HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem NJune 12, 2000
STAFF REPORT
To: Mayor Campbell and Members of the City Council
Attention: Keith R. Till, City Manager
nb d oa f
.1 VIA
r
I
From: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
Subject: PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVAL. OF EUCALYPTUS
TREE PERMIT NO. 99 -2, SEAL BEACH
BOULEVARD NORTH OF LAMPSON AVENUE
(BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWN CENTER).
After receiving all public testimony and considering the decision of the Planning Commission, the
City Council has the following options:
1) Deny the appeal and sustain the decision of the Planning Commission.
2) Sustain the appeal, reversing the decision of the Planning Commission.
3) Modify the Commission's decision (e.g., impose additional, reasonable conditions to insure
the preservation of the eucalyptus grove).
Staff has prepared as Attachment A, a resolution of the City Council sustaining the determination of
the Planning Commission. If the City Council adopts option (1), it would be appropriate to adopt
that resolution. If the City Council adopts option (2) or (3), it is appropriate to revise the resolution
based upon the determinations of the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
Overview of Application:
AGENDA ITEM I
C:Ny Docum \Riby Town Ca E1R\Fuee1yp=Tree Pame 99- 2.AppeJ Suff Repm.dmc LW\05-31-00
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
City Council Staff Report
June 12, 2000
On May 3, 2000, the Planning Commission considered the above referenced application for
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2. After receiving all testimony at the public hearings and
extensive deliberations among the members of the Commission, a motion to approve the
application failed by a 2 -2 -0 vote (Commissioner's Lyon and Hood voting no). In that the
application requires a majority vote by the Commission for approval, staff drafted a resolution
denying the application. After Commission reconsideration, the Commission declined to adopt
the draft resolution and instead adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 99 -20 on May
17, 2000. Resolution No. 99 -20 approved the Eucalyptus Tree Permit, and set forth the
findings and determinations of the Commission regarding the requested tree removals within
the existing eucalyptus grove along the easterly side of Seal Beach Boulevard. The Resolution
also imposes 10 conditions of approval for the project. The resolution was adopted on a 3 -1
vote of the Commission, with Chairman Hood voting no.
A timely appeal was filed, and the matter is now before the City Council for consideration at a
public hearing (See Attachment B).
The applicant is proposing to remove certain specified eucalyptus trees on the subject property
as a component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project implementation, the area
subject to this permit request being the 40' -wide eucalyptus windrow located easterly of Seal
Beach Boulevard and north of Lampson Avenue.
The subject area comprises the frontage area along Seal Beach Boulevard from Lampson
Avenue north to approximately the previous driveway location of World Bank, approximately
2,000 feet. The subject area encompasses the existing 40' -wide eucalyptus windrow along the
Bixby Old Ranch Golf Course and the proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
(Development Areas "A" and "C ").
The Planning Commission devoted a substantial amount of time during their deliberations on this
application. Please refer to the draft Planning Commission Minutes of May 3 and May 17, 2000
(See Attachments E and D, respectively). Nevertheless, the appellant asserts that the requested tree
removals are an issue of citywide significance that should be decided by the Council.
Previous Site flan Review Approvals:
On April 21, 1999, the Planning Commission approved Revised Site Plan Review 98 -1, which
approved a commercial shopping center of a maximum of 286,967 square feet at Development
Area "A" of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project. This approval also established the
driveway entrance /exit points into the shopping center. The City Council approved Site Plan
Review No. 98 -1, Revision 112, on August 23, 1999 (See City Council Resolution No. 4731,
Attachment G). At the August 23, 1999 City Council Meeting, the City Council also re-
approved the following projects previously approved on the subject shopping center site:
Eu"Iypw, Tm Permit 99- 2.App"I Suff Repon 2
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
City Council Staff Report
June 12, 2000
• Certification of EIR - This action established the project parameters and adopted the
"Mitigation Monitoring" program, which has been utilized in establishing conditions of
approval for the actual development applications approved by the City (City Council
Resolution No. 4728).
• Development Agreement - Approval of the Development Agreement binds the City
and the project proponent to perform certain actions and proceed with the development
of the subject properties in accordance with the terms and conditions of the
development Agreement and subsequent "Operating Memoranda ", as approved by the
City Council (City Ordinance No. 1440 -A)
o Tract Map No. 15767 - Approval of this Tract Map provides for the further
subdivision of the 26.045 -acre commercial shopping center into smaller parcels for
ultimate disposition to the various tenants of the shopping center (City Council
Resolution No. 4734).
• Conditional Use Permit No. 98 -16 - Approval of a drive - through window for
pharmacy purposes and a 24 -hour drug store operation (City Council Resolution No.
4737).
• Conditional Use Permit No. 98 -17 - Approval of a home improvement center
business operation with an outdoor garden area (City Council Resolution No. 4738).
❑ Conditional Use Permit No. 99 -5 - Approval of the sale of liquor in conjunction with
a 24 -hour drug store operation (City Council Resolution No. 4739).
• Height Variation 98 -5 - Approval of architectural features in conjunction with the
26.045 -acre commercial shopping center (City Council Resolution No. 4741).
• Planned Sign Program 98 -1 - Approval of building, monument, and temporary signs
in conjunction with the 26.045 -acre commercial shopping center (City Council
Resolution No. 4742).
❑ Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -1 - Approval to remove eucalyptus trees within various
areas of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project area, including 100 eucalyptus
trees within the 26.045 -acre commercial shopping center site. This approval did not
include any trees located within the 40 -foot greenbelt area that is the subject of this
permit in conjunction with the 26.045 -acre commercial shopping center (City Council
Resolution No. 4743).
In early 1999, the issue of the appropriate number of driveway locations for the shopping
center development was raised by Councilperson Campbell. In response to those concerns, the
City requested Linscott, Law & Greenspan, the city - selected traffic consultant for the
environmental documentation on the project, to evaluate several alternatives proposed by
Councilperson Campbell. A letter report (See Attachment H) was submitted to the City
Engineer on March 29, 1999 regarding those alternatives analysis. In regards to the driveway
elimination within the subject eucalyptus tree removal area, it was the conclusion of the City's
professional traffic engineering consultant that modification of the previously proposed and
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99- 2.Appul Suff Report 3
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
Cry Council Staff Report
June 12, 2000
approved driveway locations would result in adverse impacts to both incoming and outgoing
traffic:
"The access /egress plan currently proposed for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne
Center is adequate and well designed. The spacing of the two proposed
signalized driveways and the two proposed unsignalized project driveways (with
respect to the signalized entries) are consistent with recommended design
practices.
In our opinion, the provision of the two signalized entries, and two unsignalized
driveways on Seal Beach Boulevard is the preferred access design configuration
for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center. This combination of driveways will
ensure that: 1) adequate and safe access to the Bixby Old Ranch Towne
Center is provided; 2) the sqfety of the passing public is not compromised; and
3) vehicular queues for inbound and outbound site tmffic at the project
driveways is kept to a minimum." (Emphasis added)
Overview of CEQA Process:
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's
Local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study and a Draft Environmental Impact
Report (DEiR), to study the environmental impacts arising from the proposed Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center Development Plan and related General Plan amendments, including these
eucalyptus tree removals. The DEIR was circulated for public review and comment from
April 15, 1998 to May 29, 1998, in compliance with the provisions of the CEQA and the
City's Local CEQA Guidelines. 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 November 9 and November 17, 1998, the City Council adopted
City Council Resolution No. 4660, certifying the Final EIR and adopting a statement of
overriding considerations. On August 23, 1999, the City Council conducted 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 this
resolution is within the scope of the project analyzed in the Final EIR, as revised, and City
Council Resolution No. 4728 is hereby incorporated by this reference. Both the EIR and the
subsequent site plan approval by the Planning Commission contemplated that certain specified
trees in the windrow, limited to 30% or fewer, would be removed.
Eucdypms Tree permit 99- 2.Appeal Staff Report 4
hk
}
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
City Council Staff Report
June 12, 2000
Project modifications which would insult in the removal of a greater percentage of the subject
eucalyptus trees than requested in the subject application, or modification of the proposed driveway
locations and/or configurations would not be within the scope the previously approved project
applications granted by the City, and would not be in accordance with the narrowly defined project
as evaluated by the City, and as upheld by the Court in its review of the environmental document.
STANDARDS FOR EUCALYPTUS TREE PERMIT APPLICATIONS
Chapter 7D of the Code of the City of Seal Beach regulates the granting of eucalyptus tree
permits. Please refer to Attachment 3 of the Planning Commission Staff Report of May 3,
2000 (Attachment F of this Staff Report) for a copy of the complete provisions of Chapter 7D,
Eucalyptus Grove Preservation.
Section 7D-5 sets forth seven standards to be considered in reviewing an application for a tree
permit. In approving the application, the Planning Commission found:
"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 of the Code of the City
of Seal Beach for the following reasons:
o The condition of the eucalyptus tree(s) with respect to disease, danger of
falling. and proximity to existing or proposed structures: As indicated by
the consulting arborist, ".. 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 common to all: they are infested with psyllids; they have
been topped; they are crowded; and there is no irrigation system".
The consulting arborist also indicates the following for the trees: "The
structural condition, health, and root condition rating mw evaluated in 0
to 10 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 no irrigation
and poor care have generally lower ratings. No trees were rated aria
The average structural condition was 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
past middle age and are in the latter part of their lives. They have
sparse foliage, reduced growth, dead branches and occasionally decay. "
Eucalyptus Tree permit 99- 2.Appal Staff Report 5
Public Heating re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
City Council Staff Report
Jmre 12, 2000
❑ The interference of trees with existing _ utility services and/or streets and
highway : As indicated by the consulting attorist, "There is a high degree
of hazard 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 weather days. Please see eucalyptus failure chWts in the appendix.
In addition the past 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 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 them near the street, I have been
instructed to preserve 70 percent of the trees over 12 inches and work to
cr ase the hazard."
❑ The number of trees which the affected pmperty can adequately %rppmt
under good forestry 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 tares 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 ".
❑ The extent to which alternative development plans which do not endanger
trees cannot achieve the same intensity of uses as the proposed plans and the
extent to which the cost of alternative development plans 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 FIR. The City Council ultimately certified the
E[R, approved the project, and adopted a Statement of Findings and
Overriding Considerations. The requested eucalyptus tree removal permits
are within the scope of the certified IIR and reflects the project as approved
Eucalyptus Tree permit 99- 2.Appeel Staff Report 6
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2
Planrung Commission Resolution 99-20
City Cowtdl Staff Report
June 12, 2000
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 site development 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 recommended for removal for
horticultural and safety reasons, about 46 percent. One hundred seventy
three were recommended for preservation, about 54 percent. The final
recommendation column reflects this consultants conforming to the city's
commitment to preserve 70 percent. 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, due to improper pruning and environmental
factors, is in effect "elderly". However, due to the City's commitment,
such trees shall be retained."
CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS re: APPEAL:
Once all testimony and evidence has been received by the City Council, the Council may:
1) Deny the appeal and sustain the decision of the Planning Commission.
2) Sustain the appeal, reversing the decision of the Planning Commission.
3) Modify the Commission's decision (e.g., impose additional, reasonable conditions to
insure the preservation of the eucalyptus grove).
Staff has prepared as Attachment A, a resolution of the City Council sustaining the determination of
the Planning Commission. If the City Council adopts option (1), it would be appropriate to adopt
that resolution. If the City Council adopts option (2) or (3), it is appropriate to revise the resolution
based upon the determinations of the City Council.
Whittenberg, Director
Development Services Department
Eucalyptus Tm Permit 99- 2.App "l Staff Repon
Keith R. Till
City Manager
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Pernut 99-2
Planning Commission Resolution 99 -20
City Council Staff Report
June 12. 2000
Attachments: (8)
ATTACBMENf A: Proposed City Council 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)
ATTACFIMENT B: Appeal by Mayor Campbell, received May 22, 2000
ATTACFiN1EiQT C: Planning Commission Resolution No. 99 -20
ATTACBN ENT D: Draft Planning Commission Minutes of May 17, 2000
ATTACM= E: Draft Planning Commission Minutes of May 3, 2000
ATTACBMENT F: Planning Commission Staff Report of May 3, 2000, with
Attachments
ATTACHDIENT G: City Council Resolution No. 4731, A Resolution of the City
Council of the City of Seal Beach Approving Site Plan Review
No. 98 -1, Revision 11 2, Approving the Site Plan for a 286,967
Square Foot Commercial Shopping Center, Including a 10,000
Square Foot Outdoor Garden Center, with Parking, Landscaping
and Other Ancillary Facilities on Property Located at the
Northeast Corner of Seal Beach Boulevard and St. Cloud Drive
(Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center)
ATTACHIY= H: Site Access Evaluation - Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center, letter
dated March 29, 1999 from Linscott, Law & Greenspan to Steve
Badum, City Engineer
ss •s
EUc Iypas Tree Pemtit 99 -2. Appal Stiff Report 8
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Planning Commission Resolution 99 -20
City Council Staff Report
June 12, 2000
ATTACHMENT B
APPEAL BY MAYOR CAMPBELL, RECEIVED MAY 229 2000
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99- 2.Appeal Suff Repon 20
FILE COPt
MEMORANDU
Date: May 22, 2000
To: Joanne Yeo
City Clerk
From: Patty Campbell
Mayor
Subject: Eucalyptus Tree Permit
On Wednesday night, May 17, 2000, the Planning Commission approved the Eucalyptus Tree
Permit. This memo is to serve notice that I am appealing that decision to the City Council.
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
City Council Staff Report
June 12, 2000
ATTACHMENT C
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-20
Eucalyptus Tree Peratit 99- 2.Appe l Suff Report 21
RESOLUTION NUMBER 99 - 20
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL
BEACH APPROVING EUCALYPTUS TREE
PERMIT 99 -2 (BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWNE
CENTER PROJECT)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH
DOES HEREBY FIND AND RESOLVE:
Section 1. On May 21, 1999, Bixby Ranch Company (the
"Applicant ") filed a request with the Department of Development Services for authority
to remove eucalyptus trees as a component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project
development.
Section 2. On June 23, 1999, this application was scheduled for public
hearing before the Planning Commission. The subject application was tabled by the
Planning Commission at the request of the applicant /property owner. The
applicant /property owner have requested this matter to now be considered by the
Planning Commission.
Section 3. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. § 15305 and § II.B of
the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission determines as follows: The
application for Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
project is within the scope of the project analyzed in the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
EIR, certified by the City Council on November 23, 1998, through the adoption of City
Council Resolution No. 4660. Said resolution and the Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations are incorporated herein by reference.
Section 4. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning
Commission on May 3, 2000, to consider the application for Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-
2. At the public hearing the applicant spoke in favor of the request, with persons
appearing both in favor of and in opposition to the request.
Section 5. The record of the hearing of May 3, 2000 indicates the
following:
a. On May 21, 1999, Bixby Ranch Company (the "Applicant ") filed a
request with the Department of Development Services for authority to remove eucalyptus
trees as a component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project development.
C: M\ Documems\RESO'Euc Permit 99.2 Approval.PC Reso.doc\LW%05 -11 -00
Planning Commission Resolution A'o. 99 -20
Eucalvptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Bixhv Old Ranch Towne ('enter - Eucalyptus H'indrmr
Mar 17, :000
b. On June 23, 1999, this application was scheduled for public
hearing before the Planning Commission. The subject application was tabled by the
Planning Commission at the request of the applicant /property owner. The
applicant/property owner has requested this matter to now be considered by the Planning
Commission.
C. Specifically, the applicant is proposing to remove eucalyptus trees
on the subject property as a component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project
implementation, the area subject to this permit request being the 40' -wide eucalyptus
windrow located easterly of Seal Beach Boulevard and north of Lampson Avenue, as
approved by the City Council in November, 1998.
d. More specifically, the subject area comprises the frontage area
along Seal Beach Boulevard from Lampson Avenue north to approximately the previous
driveway location of World Bank, approximately 2,000 feet. The subject area
encompasses the existing 40' -wide eucalyptus windrow along the Bixby Old Ranch Golf
Course and the proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center (Development Areas "A" and
"C,).
e. On April 21, 1999, the Planning Commission approved Revised
Site Plan Review 98 -1, which reduced a previously approved commercial shopping
center from a maximum of 299,000 square feet to a maximum of 286,967 square feet at
Development Area "A" of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project. This approval
also set forth the driveway entrance /exit points into the shopping center.
f More specifically, 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 30.04% of the eucalyptus trees
subject to the permit requirements, and are recommended for removal for the following
reasons:
❑ Street./driveway entrance removals: 35 trees
• Sight line removals:
15 trees
• Bus Stop removals:
8 trees
• Building Pad removals:
7 trees
• Other removals:
2 trees
g. The City Council approved on November 23, 1998, the appropriate
resolutions and adopted the appropriate ordinances which certified the EIR for the project
and approved requests by the Bixby Ranch Company for General Plan amendments, zone
changes, subdivision map approvals and development agreement approvals to conform
the General Plan land use designations and zoning of the subject area to conform to the
Euc Permit 99.2 Approval. PC Reso 2
Planning Commission Resolution A'o. 99 -20
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Bixhv Old Ranch Towne Center — Eucalyptus N indrou
Mav 17, 2000
proposed uses of land set forth in this application. The EIR evaluated the impacts of the
tree removals and the City Council adopted mitigation measures relating to the
anticipated eucalyptus tree removal requests.
h. Chapter 7D of the Code of the City of Seal Beach sets forth the
standards for the granting of eucalyptus tree permits.
i. 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 this
development application. The applicable mitigation measures are conditions of approval
for Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 (5 mitigation measures), and are incorporated herein by
reference.
j. The report of the arborist, Greg Applegate, indicates the following
regarding the subject eucalyptus trees:
❑ "hn 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 common to all: the), are infested with psyllids; they,
have been topped; they, are crowded; and there is no irrigation system."
