Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - BC - 2009.10.01AGENDA B URLINGAME BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 2009 - 6: 00 PM CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD — Con erence Room A Burlingame, CA I. ROLL CALL Ii�►511►1i�L.� III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. FROM THE FLOOR (At this time, persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter. The Ralph M. Brown Act prohibits the Commission from acting on a matter which is not on the agenda. Comments are limited to three minutes) V. OLD BUSINESS 1. Arbor Day Celebration —March 2010 `-- VI. NEW BUSINESS 1. Appeal of Decision Approving Removal of 6 Lombardy Poplars, 3 Black Acacias, and Monterey Pine at 1568 Alturas Drive 2. Community Garden — Discussion 3. Adopt -a -Planters on Burlingame Avenue - Discussion VH. REPORTS 1. Staff 2. Chairperson 3. Commissioners Next Regular Meeting: Thursday, November 5, 2009— City Hall NOTICE: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities should contact the Parks & Recreation Dept. at (650) 558-7323 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the agenda packet is available for review at the Recreation Center, 850 Burlingame Avenue, during normal office hours. The agendas and minutes are also available on the City's website: www.burlingame.orQ. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Beautification Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at 850 Burlingame Ave during normal business hours. CITY OF BURLINGAME PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 850 Burlingame Avenue Burlingame, California 94010 Telephone: (650) 558-7300 • Parks/Trees (650) 558-7330 Fax: (650) 696-7216 • Email: recreation@burlingame.org August 19, 2009 Cathy Ng 1568 Alturas Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: APPEALS REGARDING THE APPROVED REMOVALS OF 6 LOMBARDY POPLARS, 3 BLACK ACACIAS, AND 1 MONTEREY PINE @ 1568 ALTURAS DRIVE - BURLINGAME We are in receipt of letters appealing the approval to remove of the above mentioned trees. The appeals will be forwarded to the Burlingame Beautification Commission and a hearing will be scheduled for the meeting on Thursday, September 3, 2009. The Commission meets at 6:00 PM at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, (Conference Room A) should you wish to attend and address the Commission regarding this matter. Adjacent property owners are also being sent copies of this letter, pursuant to City Ordinance, so they may attend the Commission meeting and make any comments if they wish to do so. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (650) 558-7330. Sincerely, Bob Disco Parks Supervisor CC: David & Anne Nannim 1555 Alturas Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 Qiang Yin Ji 1566 Alturas Dr. Arcadia, CA 91006 Brian & Linda Murphy 3101 Margarita Ave. Burlingame, CA 94010 Ken Woo 1029 Monterey Dr. Foster City, CA 94404 Richard & Helaine Darling 3100 Margarita Ave Burlingame, CA 94010 Madeleine Fiore 1560 Alturas Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 Carolyn & Donald Kenison 3051 Arguello Ave. Burlingame, CA 94010 Linda Carlton 1552 Alturas Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 William Arnsbarger 3059 Arguello Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 CITY OF BURLINGAME PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 850 Burlingame Avenue Burlingame, California 94010 Telephone: (650) 558-7300 • Parks/Trees (650) 558-7330 Fax: (650) 696-7216 • Email: recreation@burlingame.org July 27, 2009 Cathy Ng 1568 Alturas Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OFTEN TREES C.) 1568 ALTURAS DRIVE - BURLINGAME I reviewed your request to remove 6 Lombardy Poplar, 3 Black Acacia, and I Monterey Pine trees in the back yard of the property at the above address and have made the following determination: 1) The 6 Lombardy Poplar trees are in decline and leaning toward the house. 2) The 3 BIack Acacia trees have a significant lean and poor structure. 3) The 1 Monterey Pine is showing signs of Pine Pitch Canker, is unbalanced with branch growth on only one side of tree. 4) Replacement with five 24-inch box size trees from the enclosed list will be required as defined in Section 11.06.090. Therefore, I intend to issue a permit for the removal of the trees subject to the provisions of the Burlingame Municipal Code. If you agree with the conditions, please sign the enclosed permit and return in the self addressed envelope BEFORE August 12, 2009. Adjacent property owner(s) listed below are also receiving notification of this decision. Appeals to this decision or any of its conditions or findings, must be filed in writing to our office by August 12, 2009 as provided in Section I I.06.080 of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance (Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 11.06). The permit will be issued on August 12, 2009, if no appeal has been received by that date. Our office may be contacted at (650) 558-7330 if you should have any questions. Sincerely, Bob Disco F; Parks Supervisor CC David & Anne Nannini Ken Woo Madeleme Fiore 1555 Alturas Drive 1029 Monterey Drive 1560 Alturas Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 Foster City; CA 94404 Burlingame; CA 94010 Qiang Yin Ji Richard & Helaine Darling Carolyn & Donald Kemson William Ansbarger 20 W. Grandview 3100 Margarita Avenue 3051 Arguello Drive 3059 Arguello Drive Arcadia, CA 91006 Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 OVtlwp¢w CITY OF BURLINGAf PARKS DIVISION, 558-7330 850 BURLINGAME AVEN r BURLINGAME, CA 94010-2858 OFFICIAL STREET TREE LIST - JULY 2008 TREES TO BE USED IN PLANTING STRIPS 4' WIDE AND UNDER 6' WIDE P. ( TREE CrrY USA Site Height at Min Botanical Name Common Name Locations Maturit L Spacing Description O Acer rubrum Red Maple 1450 Capuchino 40-50' 35' DECIDUOUS: Fast growth; lobed, green leaves; brilliant fall color Aesculus carnea Red Horsechestnut 2212 Adeline 40' 30' DECIDUOUS: Fast early growth; round headed; dark green leaves plumes of crimson flowers inspring. O Celtis