HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - BC - 2023.07.06CITY O
p
ipQRATED ,
Thursday, July 6, 2023
City of Burlingame
Meeting Agenda
Beautification Commission
6:30 PM
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Burlingame Community Center
850 Burlingame Avenue
Members of the public may view the meeting by logging into the Zoom meeting listed below. The
meeting video will be uploaded to the City's website after the meeting. Members of the public may
provide written comments by email to vflores@burlingame.org.
Emailed comments should include the specific agenda item on which you are commenting or note that
your comment concerns an item that is not on the agenda or is on the Consent Calendar. The length
of the emailed comment should be commensurate with the three minutes customarily allowed for
verbal comments, which is approximately 250-300 words. To ensure that your comment is received
and read to the Beautification Commission for the appropriate agenda item, please submit your email
no later than 5:00 PM on August 4, 2022. The City will make every effort to read emails received after
that time but cannot guarantee such emails will be read into the record. Any emails received after the
5:00 PM deadline which are not read into the record will be provided to the Beautification Commission
after the meeting.
Please click the link below to join the webinar.-
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87397551772?pwd=dDJ5RkZIN2wzSklINUNMZWFIOWE1 UT09
Passcode: 064678
Or One tap mobile:
+16694449171„87397551772#,,,,*064678# US
+16699006833„87397551772#,,,,*064678# US (San Jose)
Or Telephone:
Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
+1 669 444 9171 US
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 253 205 0468 US
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 719 359 4580 US
+1 646 9313860 US
+1 689 278 1000 US
+1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 305 224 1968 US
+1 309 205 3325 US
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 360 209 5623 US
+1 386 347 5053 US
+1 507 473 4847 US
+1 564 217 2000 US
Webinar ID: 873 9755 1772
Passcode: 064678
City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 6/30/2023
Beautification Commission Meeting Agenda July 6, 2023
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. MINUTES
A. June 1. 2023 BBC Draft Minutes
Attachments: Draft Minutes
4. CORRESPONDENCE
5. FROM THE FLOOR
Speakers may address the Commission concerning any matter over which the Commission has
jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance that is not on the agenda. Additional public comments
on agenda action items will be heard when the Commission takes up those items. The Ralph M.
Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the Commission from acting on any
matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on
the table by the door and hand it to staff, although provision of name, address or other identifying
information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each, although the Commission may
adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers.
6. OLD BUSINESS
A. Trees of Burlingame Ad Hoc Committee Members Update
B. Residential and Business Landscape Award Update
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. Ad Hoc Committee to Review the Art in Public Places Policy
Attachments: Staff Report
8. REPORTS
9. UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS
City of Burlingame Page 2 Printed on 6/30/2023
Beautification Commission Meeting Agenda July 6, 2023
Next Regular Meeting: August 3, 2023
Notice: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities should contact the Parks & Recreation
Dept. at (650) 558-7330 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.org.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Burlingame Beautification Commission
regarding any items on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at 850 Burlingame
Avenue during normal business hours.
City of Burlingame Page 3 Printed on 6/30/2023
BURLINGAME BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION
Draft Minutes June 1, 2023
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Beautification Commission was called to order at 6:30 pm by Chair
Bauer.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Bauer, Commissioners Batte, Kirchner, Chu, and Khoury
Absent: None
Staff: Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad, Parks Superintendent/City Arborist Holtz, and
Recording Secretary Flores
Others: None
MINUTES
Commissioner Batte made a motion to approve the April 6, 2023, Regular Meeting minutes as written. The
motion was seconded by Commission Chu and was approved 5-0-0.
CORRESPONDENCE
None
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
OLD BUSINESS
1. Trees of Burlingame Ad Hoc Committee Members Update
Commissioner Kirchner stated that the Trees of Burlingame booklet is nearing completion, and he would
work on the timeline and several maps. He suggested that an Ad Hoc Committee meeting be held to discuss
current content and how best to put the book together.
2. Residential and Business Landscape Award Update
Commissioner Chu stated that the Commission had received ten nominations for the Business Landscape
Award, eight from the Commissioners and two from the public. A total of 12 nominations have been
submitted for the Residential Landscape Award from the Commission. He explained that Commissioners
should conduct site visits before the August 3, 2023 Commission Meeting.
Chair Bauer asked whether each Commissioner was limited to two nominations for the RLA.
Commissioner Chu confirmed the limit of two nominations. Commissioner Batte stated that she would
narrow down her list of nominations.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Protected Tree Removal Appeal —1515 Floribunda Avenue
City Arborist Richard Holtz explained that the City was contacted by a condominium resident at 1515
Floribunda Avenue in February, who expressed concern about landscape plans to renovate the residence.
Arborist Holtz reached out to the Homeowners Association (HOA) to inform them of the trees that were of
protected size and would require a Private Tree Removal application for any proposed removals. In March,
the HOA submitted a Private Tree Removal application for three protected -size trees, including one City
tree and two private trees. The request to remove the City tree was denied. The request to remove the two
private trees was approved due to infrastructure conflict confirmed by an independent arborist report
attached to the application. Arborist Holtz went into more detail on the decision for the removal of the
Hollywood Juniper and Hemlock tree as noted in the staff report.
Public Comment
Condominium resident and HOA Board Member Chizuko Arai stated that the Hemlock tree posed a danger
to gas and sewer lines and that the City was at the site and found debris and roots affecting the main sewer
line. Also, she explained that the Juniper tree request to remove was due to the private arborist's
recommendation, which confirmed the tree was too close to the building.
Owner and resident at 1515 Floribunda Avenue and HOA Board Member Nirav Shah explained that 11
new trees were planted around the property, that the Board was aware of the requirement to get a permit,
and that they followed the process and procedures laid out by the City. He highlighted that they had
experienced sewer back-ups within the last week due to the Hemlock tree directly above the main sewer
line.
Chair Bauer closed Public Comment and welcomed appellant Nick Popovic to speak to the Commission.
Mr. Popovic stated that one of the main attractions of being a Burlingame resident is being in the City of
Trees. He explained that 18 owners signed a letter opposing the landscape project presented by the HOA
Board because they believed the project was not a priority or good use of funds and wanted to preserve the
mature trees. He stated that the new trees were no larger than 3-4 feet, while the trees that were being
removed were large and more mature. Further, he explained that the trees give homeowners privacy from
El Camino Real. He asked the Commission to consider actions from the tree preservation and ecological
perspective. Mr. Popovic stated that other neighboring locations that also have mature trees growing within
10 feet or less of a building are not removed but are incorporated into the landscape design.
Commission Discussion
Commissioner Chu asked about the proposed removal of all trees. Arborist Holtz noted that there are seven
trees of protected size and that he believed the other four trees not included in the application were to
remain. Commissioner Chu inquired about the area surrounding the Hemlock tree being re -graded, whether
it may have negatively impacted the tree, and how best to approach a situation where someone intent on
removing the tree is also actively performing work that may harm it. Arborist Holtz explained that he is
working with City Attorney's office to update the Urban Forest Code and Municipal Code regarding trees
because it is currently vague and has loopholes that unintentionally allow people to damage or endanger a
tree. At present, there is nothing in the Code to address grading around trees.
Chair Bauer asked about the Hemlock tree and whether the gas and sewer intrusions could be removed or
alleviated without removing the tree. Arborist Holtz confirmed he does not have evidence that roots have
gone into the gas line but did speak to City staff, who verified there was root intrusion into sewer lines.
However, it was unclear if it came from the Hemlock tree or a different City tree. He stated that root
intrusion into sewer lines is common and can be dealt without issue but depends on the tree's proximity.
Chair Bauer inquired about cabling, and Arborist Holtz confirmed that it would be at the expense and
maintenance of the property owner.
Commissioner Kirchner asked about the replacement tree requirement. Arborist Holtz confirmed that the
Code requires a one -for -one replacement with a minimum 24-inch box tree (not including palm, fruit,
Japanese Maple, or Italian Cypress tree) that will grow at least 15 feet high at maturity. Commissioner
Kirchner asked whether there was any concrete evidence that the Juniper tree was causing structural
damage. Arborist Holtz explained that a structural report could be required from the applicant to confirm
any damage but that his observation is of an overgrown tree for the space near the building.
Commissioner Chu suggested that each tree receive a motion and vote.
Commissioner Kirchner made a motion to deny the appeal of the Hemlock tree per the criteria in
Burlingame's Municipal Code Chapter 11.06.060 (d)(1) and (d)(7). The motion was seconded by
Commission Batte and was approved 5-0-0.
Commissioner Chu made a motion to uphold the appeal, rejecting the City Arborist's decision to remove
the Hollywood Juniper tree. The motion was seconded by Commission Kirchner and was approved 5-0-0.
