The URL can be used to link to this page

TR-2011-20b OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 C U P E RT 1 N O (408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • planning C� cupertino.org June 6, 2011 Cindy Cheng Cupertino Investment Partners 1975 Hamilton Avenue #33 San Jose, CA 95125 SUBJECT: TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ACTION LETTER — Application TR-2011-20: This letter confirms the decision of the Director of Community Development, given on June 6, 2011, approving a tree removal permit to remove two (2) Evergreen Ash trees at 19925 Stevens Creek Boulevard with the following conditions: 1. APPROVED PROTECT The approval is based on the arborist report prepared by Michael L. Bench on April 26, 2011, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution. 2. TREE REPLACEMENTS The applicant shall be required to plant three (3) 24-inch box Crape Myrtle trees on the property in accordance with the City's Protected Tree Ordinance. The trees shall be planted prior to final occupancy of building permit no. 10080078 (Use Permit U-2009-09-- Kiddie Academy). 3. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. Staff has made the findings necessary to grant the tree removal permit in accordance with Section 14.18.180 of the Protected Trees Ordinance. Sincerely, George Schroeder, Assistant Planner 408-777-7601, georges@cupertino.org CC: Stevens Creek Investors, LLC,19925 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino, CA 95014 Evaluation of Trees at the Kiddie Academy, 19875 Stevens Creek BLvd., Cupertino, CA Assignment I was asked by Mr. George Schroeder, Planner, City of Cupertino, to evaluate the trees and plants for screening at the Kiddie Academy, 19875 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California. Specifically N1r. Schroeder asked that I address the following three four areas: • Recommend measures to address the roots growing into the future parking/playground Page � 1 area without harming the trees. • Evaluate whether existing tree screening by the future playground is sufficient. • Assess trees visually in need of imrriediate remediation measures. • Recommendations for replacement trees for the trees requiring removal to allow the reciprocal access driveways at the rear. The plans provided for this evaluation are: (1) The Inigation Plan, Sheet L-2, dated 09-22-10; and (2) the Planting Plan, Sheet L-1, dated 9-22-10. These plans were prepared by prepared by V�ilson and Associates, Landscape Architects, Berkeley, California. Observations The existing trees are identified on the Planting Plan, and for this reason, I shall not repeat the entire list, but I will refer to them as it appears appropriate to address the assigned topics. West Side There is a row of Evergreen ash trees (also called Shanzel ash) or Fraxinus uladei, along the west side propei boundary on the neighboring propei The roots of some of these trees are lifting the paving on this property. Although these trees are good size, approximately 30 feet in height, they are still relatively young and can be expected to reach heights of 60-80 feet. Their ti currently measure between 12 and 18 inches in diameter, but they commonly have trunk diameters of 30 to 40 inches in diameter at Inaturity. The Fraxinus uhdei species commonly causes significant infrastructure damage as they mature. Thus, the paving damage on this property is currently fairly nunor compared to the damage that is likely to occur in the future. — ;: ,_. 4- -- , r r f �-,� ; -;:r �v r _ ;; �y � -" � � � . 1' '='E;w : '; �, ' f � _ 'a� � - " _ . • . � � � � ._ � , �� <,� ��s'*Y "�"�: �- ;��: The heaved paving seen in .� ��'�r'� �,�. t � *� :� .: this photo is the worst �. �:�-,_,. _ . . . _ - � �: - _ � r �� -�� -.`$�::... damaged area at this time, but .� _.: � �-.. f s � ��` -��-°� - '�` �} � this damage should be �� ..� � ' � !i ! / - . . R � - .. . � ` r 7 ��,,;� : �_ �; ��'= -� � � expecte� to accelerate with ��!�,i�A' ':�', � � -e*��r � �' r�-�.� `�" - =� � � time. . �� - . � ~ � ,__ ` - � I ;. � .�.--� � �., � � � .c.y�,r'��." � � • ' � � �-� � � r'. =�`��-, L --. " �� . . � r �„_� Fs,.''f °�"�,�' � - `/�"r� . �--� .a. Y _ e . . . . .. � , . ' � ' �� Y �� ` .,. . �� . . _ • - . � � �. �� .�: ��X � � . � ROVAL - .��-�...� �> ;,��., � �r �_ �� oCl .. , .� .x� � ` .�� x� ��... , i � � � � �'" . � �` �� - �,;;-_�� :.�iOn �`=.�:r.�t�OT �:! 3 - _ � • ��;: _ � . f. ' ' _ _ ' ' ,. � ". _ �� ' - : -. �, - ''� _ _:. _. . - , � �- - r __.. _ . . � �. � � .m...�.._ ... . . . , _ _. . ... .. - L , - , ,.,, _ _, � , :: : � . , � � y'4 - ��..: t�. r a: , i,.+ ; v `�+ ,.�. .. ..... . , . Prepared by Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist April 26, 2011 Evaluation of Trees at the Kiddie Academy, 19875 Stevens Creek BLvd., Cupertino, CA Procedure for Treatment of Roots Which Heave Paving Small roots (approximately 1 inch in diameter or smaller) that lift the paving can usually be severed and removed without significant damage to the tree. Medium roots (approximately 2 inches in diameter) should not be severed unless approved by a qualified arborist). Large roots (3 inches in diameter or larger) must not be severed. Instead large roots may be treated as follows: 1. Excavate the top half of roots, which are heaving paving, with a specialized tool called an Page � 2 air spade, designed to remove the soil without damaging the root. 2. Shave approximately 1 inch off of the top of the most severely elevated area of the root (each root must be assessed individually for this procedure). 3. Install a steel plate over the shaved root secured to the root with large screws. 4. Re — pave directly over the root, often resulting in a slight raised area of the paving. After this procedure, the root should grow horizontally like a pancake instead of growing round. This procedure has been in use for a few years by the City of Sunnyvale and the City of Mountain View. Trees typically survive in good condition usually adding 15-20 years of service life. This type of "repair" should be expected to accelerate as these Evergreen ash trees mature. Screening On the West Side � The Evergreen ash (Fraxinus uhdei) is not as evergreen as its name would suggest. It is usually semi-deciduous in this area depending on the severity of each winter. Thus, the screening will usually be significantly reduced in the winter most years. One or two of these Evergreen ash will require removal to construct the reciprocal access driveway on the back side (north side of the property). Between the Evergreen ash trees there are oleander shrubs (Nerium oleander), which are evergreen. In my opinion, their performance ranges between fair to poor on average, and their screening function mimics their performance. The causes appear to be as follows: l. These shrubs are competing in very confined spaces with very aggressive trees. 2. These shrubs naturally grow about 15-20 feet wide, but are pruned to grow about 4 feet wide, which results in few leaves on lower branches. 