australis European Hackberry 1108 Cambridge 40-50' 40' DECIDUOUS: Fast growth; gray -green, elm -like leaves; upright, round headed form. O Celtis sinensis Chinese Hackberry 2711 Easton 30-40' 25' DECIDUOUS: Fast growth, glossy, dark green , elm -like leaves; upright round form. Suse table to wooly aphids Eucalyptus nicolii Willow -Leafed 1556 Westmoor 35-45' 25' EVERGREEN: Fast growth; p•aceful, weeping form; textured, Peppermint light i•een leaves; slight odor of peppermint. Fraxinum oxycarpa Raywood Ash 2600 Easton 40-50' 25' DECIDUOUS: Fast growth; compact, round headed; dark green O leaves turn claret red in fall. Gingko biloba Maidenhair tree 405, 409 Block Bays\vater Ave, 30-50' 40' DECIDUOUS: Slow growth; fan shaped leaves turn yellow in fall: O 1240 Cabrillo s readin , almost umbrella form. Magnolia grandiflora Magnolia 'Samuel 2109 Ray Drive 30' 30' EVERGREEN: Fast growth; upright branches; dark green foliage Sommer' has a rusty bronze coloring on leaf underside. White flowers in early spring and again late in summer. Myoporum laetum Myoporum 1503 Ray Drive 20-30' 25' EVERGREEN: Fast growth; dense, glossy, light green foliage. Pistacia chinensis Chinese Pistache 2705 Easton, 121 Costa Rica Ave 30-40' 40' DECIDUOUS: Moderate growth; dark green leaves. brilliant fall O color. Platanus acerifolia London Plane 603 Plymouth 40-60' 45' DECIDUOUS: Fast growth; large, lobed, maple like leaves; sheds O Columbia' (Sycamore) old bark; new bark smooth, cream colored. * Quercus coccinea Scarlet Oak 2022 Ray Drive, 1422 Capuchino 40-70' 45' DECIDUOUS: Moderate to fast growth; high, open branches; O large, bright green leaves tum scarlet in cold fall. * Quercus rubra Red Oak 326 Clarendon Road, 2509 Hillside 40-70' 45' DECIDUOUS: Fast growth; spreading branches with round crown. O Drive Robinia ambigua Idaho Locust 1446 Capuchino 30-40' 30' DECIDUOUS: Moderate to fast growth; spring clusters of bright magenta flowers: long leaves divided into oval leaves. Sapium sebiferum Chinese Tallow 2009 Devereaux Drive 35' 40' DECIDUOUS: Moderate to fast growth: dense, round crown: outstanding fall color O Tristania conferta Brisbane Box 860 Walnut 30-60' 45' EVERGREEN: Moderate to fast growth; reddish-bro\vn bark; green oval leathery leaves: resembles some Eucalyptus. * Ulmus Accolade Elm 1080 Howard 60-80' 55' DECIDUOUS: Fast growth; graceful vase shape limbs; glossy dark O green foliage, yellow in fall. Subject to availability. O Zelkova serrata Zelkova 'Green Vase' 205, 226 Anita Road 60' 60' DECIDUOUS: Moderate to fast growth; vase shaped; oval saw toothed leaves; fall color: drought and wind tolerant. Planter width must be 5ft and over Q City recommended trees to increase the Urban Forest Canopy PROTECTED TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICATION PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 850 BURLINGAME A VENUE BURLINGAME, CA 94010 (650) 558-7330 The undersigned owner of the property at: ADDRESS: /56�) AL URA) DR., 6-A / l o i J (print or type) hereby applies fora � erto�remove or prune more than 1/3 of the crown or roots of the following protected tree(s): p�NECPn>;� - � ► �yN�j c-Aim = �':y'r>,� :z�% ,. C�.,LAcL A CKjA 3 Ci > «V vJ� !)&9" 7'' SPECIES .( if CIRCUMFERENCE LOCATION ON PROPERTY /j 4 � A k7_J) AS DRj 1' WORK TO BE PERFORMED % X F RlEA%OGIAl , REASON WORK IS NECESSARY Zc Ll-!:' I 'IVV- 6] (Please use back ofform for additional comments.) NOTE: A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE TREE(S) OWNER (Print) LA 1H %' A) &7 a.. MUST BE SUBMITTED ALONG WITH A $75.00 CHECK TO: CITY OF BURLINGAME ADDRESS Attach any supporting documentation you may have (Example: Report from an Independent Arborist). PHONE 531J -I ----- ----------------------------------- PERMIT This permit allows the applicant to remove or prune the above listed tree(s) in accordance with the provisions of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 11.06). By signing this permit, the applicant acknowledges receipt of a copy of Chapter 11.06, and agrees to comply with its provisions and all conditions listed below; and that all appeals haveexpired or been resolved. OWNER CITY ARBORIST PARKS & RECREATION DIRECTOR CONDITIONS: VK2� (5) 24 - inch box size landscape tree(s) will be required and may be planted anywhere on the property. If conditions are not met within the allotted time as specified in Section 11.06.080, payment of $400 for each tree into the tree replacement fund will be required. NO replaeement(s) required Contact the Parks Division at (650) 558-7330 when removal(s) completed DATE PERMIT EFFECTIVE PERMIT EXPIRES This work should be done by qualified tree professionals and a copy of this permit must be available at the job site at all times when work is being performed N%1,,, David & Anne Nannini 1555 Alturas Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 650-343-5922 nanninidanda@aol.com August 7, 2009 Bob Disco Parks Supervisor City of Burlingame 850 Burlingame Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: 1568 Alturas Drive Dear Mr. Disco This morning I spoke with Karleen and we discussed the letter you sent to adjacent property owners to the above mentioned address regarding the removal of 10 trees from their property. This is a huge undertaking and as 1 look out of my front and upstairs windows', my husband and I cannot imagine the trees gone. Right now we feel like we are in a park like setting and when the trees are gone we are going to be looking at a hay field of the canyon and our neighbors from Arguello. This is wrong and there must be another alternative to take. These trees incase the home and separates from the canyon. Without these trees, the house will look as if it is sitting in a hole deserted and out of place. The fact you mentioned ten trees are being removed and only five trees will need to replace the ones removed bothers us immensely. You need to come to our property to see the value of the trees. Your letter does not suggest what type of trees would need to replace what is being removed and I understand you leave that up to the homeowner to pick and