HomeMy WebLinkAboutDirect the City Administrator to Allow Removal and Replaceme CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
City Council Interoffice Communication
T
To: Honorable Mgyor nd City Council Members V
G�
From: Gil Coerper, air on behalf of the Beautification, Landscape, & Trek .:
Committee; Jill Hardy, Mayor Pro Tem; and Dave Sullivan, City ��
Council Member
Date: November 2, 2004
Subject: C-ITEM FOR NOVEMBER 15, 2004, CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY TREE REMOVAL AND
REPLACEMENT POLICY
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
The current City Tree Removal and Replacement Policy, approved by the City Council
on March 15, 2004, allows property owners to remove street trees that are causing
damage when the property owner also repairs and replaces any damaged adjacent
sidewalk, curb, and gutter and replaces the tree with a city-approved species. This
policy is intended to allow property owners waiting to have the repairs completed by the
city, the opportunity to accelerate the schedule by funding the improvements
themselves. To ease the financial burden on property owners wishing to accelerate the
schedule for repairs, the Beautification, Landscape and Tree (BLT) Committee is
recommending that the concrete repairs be limited only to the sidewalk.
ANALYSIS:
The current Tree Removal and Replacement Policy allows property owners to remove
and replace street trees that are causing damage to adjacent curb, gutter, and sidewalk
without having to go through the Street Tree Petition process and not having to wait for
city-funded repairs. Since March 15, 2004, the effective date of the policy change,
numerous property owners have reviewed this opportunity with private, licensed, and
insured contractors. Due to the high expense of the curb and gutter concrete work,
many property owners have decided not to pursue the tree removal and replacement.
Individual residents have requested that the city modify the removal and replacement
policy to allow damaged sidewalk and tree removal replacement only, leaving the curb
and gutter for city-funded repairs when resources become available.
Currently, over 100 street segments are awaiting work on the Street Tree Petition
process. The estimated cost of these repairs exceeds $14 million. The March 15,
2004, policy revision was an attempt to allow greater flexibility to the property owners to
address problem trees and concrete in front of their residences. The BLT Committee
considers the enhancement of pedestrian travel as a high priority in recommending a
modification to the existing policy.
� � 1
Included here is the July 27, 2004 and the August 24, 2004 BLT staff reports, outlining
the discussions that have taken place in regard to this issue.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Direct the City Administrator to allow removal and replacement of parkway trees,
including necessary sidewalk repairs, without the repair of curb and gutter, all at the
expense of the property owner, by a licensed contractor, after a city permit has been
issued. All other conditions of the current Tree Removal and Replacement Policy will
remain in effect.
BEAUTIFICATION, LANDCAPE AND TREE (BLT) COMMITTEE ACTION:
The BLT reviewed and approved the change to the policy at the September 28, 2004
meeting, by a vote of 2-1-0.
xc: Penny Culbreth-Graft, City Administrator
Bill Workman, Assistant City Administrator
Joan Flynn, City Clerk
Robert Beardsley, Director of Public Works
2
(6) November 15, 2004 - Coocil/Agency Agenda - Page 6
Speaker brought a binder he alleged contained documents that are fraudulent involving the
Planning Department and a local developer.
Speaker spoke in favor of fireworks at the beach, commended Fire, Police, and Public Works
for their efforts at this year's event, and asked Council to consider alternatives to solve
parking problems.
Councilmember Sullivan clarified a previous speaker's comments relative to a political
mailer and City letterhead.
Councilmember Coerper announced an opening on the 4tn of July Board and asked
interested citizens to contact Council Administrative Assistant Cathy Fikes at 536-5553.
