HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Res 4814 2000-06-12
RESOLUTION NUMBER_
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH SUSTAINING
THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL
OF EUCALYPTUS TREE PERMIT NO. 99-2
(BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER
PROJECT)
I
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND FIND:
Section 1. On May 21, 1999, Bixby Ranch Company (the
"Applicant") fIled a request to remove eucalyptus trees as a component of the Bixby
Old Ranch Towne Center project development' approved by the City Council. The area
subject to this pennit request is the 40'-wide eucalyptus windrow located easterly of
Seal Beach Boulevard and north of Lampson Avenue. In addition to approving the
ovemll project, the City Council has approved Site Plan Review 98-1, which approved
a commercial shopping center at Devclopment Area "An of the Bixby Old Ranch
Towne Center Project. TIlis approval also set forth thc driveway entrance/exit points
into the shopping center.
Section 2. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~ 15025(a) and ~~
Il.C and III of the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study and a
Dmft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), to study the environmental impacts arising
from the proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development Plan and related
Geneml Plan amendments, including this Eucalyptus Tree Pennit. The DEIR was
circulated for public review and comment from April IS, 1998 to May 29, 1998, in
compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and the City's Local CEQA Gnidelines. Upon completion of the public review period, a
Final Environmental Impact Report was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a
public hearing held on September 9, October 21, and November 4, 1998. After the
public hearing, the Planning Commission found, through the adoption of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 98-37 that the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Development Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is adequate under CEQA.
After considering the Final EIR and public testimony thereto at a public hearing on
Novcmber 9 and Novcmber 17, 1998, the City Council adopted City Council
Resolution No. 4660, certifying thc Final EIR and adopting a statement of overriding
considerations. On August 23, 1999, the City Council condncted a public hearing to
consider revisions to the EIR and a statement of overriding considerations pursuant to
the August 3, 1999 writ issued by the Orange County Superior Court. The approval of
tlus resolution is witlun the scope of the project analyzed in the Final EIR, as revised,
and City Council Resolution No. 4728 is hereby incorporated by this reference.
I
Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the
Planning Commission on May 3, 2000, to consider the application for Eucalyptus Tree
Penllit 99-2. At the public hearing tile applicant spoke in favor of the request, with
persons appearing both in favor of and in opposition to the request.
I
Section 4. The Planning Commission approved Eucalyptus Tree
Pennit 99-2 subject to 10 conditions through the adoption of Plamung Commission
Resolution No. 99-20.
Section 5. An appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of
Eucalyptus Tree Pernlit 99-2 was timely fIled. On Junc 12, 2000 the City Council held
a duly noticed pnblic hearing to consider the appeal. The Council considered all oml
Resolution Number ~/-I
and written testimony and evidence presented at the time of the public hearing,
including the staff reports.
Section 6. The record of the hearings before the Planning
Commission and City Council indicates the following:
I
a. The applicant is proposing to remove 67 of 223 eucalyptus trees
greater than 12-inches in diameter, measured 4.5 feet above grade, in conjunction with
the proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project (Development Areas "A" and
"C"). The areas where the trees will be removed are within the eucalyptus grove area
along the east side of Seal Beach Boulevard, north of Lampson Avenue. The
eucalyptus trees recommended for removal comprise 30% of the eucalyptus trees
subject to the penn it requirements, and are recommended for removal for the folIowing
reasons:
o Street/driveway entrance removals:
o Sight line removals:
o Bus Stop removals:
o Building Pad removals:
o Other removals:
35 trees
15 trees
8 trees
7 trees
2 trees
I
b. The City Council has previously certified the EIR for the project
and approved related General Plan amendments, zone changes, subdivision maps and a
development ,agreement for the project including the subject area. The EIR evaluated
the impacts of the tree removals and the City Council adopted mitigation measures
relating to the anticipated eucalyptus tree removal requests. The City Council adopted
"Mitigation Monitoring Program" for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project
establishes a number of specific action measures which have been proposed to reduce
the identified environmental impacts of the requested eucalyptus tree removals to a level
of insignificance in relation to tltis development application. The applicable mitigation
measures are conditions of approval for Eucalyptus Tree Pennit 99-2 (5 mitigation
measures), and are incorporated herein by reference.
c. Chapter 7D of the Code of the City of Seal Beach sets forth the
standards for the granting of eucalyptus tree pennits.
d. The report of the arborist, Greg Applegate, indicates the
following regarding the subject eucalyptus trees:
o "In contrast to the findings in the EIR, all or nearly all of the eucalyptus
have been topped or severely headed and almost no seedlings are growing in
this area. As a group these trees are in poor and declining condition for
several reasons commoll to all: they are irifested with psyllids; they IUlve
been topped,' they are crowded,' and there is no irrigation system." {Page
3)".
