CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/23/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Study Session - Tree Ordinance - Community Outreach & Benchmarking Study RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive a report regarding the Tree Ordinance - Community Outreach & Benchmarking Study and provide direction to the City Manager regarding next steps for Tree Ordinance revisions.
STAFF CONTACT:
Sam Bautista, P.E., Dep. Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Lisa Petersen, P.E., Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3767
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Starting in 2020, the City of Pacifica began a study and public engagement process to revamp the City’s existing Heritage Tree Ordinance. This included contracting with Davey Resource Group (DRG) to provide robust community outreach and an information gathering phase to help define desired changes that would meet both the Pacifica community’s needs, as well as Industry Best Management Practices for tree preservation.
In the City, large, mature trees on private and public property have been protected from removal for nearly 40 years under Municipal Code Title 4, Chapter 12 -Preservation of Heritage Trees. In 2006, the adoption of Title 4, Chapter 14-Maintenance and Preservation of City Trees recognized the value of public trees to the community. Adopted in 1996, the “Logging Ordinance” (Ordinance No. 636 C.S. and No. 673 C.S.) defines logging operations and prohibits logging operations within the City. Together, these regulations have protected many trees from unnecessary removal.
While Chapter 12 provides protective status for trees that meet the definition of “Heritage Tree,” City staff and members of the community are concerned that there are still many valuable trees in the community that are not being protected for future generations. The current definition of heritage tree is limited to trees or groves of trees that have reached a specific size (trunk diameter), which does not account for trees that are significant to the community for reasons other than size (e.g., native trees, visibly prominent, historically or culturally significant, etc.). In addition, City trees that do not meet the definition of a Heritage Tree have no legal protection from removal. Another challenge with the current ordinance is that the permitting process for legally removing a tree is difficult to navigate for community members and City staff. Currently, the Municipal Code requires that both Public Works and Planning are responsible for the review and processing of applications. The community desires improvements to the permitting process and greater transparency in the decision-making process for approval or denial of applications. The “logging ordinance” is not easily accessible through the City’s website. The lack of accessibility and visibility of this ordinance may be contributing to the loss of groves of trees that do not meet the definition of a Pacifica City Council 2
May 23, 2022
Heritage Tree.
In response to these concerns, the City contracted with DRG in 2021 to assist with updating Chapter 12 and 14 of the Pacifica Municipal Code. The initial process included benchmarking the tree preservation ordinances in eight other communities and engagement with the community and stakeholder groups to clarify existing challenges and opportunities for improvement.
This robust community engagement process included development of a project website, meetings with commission/committees/stakeholders, a participatory online public survey, update e-mails to stakeholders, pop-up events at the Pacifica Beach Farmers Market, Rotary Club meeting and a virtual public meeting. Results of this engagement process, as well as Industry Best Management Practices, helped to inform the Community Outreach and Benchmarking Study (Report) recommendations. Based on the results of the public engagement, the Pacifica community generally is aware of the existing Heritage Tree Ordinance and in favor of more specifically defining the ordinance. They understand the value of trees in the community and the need for protection and notification when these significant trees are removed. The community also sees the need for replacement of trees that are removed.
The Report can be found online at
<https://www.cityofpacifica.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=19747>. The Report details the process that led up to the recommendations, identifies challenges and opportunities with the existing Code provisions and makes recommendations based on industry standards and input from City staff and the community. The Report was released to the Community for review on April 22, 2022. The following are Key Recommendations for revisions to Chapter 12, Chapter 14, and Ordinance No. 636 C.S. and No. 673 C.S. from the Report:
Key Recommendations for revision to Chapter 12-Preservation of Heritage Trees of Pacifica are:
• Revise the definition of “Heritage Tree” to specifically recognize native and other significant trees in the community.
• Add a definition of “Protected Tree” to identify and protect trees of a specific size that are currently defined as Heritage Trees.
• Use the industry standard of diameter at breast height (DBH) to measure trunk diameter. • Require developers to protect trees defined as “Heritage” or “Protected” from construction activities, including trees on adjacent properties.
• Revise criteria for evaluating tree removal permit applications. • When a “protected” or “heritage” tree must be removed, require a minimum of two (2) replacement trees for every otherwise healthy tree that is removed. • Permit the use of in-lieu fees when trees cannot be replaced on site.
Key Recommendations for revision to Chapter 14-Maintenance and Preservation of City Trees are:
• Protect all City trees, including trees not currently protected under Chapter 12.