(Page 3) ".
❑ "There is a high degree of hazard due to falling limbs on or in the way of
passing motorists. Rh er gumus have a hi.stoi), and reputation for dropping
limbs, even on calm weather days. Please see eucalyptus faihire chants in
the appendix. In addition the past pruning practice, and the fact that
many trees are leaning over, or hm a branches hanging over Seal Beach
Boulevard makes these trees especially hazardous. 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 hazard." (Page 4)
❑ "The structural condition, health, and root condition rating was evaluated
in 0 to 10 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 no irrigation
and poor care have generally lower ratings. No trees were rated at 10.
The average structural comlition was 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 past
Euc Permit 99 -2 .Approval.PC Reso 3
Planning Commission Resolution No. 99 -10
Eucalvptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Bixby Old Ranch Towne ('enter— Eucalyptus Windrow
May ) 7, 2000
middle age and are in the latter part of their lives. They have sparse
foliage, reduced growth, dead branches and occasionally decay" (Page 4)
❑ "In the original Horticultural Recommendations portion of the "Matrix of
Findings" a large number of trees were recommended for removal for
horticultural and safety reasons, about 46 percent. One hundred seventy
three were recommended for preservation, about 54 percent. The final
recommendation column reflects this consultants conforming to the city's
commitment to preserve 70 percent. 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." (Page 6)"
a "The present 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, without irrigation
and infested 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 and
fenced off." (Page 18)
Section 6. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including
those stated in §5 of this resolution and pursuant to Chapter 7D of the City's Code, the
Planning Commission makes the following findings:
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 November 23, 1998, 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 of the Code of the City of Seal Beach for
the following reasons:
❑ The condition of the eucalyptus tree(s) with respect to disease, danger of falling
and proximity to existing or proposed structures: As indicated by the consulting
arbori st, "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
Euc Permit 99.2 Approval.PC Reso 4
Planning Commission Resolution No. 99 -20
Eucalvpius Tree Permit 99 -2
Bixhv Old Ranch Towne Center — Eucalvptus N indrou
May 17, 2000
❑ The extent to which alternative development 121ans which do not endanger trees
cannot achieve the same intensity of uses as the proposed plans, and the extent to
which the cost of alternative development plans 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 determined to certify the EIR, approve the
project, and adopt the appropriate Statement of Findings and Overriding
Considerations. The requested eucalyptus tree removal permits 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 site development 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 gf Findings" a large number of trees
were recommended for removal for horticultural and safety reasons, about 46
percent. One hundred seveny three were recommended for preservation, about
54 percent. The .final recommendation cohinnn reflects this consultants
conforming to the city's commitment to pres'ene 70 percent. Trees have life -
spans, long if 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."
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 6. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission
hereby approves Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2, subject to the following conditions:
1. 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 trees 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:
Euc Permit 99 -2 Approval.PC Reso 6
Plannink Commission Resolution No. 99 -20
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -1
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center — Eucalvptus Windrow
Mav 17, 2000
❑ The extent to which alternative development plans which do not endanger trees
cannot achieve the same intensity of uses as the proposed plans and the extent to
which the cost of alternative development plans 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 determined to certify the EIR, approve the
project, and adopt the appropriate Statement of Findings and Overriding
Considerations. The requested eucalyptus tree removal permits 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 site development 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 recommended for removal for horticultural and safety reasons, about 46
percent. One hundred sevent) three were recommended for preservation, about
54 percent. The final recommendation colunnt reflects this consultant,
conforming to the city's commitment to preserve 70 percent. Trees have life -
spans, long if 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 to effect "elderly ". However, due to the C ty'.s
commitment such trees shall he retained."
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 6. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission
hereby approves Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2, subject to the following conditions:
1. 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 trees 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:
Euc Permit 99 -2 Approval.PC Reso 6
Planning Commission Resolution A'o. 99 -20
Eucalvpius Tree Permit 99 -2
Btzbv Old Ranch Towne Cenier - Eucalyptus 11'indrou
Mav 17, 2000
• StreeiJdriveway entrance removals. 35 trees
• .,Sight line removals: 15 trees
• Bus Turnout removals: 8 trees
• Roadway Realignment: 7 trees
• Other removals: 2 trees
1 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:
• No vehicles, equipment, materials, fuels, soils, excess concrete or other
debris, liquid or solid, shall be dumped or stored in- ermeef within 18 feel
of the trees to be preserved. Signs shemid be psoed to fhiq e&@ . These
areas shall he clearh• identified in accordance with Mitigation 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 should 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 should be hagnn shall begin as soon as the
other trees are removed and should 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. Mulch 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.
• The pattern of replacement should begin at the southern most area where
the new trees will get the most sun and wind protection. The replacement
should be in minimum 100 foot long sections removing and replacing 20
percent per year.
• 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
Euc Pemil 99 -2 Appro%al. PC Revo 7
Planning Commission Resolution a'o. 99 -20
Euealvptu.c Tree Permit 99 -2
Bixhr Old Ranch Towne Center - Eucalvplu.s 11 indrov
Hav 17, 2000
.:.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 Abborist".
• 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 -11, G -13, M -4, M -5 and M -6, as adopted by the City Council on November
23, 1998,
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 permits. Said plan shall include a long -term
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 Permit shall not become effective for any purpose
unless an "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant
in the presence of the Director of Development Services, or notarized and
returned to the Planning Department; and until the ten (10) day appeal period
has elapsed.
Euc Permit 99 -2 AWroval.PC Rao 8
Planning Commission Resolution Vo. 99 -20
Eucalvptu.c Tree Permit 99 -2
BiXhV Old Ranch Towne Center— Euealvptus Windrow
May 17, 2000
8. A modification of this Eucalyptus Tree Permit shall be obtained when the
property owner proposes to modify any of the conditions of approval for this
Eucalyptus Tree Permit.
9. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke or modify this
Eucalyptus Tree Permit if any violation of the approved conditions occurs,
any violation of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, occurs, or for those
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 (l) year of the date of final 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.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the
City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the /717/ day of
2000, by the following vote:
AYES: CommissionersQ pw T� CuTULI� i¢n/G� L �lJ��
NOES: Commissioners - 0c "o
ABSENT: Commissioners Ala
David Hood, Ph.D.
Chairman of the Planning Commission
e Whittenberg
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Euc Permit 99 -2 ApprovaITC Reso 9
Public Rearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
Clry Council Staff Report
June 12, 2000
ATTACHMENT D
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 17, 2000
Eucelypws Tr Pemut 99- 2.Appm1 Stiff Report 22
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2000
2. Minor Plan Review 00 -3
241-17 th Street
Applicant/Owner: Brennan & Stacie Hill
Request: Expansion of a bedroom to a non - conforming structure.
Specifically, the applicant proposes to add approximately
209 square feet.
Recommendation: Recommend approval, subject to conditions, and adoption
of Resolution No. 00 -16.
SCHEDULED MATTERS
3. Resolution No. 99 -20 — Denying Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 (Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center Project)
Mr. Whittenberg noted that Eucalyptus Tree Permit (ETP)) 99 -2 was presented at a
public hearing at the May 3, 2000 Planning Commission meeting and the
Commission determined by a 2 -2 vote to deny approval. He said that Staff is now
presenting Resolution 99 -20 recommending denial of ETP 99 -2.
Commissioner Brown stated that the reasons for denial were not listed in Resolution
99 -20. Mr. Boga stated that the Commission's vote to deny was sufficient to prepare
the resolution requesting denial of this application. Mr. Whittenberg referred the
Commissioners to Page 4, Section 6, of Resolution 99 -20. Commissioner Brown
noted that this section lists only that ETP 99 -2 was denied, but does not list the
reasons why. Mr. Whittenberg responded that Staff does usually list the reasons for
denial on resolutions, but will only reflect what the vote was, since there was no
prevailing vote. Commissioner Brown stated that he would like to re -poll the
Commissioners to make sure that all members had voted as intended and to hear
their reasons for casting the vote as they had.
Commissioner Lyon stated that he had voted a e permit because too many
trees had been removed and no irrigation was being provided to the remaining trees,
which were also dying. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he wished to Clarify that
approval of ETP 99 -2 was to grant a permit to the Bixby Ranch Company to remove
30% of the eucalyptus trees in order to construct the driveway approaches for the
commercial development. He noted that there were separate mitigation measures
required by the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which required the preparation
of a eucalyptus preservation plan. He stated that this document would be submitted
to the City and reviewed by a third party landscape architect to ensure that it meets
all of the EIR standards to attempt to bring the eucalyptus grove back to a healthy
status. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this would include installation of an appropriate
5
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2000
irrigation system within the grove. He said that the approval or denial of ETP 99 -2
would not impact completion of the irrigation requirements unless none of the trees
are removed, eliminating the need to meet this mitigation requirement.
Commissioner Brown clarified that the irrigation system was a separate issue from
the eucalyptus tree permit. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this was the case.
Commissioner Brown asked if this included the requirement to replace trees
removed by a 4:1 ratio. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this was true. Chairperson
Hood asked if the new trees would be planted within the existing group. Mr.
Whittenberg confirmed that this was not necessarily the case as the trees there were
already too close together. He reported that the areas for new tree plantings would
be along the perimeter of the shopping center, in the golf course area, and some
areas along the far northern end of the eucalyptus grove. He indicated that the area
south St. Cloud Drive would require fewer trees to be planted. Commissioner Brown
asked if Commissioner Lyon would like to reconsider his vote. Commissioner Lyon
stated that he would like to do so. Commissioner Brown inquired as to the motion to
be made to amend Resolution 99 -20 to indicate approval of ETP 99 -2.
Mr. Whittenberg noted that Staff has the original Resolution 99 -20 recommending
approval and listing the conditions of approval. He said that Staff could provide a
copy for the Commission's review. Commissioner Brown asked if this could be
substituted for Resolution 99 -20. Mr. Whittenberg explained that the resolution
number would remain the same. He noted that Condition No. 4, under the
Conditions of Approval does include the mitigation measures for preservation and
maintenance of the eucalyptus grove.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to approve Resolution 99 -20 recommending
approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 and adopt Resolution 99 -20.
MOTION CARRIED: 3-0-1
AYES: Brown, Cutuli, and Lyon 01
w A
NOES: Hood QK1^
ABSENT: None
Mr. Whittenberg advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 99 -20 begins a 10-day
calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final
and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
STAFF CONCERNS
6
Public Rearing re: Appeal of ApproAW of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
City Council Staff Repor!
June 12, 2000
ATTACHM ENT E
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 39 2000
Eucelypms Tree permit 99- 2.Appeel Suff Report 23
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of May 3, 2000
Mr. Ron Bradshaw stated that the City was concerned with placing a quality hotel on
this site, and he believes that the Ayres Group has designed a quality hotel that will
provide all of the best amenities to its guests.
Mr. Reg Clewley said that if this is approved, the Commission is basically approving
across the board height variations up to the rooftop. He stated that although he was
not overly concerned about the hotel, there were many other situations in which
residents will receive approval for a height variation and wait until after the final
inspection to install Closet space.
Ms. Sue Corbin stated that no comment had been made about the `butchering' of all
of the eucalyptus tress at the project location. She said that granting this height
variation would be a special privilege. She stated that none of the residents in the
development area wanted the project, and she did not believe any consideration or
special privilege should be allowed the Bixby Ranch Company.
Mr. Ayres rebutted by stating that the only portion of the roof structure that could be
extended up is the furthest most portion beyond the head of the building. He stated
that The Ayres Group has constructed 15 of these hotels and spends a lot of money
on design and furnishings to make it better than the average hotel.
Chairperson Hood closed the public hearing. He stated that he was concerned
about the issue of special privilege. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff feels that the
proposals for this project are within the overall volume of the structure, and feel that
the architectural feature is an enhancement to the structure. He said that as a part
of the approval for the commercial project, similar height variations for several roof
projections for the commercial buildings had also been approved.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to approve Height Variation 99 -2 and adopt
Resolution 99 -19 as amended.
MOTION CARRIED: 3-1
���
AYES: Brown, Cutuli and Hood V
NOES: Lyon VS
g1
None
Mr. Whittenberg advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 99 -17 and Resolution
No. 99 -19 begins a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The
Commissioner action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow
morning.
6. Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center, Lampson Avenue and Seal Beach Boulevard
Applicant/Owner: Bixby Ranch Company
1117
1
2
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
City of Sea/ Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of May 3, 2000
Request: To remove eucalyptus trees within the 40 -foot windrow in
conjunction with the approved Bixby Old Ranch Towne
Center Project.
Recommendation: Recommend approval, subject to conditions, and adoption
of Resolution 99 -20
Staff Report
'DRAFT
Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in
the Planning Department.) He stated that this item had previously appeared before
the Planning Commission in April 1999, along with the hotel project. He noted that
at the request of the applicant, both of these items were tabled pending a court
decision that required the City to rescind all approvals on the Bixby Project until the
re -evaluation of certain portions of the Environmental Impact Report was completed.
Mr. Whittenberg explained that the application deals with the existing 40 -foot wide
windrow of eucalyptus trees along the east side of Seal Beach Boulevard, north of
Lampson Avenue. He said that the zoning includes a 40 -foot landscaped setback
area assigned to the City, and the shopping center area and the golf course. He
reported that the proposal was to remove 67 of the 223 trees (30 %) within the grove
that are subject to the conditions of the Eucalyptus Tree Permit. City Council has
proposed that 70% of the trees in that particular grove be maintained. He provided
an overview of the diagram of trees designated for removal. He noted that the
primary reason for the removal of the trees is to accommodate the entry and exit
driveways to the shopping center. He noted that 47 of the 67 trees designated for
removal are located in the shopping center area of the project. Mr. Whittenberg then
reported on the number of trees of the total 67 to be removed within each
development area. Mr. Whittenberg referred to the Tree Preservation Report
completed by Mr. Greg Applegate, the arborist evaluating the eucalyptus grove. He
reported that Mr. Applegate recommends removal of 46 percent of the trees as a
result of infestation. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission not follow Mr.
Applegate's recommendations. Staff would like to instruct the arborist to designate
trees for removal while staying with the recommendation of City Council to remove
only 30% of the trees. Mr. Whittenberg then briefly outlined the plans for tree
removal and replacement. He stated that Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 is in
conformance with the standards of Section 7D of the City Code and with the
mitigation measures as proposed by City Council, He then reviewed the conditions
for approval and presented several photographs of eucalyptus tree groves in Seal
Beach and Irvine. Staff recommends approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Cutuli asked if there is a plan to provide for watering of the trees. Mr.
Whittenberg responded that the plan does require an aboveground irrigation system
for the eucalyptus grove.
14
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minufes of May 3, 2000
Chairperson Hood inquired about the Eucalyptus Windrow Preservation Plan. Mr.
Whittenberg reported that the plan has not yet been prepared, but would be
prepared once the Planning Commission and City Council approve which trees are
to be removed. Chairperson Hood stated that his Councilperson has requested that
if possible, some changes be made in the locations of some of the entry/exit
driveways for the development. Using the overhead projection of the landscape plan
Chairperson Hood pointed out the driveways proposed for relocation and discussed
the reasons for relocating these entry/exit driveways. Mr. Whittenberg noted that
this particular Site Plan with the 4 driveways in the locations as they are proposed at
this time had been approved by City Council by a 4 -1 vote. He reported that based
on the site plan approvals granted by both the Planning Commission and the City
Council, plans are presently being drafted for the Sav -On Drug Store to be located at
the southerly end of the commercial development. He remarked that much
consideration has been given to the issue of how much flexibility is given to the
mitigation requirement that the City maintain at least 70% of the trees. He stated
that should the Planning Commission approve removal of more than 30% of the
trees, Staff would have to produce some kind of supplemental environmental
document that would have to be circulated. He said that this was why Staff had
been very careful to ensure that applications for this development are in accordance
with the approved mitigation measures.
Public Hearing AFT
Chairperson Hood opened the pu91ring.