choose. What if the homeowner picks a slow growing tree? It will take years to replace the beauty that now exists on this property. Why can't the owner cut back and prune the six Lombardy Poplar trees versus total removal. The Monterey Pine may show signs of Pine Pitch Canker but so do all of the pine trees in our neighborhood. Again, why can't the tree be cut back and pruned versus removal. Black Acacia, well I am not a fan of acacia, (although that fills in their back yard beautifully) replacing them wouldn't be a problem, but again not with a slow growing tree. I also asked Karleen if the trees being considered for removal are actually on the owner's property or sitting on canyon property. Although reassured by Karleen they were not sitting on canyon property, how do we really know? Many homeowners have taken over easements in this neighborhood and who is to say that one of the past owners didn't do the same. Have the new homeowners done a property survey of their lot? I also checked over the names on the letter and Qiang Yin Ji may be the owner of a property but I wasn't aware of any rentals around 1568 Alturas. I notice you did not send a letter to the owners of 1564 Alturas which is below 1568 and the removal of trees would definitely affect their property. Please reconsider issuing a permit for the total removal of ten trees and re-evaluate their request along with our concerns. Sincerely David and Anne Nannini Helaine & Richard Darling 3100 Margarita Ave., Burlingame, CA 94010 August 7, 2009 City of Burlingame — Parks and Recreation Department Attn: James Skeels, Director 850 Burlingame Ave. Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: APPEAL OF DECISION TO PERMIT TREE REMOVAL AT 1568 ALTURAS DR. — B URLINGAME Dear Director Skeels: I am writing to appeal the decision to issue a permit to remove ten (10) "protected" trees at 1568 Alturas Drive in Burlingame. This appeal is supported by the neighbors listed and signing below. I was notified of this decision by a letter from Bob Disco, Parks Supervisor, dated July 27, 2009. This appeal is made pursuant to Section 11.06.80 of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance (Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 11.06). My family has made its home at 3100 Margarita Ave., Burlingame for over 30 years. Our house is next to 1568 Alturas Dr. in a west direction. We enjoy the scenery and privacy that these trees afford us. I am appealing the decision to remove the trees on two (2) grounds: 1. Planning Commission Requirement — Privacy and Scenery. The subject trees line the border between my property at 3100 Margarita Ave. and 1568 Alturas Dr. These trees afford a great deal of privacy between the two properties and provide valuable scenery from my property. In 2000, the Burlingame Planning Commission recognized the privacy and scenic value these trees and required the up -keep of the subject trees and planting of additional trees in this location. This issue was before the Planning Commission in August/September 2000 when prior owners of 1568 Alturas Dr. sought a construction permit to build the current structure. Attached is a letter dated September 6, 2000 from the City Planner and excerpts from the August 28, 2000 Planning Commission Meeting showing that one of the specific conditions to granting the construction permit for the current structure was for the maintenance of the trees that obscure the views between my property and 1568 Alturas Dr. I respectfully request that the Parks and Recreation Department reverse its decision to issue a permit to remove these trees in the precise location that the Planning Commission deemed so important so as to condition a construction permit. 2. Environmental Impact Not Fully Studied. I do not believe that the full environmental impact of the removal of the subject trees has been studied. First, the July 27, 2009 letter that I received from the Parks Supervisor does not indicate that consideration was made to the risk of soil erosion posed by removal of the trees. The trees are located on a hill between my property and 1568 Alturas Dr. I understand that at least the six (6) Lombardy Poplar trees were planted specifically to help avoid soil erosion on this hill. Second, the letter does not indicate that any study was made to evaluate the impact the tree removal would have to wind blockage. Third, none of the numbered conclusions in the letter indicate that there is any immediate health problem to any of the subject trees or that they pose a substantial risk to the structure at 1568 Alturas Dr. I would request the Parks and Recreation Department �.- to have the applicant provide an environmental impact study that evaluates all of the points above prior to granting any permit. N I respectfully request that the Parks and Recreation Department consider this appeal and reverse its �.. decision to allow the removal of ten (10) protected trees from 1568 Alturas Dr. If you have any questions about this appeal, do not hesitate to contact me at (650) 759-1098. Very truly, % _ Helaine Darling IC, cG?,e,,cj cc: Cathy Ng 1568 Alturas Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 Neighbors Supporting this Appeal: Kent oo (owner 1556 Alturas Dr.) 1029 Monterey Dr. Foster City, CA 944/04 William Arnsbarger 3059 Arguello Dr. _ Burlingame, CA 94010 C�'-� � •'� •tom Carolyn I ison 3051 Arguello Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 m m THE ENCLOSED PHOTOS ATTEMPT TO SHOW HOW THE REMOVAL OF THE TREES IN QUESTION WOULD AFFECT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. t • "_ 1. SOIL EROSION 2. PRIVACY 3.SCENERY (PHOTOS CAN BE VIEWED AT THE PARKS OFFICE AND WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING) Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2000 0 1568 ALTURAS DRIVE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION (ROBERT A. GERMAN, PYRAMID DESIGN -, OUP, APPLICANT; ANDREAS R. HILDEBRANDT AND ANNIE FLANNERY-HILDEBRANDT, PROPERTY '*t c NERS) Reference staff report, 8.28.00, with attachments. Senior Planner Brooks and Commission discussed the report, reviewed criteria and Plan ling Department comments. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. Corm-nission asked if the pictures in the report were taken from the proposed deck level or the ❑widow❑s walk:; the applicant clarified that they were taken from the deck level. There were no further questions of staff. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public hearing. Robert German, 462 Sterling Road, Mountain View, project architect, noted that story poles were put up where the ❑widow❑s walk❑ will be, changes had been made to the plans as requested by the commission, and explained the proposal. Helaine Darling, 3100 Margarita Avenue, lives next door to proposed addition, presented photos and a letter addressing concerns; how high will the addition be, appreciated that story poles had been put up, can see impact of addition, concerned with impact on her view, have been able to come to an amiable solution, request that applicant landscape and maintain the west corner of the property to obscure views of the chimney and ❑widow❑s walk[], would like the placement of trees and bushes to be made a condition of approval of the project; asked if conditions were added how would it be enforced if future owners wanted landscaping removed. CA Anderson noted that landscaping is not enforceable unless it involves a heritage tree, can ask applicant to plant landscaping, but maintenance would take good faith effort of neighbors. Andreas Hildebrand, 1568 Alturas Drive, project gave him chance to meet neighbors, showed them the plans, had no L xtions, additional landscaping is reasonable request, have hired a landscape architect and will come up with aplan. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner comments: visited the site and talked to the neighbors and applicant, commend applicant for putting up story poles, when look out neighbor❑s side window, do see a small portion of the addition; since applicant willing to install landscaping will add condition; design is nice, blends well with existing house and neighborhood. C. Keighran moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped August 17, 2000, Sheets P 1 through P5, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2) that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a donner(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3) that the conditions of the City Engineer❑s June 30, 2000 memo shall be met; 4) that the western corner of the property adjacent to 3100 Margarita Avenue, shall be landscaped and maintained with trees and bushes that will obscure the view of the addition from the neighboring property; and 5) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Deal. There was no discussion on the motion. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal r -�edures were advised. The item concluded at 8:15 p.m. Approved Minutes -5- fib, CITY � DURLIJdaAME CITY OF BURLINGAME Planning Department September 6, 2000 Robert A. German Pyramid Design Group 462 Steirlin Road Mountain View, CA 94043 Dear Mr. German, City Hall - 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 94010-3997 Tel. (650) 558-7200 Since there was no appeal to or suspension by the City Council, the August 28, 2000 Planning Commission approval of your design review application and hillside area construction permit became effective September 5, 2000. This application was to allow a second story addition at 1568 Alturas Drive, zoned R-1. The August 28, 2000 minutes of the Planning Commission state your application was approved with the following conditions: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped August 17, 2000, Sheets P1 through P5, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormers), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3. that the conditions of the City Engineer's June 30, 2000 memo shall be met; 4. that the western corner of the property adjacent to 3100 Margarita Avenue, shall be landscaped and maintained with trees and bushes that will obscure the view of the addition from the neighboring property; and 5. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Reimbursement of any unspent portion of your design review deposit has been processed and will be mailed �, to the property owner under separate cover. September 6, 2000 1568 Alturas Drive page -2- All site improvements and construction work will require separate application to the Building Department. This approval is valid for one year during which time a building permit must be issued. One extension of up to one year may be considered by the Planning Commission if application is made before the end of the first year. The decision of the Council is a final administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. If you wish to challenge the decision in a court of competent jurisdiction, you must do so within 90 days of the date of the decision unless a shorter time is required pursuant to state or federal law. 4erinely yours, rett MoTir1 City Planner MM : mrb 1568 ALTU.cca c: Andreas Hildebrandt and Annie Flannery, property owners Chief Building Inspector Chief Deputy Valuation, Assessor's Office (99.93 FT X 121.23 FT BEING PTN MARGARITA & ALTURAS DR ABAND & PTN LOT A & PTN LOTS 19 & 20 BLOCK 5 BURLINGAME MANOR MAP NO 1 RSM 26/15 16, CITY OF BURLINGAME; APN: 027-021-290) Brian and Linda Murphy 3101 Margarita Ave Burlingame, CA 94010 July 30, 2009 Bob Disco, Parks Supervisor City of Burlingame Parks & Recreation ill 11IMMINW7 Unfortunately in recent years our neighborhood has lost too many majestic and `protected' trees to un-permitted removal and/or pruning. We commend the new owners at 1568 Alturas Drive for following proper course in seeking changes to their trees. We are in agreement with your findings for the removal of the Black Acacia (3) and Monterey Pine (1), however, the Lombardy Poplars (6) appear healthy. Has the Arborist determined that all 6 trees are diseased or are a danger? We have enjoyed viewing the notable and distinctive Lombardy Poplars for the past 10 years we have resided in our home. Since these trees provide the immediately