Key Recommendations for revision to Ordinance No. 636 C.S. and No. 673 C.S. (Logging Ordinance) are:
• Incorporate important protections for groves of trees into Chapter 12. • Repeal Ordinances no. 636 C.S. and no. 673 C.S
On September 28, 2021, the City held a Joint Study Session on the Heritage Tree Ordinance Update with the Planning Commission, Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission, and Beautification Advisory Committee. A series of questions were posed to the groups regarding Pacifica City Council 3
May 23, 2022
definitions of heritage trees, methodology of measuring trees, tree removal permit reviews, notifications of removals, fees and penalties, mitigating loss of trees, changing the title for Chapter 14, responsibility of City trees, planting in the public rights-of-way, and evaluating the logging ordinance. In general, the majority of the people at the virtual meeting were in favor of revising definitions of Heritage and Protected trees; requiring a minimum of two (2) replacement trees; and to permit the use of in-lieu fees.
Appendix C of the report provides information related to responses from the community regarding these same questions. As seen in Appendix C, there was strong support from the public for the current staff recommendations related to these questions during the 45-person virtual public meeting, as shown below:
1) 87% agreed that “Heritage Tree” should be more specifically defined. 2) 77% agreed that a new definition for “Protected Tree” should be added. 3) 69% agreed that the City should adopt the industry standard for measuring tree diameter at 54-inches above the ground.
4) 76% agreed that an arborist report should be required for removal of Protected Trees based on health, pest/pathogen, and/or when a tree is a Heritage Tree. 5) 46% agreed (majority from options provided) that website tree removal notification should be provided over other possible types of notification or no change to the current notification process.
6) 88% agreed that disincentivizing illegal tree removals should be studied. 7) 88% agreed that establishment of a Tree Fund should be reviewed. 8) 74% agreed that the City should require a 2:1 replacement for removal of an otherwise healthy heritage/protected/City tree.
9) 88% agreed the City should review establishing in lieu fees for trees not replaced on site.
Response from the Rotary Club also generally aligned with the virtual public meeting responses.
Based on the strong confirmation of many key staff recommendations during the community outreach process, the more detailed discussion of the recommendations in this Council report and at the Study Session will revolve around areas that staff found needed further policy discussion from the Council in order to prepare an ordinance amending Chapters 12 and 14. These areas include the following:
• Specific definitions of a heritage tree and protected tree. • Use of industry standard for measuring trunk diameter. • Protection of trees during construction.
• Revising criteria for evaluating removal permits.
• Logging Ordinance - loss of protection for groves.
• Fees and Penalties.
Specific Definition of a Heritage Tree and Protected Tree Because the benefits of trees transcend property lines, many communities have ordinances to protect trees on private property from damage and removal. Tree preservation ordinances generally are intended to preserve large trees on private property for the sake of conserving canopy cover. A heritage tree designation is usually applied to trees that require special recognition and protection. In many instances, having both a definition for “Protected Tree” and “Heritage Tree” can protect even more trees.
Strong support from the Community was noted for a more specific definition of a “Heritage Tree” and a new definition for a “Protected Tree.” However, during this discussion, a specific recommendation from staff related to these definitions had not yet been developed. The recently Pacifica City Council 4
May 23, 2022
released Report provided recommendations related to a specific definition for a “Heritage Tree” and “Protected Tree” based on discussions with the community, benchmarking information, and Industry Best Management practices. The recommended definitions in the Report were as follows:
• Heritage Tree - If one of the following criteria are met and trees are in a condition that can be maintained in the landscape so as not to create an unreasonable risk shall be designated as a “Heritage Tree”:
o Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak), Quercus lobata (valley oak), Aesculus californica (California buckeye), Pinus radiata (Monterey pine), and Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) greater than 12-inches DBH
o Heteromeles arbutifolia (toyon) greater than 4-inches DBH o Trees of historic value
o Specimen tree of any species
o Is one of the largest or oldest trees in Pacifica
o Significant habitat value
o Visibly prominent in the community.
• Protected Tree - Use current definition of “Heritage Tree” to define a “Protected Tree”.
Questions for Council:
• Should the City adopt the above recommended definition for a “Heritage Tree”? • Should the City adopt the above recommended definition for a “Protected Tree”? Measuring Trunk Diameter
Current methodology of measuring diameter is not consistent with industry standards. Some Community members expressed concerns that if the method of measurement is changed, some trees that are currently protected may no longer be protected as the diameter of some trees may be less that 16-inches if measured at 54-inches above natural grade. Staff recommends measuring trees according to ISA Best Management Practices (Tree Inventories, Second Editions, 2013 by Jerry Bond). It is also recommended to reduce the minimum diameter in the new definition for “Protected Tree” from 16-inches to 14-inches to ensure that no trees that are currently protected by the “Heritage Tree” definition will lose protective status.