C-1. Council Committee/Council Liaison Reports
C-1a. (City Council) Direct the City Administrator to Allow Removal and Replacement of
Parkway Trees, Including Necessary Sidewalk Repairs,without Curb and Gutter Repair,
by a Licensed, Permitted Contractor, (All at the Property Owner's Expense) Pursuant to
the Beautification, Landscape and Tree (BLT) Committee Recommendation ( . )
Communication from Councilmember Gil Coerper on behalf of the Beautification, Landscape
and Tree (BLT) Committee members, Mayor Pro Tern Jill Hardy and Councilmember Dave
Sullivan transmitting the following Statement of Issue: The current City Tree Removal and
Replacement Policy, approved by the City Council on March 15, 2004, allows property owners
to remove street trees that are causing damage when the property owner also repairs and
replaces any damaged adjacent sidewalk, curb, and gutter and replaces the tree with a city-
approved species. This policy is intended to allow property owners waiting to have the repairs
completed by the city, the opportunity to accelerate the schedule by funding the improvements
themselves. To ease the financial burden on property owners wishing to accelerate the
schedule for repairs, the Beautification, Landscape and Tree (BLT) Committee is recommending
that the concrete repairs be limited only to the sidewalk.
Analysis:
The current Tree Removal and Replacement Policy allows property owners to remove and replace
street trees that are causing damage to adjacent curb, gutter, and sidewalk without having to go
through the Street Tree Petition process and not having to wait for city-funded repairs. Since
March 15, 2004, the effective date of the policy change, numerous property owners have reviewed
this opportunity with private, licensed, and insured contractors. Due to the high expense of the curb
and gutter concrete work, many property owners have decided not to pursue the tree removal and
replacement. Individual residents have requested that the city modify the removal and replacement
policy to allow damaged sidewalk and tree removal replacement only, leaving the curb and gutter
for city-funded repairs when resources become available.
Currently, over 100 street segments are awaiting work on the Street Tree Petition process. The
estimated cost of these repairs exceeds $14 million. The March 15, 2004, policy revision was an
attempt to allow greater flexibility to the property owners to address problem trees and concrete in
front of their residences. The BLT Committee considers the enhancement of pedestrian travel as a
high priority in recommending a modification to the existing policy.
(7) November 15, 2004 - Colo. cil/Agency Agenda - Page 7
Included here is the July 27, 2004 and the August 24, 2004 BLT staff reports, outlining the
discussions that have taken place in regard to this issue.
Beautification, Landscape and Tree (BLT) Committee Action:
The BLT reviewed and approved the change to the policy at the September 28, 2004 meeting, by a
vote of 2-1-0.
Recommended Action: Motion to:
Direct the City Administrator to allow removal and replacement of parkway trees, including
necessary sidewalk repairs, without the repair of curb and gutter, all at the expense of the property
owner, by a licensed contractor, after a city permit has been issued. All other conditions of the
current Tree Removal and Replacement Policy will remain in effect.
Councilmember Cook inquired what the criteria would be for determining tree removal, to
which Public Works Director Robert F. Beardsley responded. Director Beardsley also
reported on costs of curb and gutter repair.
Deputy Public Works Director Paul Emery also reported.
Mayor Pro Tem/BLT Committee member Hardy gave reasons for her opposition to this
item and for keeping policy the same.
Council/BLT Committee member Sullivan stated reasons for his support of this item.
Motion to amend recommended action that Public Works encourage curb and gutter
repair if needed, at homeowner's expense and notify/clarify to homeowner who is
responsible if the curb or gutter is damaged in the process of tree removal in the event
the contractor pulling the permit looks to owner for compensation. (The maker and the
second agreed).
Approved 6— 1 (Boardman - No)
C-2. City Administrator's Reports
C-2a. (Redevelopment Agency) PowerPoint Presentation by the City Administrator
Penelope Culbreth-Graft Re: Discussion of Redevelopment Agency Tax Increment/Other
Revenues, Assets and Debt ( . )
City Administrator Penelope Culbreth-Graft will present a PowerPoint report titled
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach— Discussion of Tax Increment/Other
Revenues, Assets & Debt.
City Administrator Culbreth-Graft presented orally. Economic Development Director
David Biggs presented PowerPoint report.
C-5a. (City Council) City Clerk to Present an Oral Report Regarding the Internet Online
Agenda Packet ( . )
City Clerk Joan L. Flynn will present an oral report regarding the Internet Online Agenda Packet
City Clerk Flynn orally reported. Deputy City Clerk Patricia Albers walked everyone
through the City's internet website.