I
o "There is a high degree of howrd due to falling limbs on or in the way of
passing motorists. River gums have a history and reputation for dropping
limbs, even on calm wealher days. Please see eucalyptus failure charts in
the appendix. In addition the past pruning practice, and the fact tlUlt many
trees are leaning over, or IUlve branches hanging over Seal Beach
Boulevard, makes these trees especially hawrdous. For these reasons the
consultant would recommend removing this entire windrow and replanting
new trees. However, because the city considers this a historic asset and is
willing to take the risk of maintaining then near the street, I have been
instructed to preserve 70 percent of the trees over 12 inches and work to
decrease the hawrd." (page 4)
o "nle structural condition, health, and root condition rating was evallJJJted in
o to 10 format. A dead tree would be rated at 0 and a near peifect tree
Resolution Number~
would be rated at 10. As one would expect, trees that have no irrigation and
poor care have generally lower ratings, No trees were rated at 10. The
average structural condition was 4.30%. TIle average health rating is
4.70%. The average root condition is 4,25. Topped trees are rarely rated
over 5 and topping effects both the structural condition, the health and root
condition. As a group the trees in the windrow have grown past middle age
and are in the latter pan of their lives. They have sparse foliage, reduced
growth, dead branches and occasionally decay" (page 4)
o "In the original Horticultural RecOl1Ullendazions portion of the "Matrix of
Findings" a large nwnber of trees were recommended for removal for
horticultural and safety reason.r, about 46 percem. One hundred seventy
three were recommended for preservalion, about 54 percent, The final
recommendation colwnn reflects this consultanrs conforming to the city's
cOl1lmitlllent to preserve 70 percent. Trees have life-spans, long life-spans if
well spaced and cared for, or shon-life spans if crowded and topped. This
stock of trees is, due to improper pruning and environmental factors, is in
effect "elderly". However, due to the City's commitment, such trees shall be
retained." (page 6)"
I
o "The presem arrangement of the windrow had an irrigated golf course in
close proximity to one side of the windrow. In the new site use it will be
hard to provide the current amount of soil volume, and a large source of
water will be removed. Roots will be cut along the inside edge of the
windrow to complete the curb edge of the parking lot or over-excavation of
the building pads. Typical requirements of over excavation and compaction
will eliminate much of the soil volume and connection to the irrigated turf
area. If the 40 foot wide area is left as is, witlwut irrigalion and irifesled
with psyllids, it will not be sufficient to preserve these trees. Since the
average diameter of these trees is about 18 inches, an area 18 feet to the
east of the eastern most trees should also be protected andfenced off." (Page
18)
I
Section 7. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including those
stated in ~6 of this resolution and pursuant to ~~ 7D-4 and 7D-5 of the City's Code, the
City Council hereby fmds:
a. The requested eucalyptus tree removal permits are within the
scope of the analysis contained within the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Environmental Impact Report, certified by the City Council on August 23, 1999, and
no further environmental analysis is required.
b. Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2, a request to remove 67 eucalyptus
trees within the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project area is consistent with the
standards for granting permits of Chapter 7D-5 of the Code of the City of Seal Beach
for the following reasons:
o The condition of the eucalyptus tree(s) with re&Pe<:t to disease. danl!er of falling.
and proximity to existing or oroposed structures: As indicated by the consulting
arborist, "In contrast to the findings in the EIR, all or nearly all of the
eucalyptus have been topped or severely headed and almost rw seedlings are
growing in this area. As a group these trees are in poor and declining condition
for several reasons common to all: they are irifested with psyllids; they have
been topped; they are crowded; and there is rw irrigation system",
'I
The consulting arborist also indicates the foIlowing for the trees: "The structural
condition, health, and root condition rating was evaluated in 0 to IO format. A
dead tree would be rated at 0 and a near perfect tree would be rated at 10. As
one would expect, trees that have rw irrigation and poor care have generally
lower ratings. No trees were rated at 10. The average structural condition was
Resolution Number ~/~
4.30%. The average health rating is 4.70%. The average root condition is
4.25. Topped trees are rarely rated over 5 and topping effects both the
structural condition, the health and root condition. As a group the trees in the
windrow have grown pa.rt middle age and are in the latter part of their lives.
They have sparse foliage, reduced growth, dead branches and occa.Jionally
decay. "
I
o The interference of trees with existing- utility services and/or streets and highways:
As indicated by the consulting arlxJrist, "There is a high degree of hazard due to
falling limbs on or in the way of pa.Jsing motorists. River gums have a history
and reputation for dropping limbs, even on calm weather days. Plea.Je see
eucalyptus failure charts in the appendix. In addition the pa.rt pruning practice,
and the fact that many trees are leaning over, or have branches hanging over
Seal Beach Boulevard, makes these trees especially hazardous. For these
rea.Jons the consultant would recommend removing this entire windrow and
replantillg new trees. However, because the city considers this a historic a.Jset
and is willing to take the risk of maintaining then near the street, I have been
instructed to preserve 70 percent of the trees over 12 inches and work to
decrea.Je the hazard. "
I
o The number of trees which the affected property can adequately support under
I!ood forestly practices: Area A is approximately 25-acres in area and the required
tree replacement program would require a total of 188 new eucalyptus trees to be
provided to replace the 47 existing trees to be removed, either within or
immediately adjacent to this proposed shopping center development. The site is
adequate in size and shape to accommodate this number of trees. The Golf
Course is approximately 158 acres in area, including the greenbelt area to be
dedicated in fee or by easement to the City, and the required tree replacement
program would require a total of 80 new eucalyptus trees to be provided to replace
the 20 existing trees to be removed, either within or immediately adjacent to this
proposed development. The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate this
number of trees.
Overall, a total of 67 eucalyptus trees are requested to be 'removed, and 268 new
eucalyptus trees will be required to be planted in accordance with the adopted
"mitigation measures".
I
o The extent to which alternative develooment plans which do not endanger trees
cannot achieve the same intensity of uses as the P1'QPosed plans. and the extent to
which the cost of alternative develo.pment Dlans is prohibitive: The City Council
considered several alternatives to the approved project which were discussed and
evaluated within the "Alternatives" section of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
EIR. The City Council ultimately detennined to certify the FlR, approve the
project, and adopt the appropriate Statement of Findings and Overriding
Considerations. The requested eucalyptus tree removal pennits are within the
scope of the certified EIR and reflects the project as approved and as conditioned
by the City Council in its adoption of the "Mitigation Monitoring Program.
Subsequently, the Planning Commission approved Revised Site Plan 98-1, which
approved the overall sitc developmcnt plan for Development Area "A", the
shopping center, including building pad and driveway locations. Further, the
report of the project arborist indicates, "In the original Horticultural
Recommendations portion of the "Matrix of Findings" a large number of trees
were recollVllended for removal for horticultural and safety rea.Jons, about 46
percent. One hwuJred seventy three were recommended for preservation, about
54 percent. TIle final reconullendarion column reflects this consultants
corifonning to the city's commitment to preserve 70 percellt. Trees have life-
spans, long life-spans if well spaced and cared for, or short-life spans if
crowded and topped. This stock of trees is, due to improper pruning and
environmental factors, is in effect "elderly". However, due to the City's
commitment, such trees shall be retained."
Resolution Number I/BII
c. Required adherence to applicable mitigation measures and
recommendations of the consulting arborist will ensure that all appropriate actions to
reduce environmental impacts to a level of insignificance are completed and an
adequate number of replacement trees will be provided in accordance with the adopted
"Mitigation Monitoring Program" and the recommendations of the consulting arborist
for the requested eucalyptus tree removals.
Section 8. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby
approves Eucalyptus Tree Pennit 99-2, subject to the following conditions:
I
I. Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2 is approved to remove 67 of 223 eucalyptus
trees greater than 12-inches in diameter, measured 4.5 feet above grade, in
conjunction with the proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
(Development Areas "A" and "C"). The areas where the ~s will be
removed are within the eucalyptus windrow area along the east side of Seal
Beach Boulevard, north of Lampson Avenue. The eucalyptus trees
recommended for removal comprise 30.04% of the eucalyptus trees subject
to the permit requirements, and are recommended for removal for the
following reasons:
o Street/driveway entrance removals:
o Sight line removals:
o Bus Turnout removals:
o Roadway Realignment:
o Other removals:
35 trees
IS trees
8 trees
7 trees'
2 trees
2.
All eucalyptus tree removals and the replanting program shall be in
accordance with the "Horticultural Recommendations" recommended in
accordance with the report submitted by the consulting arborist, Greg
Applegate, dated May 19, 1999, as set forth below, and as revised by staff:
I
· No vehicles, equipment, materials, fuels, soils, excess concrete or other
debris, liquid or solid, shall be dumped or stored in af ReRf within 18
feet Q.f the trees to be preserved. gigRs slleuld l:le pllotll!l III tllis ilBOe!.
These areas shaLL be clearly identified in accordance with Mitillation
Measure G-6.
· Trees marked "Remove" must be removed carefully and skillfully by
properly trained and equipped arborists so as to not damage trees to be
preserved.
· The vigor and internal hydration of each tree to remain was tested using
a Shigometer and the readings slleuld shall be retested monthly and
compared to new readings to monitor stress and to schedule irrigation
during the construction process and one year following completion.
· Irrigation of the trees to remain skeul!lllil l:leguR shall bel/in as soon as
the other trees are removed and slleul!l shall be monitored by a qualified
horticulturist and arborist monthly during construction and for two years
after replanting. As the weather changes and/or Shigometer readings
indicate stress, the watering schedule must be changed.
· Irrigation of the trees must be by surface-laid drip or mini-spray system.
Line shall be run between rows of trees. Mnlch should be applied and
maintained over flex lines for camouflage.
· Fertilizer is not recommended unless a deficiency becomes visually
apparent.
· A removal and replacement program should be begun to replace the
existing trees over a five year period with another species of eucalyptus
not susceptible to psyllids. However, this is not possible while
preserving 70 percent.
I
ResolU:tion Number ~~/~
I
· The pattern of replacement should begin at the southern most area where
the new trees wi\1 get the most sun and wind protection. The
replacement should be in minimum 100 foot long sections removing and
replacing 20 percent per ycar.
· A pruning program should be established to keep the trees from
becoming too densely foliated before they have adjusted to their new
wind loads. A program of restructuring topped trees must be
implemented to develop better branch attachment.
· A set of pruning specifications shall be produced to control the above
work.
· All pruning shall be continually supervised by a "ISA Certified
Arborist" .
· Contact and stay in contact with Jocelyn Millar, Professor of
Entomology and Chemical Ecology, University of California,
Department of Entomology, Riverside, CA 92521,909-787-5821, to be
a candidate for early release of natural predators of the psyllids.
,
· Contact and stay in contact with Rincon- Vitovia Insectaries (800-248-
2847) to be notified if they develop or introduce predators. '
3. Not more than 67 trees shall be removed from the subject area, in
accordance with 'the report submitted by the consulting arborist, Greg
Applegate, dated May 19, 1999.
4. All eucalyptus tree removals shall be in compliance with Mitigation
Measures G-ll, G-13, M-4, M-5 and M-6, as adopted by the City Council
on November 23, 1998.
I
5.
The subject parking lot area shall be designed in such a manner as to
preserve a minimum landscaped area of 18-feet from tree numbers 72, 73,
75,77 and 80 to the compacted parking lot areas. This can be accomplished
by providing landscape islands within the parking lot design to accommodate
the recommended open space buffers around the potentially impacted trees. .
These areas to be protected during final site preparation activities in
accordance with the report submitted by the consulting arborist, Greg
Applegate, dated May 19, 1999.
6. A Eucalyptus Windrow Preservation Plan shall be prepared by a licensed
arborist or a landscape architect and submitted to the Department of
Development Services and the Street Tree Division of the Public Works
Department for review and approval prior to or concurrent with tentative
parcel/tract maps or grading penn its. Said plan shall include a long-tenn
maintenance and financing component which shall be included in the
Development Agreement to be executed between the project proponent and
the City of Seal Beach.
7.
This Eucalyptus Tree Pennit shall not become effective for any purpose
unless an "Acceptance of Conditions" fonn has been ,signed by the applicant
in the presence of the Director of Development Services, or notarized and
returned to the Planning Department.
I
8.
A modification of this Eucalyptus Tree Pennit shall be obtained when the
property owner proposes to modify any of the conditions of approval for this
Eucalyptus Tree Pennit.
9. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke or modify this
Eucalyptus Tree Pennit if any violation of the approved conditions occurs,
any violation of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, occurs, or for those
Resolution Number~/~
reasons specified by Article 28, and in the manner specified in Article 25, of
Chapter 28 of the Code of the City of Seal Beach.
10. This Eucalyptus Tree Permit shall become null and void unless exercised
within one (1) year of the date ~f fmal approval, or such extension of time as
may be granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to a written request
for extension submitted to the Department of Development Services a
minimum of ninety (90) days prior to such expiration date.
Section 9. The time within which judicial review, if available, of this
decision must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure and Section 1-13 of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, unless a shorter time
is provided by applicable law.