3. The Nerium oleander species can survive in the shade, as is the case here, but they need full sun to thrive and become dense specimens. The plants will not be as dense and as vigorous as they are capable due to the shade. 4. It appears that the irrigation functions only on the ends of the row of trees (at the north and the south ends). Non-irrigated trees and shrubs of these species will be fairly sparse. These conditions reduce their performance for screening. �If these plants were better irrigated, fertilized, and pruned more from the top and less from the sides, they should be more dense. It should be noted that Nerium oleander is a poisonous plant. The Kiddie Academy will serve small children, who tend to put things in their mouths unaware of the risk. Prepared by Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist April 26, 2011 Evaluation of Trees at the Kiddie Academy, 19875 Stevens Creek BLvd., Cupertino, CA East Side There are 5 flowering pear trees (Pyrus callerya�za) and one small coast redwood tree (Sequoia sempervire�zs) in a row on the neighboring property toward the east. Between these trees, young tree form oleanders (Neriunz olea�zder) have been planted. The flowering pear trees have dense canopies and are very healthy, but their sti are poor Page � 3 By "structure" I refer to their ability to remain standing, which in this case is good, and to their ability to maintain all of their limbs without splitting apa.rt from the parent stems as they mature. The attachments of the limbs of these 5 trees have poor to extremely poor structure. The tree seen in this photo has the worst branching sti of the trees at this site, but all of the 5 flowering pear trees have this weakness, which is �� z' � ,-> � `° called co-dominant stems with imbedded bark. This , �" v `� #': -� i �I � r ` M F , , y , 3 .: bt �� } '' ��. �r` ' ;:;;. �Y r : r<` � structure is inherently weak, because each of these �" =� ,,� �.�� -`' stems is growing in diameter as they put a new :V � ,;� -, � r; �.� �� f ,� growth ring each year. These limbs are literally �. .� �:;-� � . £ ,� s, ,�� ti pushing against each other. The pressure between the - � � � � � � � ' ; `� limbs increases with each new growth ring. � �� f°� ,s � `` �' �'�� ;' Eventually one or more limbs will split apart and r : �'��`'`' ` ' � t �` *� fall. This could have been coi7ected b io er ��E"': Y � ` a:_}e�! ��. �. ,;'r v 1 . y ' �: .- �„ x _ Y l� ' P ' � � a .'_ � { �� µ: , �' =�� ` �� -�' pi when the trees were young, but corrective ��►� � ��r� �� a � � � ' � �� ' � ��' �'� ,�� '� �� "� �`' ��''� � �`�.-�� `�'� ��"`��'��'� runin at this oint would be too severe. �" �►��#��; ��r� f� r � ��.��..�;.� P g P i '�� '4� �L� . � �'� � .,� !� w�i �. �� ,�` �. n� . ,. ��,• :��__�; 1,� F , �;�! � I consider all 5 of these trees to be moderately � �� 1 � �'� � �_�� 1�'�'��'�p�' � � � hazardous. �a �� x ,�� W G ��'��',��x,��,�1,��. R � ' � '9! �F . ��, w � � � � � � � � � �� i �.��' � �.: ��"�l�� . . . . .. . F �� I �� ..,i� , � �..�� ` ��`� ��`�'��►`�� '..; ,��►�'�� `�'� �� _ _ .��.