2. Consideration of Changing the Themed Block Tree Species for the 1600-1700 Block of Easton Drive
City Arborist Holtz presented the staff report. He provided a brief history of the Easton trees and their
maintenance. He clarified that a Themed Block designation does not mean the City will clear-cut all current
trees to plant the theme tree, but as trees needed to be removed the new theme tree would be planted.
Arborist Holtz provided a breakdown of the tree work performed on Easton after the storms earlier this
year. Further, he explained why the Lemon Scented Gum (Corymbia Citriodora) was chosen as the theme
tree and listed its characteristics.
Arborist Holtz discussed the petition the City received to modify the themed block and confirmed that 1600,
1700, and 2000 blocks of Easton met the 75% of signature threshold. The petition asked for a native
sustainable tree with a shorter height and easier maintenance to replace the Citriodora tree as the theme tree.
He stated that Easton's heritage designation and reforestation plan should guide the decision on the future
look of Easton Drive. Arborist Holtz provided a brief list of alternative trees that would fit the planter strip
and meet the needs of the petitioning residents. He explained that the Commission could vote to reject the
petition, modify the existing long-range reforestation plan, or remove the Themed Block designation.
Chair Bauer asked whether any tree failure during the 2022-2023 storms was a Citriodora, and Arborist
Holtz confirmed there were no Citriodora failures but did see Blue Gum, Red Gum, and Manna Gum
failures.
Commissioner Kirchner inquired about Easton Drive being six themed blocks versus a themed street.
Further, he asked whether there was any implied protection to trees deemed part of a heritage grove.
Arborist Holtz confirmed that our ordinance describes a historic tree or grove as protected.
Commissioner Batte wanted further clarification on multiple blocks being part of the Themed Block
designation versus an entire street. Director Glomstad confirmed the designation is block by block, not an
entire street.
Commissioner Chu asked whether the replacement theme option, if chosen, had to be determined at today's
meeting. Director Glomstad confirmed the item could be continued to a future meeting and that it would
only go to City Council once the recommended species is determined.
Public Comment
Amandeep Khurana stated that he is one of the residents that signed the petition and letter. He explained
that he wanted a safe environment without the worry of falling limbs. He said that he still desires an urban
forest and trees in the area, but with a balance between resources and what it takes to maintain these trees.
He stated his appreciation for the history and beauty of the current trees but wondered if they remained a
good choice, considering climate change, maintenance cost increases, and tree failures. Although beautiful,
Lemon Scented Gum still grows to be 200 feet tall, and he urged the Commission to look at this with an
open mind and a focus on future generations instead of the past.
Julie Cockle, a resident of the 1600 block of Easton Drive, spoke of the neighboring cities removing
Eucalyptus trees due to shallow roots, fire risk, and tendency to drop large, heavy limbs. She explained that
we should not be protecting a tree that cities are banning and that this decision should not be a debate with
the new information. Further, she said she welcomed any tree species on the approved Street Tree Lists.
Susie Lahey, a resident of the 1700 block of Easton Drive, stated that although the City experienced
unprecedented storms, we need to consider the well -established, historically designated grove and the work
that had gone into the maintenance and reforestation of the streets. She explained that the large canopy and
trunk size are distinctive and do not come quickly. She spoke of the shade and wildlife residents enjoyed
from the trees. She stated that she takes issue with the shift in the neighborhood demographics and that
being a contributing factor to this decision.
Scott Hill, a resident of the 1900 block of Easton, spoke in favor of keeping the current theme. He explained
that the look and majestic feel of the Eucalyptus grove is a big part of why he bought his property in
Burlingame almost 20 years ago. He stated that wildlife might not get a lot of focus but that a significant
amount inhabited the trees. He participated in the 2007 discussions that resulted in the long-range plan for
Easton and believed the City had done a great job preserving the heritage trees. He felt the recent pruning
had significantly reduced the risks and was happy he had a large tree at the front of his yard. Further, he
felt that the Citriodora is a great choice then and now and that other species do not measure up. He suggested
more clarification on the differences between Blue Gum and Citriodora. He also said that it is difficult to
consider another species without knowing what that species would be.
Diane Condon, Cypress resident, spoke in favor of keeping the current theme. She provided information
and the historical background of the North Burlingame Women's Club. She understood there should be
responsibility and action block by block. She thought the whole City should be considered, not just Easton
Drive. She explained that the theme designation came in 2007, 1 year after the City's 100th anniversary.