Mr. Ron Bradshaw stated that the tree removal plan was exactly the same as it had
been when it was reviewed in April of 1999. He stated that 67 trees had been
proposed for removal to accommodate the street- widening portion of the project. He
reported that 317 permits were issued for all of the areas of removal with the
exception of the historic windrow, and 316 of those trees have been removed. He
stated that 456 eucalyptus trees have been replaced by now. Mr. Bradshaw said
that 1,425 eucalyptus trees have been planted on the golf course. He stated that by
the time the golf course planting was complete, all of the requirements for
eucalyptus replacement would have taken place. He reported that approximately
800 to 1,000 trees had been planted along Lampson Avenue, essentially creating
another windrow along this street. He stated that 297 other types of trees that had
been removed would also be replaced, for a total of more than 3,000 trees planted in
the area. Mr. Bradshaw noted that when the project began there were 1,133 trees,
and currently there are 2,176 trees, and there will be 700 to 800 more trees planted
before the project is complete. Commissioner Cutuli asked how many new trees
were to be planted in the windrow. Mr. Bradshaw responded that based upon the
arborist's recommendation, the windrow trees would be replaced as they succumb to
natural attrition. He noted that the lerp psyllid eradication program had begun and
the arborist would provide monthly status reports on the health of the trees.
Is
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of May 3, 2000
1 Ms. Sue Corbin stated that this was a very sad situation. She stated that widening
2 of the Seal Beach Boulevard/1 -405 overc Tossing would mean that more of the
3 eucalyptus trees would have to be removed. She said that she found it incredible
4 that the trees slated for removal because they had been `topped,' had in fact been
5 "topped° by the City. - Ms. Corbin noted that previous to the approval of this new
6 development project, the Bixby Ranch Company had no concern for the health of the
7 eucalyptus grove trees. She stated that the whole issue was just 'a big lie.'
8
9 Chairperson Hood asked how many trees would be removed to widen the Seal
10 Beach Boulevard overcrossing. Mr. Whittenberg responded that seven (7) trees
11 would have to be removed.
12
13 Commissioner Comments
14
15 Mr. Whittenberg reported that an unsigned letter was received stating opposition to
16 the Bixby Ranch Old Towne Center Project. Chairperson Hood read the letter into
17 the record.
18
19 MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to approy� Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 and
20 adopt Resolution 99 -20. ���"`
2,
22 MOTION FAILED: 2-2 0
23 AYES: Brown and Cutuli
24 NOES: Hood and Lyon
25 ABSENT: None
26
27 Mr. Boga stated that a Resolution to deny Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2 will be
28 brought before the Commission for consideration, and may be reconsidered and the
29 permit approved by a two- thirds vote.
30
31
32 7. Variance 00-2
33 13001 Seal Beach Boulevard
34
35 Applicant/Owner: Mr. John Koos (On behalf of Airtouch Cellular) / B&P
36 Custom Building Products
37 Request: To increase the height of cellular antennas placed on top of
38 the roof.
39
40 Recommendation: Pleasure of the Planning Commission.
41
42 Staff Report
43
44 Mr. Cummins delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the
45 Planning Department.) He provided background information on this item and listed
46 the surrounding land uses to the property as follows:
16
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
City Council Staff Repon
June 12, 2000
ATTACHMENT F
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OF
MAY 3, 2000, WITH ATTACHMENTS
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99- 2.Appeal Staff Report 24
Mae 3, 2000
STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission
From: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Department of Development Services
Subject: BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER — Eucalyptus Tree
Permit 99 -2
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
BIxBY RANCH COMPANY
BIXBY RANCH COMPANY
40' -WIDE EUCALYPTUS WINDROW ALONG EAST SIDE OF SEAL
BEACH BOULEVARD, NORTH OF LAMPSON AVENUE — BixBY
OLD RANCH PROPERTY
GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C -2) ZONE - OLD RANCH TOWNE
CENTER OVERLAY AND PUBLIC LAND USEIRECREATION
(PLU/R) ZONE
TO REMOVE EUCALYPTUS TREES WITHIN THE 40' WINDRON
IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE APPROVED BIXBY OLD RANCH
TOWNE CENTER PROJECT. SEE "DISCUSSION" SECTION
BELOW FOR DETAILED TREE REMOVAL REQUESTS.
Environmental Review: THIS PERMIT REQUEST HAS BEEN ANALYZED AS A
COMPONENT OF THE BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER
EDL
7D-4
APPROVE, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
C Nlp Dbcummi, Hich,% Tow C *mw EIR Eucal%pw. Tr" ?m l 99-2. PC SuB Repo dm LW`w -24 -oo
FACTS
Planning Connnission A'taffReport - Eucalcpius Tree Permit 99 -.
Buhr Old Ranch 7oNne tenter Protect
Afar 3. 2000
• On May 21, 1999, Bixby Ranch Company (the "Applicant ") filed a request with the
Department of Development Services for authority to remove eucalyptus trees as a
component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project development.
• On June 23, 1999, this application was scheduled for public hearing before the
Planning Commission. The subject application was tabled by the Planning
Commission at the request of the applicant/property owner. The applicant/property
owner have requested this matter to now be considered by the Planning Commission.
• The applicant is proposing to remove eucalyptus trees on the subject property as a
component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project implementation, the area
subject to this permit request being the 40' -wide eucalyptus windrow located easterly
of Seal Beach Boulevard and north of Lampson Avenue.
• The subject area comprises the frontage area along Seal Beach Boulevard from
Lampson Avenue north to approximately the previous driveway location of World
Bank, approximately 2,000 feet. The subject area encompasses the existing 40' -wide
eucalyptus windrow along the Bixby Old Ranch Golf Course and the proposed Bixby
Old Ranch Towne Center (Development Areas "A -' and "C ").
• The City Council approved on November 23, 1998, the appropriate resolutions and
adopted the appropriate ordinances which certified the EIR for the project and
approved requests by the Bixby Ranch Company for General Plan amendments, zone
changes, subdivision map approvals and development agreement approvals to conform
the General Plan land use designations and zoning of the subject area to conform to
the proposed uses of land set forth in this application.
• The certified EIR evaluated the impacts of the tree removals and the City Council
adopted mitigation measures relating to the anticipated eucalyptus tree removal
requests. Both the EIR and the subsequent site plan approval by the Planning
Commission contemplated that trees in the windrow would be removed.
• On April 21, 1999, the Planning Commission approved Revised Site Plan Review 98-
1, which approved a commercial shopping center of a maximum of 286,967 square
feet at Development Area "A" of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project This
approval also established the driveway entrance /exit points into the shopping center.
Eucahptus Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Report 2
r
Planning Commission Staff Report - Eucohptu. Tree Permit 99 --
Rcxh, Old Ranch Towne Center Prolect
Slat +. '000
• The subject request includes eucalyptus tree removal activities within the 40 -foot
greenbelt area established by the City Council along Seal Beach Boulevard north of
Lampson Avenue. Additional detail regarding the proposed eucalyptus tree removals
will be provided below in the "Discussion" section.
DISCUSSION
Overview of Proposed Eucaltptus Tree Removal Requests:
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 Area "A "). The areas where the trees will be removed
are within the 40' wide eucalyptus windrow area along the east side of Seal Beach Boulevard.
north of Lampson Avenue The eucalyptus trees recommended for removal by the applicant
comprise 30.04% of the eucalyptus trees subject to the permit requirements Staff has
reviewed the proposed removals and is of the opinion that, depending upon actual field
conditions that would have to be verified, several trees proposed for removal may in fact be
retained. Based on the staff review, presented below are the recommendations by the
applicant and suggestions by staff for removal for the following reasons
It should be noted that staff is recommending approval of the subject permit for 67 trees, since
that is within the requirements of Mitigation Measure _, and field conditions may ultimately
require the removal of the 7 trees which staff feels may be able to be retained If field
conditions allow some the trees to be retained, then the existing grove will be that much
further enhanced.
Below is a general overview of the requests before the Planning Commission regarding the
requested eucalyptus tree removals:
Eucahpius Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Report 3
Applicant
Staff
Reauest
Sue¢estion
• Street /driveway entrance removals
35 trees
32 trees
• Sight line removals
15 trees
13 trees
• Bus Turnout removals.
8 trees
8 trees
• Street Realignment removals:
7 trees
7 trees
• Miscellaneous removals:
2 trees
0 trees
TOTAL TREE REMOVALS
67 trees
60 trees
PERCENT OF TREES REMOVED
30.04%
26.90%
It should be noted that staff is recommending approval of the subject permit for 67 trees, since
that is within the requirements of Mitigation Measure _, and field conditions may ultimately
require the removal of the 7 trees which staff feels may be able to be retained If field
conditions allow some the trees to be retained, then the existing grove will be that much
further enhanced.
Below is a general overview of the requests before the Planning Commission regarding the
requested eucalyptus tree removals:
Eucahpius Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Report 3
Planning C'omrrtission .Staff Report - Euc ah ptu., Tree Permit 99 -:
Btxhi Old Ranch 7ou ne Center Prnlec i
lfas 3. 2000
Area A: Shopping Center — Permit request to remove 47 eucalyptus trees within this area
The requested removals are due to trees being located within the driveways (35 trees), within
sight lines (10 trees), and adjacent to proposed building pads (2 trees) The report of the
arborist indicates there are 131 eucalyptus trees subject to the permit requirements within this
area, and 47 of these trees will be removed, or 35.9 %.
Area C: Golf Course — Permit request to remove 20 eucalyptus trees within this area. In this
area tree removals are requested for the following reasons: sight line (5 trees), bus turnout (8
trees), and street realignment (7 trees) The project applicant indicates there are 92
eucalyptus trees subject to the permit requirements within this area, and 20 of these trees will
be removed, or 21.7 %.
Each of these requests will be discussed in detail in the following sections of the Staff Report.
including a general overview of the request, the basic issues to be considered by the Planning
Commission, and recommended conditions of approval.
The applicant- retained arborist, Greg Applegate, has submitted a detailed report evaluating all
of the trees within this area subject to the permit requirements of the City (See Attachment 2)
Mr. Applegate has worked on behalf of the City with the Tree Preservation Committee and his
employment by Bixby Ranch Company was concurred with by the City. Mr. Applegate's
report indicates
"In contrast to thefndings in the EIR, all or nearly' all of the eucal}ptus have
heen topped or `:ievere /t headed and almost no seedlings are growing in this area.
As a group these frees are in poor and declining condition for- several reasons
common to all: them are it fested with ps3lhd+: the) have heen topped: they are
crowded: and there i. +no in-iganun.s}sient-• (Page 3)
"There is a high degree of hazard due lo falling limb.s on or in the A ar of passing
motorists. River gums have a history and reputation for dropping limbs, even on
calm weather dais. Please see eucal3pna failure charts irr the appendix. hr
addition the past pruning practice, and the fact that mane trees are leaning over,
or have branches hanging over Seal Beach Boulevard, makes these trees
especially hazardous. 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, 1 hmte been instructed to preserve 70 percent of the trees
over 12 inches and work to decrease the hazard" (Page 4)
"The structural condition, health, and root condition rating was evaluated in 0 to
10 format. A dead tree would be rated at 0 and a near perfect tree would be
rated at /0. 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 %. The average health rating is 4.10 %. The average root
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 PC Staff Repon 4
Planning Commission AiaffReport - Eucoh ptu.� Tree Permit 99
Ruhr Old Ranch Toone ('enter l'ngee t
!lot 3. 2000
condition is 4.25. Topped trees are rarely rated over S and rapping effects both
the structural condition, the health and root condition. As a ,group the trees in
the windrom have grown past middle age and are in the latter pan of their lives.
They have sparse foliage, reduced growth, dead branches and occasionally
deem" (Page 4)
"In the original Horticultural Recommendations portion of the "Matrix of
Findings '• a large number of trees were recommended for removal for
horticultural and safety reasons, about 46 percent. One hundred seventy three
were recommended for preservation, about 54 percent. The final
recommendation column reflects this consultants conforming to the city's
commitment to preserve 70 percent. Trees have life-spans, long if life -spans if
well spaced and cared for, or short -life spans if crowded mid topped This stock
of trees is, due to improper pruning and environmental factors, is in effect
..elderly". However, drie to the Chys commitment sruch trees shall be retained.°
(Page 6)
"The present arrangement of the windrom' had an irrigated golf course in close
proximip to one side of the windrow. In the new site use it will be hard to provide
the current amount of soil voluume, and a large .coerce of water will he removed.
Roofs 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 parts. 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, without
irrigation and infested with psyllids, it will not be sufficient to preserve these
trees. .!'nice the average diameter of these trees is about IN inches, an area IN
feet to the east of the eastern most trees should also be protected and fenced off. "
(Page 18)
Provided below is a summary of the number of tree removals for each of the approved
driveway locations for the shopping center development (Development Area "A "), from south
to north:
• St. Cloud Drive: Driveway removals - 10 removals; sight line removals - 5 removals
• Next northerly driveway: Driveway removals - 9 removals, sight line removals - 3
removals.
• Main Entrance Drive: Driveway removals - 12 removals, sight line removals - 3
removals.
• Most northerly driveway: Driveway removals - 3 removals, sight line removals - 0
removals.
Overview of Eucalyptus Grove Preservation Provisions:
Eucahptus Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Report 5
Planning Commission StafReport - Eucolvptu� Tree Perms 99
Btshi Old Ranch Tokne ('enter Protect
of 3. 2000
Chapter 7D of the Code of the City of Seal Beach sets forth the standards for the granting of
eucalyptus tree permits, the approving body, and the standards for granting permits In
summary:
o a permit is required to remove the requested trees in accordance with Section 7D4(a), as
the subject trees meet the definition of an eucalyptus tree set forth in Section 7D -3(b)
o the Planning Commission is the approving authority for the subject requests in accordance
with Section 7D- 4(b)(1), as the request is in connection with the use or development of
private property, and
o the subject trees comply with the various standards for granting permits as set forth in
Section 713-5 and are within the extent of the environmental analysis conducted for the
subject project and approved by the City Council.
Please refer to Attachment 3 for a copy of the complete provisions of Chapter 7D, Eucalyptus
Grove Preservation.
Recommended ('ondition.c o{Annroval:
As discussed above, the subject request for eucalyptus tree removals was evaluated within the
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR, certified by the City Council in November, 1998 This
permit request is the detailed tree removal request based upon the final project design as
approved by the City Council and the Revised Site Plan 98 -1 as approved by the Planning
Commission on April 21, 1999. In certifying the Elk the City Council adopted specific
mitigation measures relating to the removal of eucalyptus trees, and those mitigation measures
are recommended as conditions of approval for the requested permits.
Those approved mitigation measures are set forth below:
Riological Re.vwcev-
Mitigation Measure G -1 1. All trees to be removed shall be clearly marked at the base of the
trunk and at 4 '/ feet above ground to avoid removal of the wrong tree.
Mitigation Measure G -13: All mature trees lost as a result of project development shall
be replaced pursuant to the following ratios: a) eucalyptus: 4 to 1 using 24 -inch box trees, and
b) non - eucalyptus: 2 to 1 using 36 -inch box specimens.
Aesthetics:
Mitigation Measure M -4. An inventory and relocation plan for existing trees on -site shall be
submitted to the Development Services Department for approval prior to issuance of building
permits. Where trees cannot be relocated, the City shall require the replacement of mature
trees pursuant to the following ratios: a) eucalyptus: 4 to I using 24 -inch box trees and b) )
non - eucalyptus: 2 to I using 36 -inch box specimens.
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Repon 6
Planning Commission StoffReport - Eucolcptu% Tree Permit 99
Btsb Old Ranch Towne Venter Pro ,z t
Sfat 3. 2000
Mitigation Measure M -5 A Eucalyptus Windrow Preservation Plan shall be prepared b) 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 permits. Said plan
shall include a long -term 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,
Mitigation Measure M -6: A Eucalyptus Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained by the project
proponent as required for the proposed removal of on -site eucalyptus trees with a trunk
diameter greater than 12 inches prior to or concurrent with tentative parcel/tract maps or
grading permits
In addition, the consulting arborist has included several "Horticultural Recommendations
regarding these requested tree removals, and staff is recommending that those recommendations
be incorporated into the approved conditions of approval Those recommended conditions can be
found on pages 31 and 32 of the consulting arborist's report.
In reviewing the approved site plan in conjunction with the "Street Widening Impact On
Eucalyptus Row ", Sheet No. S -01 dated 4- 21 -00, it appears there are 5 trees that are to be
preserved in place which may be closer than 18 feet to the proposed parking lot area between the
driveway at St. Cloud and the next northerly driveway.
Staff recommends conditions of approval to require that the subject parking lot area be designed
in such a manner as to preserve a minimum landscaped area of 18 -feet from these tree locations 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. The potentially impacted trees are numbers 72, 73, 75, 77 and 80.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission, after considering
all relevant testimony, written or oral, presented during the public hearing, approve Eucalyptus
Tree Permit 99 -2, as discussed above. In approving the permit request, the Commission must
base that action upon consideration of the following standards:
• The condition of the eucalyptus tree(s) with respect to disease, danger of falling, and
Proximity to existing or proposed structures;
• The determination of an existing or potential danger to life or property;
• The number of trees which the affected property can adequately support under good
forestry practices,
• The interference of trees with existing utility services and /or streets and highways,
Eucal)pms Tree Permit 99.2. PC Staff Repon 7
Planning l'omnussion StaffRepori - Eucahpiu. Tree Perms 99 -=
Btsbti Old Ranch Toune (-enter Proles i
Alai 3. 2000
• The topography of the land and the effect of tree removal or erosion, soil retention, and
the diversion or increased flow of surface waters,
• The effect of tree removal on neighboring properties, and
• The extent to which alternative development plans which do not endanger trees cannot
achieve the same intensity of use as the proposed plans, and the extent to which the cost
of alternative development plans is prohibitive.
The City Council has determined the major policy issue regarding the acceptability and
appropriateness of the requested eucalyptus tree removal permit requests for the Bixby Old Ranch
Towne Center project through its certification of the EIR and its approvals of the necessary
General Plan Amendments and zone changes on November 23, 1998. This eucalyptus tree
removal permit request further implements the City Council's policy decision. In addition, the
tree removal will make the "greenbelt" area somewhat safer for pedestrians and automobiles -
The Planning Commission has previously approved the entrance /exit driveway locations for the
shopping center in its approval of Revised Site Plan 98 -1 on April 21, 1999.
Based on the previous determinations of the City Council and Planning Commission, staff is
recommending approval of the requested tree removal permit to the Planning Commission, and
has prepared the appropriate resolution for consideration of the Commission as Attachment I to
this Staff Report.
ee Whitienberg
Director of Development Servic
Attachments: (5)
Attachment 1 Proposed Resolution 99 -20, A Resolution of the Planning
Commission of the City of Seal Beach Approving Eucalyptus Tree
Permit 99 -2 (Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project)
Attachment 2: "Tree Preservation & Management Plan for Historic Windrow, at
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center', prepared by Greg Applegate,
ASCA, ASLA, dated May 19, 1999
Attachment 3: Chapter 7D — Eucalyptus Grove Preservation, Code of the City of
Seal Beach
Attachment 4. Tree Removal Summary by Area and Tree Number
Attachment 5: Photos: Existing Grove and Comparable Groves
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Report 8
Planning Commission RtaJfReport - Eucolrptu% Tree Perron 99 -2
Buhr Old Ranch Toane Center Project
Afar 3. 2000
ATTACHMENT I
PROPOSED RESOLUTION 99 -20, A RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING
EUCALYPTUS TREE PERMIT 99 -2 (BIXBY OLD
RANCH TOWNE CENTER PROJECT)
x
Eucal.Nptus Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Repon 9
xi
Planning Commission RtaffReport - Eucolrpluc Tree Permit " -_
Buhr Old Ranch Tone tenter Protect
Afar 3. 2000
RESOLUTION NUMBER 99 - 20
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING
EUCALYPTUS TREE PERMIT 99 -2 (BIXBY OLD
RANCH TOWNE CENTER PROJECT)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES
HEREBY FIND AND RESOLVE:
Section 1. On May 21, 1999, Bixby Ranch Company (the "Applicant ") filed a
request with the Department of Development Services for authority to remove eucalyptus trees as
a component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project development.
Section 2 On June 23, 1999, this application was scheduled for public hearing
before the Plannin¢ Commission. The subject application was tabled by the Planning Commission
at the request of the applicant /property owner The applicant /property owner'have requested this
matter to now be considered by the Planning Commission
Section 3 Pursuant to 14 Calif Code of Regs. § 15305 and § ILB of the
City's Local CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission determines as follows: The application
for Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project is within the
scope of the project analyzed in the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Ea certified by the City
Council on November 23, 1998, through the adoption of City Council Resolution No. 4660 Said
resolution and the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations are incorporated herein
by reference
Section 4. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning
Comrrrission on May 3, 2000, to consider the application for Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2. At the
public hearing the applicant spoke in favor of the request, with persons appearing both in favor of
and in opposition to the request.
ion 5. The record of the hearing of May 3, 2000 indicates the following.
a. On May 21, 1999, Bixby Ranch Company (the "Applicant ") filed a request
with the Department of Development Services for authority to remove eucalyptus trees as a
component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project development
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Repon 10
Planning Copnmi.c.cion A'taffRepnri - Eucahptu� Tree Permit 99 -'
Hixh_r Old Ranch Towne Center Projec i
S1ar3 '000
b. On June 23, 1999, this application was scheduled for public hearing before
the Planting Commission. The subject application was tabled by the Planning Commission at the
request of the applicant/property owner. The applicant /property owner has requested this matter
to now be considered by the Planning Comrttission.
C. Specifically, the applicant is proposing to remove eucalyptus trees on the
subject property as a component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project implementation,
the °area subject to this permit request being the 40' -wide eucalyptus windrow located easterly of
Seal Beach Boulevard and north of Lampson Avenue, as approved by the City Council in
November, 1998.
d. More specifically, the subject area comprises the frontage area along Seal
Beach Boulevard from Lampson Avenue north to approximately the previous driveway location
of World Bank, approximately 2,000 feet. The subject area encompasses the existing 40' -wide
eucalyptus windrow along the Bixby Old Ranch Golf Course and the proposed Bixby Old Ranch
Towne Center (Development Areas "A" and "C ").
e. On .April 21, 1999, the Planning Commission approved Revised Site Plan
Review 98 -1, which reduced a previously approved commercial shopping center from a maximum
of 299,000 square feet to a maximum of 286,967 square feet at Development Area "A" of the
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project. This approval also set forth the driveway entrance /exit
points into the shopping center.
f. More specifically, 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 30.04% of the eucalyptus trees subject to the permit requirements, and are
recommended for removal for the following reasons
❑ Street/driveway entrance removals: 35 trees
❑ Sight line removals:
15 trees
❑ Bus Stop removals:
8 trees
❑ Building Pad removals:
7 trees
❑ Other removals.
2 trees
g. The City Council approved on November 23, 1998, the appropriate
resolutions and adopted the appropriate ordinances which certified the EIR for the project and
approved requests by the Bixby Ranch Company for General Plan amendments, zone changes.
subdivision map approvals and development agreement approvals to conform the General Plan
land use designations and zoning of the subject area to conform to the proposed uses of land set
forth in this application. The EM evaluated the impacts of the tree removals and the City Council
adopted mitigation measures relating to the anticipated eucalyptus tree removal requests.
Eucahptus Tree Permit 99.2 PC Staff Repon I 1
Planning Coninnssion staff Report - Euraliptut Tree Pernm 99 -'
Bixhr old Ranch Towne (enter Prolec i
dlal 9 '000
h. Chapter 7D of the Code of the City of Seal Beach sets forth the standards
for the granting of eucalyptus tree permits.
i. 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 this development application. The applicable
mitigation measures are conditions of approval for Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 (5 mitigation
measures), and are incorporated herein by reference.
j. The report of the arborist, Greg Applegate, indicates the following
regarding the subject eucalyptus trees:
❑ "ht contrast to the .findings in the FJR, 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
common to all. them are infested with psyllids: they have been topped: they are
s, crowded: and there is no irrigation . %ysienn - (Page 3) ".
o "There is a high degree of hazard due to falling limbs on or in the xa}. of passing
motorists. River gums have a histor} and reputation for dropping limbs, even oil
calm weather days. Please see eucal}pnr.s.faihae charts in the appendix. In
c addition the past pruning practice, and the fact that marry trees are leaning over.
or have branches hanging over Seal Beach Boulevard, makes these trees
N especially hazardous. For these reasons the consultant would recommernd
removing this afire windros, 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 heen instruced to preserve 70 percent of the trees
over 12 inches and work to decrease the hazard." (Page 4)
❑ "The structural codition, health, and root condition rating was evaluated in 0 ro
10 format. A dead tree would be rated at 0 atul a near perfect tree 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 %. The average health rating is 4.70 %. The average root
condition is 4.23. 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 part of their lives.
They have sparse foliage, reduced growth, dead branches and occasionally
decay" (Page 4)
❑ "!n the original Horticultural Recommendations portion of the "Matrix of
(
Findings- a large number of trees were recommended for removal fur
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2 PC Staff Repon 12
Planning ('ommission .1'taffRepori - Eucoh piva Tree Permit 99 -2
Btxbr Old Ranch Toune ('enter Protect
Mat 9. 2000
horticultural and safeo reasons, about 46 percent. One hundred seven!) three
were recommended for preservation, about 54 percent. The feral
recommendation column reflects this consultants conforming to the city's
commitment to preserve 70 percent. Trees have life- spans, long life -spans if we//
N 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."
(Page 6)"
.,.❑ "The present 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 !u provide
Me current amount of soil volume, and a large source of water will be removed.
Routs will he cul 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, without
irrigation and infested with psyllids, it will not he sufficient to preserve these
trees. Since the average diameter of these trees is about IR inches, an area IN
feet to the east of the eastern must trees should also be protected and fenced off."
(Page 18)
Section 6. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including those stated
irCk5 of this resolution and pursuant to Chapter 7D of the City's Code, the Planning Commission
makes the following findings
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 November 23, 1998, 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 of the Code of the City of Seal Beach for the following reasons.
❑ The condition of the eucalyptus tree(s) with respect to disease, danker of falling, and
proximity to existing or proposed structures: As indicated by the consulting arborist, "In
contrast to the findings in the EIR all or nearly all of the eucalyptus hm,e been topped or
w severely header( and almost no seedlings are growing in this area. Asa group these trees
are in poor and declining condition for several reasons common to all: the}-are infested
with psyllids; they, have been topped; they are crowded; and there is no irrigation
system
The consulting arborist also indicates the following for the trees: "The structural
condition, health, and root condition rating was evaluated in 0 to 10 format. A dead tree
Eucahpius Tree Pernut 99 -2. PC Staff Report 13
Planning l bnrnu.."ton AYnffReport - Eucalhptu% Tree Permit vv -_
Btzbc Old Ranch Towne Center Protect
AM% 3. 2000
would he rated at 0 and a near perfect tree would be rated at 10. As are would expect,
trees that have no irrigation and poor care have generalltt lower ratings. No trees x ere
rated at 10. The average structural condition was 4.3091o. The average health rating is
4.70"/0. 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 aml are in the latter part of their
lives. They have sparse foliage, reduced growth, dead branches and occasionally
decay. "
D The interference of trees with existing mfift services and/or streets and highways: As
indicated by the consulting arborist, "There is a high degree of hazard due to falling limbs
on or in the way of passing motorists. River gums have a history and reputation for
dropping limbs, even or calm weather days. Please see eucalyptus failure charts ter the
appendix. I» addition the past pruning practice, and the fact that many trees are leaning
over, or have branches hanging over .Seal Beach Boulevard, makes these trees espectalh
ha:ardot.s. For these reasons the consultant would recommend removing this ennre
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
hazard."
o The number of trees which the affected p2perty can adequately S=rt under good forestry
cti s: 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'.
o The extent to which ahernative development plans which do not odanger trees cannot
achieve the same intensity of uses as to Pl=scd flans and the extent to which the cost of
ahernative development RIM is RD2Wbitive: 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 Elk. The City Council
uhimately determined to certify the EIR, approve the project, and adopt the appropriate
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations. The requested eucalyptus tree
removal permits are within the scope of the certified E1R and reflects the project as
Eucal)ptus Tree Permit 99 -2 PC Staff Repon 14
Planning ('ommis.cion A'1afReport - Eucalvpius Tree Permit 99 -2
Btxhi Old Ranch Towne ('enter Prutert
.t tat 3. 2000
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 site development plan for Development Area "A', the
shopping enter, including building pad and driveway locations. Further, the report of the
project arborist indicates, "In the original Horticultural Recommendations portion of the
"Matrix of Findirngs" a large number of trees were recommended for removal for
horticultural and safety reasons, about 46 percent. One hundred seventy three were
recommended for preservation, about 54 percent. The final recommendation column
reflects this consultants conforming to the city's commitment to preserve 70 percent.
Trees have life - spans, long if 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 he
retained."
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 6. t Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission - hereby
"approves Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2, subject to the following conditions.
1. 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 trees will be removed are within the eucalyptus windrow area
along the east side of Seal Beach Boulevard, north of Lampson Avenue. The
eucalvptus trees recommended for removal comprise 30.049/10 of the eucalyptus trees
subject to the permit requirements, and are recommended for removal for the
following reasons
u Street/driveway entrance removals: 35 trees
o Sight line removals:
15 trees
o Bus Turnout removals:
8 trees
o Roadway Realignment:
7 trees
o Other removals:
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:
Eucahptus Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Repon 15
Planning ! ommi.mon StoffReport - Eucolcptw Tree Permu 99 -'
Rixht Old Ranch Toune Center Proleci
Mal 9. ?000
r
•
No vehicles, equipment, materials, fuels, soils, excess concrete or other debris.
liquid or solid, shall be dumped or stored in- ermeer wahin 18 feet olthe trees to be
preserved. Signs shotild be pasied is Otis effem, These areas shall he clearly
identified in accordance with Mitigation 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 sheeid 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 should -be -begun shall berm as soon as the other
trees are removed and sheuid 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. Mulch should be applied and maintained over flea
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.
•
The pattern of replacement should begin at the southern most area where the nets
trees will get the most sun and wind protection. The replacement should be in
minimum 100 foot long sections removing and replacing 20 percent per year
•
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.
t 4 All eucalyptus tree removals shall be in compliance with Mitigation Measures G -11.
G -13, M-4, M -5 and M -6, as adopted by the City Council on November 23, 1998
Eucalmus Tree Permit 99 -2 PC Staff Repon 16
Planning Commi.ccion .StafjReport - Eucah plus Tree Permit 99 -2
Bizbr Old Ranch ToNne Center Project
Afar 9, 2000
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 permits. Said plan shall
include a long -term 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 Permit shall not become effective for any purpose unless an
"Acceptance of Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant in the presence of
the Director of Development Services, or notarized and returned to the Planning
Department, and until the ten (10) day appeal period has elapsed.
8. A modification of this Eucalyptus Tree Permit shall be obtained when the property
owner proposes to modify any of the conditions of approval for this Eucalyptus Tree
Permit.
9. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke or modify this Eucalyptus Tree
Permit if any violation of the approved conditions occurs, any violation of the Code of
the City of Seal Beach, occurs, or for those 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 of final 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.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal
Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of 2000,
by the following vote'
AYES. Commissioners
NOES Commissioners
ABSENT Commissioners
Eucahpius Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Report 17
Planning l bmm(ssion A'taf(Report - Eucah ptu.c Tree Pernm 99 -2
Bixhv Old Ranch Toe ne Center Proiec -t
Mat 9. 2000
David Hood, Ph.D.
Chairman of the Planning Commission
Lee Whittenberg
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Repon 18
Planning l'ommi.ccion RmffReport - Eucahptuc Tree Permu 99 -:
Bixhr Old Ranch Tmrne Center Prolec t
Mar 3. 000
ATTACHMENT 3
CHAPTER 7D - EUCALYPTUS GROVE
PRESERVATION, CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL
BEACH
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Report 20
Planning Coninncvion Staff Report - Eucalvpm.t Tree Permit 99
Btrbr Old Ranch Tone Center Project
lfot 3. 2000
CHAPTER 71)
EUCALYPTUS GROVE PRESERVATION
§ 7D-1.
Purpose.
§ 7D-2.
Scope.
§7D-3.
Definitions.
§7D-4.
Requirements and Procedures.
§7D-5.
Standards for Granting Permits.
§7D-6.
Expiration of Pen-nits.
Section 7D-1. Pumose. Eucalyptus groves are of great historical, aesthetic, and
environmental value to the citizens of Sea] Beach. The preservation of eucalyptus groves is
necessary to promote the public health and welfare by enhancing the scenic beauty, preventing
erosion of top soil, protecting against the risk of landslides, counteracting pollutants, and decreasing
wind velocities. The purpose of this Chapter is to regulate the removal and destruction of
eucalyptus groves to encourage the preservation of eucalyptus trees. (Ord. No. 1271, §1)
Section 7D-2. Scone. The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to eucalyptus groves on all
public property and on private property which is vacant, undeveloped, or which is the subject of a
change or expansion in land use, exclusive of private communities with a separate governing board
existing on the effective date of this ordinance. (Ord. No. 1271, §1)
Section 7D-3. Definitions. For the purposes of this Chapter, certain words and phrases are
defined as follows:
(a) "Director" shall mean the Director of Development Services in a matter involving
private property; and "Director" shall mean the Director of Public Works in a
matter involving public property or property to be dedicated for public use.
(b) "Eucalyptus Tree" shall mean any tree of the eucalyptus species which measures
more than 12 inches in diameter at a point 4.5 feet above the ground.
(c) "Grove" shall mean a cluster of not less than fifteen (15) trees.
(d) "Preservation" shall mean the act of keeping or saving a tree from harm or
destruction by proper maintenance, pruning treatrnent, and other means of
safeguarding trees.
(e) "Pruning and/or Trimming" shall mean the cutting of any limb or branch.
Eucahpms Tree Permit 99.2 PC Staff Repon 21
Planning ('antmissian .Staff Report - Eucahpiu.N Tree Perrot 99
Ruhr Old Ranch Tome !'enter Pruteu
Star 3. 2000
(Ord. No. 1271, § 1)
on 7D4. Tree Permit Reauirements and Procedure
x (a) Permit Required. No person may remove, cut, destroy, relocate, or undertake
other activities which may damage a eucalyptus tree without first obtaining a tree
permit from the City. The application for such tree permit shall be on the form
approved by the Planning Commission and submitted to the Director, accompanied
by the required fee as determined by the Planning Commission.
rM, IM
(1) City Council Anoroval. City Council approval is required for issuance of a
tree permit if the property on which such tree is located is owned or
controlled by the City. The City Council may direct the Planning
Commission to make a recommendation on such permit to the Council.
(2) Planning Commission Atmroval. Planning Commission Approval is
required for issuance of a tree permit if the proposed activities are
undertaken in connection with the use or development of private property.
(3) Director Anoroval. The Director may issue a tree permit in the event that
the proposed activities are not undertaken in connection with the
development of property and where the removal or modification of a
eucalyptus tree is necessary for the preservation of a grove or tree or for the
protection of the public health, safety and welfare.
(c) Review. Upon review of an application for a tree permit, the issuing authority may
approve, approve with conditions, or deny such application subject to the standards
set forth in this Chapter. In approving a tree permit, the issuing authority may
impose any reasonable conditions which it deems necessary and appropriate to
insure the preservation of eucalyptus trees as set forth in this Chapter.
(d) jjgarine. A public hearing shall be held as set forth in Section 28 -2704 for all tree
permit applications which are considered by the City Council or the Planning
Commission. Notice shall be trailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the
subject property, and published in a newspaper of general circulation not less than
ten days before the hearing date.
(e) Concurrent Review. A tree permit may be considered concurrently with, and as a
part of the required public hearing for related land use proposals. Notice as
provided in this section shall be given in addition to any notice required for actions
considered concurrently with the tree permit.
Eucahpius Tree Permit 99 -2, PC Staff Repon 22
i
Planning Commission SiaffRepori - Eucalt -pius Tree Permit 99 -'
Bixby Old Ranch Toune C'emer Prolect
.flat 3. 2000
(f) AgpgW. Any decision of the Director approving or denying a tree permit may be
appealed to the Planning Commission. Any decision of the Planning Commission
approving or denying a tree permit may be appealed to the City Council. Any
appeal must be filed in writing within ten days after the decision of the Director or
the Planning Commission approving or denying a tree permit. The decision of the
Director and of the Planning Commission shall be final unless an appeal is filed as
set forth herein. All decisions of the City Council shall be final.
(Ord. No. 1271, § 1)
Section 7D-5. Standards for Granting Permits. The following standards shall be among those
considered in reviewing an application for a tree permit:
(a) The condition of the eucalyptus tree(s) with respect to disease, danger of falling.
and proximity to existing or proposed structures.
(b) The determination of an existing or potential danger to life or property;
(c) The number of trees which the affected property can adequately support under good
forestry practices;
(d) The interference of trees with existing utility services and/or streets and highways:
(e) The topography of the land and the effect of tree removal or erosion, soil retention.
and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters;
(f) The effect of tree removal on neighboring properties;
(g) The extent to which alternative development plans which do not endanger trees
cannot achieve the same intensity of uses as the proposed plans, and the extent to
which the cost of alternative development plans is prohibitive.
(Ord. No. 1271, §1)
Section 7D -6 Expiration of Permits. An approved tree permit which is not used within the time
specified in the permit or, if no time is specified, within one year after the issuance of such permit,
shall become null and void. An application requesting an extension may be filed prior to such
expiration date, and the Director may extend the life of the permit for a period not to exceed one
year (Ord. No. 1271, §1)
•s ss
Eucalyptus Tree Pennit 99 -2. PC Staff Repon 21
Planning C ommission RtaffRepon - Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2
RIXhl Old Ranch Tnene C-emer Project
Mai 3 ?000
ATTACHMENT 4
TREE REMOVAL SUMMARY BY AREA
AND TREE NUMBER
AREA A - 26 -ACRE SHOPPING CENTER:
❑ Street /driveway entrance removals: 35 trees 32 trees
Tree Numbers (from north to south)
33. 34, 35, 56,57, 125, 127, 128, 131, 132, 133, 134, 138, 140, 68, 69, 70, 71, 181. 185.
186, 189, 192, 194, 81, 82, 223, 227, 231, 233, 235, 236, 238, 239, 240
• Sight line removals. 15 trees 13 trees
Tree Numbers (from north to south):
365, 117, 119, 122, 142, 146, 149, 187, 198, 200, 242, 245, 902, 903, 907
• Miscellaneous removals: 2 trees 0 trees
Tree Numbers (from north to south):
64,65
Area C: Golf Course:
❑ Bus Turnout removals: 8 trees 8 trees
Tree Numbers (from north to south):
207, 209, 210, 211, 213, 215, 217, 218
❑ Street Realignment removals: 7 trees 7 trees
Tree Numbers (from north to south):
962,967,971,97,',974,975,980
Eucal. Pius Tree Permit 99 -2. PC Staff Report 24
1
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99 -2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-20
City Council Staff Report
June 12, 2000
ATTACENMNT G
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 47319 A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING SITE PLAN
REVIEW NO. 98 -1, REVISION # 2, APPROVING
THE SITE PLAN FOR A 286,967 SQUARE FOOT
COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER,
INCLUDING A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT OUTDOOR
GARDEN CENTER, WITH PARKING,
LANDSCAPING AND OTHER ANCILLARY
FACILITIES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF SEAL BEACH
BOULEVARD AND ST. CLOUD DRIVE (BIXBY
OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER)
Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99- 2.Appeal Staff Report 25
RESOLUTION NUMBER ,4/70/
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING
SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 98 -1, REVISION # 2,
APPROVING THE SITE PLAN FOR A 286,967
SQUARE FOOT COMNERCIAL SHOPPING
CENTER, INCLUDING A 10,000 SQUARE
FOOT OUTDOOR GARDEN CENTER, WITH
PARKING, LANDSCAPING AND OTHER
i ANCILLARY FACILITIES ON PROPERTY
LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD AND ST. CLOUD
DRIVE (BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWNE
CENTER)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY
FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE:
Section 1. The Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing
regarding Site Plan Review 98 -1, Revision # 2 on August 4, 1999 and approved the
project through the adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 99 -26. On August 3,
1999, the Orange County Superior Court issued a writ in the matter of City of Los
Alamitos, et al. v. City of Seal Beach ordering the City to vacate Resolution No. 4660 and
any approvals relying on the Final IIR. On August 16, 1999, the City Council adopted
Resolution 4726, vacating Resolution No. 4660 and any approvals relying on the Final
IIR, subject to and pending further Court order.
Section 2. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. § 15025(a) and §§ ILC and III
of the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study and a Draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEiR), to study the environmental impacts arising from the
proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development Plan and related General Plan
amendments, including this amendment. The DEIR was circulated for public review and
comment from April 15, 1998 to May 29, 1998, in compliance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's Local CEQA Guidelines.
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
C:\M% Doc rncnts\RESO`Sitc Plan Review 98 -1. Revision s 2.CC Reso.doc,LMVS -23 -99
City Council Resolution No. 4731
Site Plan Reyieu 96-1, Revision = 2
Bixhr Old Ranch Towne Center Project
August 23, 1999
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 November 9 and November 17, 1998, the City Council adopted City
Council Resolution No. 4660, certifying the Final EIR and adopting a statement of
overriding considerations. On August 23, 1999, the City Council conducted 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 this resolution is within the scope of the project analyzed in the Final EIR, as
revised, and City Council Resolution No. 4728 is hereby incorporated by this reference.
Section 3. Pursuant to the August 3 Writ, the City Council held a public
hearing on August 23, 1999 to consider approving this site plan.
Section 4. The record of the hearing before the Planning Commission on
August 4, 1999 indicates the following:
(a) Kitchell Development Company (the "Applicant ") filed an
application with the Department of Development Services for approval of a revised site
plan to develop the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center 26.045 -acre commercial shopping
center site located at the northeast comer of Seal Beach Boulevard and St. Cloud.
(b) .. The proposed site plan depicts_ 286,967 square feet of retail
commercial floor area separated into numerous building pads, which includes an outdoor
nursery service area of approximately 10,000 square feet attached to one of those retail
sites, approximately 1,564 parking spaces and landscaping.
(c) Area A is located north of St. Cloud Drive on the east side of Seal
Beach Boulevard. The property has approximately 1,307 feet of frontage on Seal Beach
Boulevard, and is approximately 975 feet in depth.
(d) Surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows:
NORTH Bixby Village residential development in the
Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone.
SOUTH Bixby Old Ranch Golf Course in the Recreation -Golf
(R -G) Zone.
EAST Bixby Village residential development in the
Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone and Bixby
Old Ranch Golf Course in the Recreation -Golf (R -G)
Zone.
Wmipected End of Formula 2
On Council Resolution No. 4731
Site Plan Revieu 9A -1, Revision = J
Rixh r Old Ranch Tou ne Center Project
AuRust23, 1999
WEST across Seal Beach Boulevard, in the General
Commercial (C -2) zone is the Rossmoor Center
shopping center development, in the City of Seal
Beach.
(e) The site plan is consistent with the General Plan, which designated
the property for commercial uses.
(f) The "Mitigation Monitoring Program" adopted in connection with
the EIR establishes a number of specific action measures which have been proposed to
reduce the identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance in relation to the
project. by' further mitigate potential environmental impacts, and to respond to concerns
raised by the public, both the project and the subject site plan were revised by the City
Council, inter alia, as follows:
• The proposed shopping center has been shifted northward, north of St Cloud,
to preserve more eucalyptus trees and to reduce "cut through" traffic through
the community of Rossmoor,
• The proposed church use to the north has been replaced with 75 residential
homes, to reduce traffic, noise and congestion; and
• A proposed gas station mini- market use on a one -acre site that was initially
proposed for the commercial shopping center has been eliminated and is no
longer part of the project.
(g) The proposed shopping center site plan, as revised, complies with
all City standards regarding minimum lot size, building setbacks, lot coverage, building
height (except for those architectural features requiring height variation approval),
landscaping, and parking requirements.
(h) Required adherence to applicable building and fire codes, along
with those mitigation measures related to utilities and water, will ensure there will be
adequate water supply and utilities for the proposed use.
Section 5. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including those stated
in §4 of this resolution and pursuant to the City Code, the City Council hereby adopts the
findings of the Planning Commission and makes the following findings:
(a) Site Plan Review 98 -1 Revision # 2, is consistent with the
provisions of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan, as amended by the City
Council concurrently with this request, which provides a "general commercial"
designation for the subject property and permits the, proposed shopping center subject to
approval of a "Site Plan Review ", and the issuance of other appropriate discretionary land
use entitlements (e.g., conditional use permits, height variations, planned sign program,
:tlnraprrted End of Formula 3
Cin Council Resolution So. 4731
Site Plan Review 98 -1, Revision = J
Bixhv Old Ranch Towne Center Project
August 23, 1999
etc.). The use is also consistent with the remaining elements of the City's General Plan,
as the policies of those elements were also amended by the City Council to be consistent
with, and reflected in, the Land Use Element. Accordingly, the proposed use is
consistent with the General Plan.
(b) The proposed style, height and bulk of the proposed shopping
center is consistent with surrounding commercial uses, which include an existing
shopping center in the same zoning area as the subject property, directly across Seal
Beach Boulevard. Similar development standards regarding building height and
landscaping will apply to any future development in the adjacent shopping center. As
approved by the City Council, there are sufficient mitigation measures adopted by the
City Council to ensure compatibility with adjoining land uses. The subject shopping
center development and the site proposed for development exceeds all standard
development requirements of the City related to lot size, setbacks, lot coverage, building
height (except for those architectural features previously approved for height variations
or variances), off - street parking, and landscaping. Therefore, the site is adequate in size,
shape, topography and location to meet the needs of the proposed use of the property.
(c) Subject to the proposed conditions of approval, the proposed use of
the property as a shopping center as approved herein will be compatible with surrounding
uses and will not be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood. As the shopping
center is sufficiently screened from adjoining uses by landscaping and the adjoining uses
are a golf course and residential development, with another shopping center located
across Seal Beach Boulevard, staff is not recommending any specific noise related
conditions at this time that would be in addition to those imposed by the Environmental
Impact Report.
Section 6. Any prior versions of a site plan for the subject property are
superseded by Site Plan Review 98 -1 Revision # 2. The Site Plan prepared by Nadel
Architects, Inc., dated July 26, 1999 is hereby approved.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby approves Site
Plan Review 98 -1, Revision # 2, subject to the following conditions:
1. Site Plan Review 98 -1, Revision # 2, is approved for a maximum of 286,967
square feet of retail commercial floor area separated into numerous building pads,
including an outdoor nursery service area of approximately 10,000 square feet
attached to one of those retail sites, approximately 1,564 parking spaces, and
landscaping on property located on the east side of Seal Beach Boulevard, north
of St. Cloud Drive, at Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center (Tentative Tract Map No.
15767), as set forth on the "Site Plan ", prepared by Nadel Architects Inc., dated
July 26, 1999.
2. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of the applicable Mitigation
Measures as adopted by the City Council in certifying the Bixby Old Ranch
!VnexpMrd End of Formula 4
Cin Council Resolution No. 4731
Site Plan RevieH 98-1. Revision 4 ?
Bixkt' Old Ranch Tmi ne ('enter Project
August 13, 1999
Towne Center EIR, as set forth in "Exhibit A ", attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
3. This Site Plan Review shall not become effective for any purpose unless an
"Acceptance of Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant in the presence
of the Director. of Development Services, or notarized and returned to the
Planning Department, and until the ten (10) day appeal period has elapsed.
4. A modification of this Site Plan Review shall be obtained when:
o The shopping center proposes to modify any of its current conditions of
, approval.
o There is a substantial change in the mode or character of operations of the
shopping center.
5. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke or modify this Site Plan
Review if any violation of the approved conditions occurs, any violation of the
Code of the City of Seal Beach, occurs, or for those 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.
6. In the event staff determines that security problems exist on the site, the
conditions of this Site Plan Review may be amended, under the procedures of the
Code of the City of Seal Beach, to require the provision of additional security
measures.
T All business establishments shall have a public telephone listing.
8. All business establishments shall comply with Section 13D, "Noise Control' of
the Code of the City of Seal Beach as the regulations of that Chapter now exist or
may hereafter be amended. Should complaints be received regarding noise
generated by a business establishment, the Planning Commission reserves the
right to schedule this permit for reconsideration and may require the
applicant/business operator to mitigate the noise level to comply with the
provisions of Chapter 13D.
9. Litter and trash receptacles shall be located at convenient locations inside and
outside all business establishments. Operators of such business establishments
shall remove trash and debris on an appropriate basis so as not to cause health
problems. There shall be no dumping of trash and /or glass bottles outside any
business establishment between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
10. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke or modify this Site Plan
Review pursuant to Articles 25 and 28 of The Code of the City of Seal Beach if
:Uxaprcted EM of Formula 5
City Council Resolution \'o. 4731
Site Plan Rerieu 98-1, Resdsion = ?
Bixhv Old Ranch Toa ne Center Project
August 13, 1999
harm or retail - related problems are demonstrated to occur as a result of criminal
or anti - social behavior, including but not limited to the congregation of minors,
violence, public drunkenness, vandalism, solicitation and /or litter.
11. Property line walls adjacent to the proposed residential /park development
adjoining the subject property to the north and east shall have a minimum 8 -foot
solid masonry or concrete block wall provided. Said wall may not exceed 10 feet
in height.
12. Loading dock areas shall not be utilized between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00
a.m. prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the first residential
unit as identified as Development Area D in the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center.
E!K and between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. thereafter.
13. This Site Plan Review shall become null and void unless exercised within one (1)
year of the date of final 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.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Seal
Beach at �titBeung the�f held on the 0404 C day of
L&6.-- , 1999, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
Mayor Jr
Tm%ptctrd End of Fomula 6
Cin Council Resolution No 4731
Site Plan Revieu 98 -1. Revision _ ?
Bixhv, Old Ranch Towne Center Project
August 23, 1999
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH }
I, Joanne M. Yeo, City Clerk of Seal Beach, California, do he y certify that the
foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number 331 on file in
the office of the City Cleric, passed, approved, and adopted by the J City Council of the
City of S l� Beach, at regular meeting thereof held on the oc 6A±- day
of 1999.
C6 Clerk
!Unripened End of Formula
Cite Council Resolution .Sb. 4731
Site Plan Review 9d -1. Revision = ?
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
August 23. 1999
"EXHIBIT A"
1. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of the following Mitigation
Measures as adopted by the City Council in certifying the Bixby Old Ranch
Towne Center EIR:
The mitigation measures relevant to the requested development are set forth
below (92 mitigation measures):
Laud Ilse:
T Mitigation Measure A-]: Detailed development plans for Development Areas
A, B and D shall include walls, landscaped buffers and building setbacks in order
to eliminate potential conflicts with adjacent residential and recreational uses.
These detailed plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director
of Development Services prior to or concurrent with approval of final subdivision
maps or plot plans.
Mitigation Measure A -2: Detailed plans for areas adjacent to Lampson Avenue
(Development Areas C, D and E) shall include perimeter landscaping and
building setbacks to insure compatibility with the Scenic Highways Element of
the City General Plan. These detailed plans shall be submitted for review and
approval by the Director of Development Services prior to or concurrent with the
approval of final subdivision maps or plot plans.
Mitigation Measure A -3. Detailed development plans for Development Area
A shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Development
Services to insure that no more than 20% of commercial space is devoted to
restaurants.
Geology,:
Mitigation Measure C -1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project
proponent shall submit a geotechnical report to the City Engineer for approval.
The report shall include the information and be in a form as required by the
Orange County Grading Manual, Section 5.4 and the Orange County Excavation
and Grading Code, Section 7 -1 -819. Project proponent shall reimburse City costs
of independent third -party peer review of said geotechnical report.
Mitigation Measure C -2: The project applicant shall incorporate measures to
mitigate expansive soil conditions, compressible /collapsible soil conditions
and liquefaction soil conditions, and impacts from trenching in site - specific
Tentative Tract/Parcel Map Review and Rough Grading Plan Review reports
prepared by the project geotechnical consultant. Recommendations shall be
RInex"ed End or FoYmula 8
Ci!v Council Re voluti on A'o. 4731
Site Plan Revie.r 9h' -1, Revision r 1
Bixhv Old Ranch Tone Center Project
August 13, 1999
based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory testing and analysis
The geotechnical consultant's site - specific reports shall be approved by a
certified engineering geologist and a registered civil engineer, and shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Project proponent shall
reimburse City costs of independent third -party peer review of said site -
specific reports.
Mitigation Measure C -3: Loose and soft alluvial soils, expansive clay soils
and all existing uncertified fill materials will be removed and replaced with
compacted fill during site grading in order to prevent seismic settlement, soil
expansion, and differential compaction.
Mitigation Measure C-4: Prior to the initiation of project grading in any
development area, all existing utilities will be located and either abandoned and
removed, rerouted or protected.
Mitigation Measure C -S: In excavations deeper than four feet but less than ten
feet, a slope no steeper than 1.5 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) shall be provided.
Steeper slopes or deeper excavations will be provided with shoring for stability
and protection. OSHA safety requirements shall be adhered to throughout the
entire,duration of project earthwork.
Mitigation Measure C -6r All grading procedures, including soil excavation
and compaction, the placement of backfill, and temporary excavation shall
comply with City of Seal Beach standards.
Mitigation Measure C -7: Permanent cut and fill slopes shall not exceed 2 to 1
(horizontal to vertical).
Mitigation Measure C -8: Graded, but undeveloped land shall be maintained
weed -free and planted with interim landscaping within ninety (90) days of
completion of grading, unless building permits are obtained. Planting with
interim landscaping shall comply with NPDES Best Management Practices.
Mitigation Measure C -9: Conformance with the latest Uniform Building Code
and City Ordinances can be expected to satisfactorily mitigate the effect of
seismic groundshaking. Conformance with applicable codes and ordinances
shall occur in conjunction with the issuance of building permits in order to
insure that overexcavation of soft, broken rock and clayey soils within sheared
zones will be required where development is planned.
Tne:pened End of Formula 9
Cin l •ouncil Resolution Yo. 4731
Site Plan Rm" 98 -1. Revision = 2
Bixhr Old Ranch Tone Center Project
Augu.rr 23. 1999
Mitigation Measure C -10: The potential on -site liquefaction hazard shall be
mitigated by removal and recompaction of on -site alluvium soils, installation of
subsurface drainage and placement of compacted fill as required.
Water/Drainage:
Mitigation Measure D -1. The capacity of the Old Ranch Retarding Basin will
be increased to 87.6 acre feet at elevation 12 so that the peak flow exiting the
Retarding Basin will be no greater than the pre - project condition thereby
eliminating the increase of runoff due to the increase of impervious area.
Mitigation Measure D -2. The runoff from the I0 -acre area at the northwest
corner of the project shall be diverted to the Old Ranch Retarding Basin. The
capacity of the Retarding Basin will be further increased to accommodate this
increase in flow to a capacity of 88.4 acre feet at elevation 12.
Mitigation Measure D -3. Additional capacity in the Old Ranch Retarding
Basin to 100 acre feet at elevation 12 will be provided as a mitigation from the
impact of drainage from future upstream development. This increase will be
approximately 13 percent over the required holding capacity based upon
Mitigation Measures D -1 and D -2 above.
Mitigation Measure D 4: The inlet capacity of on -site catch basins will be
constructed a minimum of 25 % larger than that required by the City Engineer
in order to reduce the potential for debris blockage during major storms.
Mitigation Measure D -5: The project shall reduce the impact of contaminants
(oil, grease and rubber) by the use of Best Management Practices (BMP) used
to conform to the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) provisions in the Clean Water Act. The BMP's
used will most likely be the use of oil and grease separators and /or vegetated
areas used to biologically treat the contaminated runoff.
Mitigation Measure D-6: The amount of sediment movement during
construction will be minimized by the use of NPDES BMP's, including, but
not limited to, sandbags, silt fences, straw bales and rock check dams. The
construction and condition of the BMP's will be periodically inspected during
construction and repairs will be made, when necessary, as required by the
NPDES.
Mitigation Measure D -7: Prior to final project design, a project specific Drainage
Report shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with
applicable requirements of the Orange County Flood Control District and the City
of Seal Beach. The report shall describe the existing drainage network, existing
Wnecpmed End ofFoMWA 10
('in Council Resolution Yo. 473)
Site Plan Revieu 9r3 -1, Revision a 1
Btxhv Old Ranch Towne ('enter Project
August 23, 1999
capacity, pre -and post - project runoff volumes, and any necessary improvements to
accommodate proposed project ninoff volumes.
Mitigation Measure D-8: Prior to final design, a comprehensive Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or a
registered professional hydrologist to protect water resources from impacts due to
urban contaminants in surface water nmoff. The plan shall be prepared in
coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Orange County, and
the City of Sea] Beach to insure compliance with applicable NPDES permit
requirements. The Plan shall include a combination of structural and non - structural
Best Management Practices (BMPs) as outlined in Countywide NPDES Drainage
' Ara Management Plan.
Mitigation Measure D-10: All project drainage facilities shall be kept
fire from vegetation and debris that causes any runoff to become impounded
for more than five days.
Air Quality:
Mitieation Measure E -1: Prior to the issuance of initial grading or building
permits, the applicant shall obtain approval of an Air Quality Mitigation Plan by the
Director of Development Services. The Plan shall address each applicable control
measure from the 1997 Air Quality Management Plan as fisted below in order to
determine which control measures are feasible, recommend implementation
conditions, and establish methods of applying conditions to contractors, buyers,
lessees, tenants and occupants. The project applicant shall reimburse City costs of an
independent third party peer review of this Plan.
Traivportarion T 'irculari on
Mitigation Measure F -1: Prior to the application of each building permit, the
applicant shall pay City Traffic Impact fees and/or post security in a manner meeting
the approval of the Director of Public Works for the "fair share" costs of highway
improvements attributed to the proposed project.
Mitigation Measure F -2: Prior to applications for building permits, the applicant
shall obtain approval by the Director of Public Works of a Bus Stop and Pedestrian
Access Plan.
Mitivation Measure F -3. Prior to applications for building permits, the
applicant shall obtain approval by the Director of Public Works of a Bus Stop
and Pedestrian Access Plan.
Biolopcal Resmirces:
!UMCpected End of Fohnula t t
Cin Council Resolution .fib. 4731
Site Plan Review 98 -1, Revision = 2
Rixht• Old Ranch Tmrne Center Project
August 23, 1999
Mitieation Measure G -1. Prior to project construction, the California
Department of Fish and Game shall be notified pursuant to California Fish and
Game Code Sections 1601 -1603 and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in
conjunction with their 404 permit process. The proposed project shall provide
all required compensation for impacts to on -site wetland habitats.
Mitigation Measure G -2. International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)
pruning standards shall be followed on all trees. General pruning guidelines
including specifipations for making correct pruning cuts, branch selection for
different purposes, and topping, as provided by the arborist, shall be followed.
` Mitigation Measure G -3. After project construction, trees that have been
topped in the past shall undergo reconstructive pruning to improve tree
structure and reduce hazards.
If
Mitigation Measure G -4. All contractors, subcontractors, equipment
operators, etc. shall be informed concerning tree preservation standards and
procedures. Tree protection guidelines and procedures shall be incorporated
into all construction and grading agreements. The project arborist and job
superintendent shall oversee all tree protection requirements.
Mitigation Measure G -5. Prior to any construction activity, tree protection
zones shall be delineated for all trees to be preserved. The protection zone
will be either: 1) five feet from the outside of the dripline of the tree canopy or
2) one foot radius from the trunk for every 1 -inch of truck diameter,
whichever is greater. If construction activity is planned within any tree
4 protection zone, a case -by -case evaluation will be made by an ISA Certified
Arborist.
Mitigation Measure G -6. Prior to any grading or construction activity, a
4 -foot high protective fence consisting of chain -link wire or fluorescent
webbing attached to steel line posts shall be constructed around the protection
zone of all preserved trees. Laminated "tree protection zone - no construction
activity" signs will be attached to the fence. This fence is to remain in place
throughout the construction period.
Mitigation Measure G -7. If contact with the tree crown is unavoidable and
tree damage will occur, as ISA Certified Arborist shall prune the conflicting
branch(es) using ISA standards. Where trenching is necessary in areas that
contain tree roots, tree roots shall be pruned using a Dosko root pruner or
equivalent. All cuts shall minimize ripping, tearing, and fracturing of the root
system of the impacted tree. The trench shall be made no deeper than the
depth of grading or trenching necessary.
!unnpr rd End or Formals 12
City (- ouncil Resolution A'o- 1731
Site Plan Revieu 9X -1, Revision = ?
Bixbv Old Ranch Towne Venter Project
August 23, 1999
Mitieation Measure G -8. In order to avoid draining or leaking equipment
fluids near preserved trees, fluids such as: gasoline,. diesel, oils, hydraulics,
paint, brake and transmission fluids and glycol (anti- freeze) shall be disposed
of properly. Construction equipment shall be parked at least 50 feet away
from existing trees to avoid the possibility of leakage of equipment fluids into
the soil.
Mitigation Measure G -9. In areas affected by grading or excessive
construction dust, the tops and undersides of foliage will be washed with a
strong water stream every two weeks in morning hours before 10:00 a.m. to
control mite and insect populations.
Mitieation Measure G -10. If irrigation systems or schedules or
drainage /runoff patterns are changed by construction activities, an assessment
of irrigation needs shall be conducted to protect the health of the trees to be
preserved. This may require the installation of a temporary irrigation system
or mobile watering by a water truck.
Mitieation Measure G -1 1. All trees to be removed shall be clearly
marked at the base of the trunk and at 4 '/ feet above ground to avoid removal
of the wrong tree.
Mitigation Measure G -12. All major tree trimming shall be scheduled
so as to not disturb birds -of -prey during nesting periods and Monarch
Butterfly overwintering as well as to prevent infestation by the Eucalyptus
Long -horn Borer. All major tree trimming shall be completed by October 31
in order to avoid infestation by the Eucalyptus Long -homed Borer, the nesting
season for birds -of -prey, and Monarch Butterfly clustering.
Mitigation Measure G -13: All mature trees lost as a result of project
development shall be replaced pursuant to the following ratios: a) eucalyptus:
4 to 1 using 24 -inch box trees, and b) non - eucalyptus: 2 to I using 36 -inch
box specimens.
Mitigation Measure G -14: All omamental ponds, pools, water hazards
or lakes shall be kept free of emergent vegetation, both of which provide
harborage for mosquito breeding. These water bodies shall also be stocked
with mosquito fish.
Mitigation Measure G -15: Grass clippings shall either be removed from
the site or composted in a manner that does not breed flies.
Mitigation Measure G -16: All structures shall be constructed in a
manner to exclude rats from gaining "indoor access ".
Hine :pealed End of Formula 13
Cirr Council Resolution No. 4731
Site Plan Re ,teu 9h -1, Re�vsion = 2
Bisbv Old Ranch Towne Center Project
August 23, 1999
Mitigation Measure G -17: All landscaping shall be open and skirted as
necessary to exclude rats from nesting in enclosed thickets of vegetation.
Euer,V,:
Mitigation Measure H -1: Development plans will be provided to the Southern
California Gas Company and the Southern California Edison Company as
they become available in order to facilitate engineering, design and
construction of improvements necessary to provide electrical, natural gas, and
telephone services to the Bixby Old Ranch site.
Mitigation Measure H -2: The applicant will comply with guidelines provided
by the Southern California Gas Company and the Southern California Edison
Company in regard to easement restriction, construction guidelines, protection
of line easements, and potential amendments to rights -of -way in the areas of
any existing easements.
Mitigation Measure H -3: Building energy conservation will be largely
achieved by compliance with Titles 20 and 24 of the Energy Conservation
Code. Title 24, California Administrative Code Section 2- 5307(b) is the
California Energy Conservation Standard for New Buildings which prohibits
the installation of fixtures unless the manufacturer has certified to the CEC
compliance with the flow rate standards. Title 24, California Administrative
Code Section 2- 5452(i) and Q) address pipe insulation requirements which can
reduce the amount of water used before hot water reaches equipment or
fixtures. Title 20, California Administrative Code Sections 1604(f) and
1601(b) are Appliance Efficiency Standards.
Mitigation Measure H -4: In order to conserve energy devoted to space
heating and air conditioning, active and passive solar techniques will be
encouraged whenever possible within the project. Active solar systems
include the use of solar space and hot water heating for buildings, swimming
pools, etc. Passive systems involve orienting buildings properly, planting
trees to take advantage of the sun, providing adequate roof overhangs, making
sure that walls are properly insulated, and installing simple heat storage
systems.
Mitigation Measure H -5. Electric vehicle charging facilities shall be provided
for a minimum of two vehicles and a maximum of four vehicles.
Noise:
Mitigation Measure 3 -1: Construction in areas within 500 feet of residential
development shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM on Monday
through Saturday. Construction activities shall not be permitted in these areas on
ninexpea rd End or ronnWa 14
('in• ('ouncil Resolution \b. 4731
Sile Plan Revieu 9h -1, Revision r ?
Rixhv Old Ranch Tou ne Center Project
August 23, 1999
Sundays or Federal holidays. Use of heavy grading equipment (such as impact
hammers and pile drivers) shall be limited to the hours of 8:OOAM to 5:00 PM on
Monday through Friday.
Mitigation Measure J -2: All noise sensitive land uses shall be sound attenuated
against present and projected noise, which shall be the sum of all noise impacting the
project, so as'not to exceed an exterior noise standard of 65 dB CNEL in outdoor
living areas (e.g., for senior - assisted living units) and an interior standard of 45 dB
CNEL in all habitable rooms. Evidence prepared under the supervision of a County -
certified acoustical consultant that these standards will be satisfied in a manner
consistent with applicable zoning regulations shall be submitted as follows:
A Prior to the recordation of a final tract/parcel map or prior to the issuance-
of Lading Permits, at the sole discretion of the City, an Acoustical Analysis Report
shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services, for approval. The report
shall describe in detail the exterior noise environment and preliminary mitigation
measures. Acoustical design features to achieve interior noise standards may be
included in the report in which case it may also satisfy "B" below.
B. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, an acoustical analysis
report describing the acoustical design features of the structures required to satisfy the
exterior and interior noise standards shall be submitted to the Director of
Development Services for approval along with satisfactory evidence which indicates
that the sound attenuation measures specified in the approved acoustical report(s)
have been incorporated into the design of the project.
C. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all freestanding acoustical
barriers must be shown on the projects plans illustrating height, location and
construction in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Development
Services.
D. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and Occupancy, field
testing in accordance with Title 25 regulations shall be required by the Director of
Development Services to verify compliance with all applicable design standards.
E. The project applicant shall reimburse the City for the costs of an
independent, third party peer review of this evidence.
Mitigation Measure J -3: All structures shall be sound attenuated against the
combined impact of all present and projected noise from exterior noise sources to
meet the interior noise criteria as set forth below:
a) commercial - 50 CNEL;
b) hotel 45 CNEL,
c) senior assisted living - 45 CNEL, and
:lineipehed End of Fdemuls 15
Citr Council Resolution \'o. 4731
Sue Plan Reviem 98 -1, Recision = ?
