11 ATTACHMENT 03 - Laserfiche WebLink

ATTACHMENT 3 PUD-82, David DiDonato, Donato Builders, Inc. Application for Rezoning of an approximately 1.17-acre site located at 4171 and 4189 Stanley Boulevard from R-1-6,500 (One-Family Residential) District to the PUD-HDR (Planned Unit Development— High Density Residential) District and for Planned Unit Development (PUD) Development Plan approval to construct 13 detached single-family homes. Marion Pavan presented the staff report and described the scope, layout, and key elements of the proposal. Chair Narum requested Mike Fulford, City Landscape Engineer, speak about the general health of the trees within the project site. Mr. Fulford stated that he understood there has been some confusion with regard to the tree reports for the project and apologized that it may have been due to the fact that he had commissioned a second tree report about a year-and-a-half after a first tree report was prepared in January 2009 by Ed Brennan, a very capable consulting arborist, who is on the City's list of consulting arborists, at the request of the developer and the Planning Division. Mr. Fulford indicated that Mr. Brennan inspected 22 trees on the property and rated them with respect to their health and value. He identified three of the trees as the prominent Deodar Cedar trees located at the front of the property, numbered Trees # 61, 62, and 64, which, at that time were found to be in moderate to good condition. Mr. Fulford continued that about a year later, Tree #62 suffered a catastrophic branch failure. He noted that all three trees have suffered some catastrophic branch failures in the past, but Tree #62's was particularly bad, and the property owner, Robert Molinaro, submitted an application to have all three trees removed. Mr. Fulford stated that because these were prominent heritage trees, he looked closely into them and commissioned an independent study by HortScience, Inc., which reported in July 2010 that all three trees were healthy, although Tree #62 was in very bad structural condition and recommended that it be removed. Mr. Fulford indicated that he allowed the property owner to remove Tree #62 based on the fact that it was significant threat to public safety, but this has not yet been done. He added that sometime in the distant past, about 30-40 years ago, all three trees were topped, which is an unacceptable pruning practice because it indiscriminately lowers the height of the tree without regard to its structure. He noted that after the topping, the three trees grew out and now possess a pretty bad structure. Mr. Fulford stated that in the first tree report, Tree #62 had an appraised value of $16,000. He noted that if appraised today, its value would be a lot less, maybe nothing, because of it structural problem. Commissioner Blank inquired if Trees #61 and #64 also had structural problems. Mr. Fulford replied that they do have structural problems but not to the degree that Tree #62 has. He added that the pruning recommendations in the HortScience report EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 13, 2011 Page 1 of 10