Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 012589 Y MEE'TI � � DA ITEM r2 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 25 , 1989 The joint meeting of the Atascadero City Council was called to order at 7 : 30 p.m. by Mayor Borgeson, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL City Council : Councilmembers Dexter, Lilley, Mackey, Shiers and Mayor Borgeson Planning Commission: Commissioners Brasher, Highland, Lopez-Balbontin, Luna, Tobey, Waage and Chairman Lochridge Staff : Ray Windsor, City Mgr. ; Henry Engen, Commun. Devel . Director; Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director; Steve Decamp, Senior Planner; Cindy Wilkins, Administrative Secy, COUNCIL COMMENT Mayor Borgeson thanked the Tree Committee (T.C. ) for its commit- ment, support and progress on the Tree Ordinance, as well as for the education provided to the public for the protection of the environment. Reminding those in attendance that this is not a public hearing but is a study session for the Planning Commis- sion and Council, she noted that 30 minutes will be allowed at the beginning of the agenda for public input. Following to- night' s session, a public hearing will be held to consider the revised draft ordinance. Public Comment Barbara Reiter, 10150 San Marcos, inquired about the removal of large sycamore trees around Atas . Lake, wondering who was given the authority to cut them down and was a tree removal permit issued. If it was the City, the tree removal criteria should apply as it does to private citizens . Mike Arrambide, representing the Chamber of Commerce, summarized the Chamber' s recommendations : Urban forester unnecessary, ex- cept on_ a consulting basis for Planning staff; the ordinance is in desparate need of simplification; a hazardous tree should be defined as any tree within or adjacent to a public right-of-way in threatening condition to vehicles or pedestrians, or any tree 1 in deteriorating condition such that its reclamation would be im- practical; the formula for determining the value of trees is unrealistic and has stymied valuable projects, affecting the City' s tax base. Livia Kellerman, former T.C. member, reviewed the history of the Tree Ordinance, noting the necessity of its enforcement powers for meaningful tree protection; it should be revised to be more workable without creating loopholes, stronger without being in- flexible and enforceable without being unfair. Steve LaSalle, former T.C. member, hopes future revisions will be a continuation of strengthening the ordinance, noting that surveys show 75-90% of Atascadero' s citizens want strong tree protection. Ken 'Marks, who works in and around the area, feels the Tree Ordinance may not be fiscally responsible if it is too restric- tive, because it may result in a reduction of development fees . He noted that many of his clients express the desire to build on their lots ( some of which are heavily wooded) without the City dictating where. Dave Baker, No. County Contractors ' Assoc . , relayed that the NCCA reluctantly supported the original Tree Ordinance in an effort to bring together the building industry and the government agencies. He expressed that the amendments are too restrictive and subjec- tive . He asked that bonding not be invoked, is opposed to the arborist concept and feels the pressures on staff are going to lessen their effectiveness for them to perform their duties . Bob Horton, Chandler Ranch resident, expressed opposition to the requirement of paying for a professional arborist to tell him that his obviously dying tree is dying; he feels individual home- owners should be intelligent enough to know what their property needs . Jack Brazeal, a certified arborist, spoke of the need to retain the forests in Atascadero, citing statistical information and physical facts threatening the trees in our environment. He spoke in support of a comprehensive ordinance and guidelines for tree protection. Ursula Luna, former T.C. member, spoke of the need for strong tree protection, urging the Council and Commission not to compromise on tree protection and the environment, mindful of the future we will leave to our children. Barbara Schoenike, former T.C. member, reviewed the five major changes which the public wished to address (based on input received by the T.C. during its six months at work) : ( 1 ) native trees changed to mature oaks, and major tree protection stan- 2 dards are now concentrated on oaks; ( 2 ) the T.C. recommended an urban forester to implement the ordinance (the variance in pri- vate arborists ' interpretations has been widely criticized) ; ( 3 ) because of public concerns, the definitions of significant trees have been changed to clarify their status in the community; (4 ) the T.C. 's recommendations now incorporate citizen concerns about removing propertyowner-planted trees; ( 5 ) the committee recommended that a removal permit not be required for dead trees . Fred Frank, resident, doesn' t believe that all trees are threat- ened nor that building will come to a halt as a result of the Tree Ordinance; he feels Atascadero needs a strong, straight- forward Tree Ordinance and should retain a professional forester to implement it. Lee Bradley, resident, expressed opposition to the Tree Ordinance due to restrictions and financial burden, in many cases, on the individual property owner. Jerry Clay, resident, expressed concern about the negative af- fects of the Tree Ordinance, feeling it is punitive and re- strictive. He is opposed to the concept of an arborist and feels a member of staff could be trained in that area. A. WORKING SESSION 1 . Zone Change 15-88 - Tree Ordinance revisions Request initiated by the City Council to consider proposed amendments to the City' s Tree Ordinance Mr. Engen gave staff report, reviewing the key policy issues in need of amendment and/or clarification related to Tree Ordinance revisions Discussion among Commission and Council began, with some review of areas of concern, similar to that expressed by the public tonight. Councilman Dexter noted the wealth of information related to tree protection which was compiled by the Tree Committee, sug- gesting it be made available to persons seeking_building permits . He then reviewed the areas which the Council Tree Sub-Committee recommended for study tonight, followed by in-depth review and discussion by the Council and Commission, item-by—item: (1) Urban forester vs. arborist on retainer: In discussing this issue, it was generally agreed that the employment of a full-time City arborist may be a favorable idea, but recognized that funds are limited. It was sug- gested that staff be authorized to have the discretion to 3 hire a qualified forester from a list approved by the