11 ATTACHMENT 04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Staff believes that the compact space on the open space parcel should be angled counterclockwise a bit more to enable easier access into and out of this space. Discussion Points • Is the proposed parking adequate? Should an additional guest parking space be added to the open space parcel? Tree Removal A tree report by Ed Brennan, consulting arborist, was prepared for the project that specifies the species, size, health, and value of the existing trees on the site that exceed six-inches in diameter (Exhibit G, Attachment 1). As originally proposed, all 20 of the existing trees on the subject property would be removed to accommodate the proposed development, including 12 heritage- sized trees (i.e., a tree which measures 35 feet or greater in height or which measures 55 inches or greater in circumference). A fruitless mulberry tree in the City right-of-way along the project frontage will also be removed as part of the City's Stanley Boulevard reconstruction project. The applicant is currently evaluating whether it would be possible to retain two trees: tree no. 65, a heritage-sized Douglas fir tree near the northern property line of Lot 3; and tree no. 76, a heritage-sized California black walnut tree near the southern property line of Lot 11. In July 2010, the current property owner, Robert Molinaro, requested to remove the three heritage-sized deodar cedar trees near the front of the property due to safety concerns with large falling branches. The City's Landscape Architect hired HortScience to conduct a thorough examination of these three trees. The tree report by HortScience dated July 16, 2010 (Exhibit G, Attachment 1), indicates that all three trees are healthy and unlikely to fall over, although each had some defects in structure. Tree no. 62 (the middle tree) has had several large branch failures over the years and has an asymmetric form and the arborist recommended removal of this tree. The City's Landscape Architect agreed with the arborist's findings and approved the removal of the tree. The City's Landscape Architect has prepared a memo (Exhibit D) further explaining the analysis in the tree report and justification for approving the tree's removal. At the time this report was written, the property owner had not yet removed the tree. In the past, the Planning Commission and/or City Council have attempted to discourage tree loss in developments by adding an extra requirement to contribute the value of removed trees to the City's Urban Forestry Fund. The Urban Forestry Fund is used to plant new trees in the City as well as conservation, promotion, and public education in regard to Pleasanton's street trees, park trees, and trees on private property. The arborist has valued the trees to be removed at$65,050, which excludes the value of the mulberry tree along Stanley Boulevard that will be removed for the Stanley Boulevard reconstruction project. Staff normally tries to mitigate tree removal by requiring additional trees be planted on the site beyond what is normally required in production home developments (i.e., street trees and other trees installed in the front yards). In some developments, tree mitigation is required at a 6:1 ratio for each tree removed with a certain percentage of those trees being box-sized. Given the small size of the lots, staff does not believe PUD-82 Work Session Page - 10 - February 9, 2011