adjacent neighboring properties with privacy, we hope that either the trees may be pruned or replaced in a similar location by trees large enough to maintain the privacy that has been cherished for many years by those residents. Thank you for taking into consideration our concerns regarding the removal of the s Lombardy Poplar trees at 1568 Alturas Drive. i Sincerely, A444A A,-� Brian and Linda Murphy CITY OF BURLINGAME PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 850 Burlingame Avenue Burlingame, California 94010 Telephone: (650) 558-7300 • Parks/Trees (650) 558-7330 Fax: (650) 696-7216 • Email: recreation@burlingame.org August 26, 2009 Cathy Ng 1568 Alturas Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: REQUEST TO POSTPONE HEARING REGARDING APPEALS FOR THE REMOVAL OF 6 LOMBARDY POPLARS, 3 BLACK ACACIAS, AND 1 MONTEREY PINE @ 1568 ALTURAS DRIVE - BURLINGAME q�Au! Annar4 As per your request to postpone the public hearing on the appeals to your request to remove the above aforementioned trees, the hearing will be postponed and rescheduled for the October 1, 2009 Beautification Commission meeting. The Commission meets at 6:00 PM at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, (Conference Room A) should you wish to attend and address the Commission regarding this matter. Adjacent property owners are also being sent copies of this letter, pursuant to City Ordinance, so they may attend the Commission meeting and snake any comments if they wish to do so. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (650) 558-7330. Sincerely, �aAa4 (,/) Bob Disco Parks Supervisor CC: David & Anne Nannini 1555 Alturas Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 Slq✓I u. c �4 r�4, �►.�ktl✓ 1566 Alturas Dr. C'Q 'limit, Brian & Linda Murphy 3101 Margarita Ave. Ken Woo 1029 Monterey Dr. Foster City, CA 94404 Richard & Helaine Darling 3100 Margarita Ave Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 Madeleine Fiore 1560 Alturas Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 Carolyn & Donald Kenison 3051 Arguello Ave. Burlingame, CA 94010 Linda Carlton 1552 Alturas Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 William Amsbarger 3059 Arguello Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 ISA Certified Arborist Report Tree Assessment Report Submitted to: Cathy Ng `-- 1568 Alturas Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 Prepared by Roberto Guzman RG Horticulture Consultant San Jose, California August 26, 2009 1. Telephone: 408-921-5078 email: arborman04@yahoo.com ^ummary This report refers to the assessment of one (1) Aleppo pine tree and four (4) Lombardy Poplar trees localized at 1568 Alturas Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010, where they have been growing for more than 40 years. I was authorized by the owners of the property to conduct the assessment of these trees due to their closeness to the house. Therefore the focus of this evaluation is to determine their current condition and give recommendations for future decisions based on their Health, structural stability and degree of hazardousness. The structural assessment of the trees was performed as a visual examination based on experience. This included the observance of red flag indicators as permanent targets under their canopies: wounds to the trunk and limbs, cavities, root problem symptoms, size and fullness of the crown (upper branches), degree of trunk tilt (inclined), etc. No invasive tools were used for this examination, however some of the main roots were uncovered manually and carefully for a close look and identification of possible problems. Pine tree. The Pine tree is located on the sloop behind the house, it has an estimated height of 45 feet and a DBH of 32 inches, the distance between the base of the tree and the foundation of the house is 16 feet; the tree is leaning about 30 degrees from vertical toward the side of the house, however most of heavy weight of the canopy aims directly to the roof. The structure of the tree is undesirable, '*-curing the past years almost the half of the branches were removed on one side leaving the stubs to decay. The main stem of the tree shows some dead heartwood as a result of past lesions or disease; there is no sign of significant pests or disease at this moment. Even though part of the foliage of the pine tree looks green, its declining process is already visible and its life span is relatively short. If the tree were located away from the house I would recommend some preservation practices as pruning, cleaning and fertilization, but given its proximity to the house, location on the slop, leaning degree, and compromised structure, my recommendation is to remove it for the safety of the inhabitants and the house. Based on the hazard scale from 0-12 (12 being the highest hazard) this tree is classified as number 9. (see pictures pine-1 t0 5) 2 Telephone: 408-921-5078 email: arborman04@yahoo.com Lombardy Poplar trees There are four mature Lombardy poplar trees grown as a row in the same property, their �,iaracteristic structure of multiple leaders have an average DBH as follows: Tree #1-26.25"; #2- 23.5"; #3- 26.5" and # 4-18.7". Their average estimated height is 65 feet and most of the co - dominants have their base at 4 and 5 feet from the ground level. Their estimated age is between 40-50 years. The distance between the base of the trees and the structure of the house is less -than 20 feet. Due to the pre -dominant winds in the area,the trees grew up leaning about 20 degrees from vertical toward the house. Lombardy poplar trees are in general short lived, prone to limb breakage and susceptible to many diseases and insects. After a close examination of the basal structure, I found scars of Cytospora canker caused by the fungus Cytospora chrisosperma, which is associated with the decline and/or death of many thousands of valuable ornamental trees. As a result of such attack during the past years, there are some hollows left by the dead limbs, also vertical cracks between the lessios and along the canker margins. It is also noticeable the presence of sunken lesions in some of the limbs. The continued decaying of the wood have affected part of the heartwood of the trees. The wide base of the trees seems to be stable, but the multiple leaders are very high, heavy, and prone to breakage during a wind storm. As well as the pine tree above descrived, these poplar trees are too close to the structure of the house, and consequently become a hazard that compromise the safety of the inhabitants and create a potential significant damage to the structure. Lombardy poplar trees are recommended for wind- break- natural barriers in the open fields away from structures. It is well known that the roots of poplar trees are too invasive and damage drainage systems and foundations if planted too close. Recommendation. My recommendation is to remove the existing poplar trees to ensure the safety of the inhabitants and structure. If these trees ever fall down over the structure, the damages could be devastating. The cutting of the trunk must be at ground level. The condition of the site makes difficult the effective use of a stump grinder; so a post -cutting treatment with concentrated herbicide on the stump will be necessary to prevent the re -growth of new shoots. These trees are classified as number 10 from the scale 0-12 of hazardous trees. Attachments. Pictures. Pictures Pine # 1 to 5 show the closeness of the Pine tree to the house, its undesirable structure and the leaning degree over the slope. 3 Telephone: 408-921-5078 email: arborman04@yahoo.com Pictures # Poplar 1 to 14 show the closeness of the row of the Poplar trees to the house, hollows on the trunk as scars of past fungal diseases, and the height of the grove compared with the height of the roof of the house. ,.,_,,id of the report. Certification of Performance I, Roberto Guzman, certify: • That I have personally inspected the tree(s) and/or the property referred to in this report, and have stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation and or appraisal is stated in the attached report and the terms and conditions; • That I have no current interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved; • That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own, and are based on experience, current scientific procedures and facts; • That my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that �..- favors the cause of the client on any other party, nor upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated result, or the occurrence of any subsequent events; • That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices; • That no one provided significant professional assistance to the consultant, except as indicated within the report. I further certify that I am a Member of the American Society of Consulting Arborist, and I am an International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist. I have been involved in the practice of arboriculture and the care and study of trees for over 30 years. Signed: Date:7 t' 4 Telephone: 408-921-5078 email: arborman04@yahoo.com i f� 4.�R� � .d.. .• I �'�' is g `"k, i' � Y ice. Y g Pt f kvl� 12 e Picture # 4 _ Pine tree. Shows the distance from the base of the tree to the house (16 feet) Ate' st .. t Sf A `_ *. Picture # 5 _Pine tree. Shop° s the stru tyre of the house as ` a Pennanent tat'get of the leaning tree. I C- e !i TI uY j: �r f; Loli 'yl l � Picture # 2 _ Poplar trees. Shows the size of the heavy structure of the poplar trees and their closeness to the house. �' Also shows the leaning of the limbs toward the house. dd Ar" Ilk t` � 4 fey .4 m ' F a. ` � � � t M i i AL R� • I 7 tt3.w�; �' '' �' 1. �w•c u� - �, 1 ; _ � � Ate. � • � � +� y,A e ® z a ,A,,, ,. � - $rk 54. �J,; 11 i � � �� 'ice.! B�" i' f` '�.ik• ga 4. by �. • a . y © k^ \\ fir" .� :� \ \< »� , . � �` � �: � A; %�< «.� r <w : Picture # 7 _Poplar tree. Shows the proximity of the branches and foliage to the house Picture # 8 _ Poplar tree. Shows the proximity of the limbs and foliage to the house from a different angle. 1 y � CX ,yA S Picture # I I _ Poplar trees and Pine tree. Shows from different angle the high foliage ot' poplars " ��` and pine trees over the roof of the house. tn { Picture # 12 _ Poplar trees. It shows a close view of some poplar trees within the grove, there are some lesions from past infestation of Cytospora canker. The tree looks disfigured by the diseases and became unattractive as landscape plant. IS1.1 *s g a si mB. a E 1 ;� t Y M BURLINGAME AVENUE PLANTERS/LANDSCAPE 1) There is no irrigation in aggregate planters 2) There is no irrigation in tree wells except at new development projects such as Peets Coffee, 1241 Burlingame Avenue and Apple, 1301 Burlingame Avenue. 3) Several shops along the avenue have hose bibs PARKS DIVISION MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY 1) Trees in planting wells on the avenue, side streets, and in parking lots 2) Low brick planter fronting "The Gap". 3) Rose Garden at entrance to parking lot J off Park Road HISTORY 15 — 20 years ago the Parks Division planted drought resistant plants (Lantana) in aggregate planters. In early 2000, Citizens for a Better Burlingame implemented the 'Adopt -a -Planter' program for new plantings and maintenance of the aggregate planters. At the August 5, 2004, Beautification Commission meeting, Stephen Hamilton of the CBB reported that he would be recommending to the Downtown Burlingame Business Improvement District that they own the Adopt -A -Planter program. He also reported that of the 20 planters on the avenue, 6 had been adopted, none of which had an operating irrigation system, and that merchants had agreed to assist with hand watering throughout the summer months from hose bibs fronting some of the businesses. At that time, cost for reinstalling irrigation to the 20 planters would be approximately $60-80,000 and the lowest cost for watering approximately 55 times a year would be $10,000. In 2004 control and management of the program was transferred to the Downtown Burlingame Business Improvement District. The DBID also managed the watering contracts. In May 2006, the DBID disbanded due to the objections of many of the local merchants and businesses. Since that time the newly formed Downtown Burlingame Business Association took over the management of the planter program. Currently, many of the planters that were "adopted" have been abandoned by the caregivers. Watering and maintenance of most planters on Burlingame Avenue is not being done and existing plants are dying. 