City Council, and authorized to consult such person for an opin- ion at such times as the adequacy of submitted tree pro- tection plans is in question. The need for a designated staff person available to give consistent information to the public was noted. Staff was directed to work with the Tree Sub-Committee toward the retention of a qualified person on staff, . responsible for tree protection matters . (2) Suggestion to limit application of Tree Ordinance to oaks and heritage trees: In addition to protecting oaks, it was suggested that home- owners could nominate their own trees for designation as heritage trees, as well as certain "landmark" trees on publicly-owned lands, regardless of the type of tree. There was discussion of the need to simplify the current tree cat- egories as stated in the ordinance, and suggestion that the City Council act as an appeal board on questions relating to treatment of designated trees . (3) Replacement tree policy: The need to re-generate the urban forest was noted. The following were suggested: That saplings count as replace- ment trees; removed oaks be replaced with oaks; that there be a cap on the number of replacement trees required in heavily-wooded areas; on sites where tree cover is sparse, it might be strongly encouraged that oaks be included in landscape plans; that any required trees be planted as a condition of final approval on new construction. Commissioner Luna suggested limiting the application of tree replacement equal to the value of the removed tree to commercial, multi-family or large subdivision projects, exempting application to residential properties . Minimum calibre of replacement trees should be established (not simply the size of the container) (4) Definition of "hazardous" tree (including emergency sit- uations) : In the Tree Committee' s definition of a hazardous tree, it was suggested that " . . . . through falling" be deleted. Coun- cilman Lilley urged the consideration of an emergency section in the ordinance, noting the need for a policy des- ignating a staff person authorized to make decisions in 4 emergency situations . Mr. Windsor noted that the City' s Emergency Plan designates the Mayor as Head of the Organi- zation, the City Manager as the Emergency Services Director and empowers him to delegate authority to the various de- partment heads in his absence. MAYOR BORGESON CALLED FOR A BREAK AT 9 :35 P.M. THE MEETING RE- CONVENED AT 9 : 50 P .M. (5) Clarify tree removal criteria: I The Tree Sub-committee recommends that no permit be required for removal of trees planted by the property owner, and fol- lowing discussion consensus was to clarify application of this only to non-oak or heritage trees; staff suggested that trees required by CUP ' s, Precise Plans or some other ap- proval be exempt from this recommendation. Consensus was to eliminate the permit fee for removal of dead or diseased trees but that a permit will still be required. (6) Simplify ordinance language: Council directed that, following draft revisions , the re- vised ordinance be submitted to the City Attorney for review and comment on the legal soundness of the document. (7) Set policy for decision-making by Planning Commission and staff, using Council as an appeal board: Consensus was for approval that appeals be heard by the Council . Following hearing and recommendation from the Planning Commission on tree removals at issue, recommenda- tions would appear on the Council agenda under the Consent Calendar for final approval . (8) Trimming and pruning as it relates to arborist review: There was consensus to agree with the. Tree Sub-committee' s suggestion to delete references of trimming and pruning in the Tree Ordinance so that property owners will be encour- aged to maintain their trees, rather than discouraged by permit fees . Topping of oak trees will still require a permit, 5 • � i (9) Clarification regarding building within tree dripline: The Tree Sub-committee concurs with current ordinance lan- guage which allows for building within driplines including a requirement that exceptions be made only after review & recommendation by the qualified City arborist regarding the necessity to build within the dripline. Consensus was to require bonding only in the case of violations . (10) Tree value, bonding and penalties for non-compliance: Councilman Shiers reviewed the Value of Oak Trees table utilized by the City of Paso Robles (recommended by the Intl . Society of Arborists) . This area was discussed at length, and many concerns were expressed: Is bonding legal and enforceable in the courts? Is tree bonding available from bonding companies? Will a bond assure that a tree won' t be damaged? It was suggested that perhaps the Stop Work Order would be a more effective deterrent to non- compliance, noting the intent is for a deterrent rather than punishment . Staff was directed to obtain a clear opinion from the City Attorney as to what is appropriate . Additional Public Comment Doug Martter urged education and volunteer efforts rather than enforcement of the Tree Ordinance, feeling "this business" (tree protection) is too touchy for the City' s involvement. A gentleman (didn' t give name) , encouraged Council to stay in the business of tree protection, favors the tree replacement policy and supports the Paso Robles value table. Jim Patterson, resident, feels the current Tree ordinance lan- guage regarding replacement trees is deficient, as it' s unclear as to what would be a proper replacement; he also feels there needs to be consistency in the ordinance for tree valuation pur- poses and that replacement should be based on replacing the value of trees removed. Glen Lewis, resident and local attorney, expressed concerns about the tree valuations issue, noting that, due to the high tree values, the issue of the possible taking of property is raised. Deborah Hollowell, Cuesta Engineering, hopes that issues that must be heard beyond staff are heard by the Planning Commission so that the tree issues can be heard along with the design issues on projects; she supports a qualified tree consultant on retainer rather than apart-time staff person; suggested that perhaps con - 6 49 0 cise sections be created in the ordinance to address the separate aspects of SFR, commercial and multi-family development. Richard Alvarez, a professional arborist, encouraged reliance on local tree professionals, noting that trees, although an asset are a definite liability. Whitey Thorpe, resident, feels people will take care of the tree situation if left alone to do so. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11 : 20 P .M. MINUTES RECORDED BY: HENRY ENG N, Dir for of Community Development PREPARED BY: CINDY WILKINS, Administrative Secy. If