, and cherry blossoms. Final landscape plans will also incorporate native species per the Town Arborist recommendation.

April 27, 2016 Planning Commission Staff Report 95 Mercedes Lane Heritage Tree Removal Page 3 CONCLUSION To grant a Heritage Tree Removal Permit, the Planning Commission shall find that the removal of the trees would not be contrary to the purpose and intent of the Atherton General Plan. The Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan cites that trees shall be preserved to the maximum extent feasible while allowing for construction within established parameters for setbacks and lot coverage in accordance with the Municipal Code chapter regulating the removal of and damage to heritage trees. As indicated above, the palm trees are in direct conflict with the proposed construction and renovation of the existing residence, the trees are non-native, and do not provide a significant canopy similar to other native and Heritage tree species. Staff is supportive of the tree removal request due to the palms non-native status, the protection of existing oaks on the property, the incorporation of more native species plantings as part of the replacement requirements, and the significant landscape improvements proposed on the site. ALTERNATIVES: The Planning Commission could approve, or modify the request. FISCAL IMPACT: All costs covering the processing of this application are paid for by the applicants. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: This project has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as the City Council has determined that the removal of five or fewer heritage trees on a lot between one two acres in size is exempt from further environmental review. RECOMMENDED FORMAL MOTION: I move that the Planning Commission find that the proposed removal of five heritage trees at 95 Mercedes Lane in Atherton would not be contrary to the purpose and intent of the General Plan, for the reasons outlined in the Staff Report, and that the Commission approve the tree removal with the conditions stated in the Draft Heritage Tree Removal Certificate. /s/ Haleigh King Haleigh King, Assistant Planner Attachments: 1. Draft Heritage Tree Removal Certificate 2. Letter of Request & Photos of Existing Trees, dated April 7, 2016 3. Town Arborist Memo, prepared by Ms. Sally Bentz, dated March 31, 2016 4. Applicant s Submitted Arborist report, prepared by John Leffingwell of HortScience, Inc., Certified Arborist, dated March 30, 2016 5. Proposed Tree Removal Plans and Landscape Plan, dated March 30 and April 19, 2016

TOWN OF ATHERTON PLANNING COMMISSION Draft HERITAGE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT the Atherton Planning Commission at a regular meeting thereof, held on Wednesday, April 27, 2016 did grant a Heritage Tree Removal Permit to Karim Temsamani and Penelope Joye pursuant to Atherton Municipal Code Section 8.10 to allow the removal of four Mexican Fan Palms and one Canary Island Palm at 95 Mercedes Lane in Atherton (Assessor s Parcel Number 070-230-150). The Permit was approved subject to the following conditions: Town of Atherton Planning Department 91 Ashfield Road Atherton, California 94027 Phone: (650) 752-0544 Fax: (650) 614-1224 1. Heritage tree removal shall be limited to five palm trees, identified as tree #14, #20, #21, #22, and #23 in the Arborist Report, prepared by John Leffingwell, Certified Arborist dated March 30, 2016 and on the Site Plan prepared by architect, Lorissa Kimm, dated March 30, 2016 and as reviewed by the Planning Commission at its April 27, 2016 meeting. Any substantive changes to the plans shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. 2. Prior to final inspection by the Building Department, the applicant shall implement the replanting of five-36 box trees and 5-15 gallon trees to the satisfaction of the Town Arborist. Trees selected for replanting shall incorporate California native species to the satisfaction of the Town Arborist. Additional landscape screening for the proposed site development shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Town Arborist. 3. This Permit is valid from one year from the effective date. Lisa Costa Sanders Town Planner Effective Date: _ Atherton, CA

Memo To: From: CC: Date: 3/31/16 Re: The Atherton Planning Commission Sally D Bentz, Town Arborist Lisa Costa Sanders Town Planner Heritage Tree Removal Permit Application, 95 Mercedes Lane I have reviewed the heritage trees at 95 Mercedes Lane and offer the following observations for your review: I noted on the plans submitted to building that the applicant wanted to remove several palms inside and outside the buildable area. I reviewed the Palms and found they were neither dead nor dangerous and recommended the applicant submit to Planning Commission for the Palms outside the Buildable area. The applicant wishes to remove 5 Palm trees outside the buildable area. #14-15 Mexican Fan Palm (Washingtonia robusta) #20-15 Mexican Fan Palm #21-15 Mexican Fan Palm #22-15 Mexican Fan Palm #23-25 Canary Island Palm- (Phoenix canariensis) The applicant is preserving trees #36 and 37, Mexican Fan Palms, towards the front of the property. The Palms they are removing inside the buildable area are #15,16,17,18, and 19 all Mexican Fan Palms. Per the ordinance no permit is required. Palms are classified as Monocots with one seed leaf. Monocots included grasses, lilies, orchids and palms. Palms do not grow annual rings of wood. Palms trunks when planted are many times already considered heritage trees. The Mexican Fan Palm is the most common ornamental palm planted in California and is fast growing. It can reach a height of 100 feet. It is native to marshes and riparian valleys in Baja California and North Western Mexico. The Canary Island Palm is native Spain s Canary Islands off of Morocco. Neither Palm is native to California. Palms also do not provide the benefits that Broad-leaved trees provide. My recommendation is to approve the removal of the 5 Palm trees based on the fact that they are non-native and are not providing the benefits other heritage trees in town do. The applicant at this time is not requesting to remove any other heritage trees on site. For non Oak trees the planning commission requires per each tree removed: 3-15 gallon, 2-24 or 1-15 gallon and 1-36. My recommendation for replacement is 1-36 box tree and 1-15 gallon tree per Palm removed for a total of 5-36 box trees and 5-15 gallon trees. I would also recommend a combination of those trees be from California native species. The replacements will be required to be planted prior to building final.

The information included in this memo is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Sally Bentz Town Arborist Certified Arborist WE#9238AM