Bixhv Old Ranch Towne Center Project
August 23, 1999
d) " Residential — 45 CNEL.
Notwithstanding any land use characterizations, all sensitive land use receptors
(including the senior assisted living, Alzheimer's care/skilled nursing facility) shall
be sound attenuated against present and projected noise levels, which shall be the
sum of all raise impacting the project, so as not to exceed an exterior noise standard
of 65 CNEL m outdoor living areas and an interior noise standard of 45 CNEL in all
habitable rooms. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, evidence prepared
under the supervision of a County-certified acoustical consultant that these standards
will be satisfied in a manner consistent with applicable zoning regulations shall be
submitted to the Director of Development Services in the form of an Acoustical
t Analysis Report describing in detail the exterior noise environment and the acoustical
design features required to achieve the interior noise standard and which indicate that
the sound attenuation measures specified have been incorporated into the design of
the project.
Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and Occupancy, field testing in
accordance with City policies shall be required by the Director of Development
Services to verify compliance with all applicable design standards.
Mitieation Measure J4: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant
shall agree by executing an agreement with the Director of Development Services
requiring that the applicant will provide to each prospective buyer, renter, or lessee of
noise sensitive land uses (e.g., senior assisted care units) a written disclosure that
certain buildings or units (without windows and doors closed) and outdoor areas
could be subject to noise levels above State and City standards or policies for noise
sensitive land uses. Such notification shall be in language approved by the Director
of Development Services and shall be formalized in written Covenants, Conditions
and Restrictions (CC&R's) recorded on the title of each noise sensitive land use
building site. In addition, each advertisement, solicitation and sales brochure or other
literature regarding noise sensitive land uses shall contain the approved notification
language. Notification shall also stipulate that the area is subject to occasional
overflights, and that in the event the Los Alamitos AFRC is activated for use as a
Disaster Support Area, raise levels could significantly increase for an unknown
period of time due to increases in airfield operations. The agreement shall also
provide that prior to the close of escrow with initial buyers, the written disclosure
must be acknowledged and signed by all initial buyers, their signature notarized and
deposited in escrow with instructions to the escrow holder to deliver the executed
disclosure form to the City Clerk within three working days after the close of escrow.
Public Services:
Mitigation Measure K -1. Prior to final approval of a vested tentative tract/
parcel map the project applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement
with the City of Seal Beach. Said agreement shall establish, if required, any
!Unexpected End ofFo Wa 16
Cin Council Resolution No. 4731
.Site Plan Rey iem 9X -1, Rmsion - 2
Bixh! Old Ranch Tou'ne Center Project
August 23, 1999
payment of the project's fair -share contribution to offset project impacts on
public facilities and services including the need for additional law
enforcement and fire protection facilities and staffing.
Mitigation Measure K -2: The City of Sea] Beach Development Services and
Police Departments shall review and approve all detailed project plans,
improvement plans, and architectural elevations in relation to the following
issues: adequate street and security lighting, clearly marked streets and
building identification, adequate internal circulation and surveillance for patrol
officers, and provision of alarm systems.
i Mitigation Measure K -3: All new structures shall provide roofing materials of
a Class B roofing assembly or better.
Mitigation Measure K4: All new structures shall install automatic fire
sprinkler systems that meet National Fire Protection Association Standards, in
accordance with the provisions of the Code of the City of Seal Beach.
Mitigation Measure K -5: All water mains and hydrants shall provide required
fire flows in accordance with requirements of the Orange County Fire
Authority.
Mitigation Measure K-6: All structures shall be constructed pursuant to
Uniform Building Code requirements relative to fire protection.
Mitigation Measure K -7: The project proponent will pay the statutory school fee,
as applicable to the project, to the Los Alamitos Unified School District. Current
capital facility rates allowed for the mitigation of school impacts in the State are set
at $1.72 per square foot of assessable space for residential construction and $0.28
per square foot for commercial/industrial projects.
(Itilities :Service .Systems:
Mitigation Measure L -1: All water lines and related facilities shall be
designed and installed pursuant to the requirements of the City of Seal Beach.
Detailed improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Seal
Beach Engineering Department for review and approval prior to project
construction.
Mitigation Measure L-2: The project applicant shall be required to pay their
"fair - share" cost for improvement of any off -site water facilities necessary to
serve the proposed project.
!tlwxpft-W End of Formula 17
City Council Resolution . \'o. 4731
Site Plan Review 9>; -1, Revision = ?
Bizhv Old Ranch Towne Center Project
August 23, 1999
Mitigation Measure L -3: Automatic sprinkler systems, soil sensors or other
best available technology shall be utilized in the irrigation of the reconfigured
golf course and other landscaped areas.
Mitigation Measure L-4: Mulch and other soil covers shall be utilized in all
landscaped areas in order to reduce irrigation demands and increase the water -
holding capacity of the soil.
Mitigation Measure L-5: The proposed project shall comply with local and
State laws requiring water efficient plumbing fixtures in order to minimize
water consumption. These laws mandate the use of low volume flush toilets
in all buildings; establish efficiency standards that set the maximum flow rates
for showerheads, faucets, etc.; prohibit the use of non - conforming or
substandard plumbing fixtures, and establish pipe insulation requirements to
reduce the amount of water used before hot water reaches the fixture.
Mitigation Measure L -7: All sewer and reclaimed water lines and any related
facilities shall be designed and installed pursuant to the requirements of the
City of Seal Beach and the County Sanitation District of Orange County.
Detailed improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Seal
Beach and the County Sanitation District of Orange County for review and
approval prior to project construction. .
Mitigation Measure L -8: The project applicant shall be required to pay their
fair share cost of any off -site wastewater transmission or treatment facilities as
well as required sewer connection fees to the City of Seal Beach.
Mitigation Measure L -9: Concurrent with approval of site plans for proposed
commercial, hotel, restaurant, senior care and residential uses, detailed plans
shall be submitted delineating the number, location, and general design of solid
waste enclosures and storage amts for recycled material.
Mitigation Measure L -10: The project developer shall adhere to all source
reduction programs for the disposal of construction materials and solid waste
required by the City of Seal Beach.
Mitigation Measure 1..12: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project
proponent shall complete a Master Water Study for submittal to the Seal Beach
Public Works Department. The study should assess available water resources and
improvements to the water system required to serve the proposed project and meet
fire flow demands. The specific contents of the study should be determined in
coordination with the Public Works Department. The project applicant shall
reimburse the City for the costs of an independent third party peer review of this
study.
nlorcpMrd End of Form W 18
Cw Council Resolution ;\'o. 4791
Site Plan Revieti 9+i -1. Revision = 2
Bixh t Old Ranch Tou ne Center Project
August 23, 1999
Mitigation Measure L -13: Based on the recommendations contained in the Master
Water Study, the project proponent shall pay a fair share of the cost required to
offset project impacts on off -site water systems.
Aesthetics:
Mitigation Measure M -1: Prior to issuance of building permits for any
proposed commercial, hotel, restaurant, senior care facility, or residential uses,
the project proponent shall submit project plans (including landscape plans and
illustrative elevations) to the Director of Development Services for approval.
Said plans shall reflect the following:
• All open areas not used for buildings, including but not limited to: parking
lots, service areas, walls, walkways, and courtyards shall be attractively
landscaped in accordance with landscape plans prepared by a licensed
landscape architect.
• Concentrated perimeter landscaping shall be installed along Seal Beach
Boulevard, Lampson Avenue and the 405 Freeway northbound off-ramp in
order to maintain and enhance views from along these roadways.
• A fully automated irrigation system shall be included in the landscape plans
for the project and all landscaped areas should be maintained in good
condition throughout the life of the project.
• All buildings and landscaping proposed for the site shall present a cohesive
image with attention to compatible materials, building proportion, signage,
and architectural styles.
• To the degree feasible, the bulk of buildings shall be minimized through
articulation of the building mass with offsets, stepped terraces, changes in
plane, and other such methods in order to reduce the visual impact of the
project as viewed from Seal Beach Boulevard, Lampson Avenue,
Rossmoor Highlands and the 405 Freeway.
• Rooftop equipment shall be screened from all off -site vantage points and
mechanical equipment shall be contained within rooftop enclosures.
Rooftop screening materials shall be complimentary in material and color
to the building's exterior.
• Rooftop structures, unless an integral part of the building's design, shall
not exceed the maximum allowed parapet elevation.
• Service areas shall be screened from off -site view and trash containers
shall be enclosed using materials complimentary to the commercial
buildings.
Mitigation Measure M -2: Prior to submittal of final project plans, a
photomontage showing illustrative project elevations in their proposed setting
shall be prepared by the project proponent and submitted to the City's
Tnexpnfed End of Formula 19
Cm Council Resolution No. 4731
Aire Plan Reviee 98.1, Revision = ]
Btxhti Old Ranch Tome ('enter Project
August 23, 1999
Development Services Department to illustrate how views from the Seal Beach
Boulevard, the 405 Freeway northbound off -ramp, Lampson Avenue, the
Rossmoor Highlands in Los Alamitos and the Bixby Office Park would be
altered by the proposed project. The photomontage shall demonstrate
compliance with Mitigation Measure M -1 above.
Mitigation Measure M -3: Prior to approval of final project plans, a landscape
plan for common areas of the project site including street trees, shall be
prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted to the Director of
Development Services, and the City Street Tree Division of the Parks and
Recreation Department for approval after review and comment by the City
Tree Preservation Committee '
Mitigation Measure M -4. An inventory and relocation plan for existing trees
on -site shall be submitted to the Development Services Department for
approval prior to issuance of building permits. Where trees cannot be
relocated, the City shall require the replacement of mature trees pursuant to
the following ratios: a) eucalyptus: 4 to 1 using 24 -inch box trees and b)
non - eucalyptus: 2 to 1 using 36 -inch box specimens.
Mitigation Measure M -5. 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
Parks and Recreation Department for review and approval prior to or
concurrent with tentative parcel/tract maps or grading permits. Said plan shall
include a long -term 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.
Mitigation Measure M -6: A Eucalyptus - Tree Removal Permit shall be
obtained by the project proponent as required for the proposed removal of on-
site eucalyptus trees with a trunk diameter greater than 12 inches prior to or
concurrent with tentative parcel/tract maps or grading permits.
Mitigation Measure M -9. A landscaped buffer of no less than ten (10) feet
shall be provided along the northern perimeter of Development Area D (the
proposed residential site) and the eastern perimeter of Development Areas A
(Old Ranch Towne Center) and D to ensure privacy and screen views to and
from the adjacent residential neighborhood in Los Alamitos. This shall be
completed prior to the final inspection of any building within these
development areas.
Mitigation Measure M -10: Prior to issuance of a building permit, a
lighting plan for the project site specifying the location and type of all exterior
!unrapecrrd End of Formula 20
City Council Resolution \'o. 4731
Site Plan Revieu 98-1, Revision = 2
Birhr Old Ranch Toune Center Project
August 23, 1999
light sources, including street lights, parking lot and driving range lights, shall
be prepared and submitted to the Department of Development Services for
approval.
Mitigation Measure M -11: Street, parking lot, and other common area
lighting shall use low or high - pressure sodium units, metal halide, clean
lucalox or other efficient lighting technology. The project proponent shall
reimburse the City for the costs of an independent third party review of
lighting plans.
Mitigation Measure M -12: All outdoor lighting should be shielded,
* directed downward, and have sharp cut -off qualities at property lines, in order,
to minimize light and glare spillover effects.
Mitigation Measure M -13: The landscape plan for the project shall
concentrate landscaping along the periphery of the site and in other areas to
minimize impacts on adjacent uses from automobile headlights and other light
sources.
Mitigation Measure M -14: Commercial buildings as well as the
proposed hotel, restaurant, and senior care structures shall use minimally
reflective or tinted glass and all materials should be selected with attention to
minimizing glare impacts to off -site areas, particularly the AFRC, the 405
Freeway, Seal Beach Boulevard, Lampson Avenue, and adjacent residential
uses.
Mitigation Measure M -15: Paved areas should be textured, and large
expanses of concrete or high gloss tile should be avoided.
Mitigation Measure M -16: Interior parking lot landscaping shall cover no
less than 5% of the parking lot areas on -site.
Cultural Resources
_Mitigation Measure N -1. A Phase I archaeological survey shall be undertaken
by an archaeologist and Native American monitor appointed by the City of
Sea] Beach City Council prior to any earth moving operations. The
Archaeological Advisory Committee shall review and provide comments and
recommendations to the City Council regarding the proposed scope of field
investigation to be completed for the Phase I survey. Such scope of work shall
contain at a minimum the following: a description of the walk -over field
survey methodology, including transect field spacing for the walk -over; a
description of the subsurface field sampling plan to be utilized, consisting of
test borings and minimum 1x1 meter test pits, and a description of additional
!Uwxpn ed End or Formal• 21
Cin Council Resolution \'o. 4731
Site Plan Revie" 9K -1, Revision = ?
Bixby Old Ranch Toe ne Center Prolect
August 23. 1999
field investigations if cultural resources are identified in the Phase 1
Investigation.
Mitigation Measure N -2. Earth removal or disturbance activities related to
rough grading and other excavation for foundations and utilities that extend
below five feet of the pre - grading surface elevation. if any earth removal or
disturbance activities result in the discovery of cultural resources, the project
proponent's contractors shall cease all earth removal or disturbance activities
immediately and notify the City selected archaeologist and/or Native
American Monitor, who shall immediately notify the Director of Development
Services, The City selected archaeologist will have the power to temporarily
halt or divert the excavation equipment in order to evaluate any potential
cultural material. The City selected archaeologist shall evaluate all potential
cultural findings in accordance with standard practice, the requirements of the
City of Seal Beach Archaeological and Historical Element, and other
applicable regulations. Consultation with the Native American Heritage
Commission and data/artifact recovery, if deemed appropriate, shall be
conducted.
Mitigation Measure N -3. if potentially significant cultural resources are
encountered during earth removal or disturbance activities, a "Test Phase ", as
described in the Archaeological and Historical Element of the City General
Plan is required and shall be performed by the City selected archaeologist, and
if potentially significant cultural resources are discovered, a "Research Design
document" must be prepared by the City selected archaeologist in accordance
with the provisions of the Archaeological and Historical Element of the
General Plan. The results of the test phase investigation must be presented to
the Archaeological Advisory Committee for review and recommendation to
the City Council for review and approval prior to continuation of earth
removal or disturbance activities in the impacted area of the proposed project.
Mitigation Measure N -4. Project - related earth removal or disturbance activity
is not authorized until such time as the "Test Phase" research is completed and
accepted by the City Council and until a written "Authorization to Continue
Earth Removal - Disturbance Activity" is issued by the Director of
Development Services to applicant for the impacted area of the proposed
project.
Mitigation Measure N -5. During all "test phase" investigation activities
occurring on site, the City selected archaeologist and the Native American
monitor shall be present to conduct and observe, respectively, such "test
phase" investigation activities.
Mitigation Measure N -6. Should any human bone be encountered during any
earth removal or disturbance activities, all activity shall cease immediately
n:neipened End of Formda 22
Citv Council Resolution No 4731
Site Plan Rci-iem 98 -1, Revision = ?
Rixhr Old Ranch To> ne Center Project
Augusi 23, 1999
and the City selected archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be
immediately contacted, who shall then immediately notify the Director of
Development Services The Director of the Department of Development
Services shall contact the Coroner pursuant to Section 5097.98 and 5097.99 of
the Public Resources Code N. relative to Native American remains. Should
the Coroner determine the human remains to be Native American, the Native
American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98.
Mitieation Measure N -7. If evidence of subsurface paleontologic resources is
found during construction, excavation and other construction activity in that
area shall cease and the contractor shall contact the City Development
Services Department. With direction from the City, a Orange County
Certified Paleontologist shall prepare and complete a standard Paleontologic
Resource Mitigation Program,
Reerealiou
Mitigation Measure 0- 1. Prior to final approval of a vested tentative tract
map, the project applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the
City of Seal Beach which shall specify that the project proponent will:
1. offer for dedication to the City of Seal Beach the 6.74 acre Bixby Old
Ranch Tennis Club facility for public recreation purposes;
2. provide an on -site joint use public /private driving range; and
3. provide a 2.5 acre improved park facility adjacent to the residential
component of the Project.
k k k f
!Unexpeml d End of Formula 23
Public Hearing re: Appeal of Approval of Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-2
Planning Commission Resolution 99 -20
Ciry Council Staff Report
June 12, 2000
ATTACHMENT H
SITE ACCESS EVALUATION - BMY OLD
RANCH TOWNE CENTER, LETTER DATED
MARCH 29, 1999 FROM LINSCOTT, LAW &
GREENSPAN TO STEVE BADUM, CITY
ENGINEER
Eucelypws Tree Pemut 99- 2.App"l Suff Report 26
E N G I N E E R S
ENGINEERS & PLANNERS a TRAFFIC, TRANSPORTATION, PARIONG
1580 Corporate Drive, Suite 122 a Costa Mesa, California 92626
Phone: 714 641 -1587 a Fax: 714 641 -0139
March 29, 1999
Mr. Stephen G. Badurtt, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Subject: SITE ACCESS EVALUATION
BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER
Seal Beach, California
Dear Mr. Badum:
As requested, Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) is pleased to submit this letter which
summarizes our evaluation of access to the proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center. Figure 1
presents the site plan of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center prepared by Nadel Architects.