I
PA)Sffi?, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council oLt)1e City of Seal
Beach lfat a meeting thereof held on the /..2 S!? day of
<--'~.ALP ~ , 2000, by the following vote:
/I ~
AYES: Councilmem t.:J(4/i
NOES:
Councilmembers
~
Councilmembers
Councilmembers
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
'-/Jrdf;;w -J, ~
MAYOR I
I
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH )
I, Joanne M. Yeo, City Clerk of Seal Beach, California, do ;;:~rtify that the
foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number / on file in the
offi f the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of
/' each, at a regular meeting thereof held on the / .;z~ day of
,2000. .
I
I
I
I
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of Orange
I am a citizen of the United States
and a resident of the county afore-
said; I am over the age of eighteen
years, and not a party to or inter-
ested in the above-entitled matter.
I am the principal clerk of the printer
of the SEAL BEACH SUN, a
newspaper of general circulation,
printed and published weekly in the
City of Seal Beach, County of
Orange and which newspaper has
been adjudged a newspaper of
general circulation by the Superior
Court of the County of Orange, State _
of .California, under the date of
2/24/75. Case. Number A82583; that
the notice of which the annexed is a
printed copy (set in type not smaller
than nonpareil), has been published
in each regular and entire issue of
said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof pn the following
dates, to-wit:
4..1
,
all in the year 2000.
I certify (or declare) under penalty of
perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Dated at Seal Beach, CA,
thisd.L..day o~ ,2000.
~a:
PUBLICATION PROCESSED BY:
THE SUN NEWSPAPERS
216 Main Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
(562) 430-7555. (949) 759-7726
"
.-
Resolution Number ~~/e;L
This space is for the County
Clerk's Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
...............................................
...............................................
_ the 'planning ComrrnSSlon detefml-
NOTICE OF'- nallon to approve a request to
PU'BUC HEARING . remove 8B of 227 eucalyptus trees
I E 'greater than 12-lnOOol In diameter.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thallhe measured 4 5 feet above grade. in
CJtv Cauncll of tj10 CJtv of Seal BeBCh ( COI'!uni:llon with the propooild Bixby
wJlfhold Ill. PUbtlC hearing on MondaV,' Old Ranch Towne Center PrOJBCt
June 12th, 2000, at 7:00 p m In the: r The are.. where the tre.. will be
City Council Chambers. 211 Eighth removed 81'8 Wlthm the eucBlyptus
Street. Seal Beach. to conSider the ',- grove area along the east side of
following Item:. :' Seal Beach Boulevard, norlh of
APPEAL OF PlANNING Lampson Avenue. The eucalyptus
COMMISSION AnpROVAL OF trees recommended for removal
. . nr- . ~ I comprise 29 95% of the eucalyptus
Eucalyptus Tree Penn1199-2 Bixby ~ treeS subject to the permit require-
Old Aimch Towne Center Project ments, and are recommended for
APPELLANT'S REQUEST: The o. ,--,removal forb follOWIng reasons:
appellant Is requesllng reversal of: (] StreerJdnveway entrance removal.
- -34 Trees -
CJ S'9ht line Removal 24 Trees
CJ Bus Stop removals S Trees
CJ Building Pad removals 2 Trees
CJ Other removals. 3 Trees .
The tree removal request .. In com-
pliance WIth CRy Council opprovod
MIUgatlon MeBBures G-11, M-4, M-
S and M-8. Specifically, the request
does nol permltlhe removal of more
than 30% of trees subtect to permit
_,In_iodhMd,
Igatlon measure M-5, The Planning
Commission Bpproved the request
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: EnvI,
ronmental Impacts of this decision
were evaluated BB part of the EI1VI-
'ronmenlallmpact Report for the
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center pro-
leet, State CIB8rlnghouse No.
97091UT7, whichwasc8rtJf\ed by the
Seal Beach CItv Council on Novem-
ber 23, 1998. the Notice of Deter--
mlnation was fiCed on November 24.
1998
CODE SECTIONS: Section 70.4, .
Code of the City of Seal .h. -
APPELLANT: Councllpel'1ldl'l Camp-
,bell , r'. . ~
APPUCANT: Bixby Ranch Compa-
ny ,
OWNER: Ililcby Rench Ciimpony.
N. the above time and place a111nte1'-
ested persons may be heard II so
desired "you challenge the proposea
acIfOns 11 court, you may be limited to
I'8IIIt1g only thOll8Issues you or some-
one else falsed at the public heanng
deSCTlbed In thiS nota, or In wnlten
correspondence delivered to the Ctty
of Seal Beach at, Dr'"pnor 10, the pub-
lic heanng ~ .
DATED THIS 23rd.day of Mey. 2000.
Joanne Yea '"
Cl1y Clerk
_ed m II-. SooIIlooch Sun.kxr,
noI, S/25/110 ,