�g�� Screening on the East Side The flowering pear trees (Pyrus calle�yana) are deciduous, and, thus, provide good screening in the growing months (typically March-October), but poor screening in the winter months (typically November-February). Also, they provide little screening below 6-8 feet even during the growing months. � Between the flowering pear trees there a.re oleander shrubs (Nerium olea�zder), which are � � evergreen. However, these have been trained to have a single trunk, wluch is unnatural for the species, to look like little trees. As such, they provide nunimal screening below 5 feet. It appears that this defeats the puipose of attempting to create a screen where small children would be playing. The fact that these oleander sluubs are primarily in shade, they will have the sai.ne perfol7nance deficiencies as the established oleander shrubs on the west side of the site, except for the fact that the flowering pear trees are less aggressive than evergreen ash. Prepared by Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist April 26, 2011 Evaluation of Trees at the Kiddie Academy, 19875 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, CA Again, it should be noted that Nerium oleander is a poisonous plant. The Kiddie Academy will serve small cluldren, who tend to put things in their mouths unaware of the risk. I personally would remove the oleander sYu on the east side, despite the fact that they have been recently planted. -. _ __ Page � 4 I recommend a double row of Heavenly bamboo (Na�idi�aa domestica) to be planted along the east side property boundary to create a screen. This species can tolerate the shade and remain dense. However, to perform as a dense screen, they would require: • Proper planting with a generous quantity of organic matter mixed in the soil to a depth of about 12 inches. Most landscapers will not do this unless they are paid additionally about their standard planting rate. • Properly irrigated weekly, but two times per week in the hot periods. • Fertilized with a balanced formula once per year. • Properly pruned once per year. Most landscape companies do not know how to prune this plant. Trees in Need of Immediate Remediation All of the trees located in the front of the property along Stevens Creek Boulevard are suffering from drought stress. The flowering pear trees are very weak. One of the Raywood ash trees (Fraxinus oxycarpa `Raywood') has branch tip die-back as a result of drought stress. It appears that this site has been neglected for a few years. It will be essential to activate the ii system or to install a new irrigation system to the trees at the front of the property if they would be expected to recover. The turf irrigation alone is not sufficient for the trees, which need deep water (penetration of the soil to a depth of 15-18 inches). I recommend deep irrigation weekly for an entire year, then every 2 weeks thereafter. Replacement Trees for the Reciprical Access Driveway I recommend that the replacement specimens be one of the following species: • London plane (Platanus acerifolia `Yarwood' or `Columbia') • Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) • Chinese pistache (Pistacia chinensis) • Fruitless olive (Olea europea) If properly planted, most any species will require irrigation for a minimum of 3 years to establish. � a� Respectfully submitted, �� Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist International Society of Arboriculture Certification # 1897 American Society of Consulting Arborists Member Prepared by Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist April 26, 2011 f M '.�,� � � � �` 1Y i. ''' � ��'' : � .r �� '�* .4�c � � . � . � � � � �: �.; � _ � � . } ,� i % . � � �� , � �� '°'�` � _ '' � g' . _ �' a ?� � ,yi , •3 ,,. '�� „�� _ _., - .� ir �, ,. , � - e,�. .� � �, -„o_ �. ►' � m 1 � � � �` � . .,.. .. ,. �� .. �� , .. . �... � � 'i .. ... " . �,�� ,1 � ! - � � � �� ,� � .. ' . � �., . � . �}� '�.., µ , ... �*�' � . .. 7 ' � _ � - w-�wa l.nw _ r - y �� . . . . . _ .. .,-. . . ,,,,��. � �''G�'q' - ...}n, �'a° _ . � y . . ' T ° ' � � � .=�+.[ ti _ . . d. . . , . . �� i, '� , .e � .� , � „�� . . . . . � ..� . . � y . � rK 'w!',/ � � � �f �'�. . . .K � r ��. ! - �x�.+.. �k� . .. � � ,. . � � .. ,'� . � � a Y , . � ` il i' � . � �� ' � .e� �. � � � � �� ` yr l . � ` {�' � � � � ::: . . ,., ' ... �g Y . + ♦ .� �, . '. .. . �.�� .� .. � � � �. iwa�� ... . . _ , . f h .T 3 } ��4bi. �•� � R� � ��^ . ��. .kG+'v� . ... . � �:: �, -: � �. � . � ' . . � �� . .. .. . _ . ' " . . !L� � . � � �� ., - �} 1".3 �, , j � � A � \ �f+ . . .. � �� . . . .+6-. � . � � . �.� •` t .� � �b i � '�� r � . ... f � ��:-- , . - .. _ � . . � 'M �' ,J � . S..so .r1, . - �... � �Y _ . - � . t , �. :.. :. ' �. i . DV' n : � . k_ "� j . ♦ b � �Ft'*'�.�Y `&� �.� ' j :Y - . .. - � Y � x ' ,, ...,� . . , .. �, �� » .� � g, ' _ .. ' - _ � ' . - . . . , � , ' . , , . „ . , .,, �. ` ��.i � .w rv_ �"' �.,, 9 .��+t, . �' ' ' '� '" t �t'�' . ! a y,.,�, r�� F �, -� r� u: , y 1 � � � , u. . . ... ;. � $ q � t � :. , f, � . ,. . . � . . � _. .. �. .. . . ,. �. , v�� , - � af �,. �..a.� .: �. �� . . - - � ..,4 ,: � :� '.y� •' 3 ,� w _ ,d l � � -�� t � ° ` � : .* . � . , , - � � ,� `. : • . _ < , -_�,�1 i� _ . . S' � , '�*; � �, � `,�'�, ' �, _ - '..—"' " � Mly .' � .� '� _ �' ` 5 p _�"� • 'g n An,x` = 1 , M1.y ...: _ .. i '�• � - '�,- � +� t . �i ::��w �A�; �. . �: �,,�� :'' .. . . ' . .' �",' . . � t .�� .. w �..,-. . . ,. - �x`'.- . .. � k�� ° . .. ` .. �� . . �� . �*�. Y � ' � �� . � 'M� �� f .. � — . .. t� �,�k��,j . .�. a �� .d, � � ; . � `�:s 'yq. . �;" _ •,� !4�` s ` 3f`�� ° ��I��..,, tj� �._ � y '� �. � . �� - � , j. � � . � � ^ .le s� �''Mt . �y: ': .� �"� �t . �ry .. � 84� +r �r4, � � . � �� ` A � .. ,.a : "�'_.�. 'pt�+�'.�`'�'� . -, � �_ . , � 6 �' � - t ,- ,. . . < < } �fi�" . �c+^ < , . . Y � ' -�� . x . -. _ . . _ . . .. .�j . � _� _ . .... . _. . t � •S � • `3.�(' . .f.' �➢!'S�.E�� . �'�5 n�.. .i . ': . . . �. . � . M 07� .,� �� *�� : S � '- ` ..,...v. � � I. �.� � .. t � ' .. . ..-.. . . .._ ., ' , .rr.�rrr�.�. •+..+..-��w �. -,� ,� . �, p . . �' tr�.:a,. �.. .P. �� '�+� � r' '� 1. . y�_.. �.. . . . � . � � r. ��: � � ��;#� ° �; _ j �� :{� � � � `�� . . � . � ,.. �. .�� . ' - . , � . . . . �„ � ._ ..:: r � _ - -�t : _ � , 3 -_�'-=-�-'-_,. ,._.�_�.,•. , ..-,. ._ �_.___..... � . � � ' .._ , � .,. . .. . .._ � .�: �_ .., . �. ;f �� S . . S . �_:. .�wrr�++ .�u..� -......... ,. � ! � i � 1 � '�: a _ . � . . '1! , , ^ } S � . fi � ,° ' a��i�}i ' -�ii � ' �' i., �... '"�+� t� a.>.s.� ; . � � � ' 3� ' � . � � 1 ►.,� � , � �. .� �c ,� �`�� 4.,:. � "� � � �. , �, � � � � � . �� , .. - �. _. - ,�, d,�; _ � �..�,.�..,,... �,�,..,.,..�.... .. � , r _ i i � �= _ 7^ �� ' • �., � , ,.r� " � � �r _ `F�'�� +k � ��, � .. _ _.f � � �� , ,,. . . t # , . .. ' ��:r.� . . . . � �� , ,: , �.:_. :; - < � ' ' � �� :. ..�'. ��, �•W3.J'T.i�'�.tti� ,�y�� ` � 4,C�,r"C��'k"F.'� � "�' �.. .1/�� L.X31�F.Ll� , �" , • r ... _ � c . ._ . ..,_ :+r . `�� ..,. .. +�iii� .. - - _ _ ' ' - _ _. ' j �� N �1�'n.�T� 7 �t�2C� N � � � � , �� 2ST(�� rN �4�J�:�� f�e,�-�� { � �� ' -�� s � l� L-r�c.,�.�� o�s S H v w�l . I�•�'S. �l��il JDL L{�G�-77D1��' 7'O �G �� 1 CTzWI ll�f--�b ( r 7 � �-� �� l t �t' z-S 5�v� ��E�� r�t,.�1.�OVAL -�.��'°° �/ �Q� �,,_,,: .�� ,r � w r�'— __�;C��'� � -��,:;'��i��`��" � G� �� _ � . � � �,�.�. _. �. -,(� - 'l I � �3� ..1 t �..e� � � , ( ' � l `' � .. �' �� ' � �� _._., _ _ . � � ; • � � � �