She urged the Commission to look at the bigger perspective.
Secretary Flores read the correspondence received via email from resident Erin Frakes, Easton Drive, where
she expressed her support to remove the Eucalyptus trees along Easton Drive as the Theme tree. She would
like to see all Eucalyptus trees, Lemon Scented Gum, and others removed and replaced with native trees
that are easier to maintain.
Secretary Flores read the correspondence received via email from Easton Drive resident Garrett Frakes. He
wrote about a large Eucalyptus tree removed near their home a couple of years ago that was large, diseased,
and threatened their family as it was situated directly above the bedrooms. He stated that the other trees
along Easton are no different, as was proven during the winter storms that brought down a large Eucalyptus
tree. He asked that these trees be removed and replaced with native trees shorter in height at maturity.
Secretary Flores read the letter submitted by Howard Wetten in support of the Citriodora species remaining
one of the trees designated for the Easton Themed Block. He expressed his pleasure in walking through the
grove and the southern view he has from his residence. He believed the Citriodora is a safe choice and
bears no relationship to the outcomes of the Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees that are not nearly 150 years old.
He summarized some of the characteristics of the Citriodora tree. He explained that although Eucalyptus
trees are not native to North America, they reside throughout California and are recognized as part of the
character of our City.
Secretary Flores read the correspondence received via email from Burlingame resident Jane Gomery in
support of the Citriodora theme that mimics the look of the Blue Gum but does not have the same invasive
roots and will not grow as large.
Secretary Flores read the letter submitted by Jennifer Pfaff, where she provided a brief timeline and history
of Easton Drive Grove. She wrote about the Lemon Gum qualities that make it a great theme choice. She
stated that the worst outcome would be to do away with the themed block entirely in favor of a pick -it -
yourself disparate mix lacking any historical relevance.
Secretary Flores read the email sent by Burlingame resident Jennifer Samuelson in support of the current
trees that occupy Easton and the current plan for similar replacement trees.
Secretary Flores read the letter submitted by Burlingame resident Leslie McQuaide, describing her work as
Chairperson for the Beautification Commission when the Themed Block designation for Easton Drive was
established. She explained the benefits of Eucalyptus trees and specifically the characteristics that make
the Citriodora an appropriately themed species. She stated that changing the look of Easton and other areas
of Burlingame would alter the distinct feel of this gorgeous City, and it would be something we would miss
and possibly regret.
Secretary Flores read the email sent by Easton resident Lynn Israelit who supported keeping the current
theme of Easton Drive. She explained that removing mature and stately trees for fear that someday they
might fail is a knee-jerk reaction that would completely alter the feel of the neighborhood. She asked that
the Commission make a decision based on fact and science rather than the agenda of a vocal few.
Secretary Flores read the letter submitted by Burlingame resident Mary Packard in support of the Easton
Eucalyptus Grove and noted that she found the dispute about the trees very unsettling. She wrote about her
experience growing up and walking along Easton Drive and provided a historical summary of the
significance of the street and the trees. She believed that the phrase City of Trees forms a part of the City's
identity and that residents moved into the area because of it. Although she does not wish for anyone to be
forced to live with trees they find frightening, no one is forced to purchase a home on a tree -lined street. It
is a choice. She would dread to find Burlingame stripped of its unique heritage.
Commission Discussion
Commissioner Chu confirmed and reiterated that the Commission is discussing whether to change the
current replacement tree theme of Easton Drive and not the removal of the Eucalyptus trees.
Chair Bauer spoke of the storm earlier this year and stated that she did not want to overreact based on that
event. She stated that the Citriodora is safer and not as tall as the Blue Gum. She also explained that she
would like to keep the six blocks cohesive and that the heritage grove should remain in place.
Commissioner Kirchner spoke of the three groves in Burlingame. He provided a history of Easton Grove
and stated he was leaning towards doing anything he could to preserve the feel of these Burlingame groves
while still acknowledging the petition that was filed. He stated that he was inclined towards modifying the
existing reforestation plan for all six blocks. He did not think the Citriodora presents as many issues as
others believe but is open to discussion. Lastly, he would not like to see the themed block designation
removed. He suggested coming back at a future meeting and finding a way to preserve the ambiance of
Easton Drive while meeting the concerns of all the people who signed the petition and stated that we could
table this item to the next meeting and come back with answers to some of the questions that were posed.