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
Y Beautification, Landscape and Tree Committee
INFORMATION ITEM
TO: Chairman Coerper and Members of the Committee
SUBMITTED BY: Robert F. Beardsley, PE, Director of Public Works
DATE: August 24, 2004
SUBJECT: Response to Committee Questions of July 27, 2004
On July 27, 2004,the Beautification, Landscape and Tree (BLT) Committee reviewed the
implications of a revised City Tree Removal/Replacement Policy that eliminated the requirement
of any adjacent concrete repair(attached BLT item).
The current policy requires that a licensed insured contractor obtain a no-fee permit to remove
the street tree and replace all of the damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk at the subject location.
The Committee asked for clarification at the last meeting on the following: if the policy were to
be amended to allow tree removal with no concrete repair, or to allow only concrete sidewalk
repairs, what recourse does the City have, if, during the tree removal process, additional damage
occurs to the concrete?
The first step would be for the inspector to request that the contractor make the additional repairs
due to the damage caused by the contractor's work. If the contractor refuses to perform this
repair work, there are two recourses. One,the contractor would not be provided a permit for any
work in the City in the future; and, two, the City would send a notice to the Contractors
Licensing Board outlining the outstanding claim. If the additional damage created a safety
concern, the City would have to make the necessary repairs.
If the policy were amended to allow tree removal without concrete repairs, what would the
implications be on responsiveness? Currently, there is a two to three-week turnaround between
maintenance personnel receiving a request for tree removal and the decision letter being sent. It
is anticipated that this turnaround would increase up to two to three months based on the
anticipated increase in calls for service.
08 Aug-Info Item-Tree removal-replacement
•J J CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
015
Beautification, Landscape and Tree Committee
INFORMATION ITEM
TO: Chairman Coerper and Meiubers of the Committee
SUBMITTED BY: Robert F. Beardsley, PE, Director of Public Works_
DATE: July 27, 2004
SUBJECT: Revised Tree Removal/Replacement Policy
The City Council, on March 15, 2004, approved the attached amended City Tree
Removal/Replacement Policy that allowed property owners to remove street trees that are
diseased or causing damage when they repair and replace any damaged adjacent sidewalk curb
and gutter as necessary; and replace the tree with a City approved species. In an effort to ease
the burden on property owners, the BLT, on May 25, 2004, requested an analysis of the
implications of eliminating the requirement for concrete repair.
The implications of revising the policy are characterized by the 1) impact to the resident, 2) the
impact on the infrastructure, 3) the impact on liability exposure, and 4) the impact on staffs
ability to absorb the workload. Following are the implications of amending the policy to allow
tree removal/replanting without requiring the concrete repairs:
1) Impact to the Resident—Many residents would take advantage of the opportunity to
remove the tree in question and replant a new tree without having to repair the concrete.
The resident could save upwards of$3,000 on concrete contactor expense depending on
the extent of concrete damage in front of their residence. Tree removal and replanting
could occur for less than $1,000 in most cases.
For those property owners who have elected to pay for the improvements under the
existing policy, they would not be eligible to recoup their costs of concrete repairs should
the policy change after they have initiated improvements. It is estimated that there are
over 40 property owners who, following the current, approved protocol, have replaced
the tree, and repaired the damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk adjacent to their homes.
2) Impact on the Infrastructure—A revised policy would not repair any of the
displaced/darnaged concrete. It could be assumed that, by removing the tree that has
damaged the adjacent concrete, additional damage would not occur and money would be
saved when the concrete repairs are actually made. While each case is unique, the
neighborhood concrete repairs that have been completed by the City have always
necessitated the complete removal of curb, gutter and sidewalk. Additional displacement
has not impacted the unit cost of removal/replacement; so, no savings are anticipated by
changing the policy.