9.22.09 BURLINGAME AVENUE PLANTERS/LANDSCAPE 1) There is no irrigation in aggregate planters 2) There is no irrigation in tree wells except at new development projects such as Peets Coffee, 1241 Burlingame Avenue and Apple, 1301 Burlingame Avenue. 3) Several shops along the avenue have hose bibs PARKS DIVISION MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY 1) Trees in planting wells on the avenue, side streets, and in parking lots 2) Low brick planter fronting "The Gap". 3) Rose Garden at entrance to parking lot J off Park Road HISTORY 15 — 20 years ago the Parks Division planted drought resistant plants (Lantana) in aggregate planters. In early 2000, Citizens for a Better Burlingame implemented the 'Adopt -a -Planter' program for new plantings and maintenance of the aggregate planters. At the August 5, 2004, Beautification Commission meeting, Stephen Hamilton of the CBB reported that he would be recommending to the Downtown Burlingame Business Improvement District that they own the Adopt -A -Planter program. He also reported that of the 20 planters on the avenue, 6 had been adopted, none of which had an operating irrigation system, and that merchants had agreed to assist with hand watering throughout the summer months from hose bibs fronting some of the businesses. At that time, cost for reinstalling irrigation to the 20 planters would be approximately $60-80,000 and the lowest cost for watering approximately 55 times a year would be $10,000. In 2004 control and management of the program was transferred to the Downtown Burlingame Business Improvement District. The DBID also managed the watering contracts. In May 2006, the DBID disbanded due to the objections of many of the local merchants and businesses. Since that time the newly formed Downtown Burlingame Business Association took over the management of the planter program. Currently, many of the planters that were "adopted" have been abandoned by the caregivers. Watering and maintenance of most planters on Burlingame Avenue is not being done and existing plants are dying. 9.22.09 'Y "5 -"ZooLl 66 0 MY . :Appeal of the Denial to Remove a City owned Liriodendron Tree (5), 212 Stanley Road - (Contd.) - the applicants were not present for comment. Commissioner McQuaide clarified that in June, the Commission tabled their decision to monitor the ffectiveness of the Merit injection and then Commissioner McQuaide moved that the request be denied for the removal of the City -owned Liriodendron tree because the Merit pesticide application had been successful in controlling the aphid infestation; seconded, Webb. The motion carried 5-0-2 (Absent/Ellis and Lauder). Yolunteer Maintenance Protects - (StaffReport) - Superintendent Richmond stated that the Commission affirmed their participation in the process at the last Commission meeting. He stated that in a memo dated July 18'h, Director Schwartz gave direction to the Commissioners with the following possible options: A. Approval of the Commission will be required for all volunteer efforts proposed by individuals and by organizations. B. Approval of the Commission will be required for volunteer projects proposed by organizations. C. Staff will notify Commission, but no Commission approval will be required for any project. D. An option yet to be developed. The Commission discussed the 4 options. Commissioner Carney stated that there should be some Commission oversight on the volunteer projects. Commissioner Grandcolas commented that the Commission could serve as some kind of clearinghouse to monitor proposed volunteer activities. Commissioner Webb slated he was concerned that volunteers would take on too much work and then be gone and asked who would then take care of the areas? Superintendent Richmond responded that Supervisor Disco would be monitoring the volunteer activities. The only projects available for volunteers are those that existing park maintenance staff cannot attend to on any regular basis. Supervisor Disco commented that the Park Workers are happy to have additional help. Chairperson Hesselgren suggested that the Commission could choose Option A, and then reevaluate the progress and/or problems in several months. Following the discussion, Commissioner Carney moved that the Commission adopt Option A that, Approval of the Commission be required for all volunteer efforts proposed by individuals and by organizations; seconded, Grandcolas. Motion carried 5-0-2 (Absent/Ellis and Lauder). Burlingame Avenue Planters - Stephen Hamilton from Citizens for a Better Burlingame reviewed with the Commission the progress of the work currently being conducted by volunteers on the planters in front of Copenhagen and La Scala Restaurants. He stated that the volunteer group has donated approximately $250 of their own money and the Burlingame Garden Center donated a tree to be planted in one of the planters. Volunteer management has. been successful with 20 volunteers gathering to do the initial planting and then individual volunteers maintaining the planters. Mr. Hamilton stated that he will be recommending to the Downtown Burlingame Business Improvement District that they own the Adopt -A -Planter program. Sam Malouf has agreed in principal to fund $400 and also adopt a planter. The BID will be considering this concept at their next meeting. The Adopt -A -Planter program has been successful in other cities such as Los Gatos and Morgan Hill. Mr. Hamilton reported that of the 20 planters on Burlingame Avenue, 6 planters have been adopted, none ofwhich have an operating irrigation system. The merchants have agreed to assist with hand watering from 'lose bibs that are fronting some of the businesses on the avenue during the summer. Cost for reinstalling irrigation in the 20 planters would cost approximately $60-80,000 and the lowest bid thus far for hand watering approximately 55 times a year, would be $10,000 a year; other bids are being sought. 0a ' W Burlingame Avenue Planters - (Contd.) k1r. Hamilton stated that once the program has been approved by the BID, announcements for a public planting and a community breakfast could be planned for early October. A public planting could then be held �. hvice a year. Mr. Hamilton concluded that he believes the Adopt -A -Planter program fits within the guidelines and hopes the Beautification Commission can endorse this program. Following a brief discussion, Commissioner Grandcolas stated that the concept fits within the guidelines and moved that the Beautification Commission endorse and support the Adopt -A -Planter program for the Burlingame Avenue Business District; seconded, Webb. Motion carried 5-0-2 (AbsendEllis and Lauder). NEW BUSINESS Request for the Removal of a Private Cedar Tree (a_) 1325 Cabrillo Avenue - Arborist Porter reported that he denied the application in June 2004 because the Cedar tree was healthy, well maintained, and structurally sound. Superintendent Richmond stated that the commission may consider other aspects such as the economic enjoyment of the property and the possible disruption of public utilities. Commissioner Grandcolas asked what the costs may be for the removal of such a large tree as opposed to trimming? Arborist Porter stated that if a crane was used, the cost could be from $5,000 to $8,000 and trimming could cost $500 to $1,500 every 3 to 4 years. Commissioner Grandcolas asked how long ago the tree had last been trimmed? Arborist Porter responded that the tree was last trimmed 2 years ago, was well done, and the tree has been well maintained. Commissioner Webb asked as to the legitimacy ofRoto-Rooter being needed 3 to 4 times a year as claimed by the neighbor? Arborist Porter responded that there was no information submitted with the application to support that claim. Chairperson Hesselgren recognized the applicant, Mrs. Levings. Mrs. Levings stated that her neighbor, Mrs. Martinez, has had problems with the pine needles and the roots from her tree but added, that the tree is more work than it's worth. Mrs. Martinez was present and stated that the pine needles get in her gutters and the roots are in her sewer. She stated that Roto Rooter spent 7 hours getting the roots out of the sewer; that, the roots are so big they are breaking her sewer line and are on top of her ground; that, fallen branches have broken her roof 2 times; and that, the tree has many dead branches and pine needles. Chairperson Hesselgren asked Mrs. Levings if she had ever considered root pruning and the placement of root barriers? Mrs. Levings replied that she had not. Commissioner Webb asked how close the Pine tree is to the other trees on the property? Mrs. Martinez said that the trees are not very close to each other. Commissioner Grandcolas stated that his property also has 2 large Pine trees that drop needles; but the City of Burlingame is a Tree City and the trees bring benefit to the community, even if at a cost to the property owner. He noted that there are new gutter covers that can keep the pine needles out of the gutters and the Commission has consistently told applicants that trimming roots, placing root barriers, and routinely maintaining their trees are viable options to removal. S... n N d T CD O CL n D cl) co (D a� �* O ni J n Co 5 -3 �o m �::F Lf) m n c fli O Ln -^ n fD o 5 ni O Q c � am r_. N%�i Q 0 D Cl) Q m C2 an 2 ti N f. ti n rD {� m 0 -n— O � v --� °' cD v( n LO LO C: aj liw� r-r � srw r RsR m ("DLO cu 3 3 0 C) - n _L rn a Aj m 0 �0 n "0e CD 0 O r-1- 0 �, � n o O -,h � n � 2 OL wow` rr� i r <(D J < cn n CD =J rD � 3 -t J 3 �rm -- r s � wes r r, Z �" 0 ;s 3 441�1RIw�/\E R ` - wlf� '%-, an rai rt n fND rD rD D W ni ;4 n. i W C (D j. rD � p C Q Lo (D O (D vi C �• 9- rn 95 zzP*j o o 0 �• o0 n rt" LO C) � rnrnC rn� ( © (D ®..: r t` D rn� l V CL (D -� 0- 3� x ^ i.11. --f--� CU. 19 D rn Adopt a Planter programs ,Many cities have adopt -a -planter programs: o Los Gatos, Morgan Hill, Iticha IVY, Bangor ME etc *.Vary between $$ to free o Adopters either pay or volunteer ..:.Very popular with cities who have programs o Waiting Citizens For A Better Burlingame is a grass -roots coalition of concerned citizens, merchants and property owners dedicated to enhancing the Quality of Life in Burlingame, California through civic engagement. MUZENS BURUNGA"I � p (`�` �i •\� , . � t,,� � ,, oin�� 6L q�~� x` jib• 0 F1r ,g "7 A� S',jE ..&;- :1111o][: kk & sfr g Ir•, L v 3HRUNNI What we have. done esearched Adopt a Planter programs ��►�Talked with and visited Los Gatos program. `Discussed with Parks department ;Inspected all Burlingame Avenue planters �Identified supportive merchants .Developed a trial planting plan Citizens For A Better Burlingame is a grass -roots coalition of concerned citizens, merchants and property owners MUZEHS : i )dedicated to enhancing the Quality of Life in Burlingame, California through civic engagement. RURUAGPP a n rD 9� " r) (D DJ 73 U.) (D OL 71 0 0 ID > CO (D n :3 CD ,0 m c D CD LO (D UO CO 0 Ul to 0 a) 3 n r) 0 0 n 0i rn :T rD o a r) fJ (D n (D La rD 3 ull (D 0) 73 r) _0 0 _0 (D 0 �E T U� gPad m LO cli 0 Z3 (D (D D C: (D 0 CL (D I 0- Lr) a n Q rr N n (D Ln v � a OT 0 D c W ZT (n v ;4 Z3 (D � W � c ZT ?. ti(D ,p v C 3 v (p o v Gi Ul o C o n Lo O a) N O v O p O � C � n � ro o a C Q. � r-r J fJ r, n� 3 73 rD v Lo Q, � c 3 � v t :3 loll 0 M CD C =20' vN c m rri 00 CD 1-1 L / �..LJ 717 L IN Is D �ar�1 l mi 70 m n 0 3 Proposed Trial ���Prepare soil in 2 planters Install semi -permanent plants including lantana and loropetalum. Plant annual color including lobelia, r segonia, salvia,. F_ .*,.,Irrigate from merchants external faucets. Citizens For A Better Burlingame is a grass -roots coalition of concerned citizens, merchants and property owners WIE dedicated to enhancing the Quality of Life in Burlingame, California through civic engagement. BURVAGPP