Figure 2 presents the Conceptual Site Access/Median Plan prepared for the project. This plan
illustrates the current access configuration of the Old Ranch Towne Center, as approved by the City of
Seal Beach. The evaluation has been prepared in response to City staff concerns/comments.
Site Access Evaluation
As shown in Figures 1 and 2, a total of five project access locations are planned along Seal Beach
Boulevard, with four driveways serving the Old Ranch Towne Center commercial project, and one
providing direct access to the future residential development.
As shown in Figure 1, the residential access roadway will be located opposite Rossmoor Center Way at
Seal Beach Boulevard. As currently planned, this entry will provide access to only the future 75
dwelling unit single residential subdivision. The conceptual internal roadway alignment for the future
residential subdivision is also illustrated on Figure 1.
Review of Figure 2 shows that two of the four access driveways to the Old Ranch Towne Center will
be signalized intersections, with one located opposite Saint Cloud Drive and the other located opposite
an existing Rossmoor Center driveway.
Philip M. linscon. P.E. (Ret.l
lack M. Greenspan, P.E.
William A. Law, P.E. (Re.)
Paul W. Wilkinson, P.E.
lohn P. Keating, P.E.
David S. Sherder, P.E.
Pasadena - 626 796 -2322 • San Diego - 619 299 -3090 a Las Vegas - 702 451 -1920 • An LG2WB Company
Mr. Stephen G. Badum, P.E.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
March 29, 1999
Page 2
E N G I N E E R S
All turning movements into and out of the Old Ranch Towne Center at the "St. Cloud" entry will be
allowed, with the exception of westbound through movements. Patrons exiting the site will be required
to turn left or right on to Seal Beach Boulevard, and will be prohibited from traveling through the
intersection (westbound) into the Rossmoor Community. In addition, the proposed primary entry on
Seal Beach will be a "frill access" signalized intersection (Driveway 43).
Review of Figure 2 shows that the other signalized project entry (Driveway #3) on Seal Beach will be
.located approximately 600± feet to the north (measured from centerline to oerrterline) of the St.
Cloud/Seal Beach intersection. The proposed separation between the signalized project driveway on
Seal Beach Boulevard and the St. Cloud/Seal Beach intersection is consistent with recommended
design practices and meets the minimum criteria for signalized intersection spacing. The location of
this proposed signal also ensures that good signal progression along Seal Beach Boulevard is
maintained. Further, the separation of the two proposed project signalized driveways on Seal Beach
guarantees that adequate left -turn storage into the Old Ranch Towne Center and the Rossmoor Center
can be provided within the center median on Seal Beach Boulevard.
Based on our level of service analyses, the St. Cloud/Seal Beach and Old Ranch Towne Center /Seal
.Beach intersections are forecast to operate at an acceptable service level during the AM peak commute
.hour and PM peak commute hour of a "typical" weekday (See column 3 of Table A, attached at the
end of this letter report).
The two remaining project driveways on Seal Beach are secondary site access points that will be
unsignalized entry/exits. The proposed project driveway (Driveway #2) located north of the "St.
Cloud" entry will be restricted to "right -turns in/out only". This entry is located roughly 300± feet
north of the St. Cloud/Seal Beach intersection.
Turning movements at the proposed project driveway located between Rossmoor Center Way and the
proposed signalized entry on Seal Beach (Driveway #4) will be restricted to northbound right -turn
ingress, westbound right -turn egress, and southbound left -turn ingress. Westbound left -turn
egress movements from the site will be prohibited. This entry is located approximately 370± feet
north of the proposed Old Ranch Towne Center /Seal Beach signalized intersection.
These two driveways are expected to alleviate "pressure" at the signalized entries and are needed to
ensure adequate service levels are maintained and proper access to the proposed Old Ranch Towne
Center is provided. We believe that the provision for these two unsignalized driveways will have a
"positive" impact on the operating condition of Seal Beach and the internal circulation of the Old
Ranch Towne Center. In our experience, inadequate storage capacity for outbound vehicular traffic can
result in backups onto the shopping center's internal circulation road and congestion within the center.
The two unsignalized driveways proposed as part of the Old Ranch Town Center project will act as
`relief valves" to ensure queues of outbound vehicular traffic are kept to a minimum and smooth traffic
flow is maintained on -site.
E N G I N E E R S
Mr. Stephen G. Badum, P.E.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
March 29, 1999
Page 3
In our opinion, the location of these two tmsignalized project driveways will not have an adverse
impact on the operating conditions of Seal Beach Boulevard. The spacing between these two
unsignalized access points and the two signalized project entry /exits is consistent with ITE
recommended practices'. Design guidelines for access point spacing for shopping centers indicate that
secondary driveways, such as those restricted to right -turn only movemerus, can be located between
200 to 300 feet of a major (signalized) intersection.
Further, the number and type of driveways proposed as part of the Old Ranch Towne Center is
consistent with recommended site design criteria. Given the size of the proposed shopping center and
the forecast project trip generation, we believe the provision for four driveways is justified and ensures
that site traffic will not queue on to City streets or on to the irrternal shopping carter roadway. This is
especially important during weekends when traffic into and out of shopping centers are greater than
during the weekday.
Evaluation of "Joint Access" via Rossmoor Center Way
In response to City staff's request, we have also assessed the benefitftmpact of providing access to
the Old Ranch Towne Center from Rossmoor Center Way. To gain access, an "easement" across
the "residential site" will be needed to link the Old Ranch Towne Center site to Rossmoor Center
Way. This parcel of the Old Ranch Master Plan now consists of a 75 dwelling unit single family
residential subdivision, but the layout of the future residential subdivision is not known at this
time.
Table A presents a summary of the Year 2001 peak hour Level of Service results for the Bixby Old
Ranch Master Plan. This table provides a summary of the anticipated levels of service at the Seal
Beach/Rossmoor Center Way, Seal Beach/Old Ranch Towne Center, and Seal Beach/St. Cloud
intersections, assuming the proposed Towne Center access configuration or the "joint access"
alternative.
As shown, no anticipated changes in service levels at the three study intersections are expected
with either of the access alternatives (compare columns 3 and 4 of Table A). However, the ICU
values do increase slightly, although not significantly, at the two signalized intersections of Seal
Beach/Rossmoor Center Way and Seal Beach/St. Cloud. The forecast PM peak hour ICU value at
the Seal Beach/Old Ranch Towne Center intersection improves marginally by .006 if "joint
access" is provided via Rossmoor Center Way.
' Guidelines for Planning and Design Access Systems for Shopping Centers, ITE publication No. IR -012, M
Informational Report, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C.
Mr. Stephen G. Badum, P.E.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
March 29, 1999
Page 4
E N G I N E E R S
Nevertheless, in our opinion, the "joint" access, if constructed, will impact the future residents of
the proposed 75 -unit subdivision rather than provide a benefit to the Old Ranch Towne Center.
Figure 3 illustrates the potential impacts to the conceptual roadway layout of the future
residential project if "joint access" to the Old Ranch Towne Center is to be provided at Seal
Beach Boulevard and Rossmoor Center Way. Under this concept, the roadway alignment to the
future residential project will have to re- routed to accommodate a direct traffic flow into and out
of the Old Ranch Towne Center.
This "realignment" will result in a less direct (more circuitous) route to the residential site and
result in residential and commercial vehicle conflicts. Joint access will induce more delay
(congestion) and longer travel times to residents since they will have to blend with the commercial
traffic flow, and deal with "cut- through" traffic. The primary area of potential congestion and
conflict between residential and commercial vehicle traffic is shown on Figure 3.
Additionally, an entry/exit to a residential neighborhood that is shared or primarily a commercial
access gives the impression of a substandard development that would not be consistent with the
quality of existing residential development in Seal Beach. This type of entry would not be
consistent with an upscale single family development that is proposed as part of the Bixby Old
Ranch Master Plan.
Hence, we recommend that the access points for the future residential project and the proposed
Old Ranch Towne Center be kept separate and that the "joint access" alternative abandoned.
Separating residential traffic from commercial traffic is always preferred. As indicated in our
evaluation, the access/egress plan now proposed for the Old Ranch Towne Center is more than
adequate and meets all site design criteria.
Impacts related to the elimination of "Right -turn only" Entry/Exit (Driveway #2)
At the City's direction, LLG has also evaluated the potential traffic/circulation related impacts
associated with the elimination of the project's "Right -tum only" entry/exit (Driveway #2) on Seal
Beach Boulevard.
The last two columns of Table A summarize the potential traffic impacts of this alternative access
configuration. As shown, a comparison of the ICU/LOS values in columns 3 and 6 indicate the
project's main entry, the Seal Beach/Old Ranch Towne Center intersection will be impacted. This
project entry deteriorates one service level from LOS B to LOS C during the PM peak commute
hour as a result of "eliminating" the right -tum only entry/exit. As indicated earlier, the "right -turn
only" driveway is required to ease "pressure" at the signalized entries.
E N G I N E E R 5
Mr. Stephen G. Badum, P.E.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
March 29, 1999
Page 5
Further, eliminating driveway #2 will negatively impact the inbound and outbound storage capacity at
the project's entries/exits (a loss of storage will resuh). The potential for backups onto Seal Beach
Boulevard is greater with this alterative access design, especially at the Seal BeacWOld Ranch Towne
Center entry, as project traffic will be distributed to only three driveways. The inbound storage to the
Old Ranch Towne Center is more critical than outbound storage because of its effect on the operation
of Seal Beach Boulevard. This is especially critical during weekends when traffic into and out of
gypping centers is peaking, and the potentiial for longer queues are greater. This design could
negatively impact traffic flow, result in longer inbound queues, and compromise the safety of passing,
motoring public on Seal Beach Boulevard.
In many instances, the required inbound storage length at shopping centers cannot be provided because
of site constraints, improper internal circulation design, or improper site access design (i.e. insufficient
number of driveways). This is not the case for the Old Ranch Towne Center. The number and type of
driveways proposed ensures adequate and safe access to the Old Ranch Towne Center is provided.
Conclusions
The access/egress plan currently proposed for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center is adequate
and well designed. The spacing of the two proposed signalized driveways and the location of the
two proposed unsignalized project driveways (with respect to the signalized entries) are
consistent with recommended design practices.
Further, given the results of the intersection capacity analysis and our evaluation, we conclude that
neither the "joint access" alternative nor the elimination of the "right -turn only" entry/exit will be a
benefit to either the Old Ranch Towne Center or the future 75 -unit residential subdivision. No
changes in the proposed access configuration to the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center, as currently
designed, are required nor recommended.
In our opinion, the provision for two signalized entries, and two unsignalized driveways on Seal
Beach Boulevard is the preferred access design configuration for the Old Ranch Towne Center.
This combination of driveways will ensure that! 1) adequate and safe access to the Old Ranch Towne
Center is provided; 2) the safety of the passing public is not compromised, and 3) vehicular queues for
inbound and outbound site traffic at the project driveways is kept to a minimum.
E N G I N E E R S
Mr. Stephen G. Badum, P.E.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
March 29, 1999
Page 6
This completes our Site Access Evaluation. If there are any further questions, or you require any
additional information, please do not hesitate to call me.
Very truly yours,
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, ENGINEERS
Richard E. Barretto, P.E.
Transportation Engineer III
Attachments
1913ACCESS.DOC
3
G
a
d
F
z
u
z
H
w u
ti y
Q �
z�aa
row
Ua �
vwv�a�
r O
�J a
Q64O
0.
O �
N
G :W
N
+ +
Y
MV
;.
CL
E
LL a+ Q C. C
m
p A
y
6
O
O �o O l
Ki
ids
"10<11
O
N r
y C Q] L
�y
m
U
m o°
T U
V
U U
R U
vg�
G a d
c o
o b `o c
C
G O C .0
U
o A°m
E o A E
zoo
p; H
R a
5 C 5
U
G C R
V C iO V
G F
�s
S
i3•E � $.E
S
O C
^ka �n� a
QU
QW
QD
b
N y
V N
d p^
h b
Q P
•O 00
CL
d Y
�i' o
as Ba
V.-a V
a
� � C ^�'
P .-•
OO b
00 f�
V
-��
a
<u
C Yji
ii W C b
C��bdtU
0
C
O
N
;.
CL
E
LL a+ Q C. C
m
y
O
O �o O l
Ki
ids
O
N r
y C Q] L
m
U
m o°
T U
V
U U
R U
vg�
c o
o b `o c
C
G O C .0
O Z p
o A°m
E o A E
zoo
R a
5 C 5
U
G C R
V C iO V
G F
�s
S
i3•E � $.E
en o
G d p
o d o R
u v= v E
p� pp
N y
V N
c
CL
d Y
�i' o
as Ba
V.-a V
Ali-
wu�arry.
Z
C
a
W
Lw<
=
AVM3Nao
°9
z w
1;
l
W;
O
,
—
O U
9zz
°op
.:
—
w w
3Na0 0nO10 '1S
�Z
<
1
1111
to ~
m
I I
W
a J
II
Q U
>
m
4
Q
W
vy
C H x
L,
II11
it 11i
NQ
C
rn
n'I
J O
z#
_
II II
1111
II II
II II
i
�jp
Q
U
1111
II II
{iy�7 e
m
W X
,.1
AVM3Naa
1
1111
II II
yy��
U m
1111
nll
iii
Z
M
na
U
Il n
,111
�
U
11n
P11
��
�n
N
II
11
F
UZZ3�1
£p
II
gg k
s
tWC
CLU
9Z
.
0 3—
AVM3Na0
'
'-
°
o�
I
W
q
II
V
y
4
1I
11;
II '1
5
1,
i Ind
ii
W
��
y�iW
`c
II11
II II
1rl
I
i 1
h h
_
i! AvM3Naa.
II
II
11
II
11
II
II
II
II
11
11
II
II
11
II
II
II
II
d 1
yl
4'1
yl
yl
f�
1
Ilk
1 I+
I'1
111
III
ii
1
l
N
I+ }
7
Ia 11
J
Od
11
a
W
ad
it
�
II
II
AVM
0
831N30
aoowssON
9
I Hill
TTppT
mgdI
a9
JJ1 Ito
o�
II ' I II'; I I III I
HI, IIII III
lal��l illl iI IIII I "1111 ��'
�i�l I IIII III i
•I a� I I II111 I III I�I �� �� 'T
II II II IIII I III c$A
Ln
I f l !!
L j6
0 e p
}
3
n
W
1
�
ZE
5°
=ate
Z W X
Z W
X (n
U
t
C6
0 W Z
m
®iIT
! o
�w
U
a Z W
W
}m
w
U in
x W
cn
M Z U
OF
O
H
H
�a
o
z
o
W
3
m
'
U
a
mW
az
s
V
z
1
�
A
Ln
I f l !!
L j6
0 e p
PUBLIC HEARING
THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL TO EUCALYPTUS
TREE PERMIT 99 -2 - OLD RANCH TOWN CENTER
MRS. YEO, HAVE NOTICES BEEN POSTED AND /OR ADVERTISED AND MAILED AS REQUIRED BY
LAW. AND HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY COMMUNICATIONS EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THE MATTER?
CITY MANAGER, IS THERE A STAFF REPORT?
WRITTEN AND ORAL COMMUNICATIONS RELATING TO THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE RECEIVED
BY THE CITY COUNCIL. ANY PERSON ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL MAY BE REQUIRED TO TESTIFY
UNDER OATH IF OFFERING FACTUAL TESTIMONY OR AN EXPERT OPINION. OTHER TESTIMONY
MAY BE OFFERED UNDER OATH IF THE PERSON ADDRESSING THE COMMITTEE REQUESTS TO BE
SWORN. SWORN TESTIMONY OFFERED AS EVIDENCE MAY HAVE MORE WEIGHT IN
DELIBERATIONS BY THE COUNCIL THAN UNSWORN TESTIMONY.
ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED
MATTER? IF SO, PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND BE SWORN BY THE CITY CLERK, IF
NECESSARY OR DESIRED,
ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED
MATTER? IF SO, PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND BE SWORN BY THE CITY CLERK, IF
NECESSARY OR DESIRED.
I HEREBY DECLARE THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
(Council receives public input - action by resolution)
AGENDA ITEM N
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 22, 2000
To: Joanne Yeo
City Clerk
Tp '
From: Patty Campbell
Mayor
Subject: Eucalyptus Tree Permit
On Wednesday night, May 17, 2000, the Planning Commission approved the Eucalyptus Tree
Permit. This memo is to serve notice that I am appealing that decision to the City Council.
j��