Commissioner Batte spoke of the Caltrans El Camino Real workshop hosted earlier this year and explained
that they had chosen three tree species replacement options for the Eucalyptus tree proposed for removal,
allowing for consistency. Commissioner Kirchner provided more information on the El Camino Real
project. Arborist Holtz stated that Caltrans has a long list of possible tree species but is primarily looking
at the Pioneer Elm and the Citriodora.
Commissioner Chu echoed Commissioner Kirchner's sentiment. He explained that there is a lot we don't
know about the Citriodora tree's safety and believed there are misconceptions due to the recent storm events.
The second consideration he spoke of is the environmental benefits of the trees and the belief that there is
a suitable tree similar to the Citriodora in stature and benefits to wildlife that can be an appropriate
alternative theme species. Commissioner Chu stated that the look, feel, and historical aspect of the Easton
Grove must consider what the residents have expressed, putting more emphasis on the residents of Easton
Drive versus the rest of the community. He explained that most of these residents favored modifying the
themed block species based on the petition and information presented. Commissioner Chu stated that he
favored changing the theme of Easton Drive.
Arborists Holtz confirmed that only three of the six blocks had met the threshold for petitioning a themed
block change on Easton Drive, and when looking at the six blocks as a whole set, they received 63% of the
required signatures. He explained that getting on the Themed Block List requires a 66% consensus, whereas
getting off the list requires a 75% consensus.
The Commission discussed whether to keep the six blocks as an entity versus considering the theme of each
individual block separately.
BIJRLIM1FGANIE STAFF REPORT
To: Beautification Commission
Date: July 6, 2023
From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director
Subject: Ad Hoc Committee to Review the Art in Public Places Policy
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Commission review the staff report.
BACKGROUND
The City established an Art in Public Places policy in 2007. The City Council is interested in
updating the policy.
Per the policy, an ad hoc committee comprised of two members from the Parks and Recreation
Commission, Beautification Commission, and the Library Board is to review the changes
proposed in the policy before review and approval from the City Council.
DISCUSSION
Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Bauer has appointed Commissioner Kirchner and
herself to the Ad Hoc committee.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact.
1
Chair Bauer made a motion to treat the 1500-2000 blocks of Easton Drive as a heritage grove, and the theme
block decision will apply to all six blocks. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Batte and was
approved 5-0-0.
Commissioner Batte stated that she favored a short list of approved theme trees for Easton Drive and
keeping the Citriodora as one of the options.
Commissioner Chu stated that he would like to see a broader list and have a follow-up discussion.
Commissioner Kirchner stated one of his choices would be the Citriodora and would choose a more vertical
tree as another option, such as the Incense Cedar and the Coastal Redwood. Commissioner Chu stated he
would prefer an Incense Cedar to a Coastal Redwood.
Commissioner Kirchner stated he would like more information about the definition of a heritage grove and
whether any protections are implied or written as part of an ordinance. Arborist Holtz also noted that he
would research more mature Citriodora trees in the neighboring cities. Commissioner Kirchner inquired
about the spacing on the easements people used for parking. Arborist Holtz confirmed the City does not
have any defined spacing requirements and noted that trees could be harmed by cars parked on top of their
root systems.
Commissioner Khoury requested more information on the more mature Citriodora trees in the area and
additional alternative tree species options. Arborist Holtz asked for clarification on whether the
Commission would like to see more native trees or trees that mimic the canopy in the area. Commissioner
Khoury confirmed the latter. Commissioner Chu stated he would also like to see more options for
replacement trees aside from those on the staff report, including the characteristics of mature size, growth
rate, drought tolerance, and form.
Director Glomstad confirmed that staff would bring more information to the July or August meeting.
Commissioner Chu made a motion to continue the item to a future meeting. The motion was seconded by
Chair Bauer and was approved 5-0-0.
REPORTS
Arborist Holtz reported that Parks staff is working to maintain areas that were neglected during the winter due
to the storms. Also, information would be sent out via e-news about additional fuel load reduction work in
Mills Canyon.
Director Glomstad encouraged Commissioners to volunteer at the Bingo and Benihana's senior event on June
15, 2023, from 3-5 pm.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:40 pm. The next Beautification Commission
meeting is scheduled for July 6, 2023.
Respectfully submitted,
Vervviicn -Flores
Veronica Flores
Administrative Staff