07 Juf Tree Removal-Replacement Modification
• •
An amended policy allowing the removal of the tree without concrete repairs could result
in additional concrete damage during the tree removal process, damage to surrounding
concrete is frequently unavoidable. A mechanism to insure that the property owner
addresses additional damage would have to be considered. Potentially, a bond would
have to be posted by the property owner to insure that if any additional concrete damage
were to occur during the tree removal process, repairs would be made.
An additional impact on the infrastructure could be the elimination of mature healthy
trees throughout our community. It is estimated there are over 3.000 street trees that leave
caused some displacement of concrete. Should property owners elect to remove these
trees under a revised policy, there would be a dramatic effect on the mature streetscape
existing in many neighborhoods. With a policy allowing each property owner to decide
the fate of the parkway tree adjacent to his home, the neighborhood could experience a
dramatic visual change that the majority of the neighborhood nnight dislike.
3) Impact on Liability Exposure —Removing the tree without repairin( /replacing the
concrete will not lower the liability exposure for the City. In fact, should the tree
removal be completed and additional concrete damage go uncorrected. then additional
liability exposure could be created especially when the wort: to remove the tree creates
constructive notice to the City, The City would continue to patch the displaced concrete
with asphalt until adequate resources are available to address the damage.
4) Impact on Staff Responsiveness—Staff, under the current policy.. is receiving between
five and ten requests for tree inspections and five and ten requests for tree service daily.
There is, currently, a backlog of between two to three weeks for inspection and four to
eight weeks to complete non- urgent service requests. It is estimated that the calls for
inspection under a revised policy would increase to twenty to thirty per day. Current
staffing allocates 1.5 persons to respond to citizen requests relating to trees. A twofold
increase in requests for inspections will immediately create a backlog of inspection
requests and, if the property owner pursued the tree removal/replacennent, it is estimated
that this backlog would grow exponentially to several months based on the staff demands
to process the removal request through the permitting process, the work inspection, the
survey of surrounding residences for species selection and the necessary paperwork
associated with this activity.
Current minimal staffing provides a level of customer service that ensures a safe urban
forest; a revised policy increasing the demand for services could result in slower response
to residents and a backlog of requests that could prove difficult to resolve.
Any revision to the current Street Tree Removal/Replacement policy will need to take into
account procedural issues of bonds to insure any new concrete damage is addressed as well as an
understanding of the customer service implications of significantly increased requests for
service.
City of Huntington Beach
Tree Removal Permits Protocol
1. Property owner via phone or letter is referred to Maintenance Operations
Division for service request.
2. Maintenance Operations personnel explain the tree removal/replacement
policy and property owner responsibility regarding repair and replacement of
adjacent concrete.
3. Should property owner wish to continue, Tree Maintenance Supervisor or
his/her designee will perform an inspection and determine appropriateness of
tree removal request.
4. Tree Maintenance Supervisor or his/her designee will send the property owner
a letter with his/her determination(copy to Development Engineering),
including the scope of concrete repairs, removal and planting requirement,
permit requirements. Included in the letter is the request that any questions or
further explanation of the policy be referred to the Tree Maintenance
Supervisor.
5. An approved contractor who meets the City requirements regarding licensing
and insurance may secure a permit (through Development Engineering) in
accordance with the letter that stipulates the extent of repairs. If there are
separate contractors the concrete contractor shall secure a permit concurrent
with or before the tree contractor. The permit will require the identification of
start and completion dates, inspector contacts and the identification of any
subcontractors. Included on the permit will be the list of inspectors to which
the permit shall be distributed.
6. Tree Maintenance Supervisor will perform all inspection, sign-off the permit
when the work is satisfactorily complete and provide Development
Engineering with a copy of the signed-off permit.
This protocol is in response to the revised City Tree Removal/Replacement Policy as
approved by the City Council on March 15, 2004. In summary the revised policy allows
residents to remove street trees that are diseased or causing damage when they repair and
replace any damaged adjacent sidewalk curb and gutter as necessary; and replace the tree
with a City approved species. All work would be at the homeowners expense and public
right-of-way encroachment permit will be required. This permit can be obtained without
a fee from the Public Works Department.
5/25/04