Questions for Council:
• Should the City adopt the industry standard for measuring tree diameter at 54-inches above natural grade?
• Should the diameter for protected trees be decreased from 16-inches to 14-inches? Protection of Trees During Construction
Trees located on the property and adjacent properties are not adequately protected during construction activities. Currently, developers are not required to identify if Heritage Trees exist on a property. It is staff’s recommendation to develop a permit application that is specific to trees in construction zones that will not be removed. In addition, staff recommends that a tree protection plan be submitted with an application for a permit and have the applicant disclose all Protected or Heritage Tree(s) that exist on the property. Developers would be required to protect trees that are on adjacent properties, where likely impacts will occur, from construction activities.
Questions for Council:
• Should there a be a separate permit for trees in construction zones that will not be removed?
• Should developers be required to hire an arborist to prepare a tree protection plan? • Should developers be required to protect trees on adjacent properties? Pacifica City Council 5
May 23, 2022
Revise Criteria for Evaluating Removal Permits
The criteria for which the Director is supposed to evaluate tree removal permit applications is vague.
There is no standard or methodology for the Director to evaluate whether the removal or retention of a tree is appropriate. It is recommended to revise the criteria for both Protected and Heritage Trees to remove the vague terminology such as “good forestry practices” and to clarify concerns for pests and disease. When reviewing the applications, assigning points to the review criteria, giving more weight to trees designated as heritage trees, would be helpful in the determination of removal.
It has also been reported that heritage trees are being illegally removed and irreparably pruned. It is recommended to require a permit for pruning of protected and heritage trees. Also, it is recommended that a certified/consulting arborist report be required when a permit is being requested to remove a tree based on poor health, pest/pathogen, and/or when the tree is a heritage tree.
Questions for Council:
• Should a point system be developed to provide guidance to staff on requested tree removals of Protected and Heritage Trees?
• Should there be a separate permit for pruning Protected and Heritage Trees? • Should an arborist report be required to remove a tree based on poor health, pest/pathogen, and/or when a tree is a Heritage Tree?
Logging Ordinance - Loss of Protection for Groves
During the stakeholder engagement sessions, there was a concern for clear cutting forested land with loss of protection for groves of trees that do not meet the size thresholds for Protected Trees.
The current ordinances provide protections for very small, groves of trees that are otherwise not protected through Chapter 12. It is recommended to repeal both Ordnance No. 636-C.S. and No. 673-C.S. and add important protections for very small, groves of trees, which are currently protected through the “logging ordinance” directly to Chapter 12 for clarity. If the ordinances are to remain, the ordnances should be more easily accessible like the rest of the Municipal Code provisions.
Questions for Council:
• Should protections for groves of trees greater than six (6) inches in diameter be added to Chapter 12?
• Should Ordinance No. 636-C.S. and No. 673-C.S. be repealed? Fees and Penalties
Pursuant to the City’s current ordinance (Sec. 4-12.11) violators of Chapter 12 will be fined no more than $1,000, imprisonment (not exceeding six month), or civil penalties as provided in the Code.
The Report indicates that the $1,000 penalty is not a deterrent for someone who is intent on removing a tree and this does not adequately compensate for the loss of a Heritage Tree. However, $1,000 is the maximum fine that can be imposed by the City for a misdemeanor violation pursuant to Government Code 36901. Because of this, the Report recommends including other alternative civil enforcement remedies and penalties, such as payment of money which would be the equivalent of the replacement value of the removed Heritage Tree for violation of the ordinance. In addition, the recommendation notes that damages collected should be applied to a tree mitigation fund that could be created and funds in that account could be used towards planting, maintenance and preservation of the urban forest.
Question for Council:
• Should staff add a section that includes other alternative civil enforcement remedies and penalties for violation as noted above and have damages applied to a tree mitigation fund?
Pacifica City Council 6
May 23, 2022
Based on tonight’s Council comments and direction, the next step would be to draft the updated ordinance showing proposed revisions and tentatively introduce the updated ordinance in July, for adoption in August, 2022.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council may choose to require further study of one or more of the recommendations, which would delay the update of the heritage tree ordinance.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
The tree ordinance update is consistent the following Council adopted Goals:
• Stewardship of City Infrastructure: The project would help provide guidelines as the City continues to maintain healthy trees and remove dead or dying trees. • Environmental Sustainability: Updating the tree ordinance would provide the City with improved best management practices for its City’s trees and promote environmental sustainability.
• Maintaining a Safe Community: The project will address how the City will manage moderate to high-risk trees.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This work is currently funded under an executed consultant agreement with Davey Resource Group.
ORIGINATED BY:
Engineering
ATTACHMENT LIST: