Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 1 of ARC__.______ .„ 4 o „:„.,,,,,,_„ , ,,,,,, . :...:.:,,,,„4„.„ fi.,,, 0. Au ��IYU3 ,,,,., °7 `� STAFF REPORT 07� ty ni of t; Development Services Department DATE: June 24, 2014 TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Tim Schwehr, Associate Planner SUBJECT: MODIFICATION NO. MP 14-04 AND OAK TREE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. TRE 14-05 WITH A CLASS 5 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR AN 11,052 SQUARE-FOOT, TWO-STORY RESIDENCE WITH A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 50'-0" IN LIEU OF 52'-6" REQUIRED; FIRST-STORY SIDE YARD SETBACKS OF 15'-0" AND 17'-6" IN LIEU OF 43'-1" REQUIRED; AND SECOND-STORY SIDE YARD SETBACKS OF 30'-0" IN LIEU OF 86'-2" REQUIRED AT 800 HAMPTON ROAD Recommended Action: Find that this project qualifies as a Class 5 Categorical Exemption from CEQA and Conditionally Approve Modification No. MP 14-04 and Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-05 SUMMARY Modification No. MP 14-04 and Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-05 were submitted by Mr. Jack Ng for a new 11,052 square-foot residence on an irregular- shaped, 35,109 square-foot lot — an aerial photo with zoning information is attached. The requested Modifications are a front yard setback of 50'-0" in lieu of 52'-6" required; first-story side yard setbacks of 15'-0" and 17'-6" in lieu of 43'-1" required; and second- story side yard setbacks of 30'-0" in lieu of 86'-2" required. The proposed architectural plans are attached. The proposed development will encroach into the protected area of six oak trees. The Oak Tree Report is attached. The architectural design of the proposed residence has been reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Board of the Rancho Santa Anita Property Owner's Association (ARB) and this project qualifies as a Class 5 Categorical Exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a minor alteration in land use limitations. Based on the irregular shape of the lot, the ARB approved the proposed design with the requested Modifications, which will provide for an appropriate improvement of this lot and avoid an unreasonable hardship. With the proposed mitigation measures recommended in the Oak Tree Report, the proposed development will not adversely impact the health of the six oak trees in the vicinity. It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Modification No. MP 14-04 and Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-05, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. BACKGROUND APPLICANT: Jack Ng LOCATION: 800 Hampton Road REQUESTS: Approval of TRE 14-05 for encroachment into the protected areas of six oak trees, and the following Modifications: • A front yard setback of 50'-0" in lieu of 52'-6" required; • A westerly first-story side yard setback of 15'-0" and an easterly first- story side yard setback of 17'-6" both in lieu of 43'-1" required; and • Westerly and easterly second-story side yard setbacks of 30'-0" in lieu of 86'-2" required. SITE AREA: 35,109 square-feet (0.81 acre) FRONTAGE: 430.66 feet along Hampton Road EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is currently developed with a two-story, single-family residence originally built in 1955, with a major addition constructed in 1995. The site is zoned R-O (30,000 sf), First One-Family Zone with a 30,000 square-foot minimum lot size. SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Single-family residences, zoned R-O South: Single-family residences, zoned R-O East: Single-family residences, zoned R-O West: Single-family residences, zoned R-O GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential Estate (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) — This designation accommodates low-density single-family residential neighborhoods. Development is typified by large lot, detached single-family residences on estate- type lots of 22,000 square feet or larger. Permitted uses include single-family residences on a single lot and private tennis courts and similar facilities. DISCUSSION The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing residence to build a new 11,052 square-foot, two-story, single-family residence with an 890 square-foot, four-car garage, as shown on the attached architectural plans. The proposed new residence includes five bedrooms, seven-and-a-half bathrooms, a home theater, an exercise room with sauna, a library, and a den. The architectural design of the proposal has been reviewed and approved by the Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners' Association's Architectural MP 14-04 & TRE 14-05 800 Hampton Road June 24, 2014 — Page 2 of 5 Review Board (ARB) and they found that the proposed setbacks are adequate — see the attached HOA Findings and Action Form. The development will encroach into the protected area of five on-site oak trees, and one oak tree located on the adjacent property to the east of the site. A Certified Arborist, Mr. Alex Hou, has prepared the attached Oak Tree Report for the project, which finds that with protective measures the development will not have a negative impact on the health of these six oak trees. Due to the irregular shape of the lot, the applicant is requesting approval of a reduced front yard setback, and reduced first-story and second-story side yard setbacks because those requirements present an unreasonable hardship for developing this irregular- shaped lot. Modification Requests The applicant is requesting a Modification to allow a 50'-0" front yard setback in lieu of the 52'-6" requirement based on the average setback of the two nearest properties along this side of Hampton Road (i.e., 738 & 758 Hampton Road). Because of the curved frontage of the property, the central and most northerly portion of the residence complies with the front setback requirement, but the corners of the residence, which are setback from the center of the house, encroach into the average front yard setback requirement. The Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners' Association has a minimum front yard setback of 50'-0", and the proposed residence complies with this requirement. Approval of a 50'-0" front yard setback for the proposed residence will secure an appropriate improvement of this lot. The applicant is also requesting a Modification to allow a westerly first-story side yard setback of 15'-0" and an easterly first-story side yard setback of 17'-6" both in lieu of the 43'-1" requirement (10% of the front lot width as measured along the front property line) and to allow westerly and easterly second-story side yard setbacks of 30'-0" in lieu of the 86'-2" requirement (20% of the front lot width). The intent of these side yard setback requirements is to provide adequate buffers between properties proportionate to the widths of the lots. However, due to the irregular shape of the subject lot, which has a front property line that measures more than three times the widths of the two nearest lots, applying the 10 and 20 percent requirements for side yard setbacks results in unreasonable requirements for this property. Allowing the reduced side yard setbacks for this property will avoid an unreasonable hardship for developing this lot. The Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners' Association's Architectural Review Board has reviewed the plans and is in favor of the Modification requests. Oak Tree Encroachment Permit The proposed development will encroach into the protected areas of five oak trees located on the subject property, and one protected oak tree located just off the site on the adjacent property to the east. Certified Arborist, Mr. Alex Hou, prepared an Oak Tree Report for this project. Mr. Hou finds that with protective measures the development will not have a negative impact on the health of these six oak trees. A copy of the Oak Tree Report is attached to this staff report, and the recommended tree protection measures are a condition of approval. MP 14-04 & THE 14-05 800 Hampton Road June 24, 2014 — Page 3 of 5 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the Development Services Department has determined that the proposed project is a minor alteration in land use limitations, and is therefore categorically exempt from further environmental review per Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached. PUBLIC NOTICE/COMMENTS Public hearing notices for MP 14-04 and TRE 14-05 were mailed to the property owners of those properties that are located within 100 feet of the subject property on June 11, 2014 — see the attached radius map. As of June 18, 2014, no comments have been received regarding this project. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Modification No. MP 14-04 and TRE 14-05, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be developed and maintained by the applicant/property owner in a manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and conditionally approved for Modification No. MP 14-04 and Oak Tree Encroachment No. TRE 14-05, subject to the approval of the Community Development Administrator or designee. 2. The project shall be developed and maintained by the applicant/property owner in compliance with all of the recommended tree protection measures listed in the Oak Tree Report prepared for this project. 3. The applicant/property owner shall comply with all City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access, public right-of-way improvements, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director and Development Services Director, or their respective designees. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval by the foregoing City officials and employees. 4. The applicant/property owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officials, officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or conditional approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or conditional approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own MP 14-04 & TRE 14-05 800 Hampton Road June 24, 2014 — Page 4 of 5 option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 5. Approval of MP 14-04 and TRE 14-05 shall not take effect unless on or before 30 calendar days following approval of these applications by the Planning Commission, the applicant/property owner has executed and filed with the Community Development Administrator or designee an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve the project, the Commission should move to approve Modification No. MP 14-04 and Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-05 and determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, subject to the conditions set forth above, or as modified by the Commission, and find that the requested Modifications satisfy at least one of the following purposes: • That the Modification(s) will secure an appropriate improvement of a lot, will prevent an unreasonable hardship, or will promote uniformity of development. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this project, the Commission should move to deny Modification No. MP 14-04 and/or Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-05, based on the evidence presented, and state the reason(s) why the proposed project does not fulfill any of the above purposes for Modifications. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the June 24, 2014 public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Tim Schwehr at (626) 574-5422, or tschwehrCcr7ArcadiaCA.gov . Approved: Jim - ama Co munity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo with Zoning Information Proposed Architectural Plans Photos of the Subject Property and Neighboring Properties HOA Findings and Actions Form Oak Tree Report Preliminary Exemption Assessment 100-foot Radius Map MP 14-04 & TRE 14-05 800 Hampton Road June 24, 2014 — Page 5 of 5 i; Site Address: 800 HAMPTON RD Property Owner(s): HOU,ALEX AND SUSAN S a AAA ea e. I , a ,a eAAJ ill , irt, t A e , Alia ii * n „ Selected parcel highlighted " ', ` Property Characteristics a,,' ,. ' Zoning: R-O (30,000) «>4 a �� General Plan: RE l - W4111111 l' is Lot Area (sq ft): 35,109 -_ 1►� i�'a. E���% as-. Main Structure / Unit(sq.ft.): 5,813 ,'���Year Built: 1955 P.111111111111111111141-alallifilillilli. .. ∎Assam l ��g Number of Units: 1 d %TENNII I '��� ,11,, ,"r`10WE .'/ 1���1 r� ■ "" � '. � � pv rla Overlays r {'' ■fib ��"- ,,�l 1„1 M■:t�■.• ssi�moliM NN Parking Overlay: n/a f / 1..a X1111 k i�YY Downtown Overlay: n/a -2: ,.,,"�"���,i,�a�r v,rGV,^����.� [�iiii -C •��` el w ■..,, r r Special Height Overlay: n/a j Gi 1 �� •\� r 2L■_{�`S4 4*ar r� Architectural Design Overlay: D Parcel location within City of Arcadia " This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for Report generated 16-Jun-2014 reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate,current, Page 1 of 1 or otherwise reliable. / / `` 9aa16 vo blavoav n NV1 3118 as Noldwvr+006 y' 36 .' 11WVd 31VNI6.21015-L $ 1 k (� C SSSS t•.-- .- . , ,i / I$4 A a. My Z - ,5Fil � •�o • \ aaaooaea'A itikk.„. ,.,,,...„.__,__.irld . . .:::::::,::::::,::::::::-..yt44- \ N. „1,..,,,,,,..„„„,:z„ .., : I 1 I11iiiii�l' %/��'tl eZ•`� • .1111116111:111:-il' `— � i/k+a'+• �'�__ 111 �. �- i= \ �FPIII 4iidll�ii�i Se ° I ��. 611111;J < 3°< I ��.► �� r, 1 i 's ��115:e IIII �Ij�iill� .= 3 3 =z �'J'''AE o�� 641 �A 119611- f f,1 z z�zoo �sz= /� fcraIn -- � II $e° III: t; a.In n o o ¢o o a ■ ���� �•p•` i 1 1 11 ?u�' �'�°_ 2Ir °§o° 11r . 4014W . •� ��i � Iy11 'It 11114.• i! 19l ° °z z zMw 8z z �'■_ 1.1.1.1.1 f `� ,{ ,"e;1�`11 d1 it v,. !+1°'2 s z z ° '2 s 111 III I� •� i1 A viii 111 110. ¢ [f! < • ,�� Ii Ili J e W a°E g a a = 2 o �---�d, 1 �g ���� a� ,�V 11f111111yi1i 1 n I - - r1- o°z�.?i�n g i� ' y \ ���IIIII�I�I�i7±�.� FF N -�a �•�/ • \ � 111 YY 1 NMYN p0.. N� ♦?/// �� \ 1111 , ♦ C O w 4 i 1 1 1 1 3 I 1 I �/// p �F.1.- I I 1`,,y� ' U g 1 11111 i•. _H 1 Q E 1 ; 1jt1iI I1 I i:�gIEi�l�lul�1�1 '��BC;= ;'11.111111 1116 iiiigi 1 1 <<C)-. \ 111111111 II1111io11a 3 ac :,y 11;1;11:::A>>11111:11 " , �y Z N :r1%. �nl�l� Z o \iitt , f.'i.'.•. �n I u z,$ooS W w a\ .............. �...,Zc.' 1, ! 1 Z co N K N N N U p F- y� Q VJ - -0 71 Q- O �'-�y Ai NM ain.onmm _.1 LL ,1 N aaaasaaaaaao I` qq k 1 y 1} IV: NMY [171-4F-2,-V--.1 - ,1',(., R Q � a 2 a c p.b I– 0 ;_.. cn g ?i° g Y ,,g? Z LJ cf, `f . I– I s 8 XF ., F A g k J F `. ...le it IC £ il.-1, A5001ki gi m z . ,„ - , d , N M n d e H m ;, a U a R .0 X .. W q i fs 9Ba16_V7'VIc v 2 3 N uNb1d �1d 1S1 36l0H.1111-IV4 rIVN6W..e1016-L i 9 i i Q 110101/r 9l $' I M „ „9;f1 / ,0;41 ,e-,II ,B,il ��� $I ® 6 +r f 1 n ,L;9 ,L-,GI -- I- ) 11.'D BMW.IN I mil our.D m I�'�i 9 r� B1 -y , 1, 1 immaiiiiiiiiiir ,e- ,,-.r I .e-fl U .[ - I WI 9® m m a a ® _i® ��'_K �1� ®_A 0 o I 1 o 9 3 E ®� T l'Eal.1.: E1 tau ,G;91 ' ,I-AI IMIIMMiie I;rl F k—I n 1..... II , I L___, 6;9 „6;r pp.11::_-_-1--1:1_,, , L.O o `' ,`1'11 1 € m \ W m �tr® I m ! ill} 1119 .� 1 .� a 9 ._.; 1 21 i li 1 et t qt 1 21 Eil ii ll a = e I- . e-L 9;GI II „9;G i,9-,6 ,e;9 Glw 01 8 � �^ h' _ !! 9 U 01 ca '' 0 i i; 1112: �� :i2 a m IT spy 3 2 ,2--,7.;L.L__. ��Ill' ICI hl9 \ f: ;4 - 3 Pi ry�l` ` 441A\- 1 Y® , ..,T i �, a y ° ' 9✓, i bli 1[1-1-- ® 1 1 ib 4'. -,, e: .43—:! .'q w q , •Pj ri ...Le...7- r___, a 1 = 41 ' Mlle I NEN I 1 q, 11 li lr z , 1! Jfl n• .: [ '� I lit g 1" s l ,yi , .--. ,„ 2 111 31— A� Ng sss his .3 1~g w ,B;ee , ,e,cl c ,0-,01 / A >3 1 O p= ` by ril 90016 VO•VIOVONV Nts1d �1d CNZ ON NOla1WVN 006 /i 33 // 0 36f1ON_111WVd 3l'7N16-1N016-L ¢ 3 (1 mil I 6 A _'�-® \ \ \ WEI hit WE '® ;l1 E I. ,G-,9 9;c 9.-9 11 ,® �' ��� i -,,, 11.• x ...k4 .■ 4 ,Lir * 'T. ._Ny) Z \--Vij ligril CC- ® P. J±tILII i il e 5 M,� 1!" I!' I�•.•.►•.•41 ..„ -. . ♦...•!•• i:•!••♦ m ® N 0r i.4ii �z '•: m .m r21 e ❑��,❑ '1, I .. J u ■' _ 3 _�faMi y I ❑I., 1IJ { q G' 'I I ��_4 m i a .w --7.---::7,-. e lieliii-11 .11IL J PI i 71■.' A . ' . 0.114:---li ' 1 '•■.W A.■A..4.1. ri =TA Y 1 III 1 I 1 eaal6vo'VlavoaV 1 S o SNOlV/�1� ab 11Oldl-VM Sae 3 el4VA 31VNI6 1.2.101.6-Z I ! S�I Q gy1 p II I I i $ i,1' P iyc i LL 1 I I I g I•; iQ jl■F j f;:I O I !1 11 101.11 i • I"-! �' 1 (-Il 11��1 • i � i- •11■ 11..11.!1 �� 1 i....! l t I I'I■ 1 1•'11 I 1: I. I;:; 11II•111111111] e e © ,...= • L 11: ,1--�.I■'.; 1111 I.... I... ::: 1 Inu� 1 1 .... I:.:y. Iii-,1� I:::: :' nI�I�I111111�iI111111111_ .. pi: 1=',-:':.,•',:!., !I.�i1. n1� n� Y , a ,J— lie .,5_r iiii/• 11 imm• CI I I::1:: 1.11 1•�Ilul■ ® IC�l.:f�:: I--- • ; 1.' l era 1 g I_ ;:::::::::i:c , 1,,.::::::: 1 111 it■-1 1 8 Y �,,c ® /:: I�,� " lam. 1 ii / 1 �Li-1 �®`tl"O' Y I .. 1 ;-1 I3i1■'ll■iO j .I. II 1 I: I ! • nil■9_I■n11■ . i II I • I 1. I I:: i I i..- i:••_. .-j X11=11:L°II: 1 / 1 • I. / • 1 I E E 1.......1".-. 1101. 1 �- 111 I 5 S 1 1r-- ,e • :::1 I - �- I II, aY a� O 1 1- �1 -.- 111'II 112111 / r meat f I .:1...::::.:; • _ p3 I. i:p: • _ { l;G • I. ■ gp 1'' a-I I 8 ' 1 1 I 1( O i 1 III I I 1 I 1� 1 ITWIll HMI:I: • ll-I I 1 1 1 1 I • ;Ill I 3 a I :-1:.::.::::::: I:: ' • O ' _.... ll" I--- \\`I ll:::::::::,: .ITarndil 1' ' 1 ;11 Int....::: �Ie9'I • 4 1,,■!�r 1ri......k": 1�1r X11 III t'--"---'-� f 1� I 1"1 i:c: 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1, i �le Ji �I' I��IIr ee li I 1 I 'll� (in�1O 11 ,��� II H 3 I •® I 1>.�..... It!Yn�JI ; 11.. -I: : �I���''II <C d �1': ': a7 I_ -■I...• �l �I `0��! 54 �yI 1 I i::"::::1:: �II � 4!!: O l SO 11 ,., ; 1 1 I :'1:::1.1. 11�: 1 { 1 '1 9 C1�I �I■1 .::!'r _=.11 i Iy'?i�Ui1i111ni11 �' i. '�1:=r' \i=.•1 p.. 1■ ;. ili �C! "II •I�pIIIl11III�IIIIIIIIIIII�� a ' 3 ! ! Y3R Y3 O iey luuunu„u 1 ■1 1,,,,■-i f OCOOCCC ,A i■la :- II!-1 i:I i III111�IIIIIIII11 ilmi O 1'1: II.�.�'r II I! !: O I1=1 1.: .ilinPl��1p•I■,II 1 c'Fli 1 MIIIIIi a 1•::: I' AMNIA;I 1■3, 1- I::,, p 1__ 'j::' i s ,ICI II I'IA; Z e'.1. t i t I is•\ r 1:::: a ..11;1 __ ::=:• (II�IIIIIIIIIIIIIII1iI■1- > 1• I'Il■ u 1:::::7. 11•-1��!1 C 111 at tl::_C. lr. m■r!il,g .. , r �,. �ill, m 1"]:1- 111011 I111 m 1 ■•11 111-r f•13s r 1::.. rt m 1:/ „1 a O O ■_ \IWr� �1 7 II p■1111 1 Q ,I " 11�e1 Z 't • 9 31f43H�S SIOOQ $ S1OCINIf ,i^ s - 9e016 5112 S1o5a5 o SNOIJ A313 as NOldl-5H 009 CCC 36fOH-1111.159 37N16--1.2,10.1.6-Z 4 b b 3g gT F la °I I. Iii -1d q ® II AI ,0 -I IK Ai O A ® h ^ n 8 jI 4 !II, j i 1C1 I! I j II j ® b " @ I I I I h b b EH j j j j H j i 8d O r: I 't pr. t11—� ,, if b b .. n 1 g l:'I• ,rrl�:::- r,piroj bb b b a i 1:-!1.:ili li I E- i 1+Illllll.lirl:iqo um= Wen !NtePum ,, CIS 1I_ ir..; j �; L Il I1�1 §4§gg g / / l 1.::: 1111111 /_. Ir, I���u�i 3 ® }, b ^\ pp I I!--1! j L.i I1 ice: n b A y I..__.1.. p_... — :-- .!'I.Mi,:•` 111/1111 6 m L_..../:: I 11.1 11 I:- �I. g.-1. r°--:I..• • ' o III 1:1:'1: r.:... �1'.313 I•-- ...7:::: i III ••i_. ltd. 1-•71 OM � •_ ,---- 1121, CAI l�llii.._ 13 gyk / CL: 1_11-1- I 1 .' _. . II ■G.:! -\ i(y n b kpy yyyy II ''11 IL I;,� . II!•11 I1 L I I�,IL� cf)to ® " b a � � 8 t ! IL , j /-I-I.11�.... ��`J is Of ig5 . A p E3p qq LE I L— /:;:::::,:%!; -: I_i ,.■ I..:: _--"1: ����� _ ter;. © r!, �' II�1�_::_ /s-` III°ll %IF�1.�11��1u 1:.,:, iii I 1•.. ' `'• ;=1.� ry-1-u!: •® " O lie _! 1. i.!:.._ � III ! II.��_ \I1 i 1!---- iGil re%a�i it: .. b jj 1..1�11 4 ::46.I:::'[^ 11�X11 1:.1 �:111 it .1u• 1.��:.1 -'Al 1:/.«. Illy 1i��11i J 1':�:: , I�3 p5I5,�5! I , 1:1[i' 1 �1 S9 1 :,Ili;;N: 1311. ,_ �1:: Ill -11. Qa�: ° 11.311 u.12 O ;,:i. ''F ITw MF;� m 6 b a Pi § b g-\ I I b b b\ - i !Hi i / w ® § b I4 = © b tR\ 111511 ° i n :r � 0® '\ ": i tf) :, M \ " i 5 141 9aais vo'viav�av 2 CC 99 3 NO.1..144V1-1 006 6N1OIJ. 8 36nom A-nwrd 317N1e-1.21016-L q ] t.0 rp 2 Q 0 XX 6 ill 4in T4,r a =o C d ID , / o iri, 'III Il ra i_ /j!ris I III11��« 11111 -( • • ET F ._ / IL _. lrIIIIE- =-fLJillIl__Lmo :i Q 1.-lall e on 111111 ■ i i1!i' !IiI�s-?. .EMr O : 1 . y =8 Ammomomml \ i 1,1 iil I.,'�i- o 0 \ W e � 1 i Q m Y Q •E m W• (, a0e 1 o Ds In t 4011 PI Iniiill i.DC LAND DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC. Land Planning, Civil Engineering,Surveying&Environmental Services January 30, 2014 Mr. Alex Hou 1165 Altura Terrace Arcadia CA 91007 Re: Oak Tree Encroachment Permit for 800 Hampton Rd. Our Project No. 13028-002 Dear Mr. Hou: At the request of Mr. Jack Ng, Land Design Consultants, Inc. (LDC) conducted a site visit on January 16, 2014 to evaluate six (6) oak trees that will be potentially impacted by the proposed construction activities on your property located at 800 Hampton Road in the City of Arcadia. Five (5) of the six(6)potentially impacted oak trees are within the subject property and one (1)is located on the adjacent property to the east. The existing residence is proposed to be demolished and a new residence will be constructed on the 36,100 square foot lot. A brief evaluation was conducted for the oak trees that included trunk measurement, canopy measurements, and overall health. The trees are numbered on the attached Oak Tree Location Exhibit as#1 —6. The field data worksheets for the six(6) oak trees are included as Appendix A. The photographs in Appendix B illustrate the existing conditions of the subject trees. The enclosed Oak Tree Location&Impact Map illustrates the potential impacts that could occur to the oaks as a result of the construction activities,as proposed. The Oak Tree Location&Impact Map was created using a copy of the project Conceptual Planting Plan that was provided to us by Jack Ng on 1/28/14. A full-size copy of this exhibit is included herein as Appendix C. Canopy measurements were taken in four compass directions. Aerial inspection, root crown excavation, and in- depth decay or disease diagnostics were not performed. Oak tree#1 is an Engelmann oak(Quercus engelmannii) and is located near the front of the property, in an established landscaped area,adjacent to Hampton Road. This oak tree has a 25.5"trunk and is well-established and in good condition with no major health or 2700 East Foothill Boulevard,Suite 200 Pasadena,California 91107 / 626.578.7000 Fax 626.578.7373 e-mail: ldc @ldcla.com • http//www.ldcla.com -t — E. 4QJiON • NI APPROVAL :00101TIOWAI,A14,P1tOVAL,sitbpato thE•folloVoing,Igotigliffmis): ja.ENIAL PAIgVE*01MTVW;-R0/14.1A•poikorn• tivoN: m ixect4 24, '7-01 3 ,AIRPNttEatikAl-StVMWJ§OA-kb:,ft.iEmaERm RE-m:1E111Na 764 MAI:61m btOteren* V-ce.k.... Atirt4-4 Di Hc.W.AA Fact.)0.4.1 oe—Prt....5er H. 80400011NoTH8 givoct.to a,,h,Prp. nA fio . L. APPEALS Appeals from tha Aktes bettetort Shalt 5 thade id the PlanntiV Onw'mission. Artytie dealt-trg k:Wake Such an'appeal Should ilottiactPiatning Seeddiat fat&facjulternehtse•reee and'Orbefeddret Said appeal Aid be smad a ih Witintatid d&Iverd td Planning SeiMilita.at 240 lit kuntinitoti Th ,AntEidier DA 91007, Within ae\len (7)beilendat.disra Of the ARB's • OPORATOOP ApPROVAt If Airs period Of One ell-Yeaefibm the d eippteval,any prpj t foi7 which'plans have been approved by tie Imo.pot begyp construction (as, evidenced by clewing And Wading ancitbr ingMlatfon of a new*itlogistion )nstskatrpo2 of pew materials vn 4 041.9.40!.i.1.*„(§ M00 tsmg.d...qiest) Qr;Ilas been pooped, abandoned'or dleconllneedi wad approval shall koc.PIPP:Tatit.8.00 110.0 ancloi no effect Such project r.nay be resubmitted to the ARB'for relleVied aitileRriali*mover;the ARS shall rvilow'the proloqi as If If had not boon previoloyapproyetf.ih="Ordar.Com/ith thti,cutrehtattindaids trt effect --; ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN'REVIEWBOARO • FINPI,NOVArt.A011014. r" A.. ,Xlia0CiATION NAME: eAucc ¼Jrf 1v.1 cr" 11'0 p-SycK.- 0.4 P,R.QAMAPI)14tbS,:,, e%C) . .14/164A.PTOP..1 124" t PROPERTY OWNER: APPiESS ctHREN . 11t 3 asee..4.434.3.0cs 1 Arge_0(01 A. CA 0‘1 00 b b.• FINDINGS(FillYtheekibeeeitlet.OPPIA and Pmvide a.wd tterl.001ariatioti.f6t.ciAbh):. Tfigpitigokott constrittitiii '43,rri:pgtiMin#11-ttle:existIng friateilelsklmojuse . ".• „. TIAPTPDP,setIlnatarlaiS WILL la ati,NOT13 haVe."telgtffIttrit etI'Verte hil6ett 6h the--Wetallipiltidititisibbkiathe:fitipeity,because a'The,Rappmf:.project IS Di 1.5:10Tt.1.4)Fifficaritty NOW' the ktfOlhitaigaid tights brAVETst; muse . _ . The tiroptised phtecOS,Ch IS-NOT,C14317111.i.,lahtlyvieffitif fr150116e bi.1,160410Vrolitittios bectuso 0. The eleftEifter.the sti*tiire's design AR A Di Alt NOT with the Aotistilt .0.41frlirlii441gn;because • .. . &Vie proposed proJect 189,18 NOT[I In tooltiorirrip.tovOmilis a1 the .Rtbk.rotisitfAxmlo tquitoiidmentS the.begjI*6#10444?ePEIPse • _ ,. . _ . The 1004.49y1 cif Ifig.pmppApcf pplEictWILLELVIALLACitp debirtfeihttd Id-the Dee and ordpymenfatid vke.of adjEidettlitetiettythd.pefghbetocck Om:wee 4. The proposed piojecrs.sAtbmakw.14.1aDO tsibt 9 proviciB fikadegtittesepitietten: betinieeh.lniphikibmehteeti the sathetiredjelnjog pioperues.))0cellee 9 OTHER FINDINGSt at2ocr -rue Fem., %0S7Q.C:i twtooi (ATI 4.3wt aue- 1-120Feerr, (p.ver) . ' ,+t, .44 as i • Fps li,1-' • °, A• s • n r ..,.� F, .!;1111111 _,r it A 111111101.' o U {.-1 t $ ,--7-.1.5-,..,..-,. L. cu w Q ---4 .,rh ;5.. r}—�1�� ' .. - , VJJ ....•-*t-,--a_ s tea +. .. •ti .. Z • • t C.I•l t id w W SI x 4 11* " e E fi T a a . c Q .q: Y y�Exy,9 \^.I .• ., C C Y t • - ; cd CO `, '1" W 2 s r L . . E x 00 b l , : ''. . ' 'T'.1'11:'.41111.,''I'll -_-___`.'"''' ., , X,' b • • t-gi; a e'.z : ct cn• cl 0 ___ t• orr74, ,_, ... _.. ,, \-,- .,. . ,= . i .„.,-,,l-k,r*D '~J r O i .a rs H } O Or•-•.)I . c m o 14.E - . - 0 0 Mk O .:'1 vs C7 -� -a 00 , , . '11 o ir, a.l • °' ft ._,,,L `s x z , If, • r: t . ♦if allgrr is 1 8 Ph.. G 0 cli , , .- V'',i—,Iii' 4 —u v i 4,7 fie' 'y ,. .. f O Q z 4'' ,2 e.-: ,„ '10, 4116A,..?":„,;,, -8... ;?it litl ' 'll 7 .{f 4 Vie '4'Y .F 'xa'"r �° * ,'At - . -1*r I:4 '4,4 'I".' ,� if Q X bn •..r .. ,. SC , . 1.• ,Y Q , . . E ., t • �#„...„ „. .. . , . > b'Y '4 Y.. ..4 ■+ !` 0 e. O O' •00 1� "s.. cad Y y L , W +M r .4 I G z w” t N yT f .a ...5. . A i Mr. Alex Hou January 30,2014 800 Hampton Rd. Page 2 of 6 structural deficiencies'. Several pruning events have been performed on the tree over the years,mostly for clearance purposes on the property. The project proposes the placement of a brick driveway, lawn, and various species of landscaping within the canopy and protected zone of the tree. The 15-foot wide brick driveway will be located completely beneath the canopy. The edge of the driveway is proposed to be approximately 10 feet from the trunk. The use of bricks to construct the driveway would minimize the impact to the tree by the placement of the driveway. The bricks are permeable and would allow air and moisture to reach the roots. The grade is not expected to be significantly changed. However,if grading does occur for the placement of the driveway, the tree's root system could be impacted. The removal of a significant portion of the root system could compromise the overall health and stability of the tree. Since the location of actual roots is unknown until excavation occurs, actual impacts to specific roots cannot be determined at this time. Any change in grade and the placement of the new driveway has the potential to negatively impact the tree. However, with implementation of the mitigation recommendations included herein,the impacts to the tree can be reduced. Oak tree#2 is a coast live oak(Quercus agrifolia)and is located along the frontage of Hampton Road. This oak tree has a 21"trunk and is well-established and in good • condition with no major health or structural deficiencies'. Several pruning events have been performed on the tree over the years,mostly for clearance purposes for the property. There is epicormic growth on that part of the scaffold branched that have been previously pruned. A tire swing is currently hanging in the canopy and is recommended for removal. The tree is currently in an established landscaped area that is mostly lawn beneath the canopy. The project proposes the placement of a decomposed granite (DG)walkway and various species of landscaping within the canopy and protected zone of the tree. In addition,the brick driveway will encroach approximately five (5)feet into the protected zone of the tree. The project proposes a seven-foot circle with DG surrounding the trunk. The grade is not expected to be significantly changed with the placement of the DG. However, if grading does occur for the placement of the DG,the tree's root system could be impacted. The removal of a significant portion of the root system could compromise the overall health and stability of the tree. Since the location of actual roots is unknown until excavation occurs, actual impacts to specific roots cannot be determined at this time. Any change in grade has the potential to negatively impact the tree. The potential impact to the tree is minimal and the overall health and structure of the tree will not be 1 As noted from a ground-plane macrovisual inspection only. No aerial inspection,root excavation,or decay detection devices were used except as noted otherwise herein. P:IDATAIPROJEC S13113028-002 IENVIRONMEN7'AIMAK TREFSypgl{3REE_01-30-14.DOC 1. pc Mr. Alex Hou January 30, 2014 800 Hampton Rd. Page 3 of 6 negatively impacted. The implementation of the mitigation recommendations included herein can help prevent impacts to the tree. Oak tree#3 is a coast live oak(Quercus agrifolia)and is located along the frontage of Hampton Road. This oak tree has a 41"trunk and is well-established and in good condition with no major health or structural deficiencies'. The tree is currently growing in an established landscaped area that is mostly lawn beneath the canopy. A portion of the northerly canopy overhangs Hampton Road. Pruning events have been performed on the tree over the years,mostly for clearance purposes for the property. The project proposes the placement of a DG walkway and various species of landscaping within the canopy and protected zone of the tree. In addition, a walkway to a proposed gazebo will encroach approximately four(4) feet into the protected zone of the tree. The project proposes a seven-foot circle with DG surrounding the trunk. The grade is not expected to be significantly changed. However,if grading does occur for the placement of the DG walkway, the tree's root system could be impacted. The removal of a significant portion of the root system could compromise the overall health and stability of the tree. Since the location of actual roots is unknown until excavation occurs, actual impacts to specific roots cannot be determined at this time. Any change in grade and the placement of the new DG walkway has the potential to negatively impact the tree. The potential impact to the tree is minimal and the overall health and structure of the tree will not be negatively impacted. The implementation of the mitigation recommendations included herein can help prevent impacts to the tree. Oak tree#4 is an Engelmann oak(Quercus engelmannii) and is located on the southwestern property boundary. This oak tree has a 30"trunk and is well-established and in fair condition. The client indicated that the 2011 windstorm caused a few large scaffold branches to break off and cause an adjacent power pole to fall. Extensive epicormic growth is present where those branches broke off. The project proposes the placement of a gazebo with an adjacent walkway and various species of landscaping within the canopy and protected zone of the tree. The proposed gazebo will encroach approximately two (2)feet into the canopy of the tree and the walkway will encroach approximately four(4) feet in the canopy. The project proposes a seven-foot circle surrounding the trunk that will be covered by natural leaf litter. The potential impact to the tree is minimal and the overall health and structure of the tree will not be negatively impacted. The implementation of the mitigation recommendations included herein can help prevent impacts to the tree. PADATATROIEC S113113028-0021ENVIRONME:NTAUOAK TREEy\OAKTREE_01-30-14.DOC .Alex Hou LDC 800 Hampton Rd. January 30,2014 Page 4 of 6 Oak tree#5 is an Engelmann oak(Quercus engelmannii)and is located in a lawn area near the southwesterly boundary of the property. This oak tree has a 13"trunk and is well-established, but is in poor condition'. There is extensive dieback with sparse foliage throughout the canopy. It is recommended that this tree be monitored to assess the health of the tree during the construction period. The project proposes the placement of a brick driveway, lawn, and various species of landscaping within the canopy and protected zone of the tree. Approximately seven (7) feet of the 15-foot wide brick driveway will encroach within the canopy. The edge of the driveway is proposed to be approximately eight(8)feet from the trunk. The use of bricks to construct the driveway would minimize the impact to the tree by the placement of the driveway. The bricks are permeable and would allow air and moisture to reach the roots. The grade is not expected to be significantly changed. However, if grading does occur for the placement of the driveway,the tree's root system could be impacted. The removal of a significant portion of the root system could compromise the overall health and stability of the tree. Since the location of actual roots is unknown until excavation occurs, actual impacts to specific roots cannot be determined at this time. Any change in grade and the placement of the new driveway has the potential to negatively impact the tree. However, with implementation of the mitigation recommendations included herein, the impacts to the tree can be reduced. Oak tree#6 is an Engelmann oak(Quercus engelmannii) and is located on the adjacent property to the east. This oak tree has two(2)trunks, at established and in good condition. Several pruning events have been eg n performed on the tree over the years,mostly for clearance purposes on the subject property. The canopy currently overhangs approximately 15 feet onto the subject property. The tree's canopy will extend approximately 15 feet within the proposed patio area adjacent to the property boundary wall. An existing driveway is currently beneath the canopy and roots are not likely to be prominent in this area. If the depth of the new patio is not changed,no additional impact should occur due to the placement of the patio, but care should be taken during construction activities. The removal and replacement of the patio is not anticipated to negatively impact the overall health and structure of the tree. The proposed encroachments to these trees should not impact the overall health and/or structure of the trees. The encroachment beneath the canopy may result in pruning to the tree's canopy. With implementation of the mitigation recommendations included herein, the encroachments will not significantly impact the ordinance-sized oak tree. P:%DATA\PROIEM-SW\]3028-0DZENVIRON •ALOAK ThEESIOAK3, _01-30-14.D0c UaIC Mr. Alex Hou January 30, 2014 800 Hampton Rd. Page 5 of 6 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES This section details the recommendations for avoidance/mitigation measures related to the encroachment impacts on the oak tree. 1. The applicant shall be responsible for notifying the City of any changes in the scope of the work and shall insure that all work is performed in accordance with applicable ordinances, permits and procedures. Work performed within the protected zone of the tree shall be preceded by not less than 48 hours notice of same to the City. 2. Except as approved by the City in the encroachment permit, all work in the protected zone of the trees approved for encroachment must be done using hand implements only. 3. Except as approved by the City in the encroachment permit, all work in the protected zone of the trees approved for encroachment shall be done in the presence of a certified arborist. 4. Any root or canopy pruning shall be performed by a certified arborist in compliance with the latest ANSI pruning standards. 5. Root-pruning within the protected zone of the subject oak shall be reduced to the minimum amount that is absolutely necessary. All roots pruned shall consist of clean, 90°-angle cuts, utilizing sharp hand tools and shall not be sealed unless directed by a certified arborist. 6. Unless specified in the Oak Tree Permit conditions of approval, equipment, materials, and vehicles shall not be stored, parked or operated within the protected zone of an oak tree, except on existing hardscape surfaces. 7. Tree #5 should remain under observation during construction activities to make sure the health of the tree does not continue to decline. If this tree further declines,it should be immediately assessed by a certified arborist. 8. Landscaping under native oaks is not generally recommended due to the different moisture needs of oaks and ornamentals, and the subsequent risk of oak root rot. However, there are selected native, dry shade-adapted, ground covers and shrubs that are suitable for the turf or under oaks. A good resource for those species is "Compatible Plants Under and Around Oaks", published by the California Oak Foundation and downloadable for free from their website at: http://www.californiaoaks.org/. 9. The provided Conceptual Planting Plan does not indicate the location of any utility trenches or catch basins. It is recommended that any proposed trench shall be located outside of the protected zone of the trees. P:\DATA\PROJECI\13\13028-002\ENVR°NMENTAL\OAK 7REES\°AKIREE 01-30-14DOC Mr. Alex Hou LC 800 Hampton Rd. January 30, 2014 Page 6 of 6 If you have any questions,please feel free to give me a call. Thank you. Sincerely, LAND DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC. Scott McAllaster Project Planner ISA Certified Arborist, WE-7011A Cc. Steve Hunter/LDC Attachments (3) PADATATROIECIS113 13028-0021ENV@O .ALwAK TREESIOAKTREE_01-30-14.DOC Mr. Alex Hou January 30, 2014 800 Hampton Rd. Appendix A OAK TREE FIELD DATA PADATA\PROJECTS\13U3028-001\ENVIRONMENTALOAK TRSBS\OARTREE_01-30-14.DOC OAK TREE FIELD DATA WORKSHEET LDC Project No. 13028-002 Survey Date: 01/16/2014 Tree Number: 1 GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS - - -- Health Rating': ®A- ❑B ❑C ❑D ❑ FSpecies: Q.a 9 nfotia ❑ Q.lobate ® Other 1_ - -- --- —- Q. engelmannii I Form: ®symmetric 0 minor asymmetry i Trunk Count: 1 Height(ft.): 30 ___ — -- -- -.. - i - ---0 major asymmetry 0 stump sprout 1 Trunk DBH(in.): 25.5 --._-- -- -_-_-- ❑stag-head LI Percent Canopy Cover: 70 % ! Crown Class2: ❑ Decurrent ®Excurrent .---..-----------'- --._.-- ----- -t------ -- _.-.. Existing Terrain: i 9 ® Flat ❑ Slope A e Class: El immature ❑semi-mature 4 Aesthetic Rating: ®A ❑B ❑C ❑D ❑F ® mature ❑over-mature/senescent ------------- Overall Grade: ®A- ❑B ❑C ❑D ❑F CANOPY CHARACTERISTICS TREE HEALTH Dripline Radius ' Canopy to Grade Wound Wood i cellent 0 Average❑ (Feet) (Feet) I Development: Poor ❑ None ❑ 22 � Foliage Density: 10 Normal❑Sparse i NE - - -- ------- _ Weak crotches: 0 No ❑ Yes f._ _.. __._25.-. . Oak Pit Scale: I® No ❑ Yes j—..-- ;- - Mainm dieback - -- - ,— sbe ste No ❑ Yes r _ _ I Exposed Roots: 0 No ❑ Yes _-- - Epicormic growth: E� No Yes IW----_- .-.-= .--_.___-29 . Shading Out: 0 No ❑ Yes Cavities: ONone b Trunk ❑Branch ---- --_ __-_ _- Exfoliating Bark: 0 No ❑ Yes CANOPY SPREAD(FEET): 56 Water Pocket(s): 10 No ❑ Yes • Mechanical Damage: :❑Trunk ®Branch PROPOSED ACTIONS _ - - ❑None Monitor for Progress: --- Yes ❑ No Canker/Galls: No 0 Yes Treat Infestations: ...-._-- Yes ❑ No Fungus: ►5 No ❑Yes Remove Deadwood: _ -- - Yes _-__ No Vigor: 10 Excellent ❑Average Support Structure: , ❑ Yes ❑ No j2 Fair ❑ Poor - IMPACTS&MITIGATIONS Twig/Branch b None ❑ Minor Dleback: ❑Moderate ❑F-xtensive In Impacted Area: ❑ Yes ❑ No Leaf Size: 0 Normal 0 Small ------ ----- Proposed Land Use: __--- _ _-._. . Heart Rot: No ❑ Yes Impacts: Insects: IS1 Minor ❑Moderate ❑Extensive ❑None Mitigations: _ ____ _ s Exudations: ,'®No❑Yes Comments Notes: Old pruning scars;minor ivy at trunk base-should be maintained to avoid growth up trunk; South side of canopy overhangs structure;West and Northeast side of canopy overhangs lawn;growing in irrigated area 1 Health:A=Outstanding;B=Above Average;C=Average;D=Below Average;F=Dead Decurrent=Lacking Strong Central Leader. Excurrent= Strong Central Leader. 3 Aesthetic(compared to standard tree of same species):A=nearly symmetrical, healthy tree—F=Dead P:IDATAIPROJECTS113\13028-0021ENVIRONMENTAL\OAK TREESIFIELD DATA WORKSHEETS-1-0.DOC �V DC OAK TREE FIELD DATA WORKSHEET LDC Project No. 13028-002 Survey Date: 01116/2014 Tree Number:2 GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS — .• Species: 0Q.awifolia 0 Q.lobate El Other Health Rating's: OA DB+ OC OD OF _ . _ -I- + Form: 0 symmetric 0 minor asymmetry - Trunk Count: 1 Height(ft.): 25 • El major asymmetry 0 stump sprout I _ _ Trunk DBH(in.): 21 i 0 stag-head --4 Percent Canopy Cover: 75 % ,' Crown Class's: E Decurrent 0 Excurrent Existing Terrain: El Flat 0 Sloge Age Class: 0 immature 0 semi-mature Aesthetic Rating6: OA 0B+ DC OD 0 F 0 mature Dover-mature/senescent Overall Grade: IDA (DB+ OC OD 0 F H-I I-- CANOPY CHARACTERISTICS TREE HEALTH Dripline Radius 1 Canopy to Grade ' Wound Wood pacellent 0 Average 0 (Feet) -] (Feet) LDevelopment: Poor 0 None 0 : N 9 I Foliage Density: Normal 0 Sparse NE j Weak crotches: No 0 Yes , E 19 Oak Pit Scale: e No 0 Yes --- SE Mainstem dieback: D No 0 Yes S 34 Exposed Roots: b No 0 Yes SW Epicormic growth: No El Yes ; W 29 i I Shading Out: No 0 Yes NW Cavities: EINone b Trunk 0 Branch • Exfoliating Bark: '0 No 0 Yes ,.- CANOPY SPREAD(FEED: 48 ; Water Pocket(s): k1:1 No 0 Yes • Mechanical Damage: ID Trunk 0 Blench PROPOSED ACTIONS D None Monitor for Progress: ' 0 Yes 0 No Canker/Galls: '0 No 0 Yes , . , Treat Infestations: ; 0 Yes 0 No Fungus: El No 0 Yes Remove Deadwood: i 0 Yes 0 No Vigor: al Excellent DAverage Support Structure: 1 0 Yes 0 No 0 Fair 0 Poor , Twig/Branch 0 None 0 Minor IMPACTS&MITIGATIONS Dieback: 0 Moderate ['Extensive , In Impacted Area: 0 Yes 0 No Leaf Size: 10 Normal 0 Small Proposed Land Use: Heart Rot: C4 No 0 Yes Impacts: Insects: ;0 Minor 0 Moderate DExtensive ONone Mitigations: Exudations: 0 No 0 Yes Comments&Notes: Epicormic growth only where previously pruned;Tire swing hanging from upper scaffold branch; exposed root on North side–damaged 4 Health:A=Outstanding;B=Above Average;C=Average;D=Below Average;F=Dead 5 Decurrent=Lacking Strong Central Leader. Excurrent= Strong Central Leader. 8 Aesthetic(compared to standard tree of same species):A=nearly symmetrical,healthy tree—F=Dead PADATA\PROJECTS\13113028-0021ENVIRONMENTAMAK TREESFIELD DATA WORKSHEETS-1-6.DOC LDC ____ OAK TREE FIELD DATA WORKSHEET Survey Date: 01/16/2014 LDC Project No. 13028-002 Tree Number:3 I GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS __. F Species: ---- ---- --- . - _,�Q`agrifolia ❑Q.lobate ❑other -- - -- Health Rating': B C+ ❑D ❑F F O^n: ❑sym metric m metric 10 minor asymmetry - - _ .Trunk Count: 1 Height ft.) 50 ❑major asymmetry ❑stump sprout-' Trunk DBH rcent Canopy Cover: --- ❑stag-head ----- - Crown Class.: -rit Existing Terrain:--_----_ -------- Flat 0 Slope T_ -_-- - __- ❑Excurrent Age Class: -_- Aesthetic a -- --- ❑immature - g : ❑A _I B - ----_-- ❑semi-mature Overall Grade: ®mature ___-- ❑A ❑B ®C ❑p ❑F -- ❑over-mature/s@nescent ----------- - . _-. L CANOPY CH .- __ CHARACTERISTICS I TREE HEALTH — Dripline Radius Canopy to Grade 1 Wound Wood - (Feet) (Feet) cellent ❑ Average El I N Development: I NE 30 f- -i--- ❑ None - - ' Foliage Density: Normal 0 Sparse ' Weak crotches: E --- SE Oak Pit Scale: — - No + i f-._ - - Yes S Mainsbem dieback: ►_� - .._ 30 - -- - - No ❑ Yes ' SW - Exposed Roots: - Epicormic growth Yes ® Yes NW Shading Out: No ❑ Yes Cavities: Trunk►'�None : nk Branch Exfoliating Bark: CANOPY SPREAD(FEET): 80 _._-- Water Pocket(s): No ❑ Yes No ►'': Yes • PROPOSED ACTIONS Mechanical Damage: 0 Trunk ®Bra' ranch Monitor for Progress: None rogress: -- ❑ Yes ❑ No Canker/Galls Treat Infestations; ❑ Yes ❑ No Yes Remove Deadwood: _._ Fungus: ,►=� No ❑ Yes ❑ No __.. Yes _. Vigor: ....- Support Structure ' El Excellent ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑Average Fair ❑ Poor IMPACTS 8 MITIGATIONS Twig/Branch Dieback: 0 Moderate 0 Minor In Impacted Area Yes ❑ Moderate ❑ No ❑Extensive • Proposed Land Use: Leaf Size: - -. - - Normal El Small Heart Rot: ; Impacts: ' No ❑ Yes Insects; 0 Minor ❑Moderate E Mitigations: xtensive ❑None -- ---_ --Mitigations: Exudations Comments&Notes: Included bark where scaffold branches diverge from main trunk;slightly sunken area No❑Yes est side of trunk(no signs of decay); -- Y);epicormic growth on main scaffold branches rea°n A Health: =Outstandin B_ K Dec Health:A =Laskin g' -Above Average;C=Average;D=Below Average;F=Dead g Strong Central Leader. Excurrent= Strong Central Leader. 6 Aesthetic(compared to standard tree of same species):A=nearly symmetrical, healthy tree-F=Dead P:IDATAIPROJECTS\1311302&0021ENVIRONMENTALIDAK TREESIFIELD DATA WORKSHEETS-1-8 DOC LDC OAK TREE FIELD DATA WORKSHEET LDC Project No. 13028-002 Survey Date: 01/16/2014 Tree Number:4 GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS ., —.-�---- -- Species: [1Q.agrifolia ❑ Q.lobate LEI Other Health Rating10: ❑A ❑B DC ❑D ❑F Q.engelmannii ; Form: D symmetric ❑minor asymmetry Trunk Count: 1 Height(ft.): 40 i ❑major asymmetry ❑stump sprout Trunk DBH(In.): 30 stag-head - --- - ------ ------ i Percent Canopy Cover. 55 % ! Crown Class": 0 Decurrent 0 Excurrent Existing Terrain: D Flat ❑ Slope Age Class: ❑immature semi-mature Aesthetic Rating12: ❑A ❑B ®C- ❑D ❑F ®mature Dover-mature/senescent Overall Grade: DA DB DC- OD 0 F CANOPY CHARACTERISTICS ITREE HEALTH i Dripline Radius Canopy to Grade Wound Wood xcellent ❑ Average (Feet) (Feet) I Development: poor I - 0 -None ❑ — , — ►-_ Normal❑Sparse 16 Foliage Density , N __ NE Weak crotches: 0 No 0 Yes E i 14 Oak Pit Scale: 0 No 0 Yes SE i i Mainstem dieback: No 0 Yes S 24 Exposed Roots: No 0 Yes 3W Epicormic growth: El No D Yes W ■ 28 Shading Out: 10 No 0 Yes i NW Cavities ®None ❑ Trunk 0 Branch Exfoliating Bark: No ❑ Yes CANOPY SPREAD(FEET): 42 Water Pocket(s): O. No 0 Yes • Mechanical Damage: 0 Trunk ® Branch . PROPOSED ACTIONS 0 None Monitor for Progress: , ❑ Yes ❑ No Canker/Galls: No 0 Yes Treat Infestations. . ❑ Yes ❑ No . Fungus: ®No .._Yes ! Remove Deadwood: ❑ Yes ❑ No Vigor: ❑ Excellent ®Average 0 Fair ❑Poor Support Structure: ❑ Yes ❑ No Twig/Branch ❑ None 0 Minor Dieback: ;D Moderate DExtensive IMPACTS&MITIGATIONS In Impacted Area: 0 Yes ❑ No Leaf Size: II]Normal ❑Small Proposed Land Use: Heart Rot: El No El Yes Insects: ❑ Minor D Moderate impacts: ❑Extensive ❑None Mitigations Exudations: ❑No D Yes Comments&Notes: Some past damage in upper canopy,client indicated that the 2011. windstorm resulted n several large branches breaking off and taking down an adjacent power pole;extensive epicormic growth where branches broke off;power lines running through canopy;South portion of canopy overhangs adj.property 10 Health:A=Outstanding;B=Above Average;C=Average;D=Below Average;F=Dead "Decurrent=Lacking Strong Central Leader. Excurrent= Strong Central Leader. 12 Aesthetic(compared to standard tree of same species):A=nearly symmetrical,healthy tree—F=Dead P:\DATA\PROJECTS\1311302&0021 ENVIRONMENTAL\OAK TREES\FIEID DATA WORKSHEETS-1-6.DOC LDC OAK TREE FIELD DATA WORKSHEET LDC Project No. 13028-002 Survey Date: 01/16/2014 Tree Number:5 7-- - j GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS — i Species: jDQ.agrifolla 0 Q.lobate ig Other : Health Rating13: OA Os DC OD 0 F 1--- --------------------------------------;-------- I - — — Q.enge/mannii ; Form: 0 symmetric 0 minor asymmetry i Trunk Count: 1 Height(ft.): 25 El major asymmetry 0 stump sprout ;_ ____ _ _ i-- ! Trunk DBH(in.): 13 1 0 stag-head 1._ _ _____ _ _ Percent Canopy Cover: 30_%_ Crown Class": 0 Decummt ElExcurrent _ Existing Terrain: 0 Flat 0 Slope , Age Class: 0 immature 10 semi-mature I_Aesthetic Rating15: ____OA..__OB. OC__OD 0 F , 0 mature Oover-mature/senescent 1 Overall Grade: OA OB Oc D 0 F -t-- I CANOPY CHARACTERISTICS TREE HEALTH !— , --- Dripline Radius I Canopy to Grade Wound Wood LExcellent 0 Average 0 (Feet) (Feet) I Development: IPOor [X] None 0 i N 25 Foliage Density: Normall$1 Sparse NE Weak crotches: 01 No 0 Yes 1 E 13 _ Oak Pit Scale: 15-4 No 0 Yes !-- .. ! SE Mainstem dieback: 6 No la Yes ! S 8 Exposed Roots: e No 0 Yes ;--. SW Epicormic growth: LI No 0 Yes Lw _ _ 20 . _ Shading Out: la No 0 Yes NW , Cavities: 0None 0 Trunk 0 Branch 1 . 1 1 Exfoliating Bark: ;C:1 No 0 Yes . CANOPY SPREAD(FEET): 33 Water Pocket(s): 0 No 0 Yes • Mechanical Damage: 1:1 Trunk 0 Branch PROPOSED ACTIONS , 0 None Monitor for Progress: 0 Yes 0 No , Canker/Galls: ig No 0 Yes ! -- , Treat infestations: ; 0 Yes 0 No ' Fungus: '0 No 0 Yes Remove Deadwood: 0 Yes 0 No : Vigor: 0 Excellent 0Average 0 Yes n Fair Z Poor . Support Structure: 0 No • ! Twig/Branch 0 None 0 Minor IMPACTS&MITIGATIONS , Dieback: El Moderate 0Extensive In Inipac Leaf Size: El Nonnal CI Small , Proposed Land Use: Heart Rot: No 0 Yes Impacts: Insects: 0 Minor 0 Moderate ;0Extensive 0None Mitigations: Exudations: 0 No 0 Yes . . . Comments&Notes: Extensive dieback;tree appears to be in decline;sparse foliage;some dead branches; surrounded by lawn;trunk slight lean to North 3 Health:A=Outstanding;B=Above Average;C=Average;D=Below Average;F=Dead '4 Decurrent=Lacking Strong Central Leader. Excurrent= Strong Central Leader. 15 Aesthetic(compared to standard tree of same species):A=nearly symmetrical,healthy tree—F=Dead P:\DATAPROJECTS113113028-0021ENVIRONMENTALIOAK TREESWIELD DATA WORKSHEETS-1-6.DOC I Dr OAK TREE FIELD DATA WORKSHEET LDC Project No. 13028-002 Survey Date: 01/16/2014 Tree Number:6 ----- --------------------- GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS Species: ❑Q.agrifolia ❑ Q.lobate ® Other I Health Rating7 : ❑A ®B ❑C ❑D ❑F Q. engelmannii , Form: ®symmetric ❑minor asymmetry Trunk Count: 2 Height(ft.): 45 ❑major asymmetry ❑stump sprout Trunk DBH(in.): 19,30 1 ❑stag head Percent Canopy Cover: 85 % Crown Class": 0 Decurrent ❑ Excurrent r- Existing Terrain: ® Rat ❑ Slope Age Class: ❑immature ❑semi-mature Aesthetic Rating18: ❑A ®B ❑C ❑D ❑F ®mature ❑over-mature/senescent Overall Grade: ❑A ®B ❑C OD ❑F CANOPY CHARACTERISTICS TREE HEALTH 1 Dripline Radius 1 Canopy to Grade Wound Wood Excellent ❑ Average El i Development: poor ❑ None ❑ N 26_. - —-- -- -- Feet Be Foliage Density: V]Normal❑Sparse NE i Weak crotches: I-� No 0 Yes E 38 Oak Pit Scale: '►e� No ❑ Yes SE Mainstem dieback: 0 No ❑ Yes Exposed Roots No ❑ Yes IS 1 SW Eplcormic growth: ;❑ No V] Yes W 30 Shading Out: 0 No ❑ Yes NW Cavities: None ❑ Trunk ❑Branch ' Exfoliating Bark No ❑ Yes CANOPY SPREAD(FEET): 68 Water Pocket(s): p No ❑ Yes Mechanical Damage: 0 Trunk ® Branch , PROPOSED ACTIONS r.3 None Monitor for Progress: ❑ Yes ❑ No Canker/Galls: 0 No ❑Yes Treat Infestations: • ❑ Yes ❑ No Fungus: J►5 No ❑Yes Remove Deadwood: : ❑ Yes ❑ No ' Vigor: ® Excellent ['Average Support Structure: ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Fair Poor Twig/Branch None ❑ Minor IMPACTS&MITIGATIONS Dieback: la Moderate ❑Extensive In Impacted Area: ❑ Yes ❑ No 1 Leaf Size: Normal ❑Small Proposed Land Use: Heart Rot: 0 No ❑ Yes Impacts: Insects: V]Minor ❑Moderate ❑Extensive ❑None Mitigations: Exudations: 0 N❑Yes 1 Comments&Notes: Not tagged;on adj. property to East;visually surveyed from behind property fence; several trees growing beneath canopy;pruning events on West side(over subject property)—nothing recent; overhangs existing structure(garage) 16 Health:A=Outstanding;B=Above Average;C=Average; D=Below Average;F=Dead "Decurrent=Lacking Strong Central Leader. Excurrent= Strong Central Leader. 18 Aesthetic(compared to standard tree of same species):A=nearly symmetrical,healthy tree-F=Dead PIDATAWROJECTS\13\13028-002\ENVIRONMENTAL\OAK TREES\FIE1D DATA WORKSHEETS-1-8.DOC 1 DC / 0 A. ,..', `.‘ 1h : . ; • .4`. - ' . 4 ■4 ".• , is., , .,,,,, Ar-, I I ,I . i I oa 5 -...— c. ic,.....i: ler- 'i4 tz.,.....,, , / LLI Z ill ° 1..::.::..:::::.:.:•:::-•:::::::: .-!., \-....„ , ,,,,,..., , , , :•-:::•:::: :;:::::::.:•••::.:.., ,\ \.\\L ., .------- I— i— 0 1-I hi! / .::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,, \ . .,. < , . . \ , < < %-- 0- m..- 0 m 0 i _ / ley .1.-::::::: • :::::::::::::::::::.-;::, .::.".,,,-.\‘..--1., . ;1 . . ,.....:.:.:.:.::::::...::: ,,,,-,:ii., ‘..,...‘livi . 0 ',- • / ,ft,?.) \::, . :::.:::::::•:•:•:•:•:.., -,.ii*A", • rOil IFQ !:4e4A• ' i. ,::::::::::: - ,, ,,,, , , :.. . I 1,,C,1,4) %•'..! .. ''•::::::::.:::•:.:.:.:.:.:•:.:•:.1:: ,• / 0 1- '' .' ' .3 4,7, ,, •,, %4-' w . • \ i. - • 1 1 , . ', •i.7.,\‘ 1 \ • A ri7o,141" Op lk::•:::::•. ,:::1':',\N ''..%,,\,1 Co ' Z'.• 1'' ''' 11 " ,c',' ,-'4it''.1.1:7•: : ::•:.::,:s.....17, '3 .• A:',,,, . .;•k -‘,.. , i i 11 ,0 -----Alffir";;%.1..*•'•:.:•::::::.:::::it mot' ::.:.?:.. ,...z...,._-- ,..".:2.- `---- .....•••.,$1.--"1,6_, :-.: ... :ia .411(:"1: \ \"" . <9 w x ',ii.----N.* -.7-',, .:::::.:::./v-'71K,,,'•:.,:::?.,.., 4•;., \ .: . . -_t''''4,901tmv 24:1,,H.L.,'t/A-, ...:-'''',:v'',. '''':::::::•.... , % \ \ ‘02, c"%,1,,(E--,-- '10 , -,-/..' ..--', 0,-'' ' f 1:•:•:::::::::::!::.•.:...... i p 1 i 1--, it - t..::::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.::., At':-.1..s•\ ';''', * ,1 ,•'1_, tot ,„,....1 ,, \i,. _, .::::::::::::::::::::::::::...:,... ..*4-„,‘. . ± 1 y 0 Ilk, 1 Ilkin 4+:*;:44, /k, _. .s.,::::.:::::::.;:::::n:.,;:.:;:.::::::.::..;i:!:. ;a4c,■\ -‘. o 1 is V •I,V,&-Vii Ihri 0,4•,,," 414111,*,)14, , 7,-. •..'...-•'--.•.'.v.•••••••.•••.... 4,114,.`%,Nkt,. _.„_--... .‘fiff.,1 ,..„.,.;" g mit,.... .t,....,_•.w.liit 1 .. ', '4,..,.,,,, -.:::::,:;::.:::,::.:::::;:::.::::,:,1w,,,,,e..,, ,....„,,, ,, $ ri . u _, !k,.t ,.......„„v4.5.7. 11Iptriso.v..1. 11 4,6 •::::::::,::.:.h.: Ivitt.m.4.- epio H 1 °t r4,-4„,,_ , . iiiii ov:,..c,Ire- 1 iit:,,,,.,-*El, -. irt„,,,,,,„,.,v,,,, ...*,.\• il ... ,. L EPql 7.7'7-7 PI V, i $4.-k•'II II ,1 I. 'Li P EN i 1 ::-.1.1.• .., ''%C.----_-.^,-----,-.-7:::T„;;J4.')'4;kl'*-r ..' \'',\NN\ 1 ..l• `;'-rn i j:. r, -•',,,ili,,,,s.,,I .4 ,,:.„.:.:.:... ,. ,„ ,,,„,,,,,.., ,,,o,,.,,,,,,,,‘, i .. , - it \ V i 4/4,..•.ti.4.0 1 1 si____gip' 'v ' 14,t+,1"4,,,X44,,.;500"... ,IN c., = , , ,. ..,_ , ,„,AIN,;..g.,-.0--•,, ,,,,,,,4,0 .., .. (i ., . _-•-- ,it‘,P,V4e.eb 1>'0,-''‘w •.., k '• ,,t,..itiou ' -''-•.. I-1--.---TI vgc..,4,4 ...,'' m.i,„,e,,,,..41 11 ---:--i.k', SU -La- - -' i . tolo;r., ,e/i/..e0. 0 ..,,, ■ w ,,,,,,...;_,T.1 1. , - ,, ••• *t . ;7.,t II , .1-4. -._ . ' 4::.• ■-..401 -. z ,..,,,14.31 I ,i; , ■ ie4 . :::::i. V.:,•,.^.4.z.,::::,4?.. ; o-'N ; i '- ,AO•.:::.,:, ....,.............,,,c, ., 0 64's.'''';`,.`,„ ',.,' ,. .4 ' 1*-9,P= 6 ! ''''"''..:X.. .n'4:4...7".*IV, .,' . '■' N, ( ''. ;.:'.''':;*::::.• :::::•.‘tir..1:.::**:.:.:.; :4•,-„ce 0 0-: N,. •. >.5.-g AV:AI •••`1`0:':::'h:'':': ; ..7****:14.4.414%, ' .---,;.‘\ - ,0 WIP • \ i '. 1 L',.1: iff :rig 1011 . I' ii lij 1 .t:411§4:Nalilliiii '' ' t : ' ., Ftivl • 1 'AO ' ‘...WC**...e.A. I,. ,,d4.::.:.;:::4 0 ,'\",..:44,14."-""„. ; -m-•-•".1„ „ 0 w .41 ,•. ',,.1,11.:;i::::::•.;&IL V'C' e' .;,..'7.,.t::.''''''INN\ ••■ .in ,4r1,....:,::::4•40,4.*„......,:•:-::,:::,:::•:.. A116,. 111 li Li *14:4761i4 I II,. I Awit-,all' ..40 Lft*-,e.,i, ,,,Vkis,,,gr„ -..:.:.:':.:.:i.::::::•:::.:esi, Nr. .• 1,11, - , "-,,_r , ,lor.,,,.,,,i,, --- -- "V.,,,........ -, ',:•:•:.:•:,.s,...........ove• -.1:. . *.° •IIPI 114 . ; .„-2...„..vu44' ---4 1---*A4:* - :4;4.,,..‘,.;.,;,.fr,::::...:..5.. A NI.\.. -144 11" 11 -- ..„.., -.^04404:4 '• '.. .''.:';'....,::'. .i....4q?..'-.\. I 5 •z4f4-.-, _101 1 %II I IIV' I I '. -:•:::?•,, 1 ' 111:**:•:.10 11;:.:::::;::::.::::Aw....44 , , - 1;‘. ' ••... r- ",°'•-00.4,....p. .— .-...-•••••,•••..,,,-,0*, to 1..",,:‘,44•_-•+:,.-,•. , ,„--....:::::::•:.::::::..:::-.0, ,,,„,4 . . .„..rL ,..0 " :: :::;:;.;;V::„P,„;.1,1‘\\ • • ' 0 a 11.• -] 71n1 1 ei..::;:::. ;',A 7#/#44•'''''SM 42 mi.„-d_,....,...,1 %.', . \..;4. - 1 1 •L . , , . . -**:: ::.„ i, k ss! T-L-22"---- -1 Iill 1614 ,' . 1- =I - ( '111!•:%::::::: 1164.V py:v..... ...-7". ..,1' '-' 1 IMI:::::::- '111.4•.4 4.:::::::*I bowl ---- i :II -'1,r ita ,,(411'Au'-V' ...4 1111,111 /11.•;:. 'eV:•:•'. It' 11*-.•'r.. .- t*.:,.., pm r 6-7:•■::::::::::., .- .., '_., ..-.r•-,-, ..,. ,. .. Lw . ....::::::::::.-'1 '", ‘-,•:.- ..' ,.... • .1 ,,,,)/ : • "® - •).,- •''. *N. r,........:.:::::.:..... ...,,,,,..,..... ,..,...,...., .,..k.,.. I, , ,.. %,::::4::::: - • • ,,,,‘ ,. . .:.:-:.:.:,..:..•:.:,: tti„-,,, 0,-,::::.:•:::::::V::::.. '7- -,..-,,\:. -,‘. • - ..:".±,,,41::.:•..:•••:.:•:-:•:,. ''..,:v),.:.:.:•:•:,:,:.:.:.:.:.:•.•.P..k ‘1.,,,, L.N•• / 1 .0,'ipo 7::•:*:::::.' ik..vr.:::::::::::::::::7:'::::::::;:;:; „. ■ '01) •..:.:.:,:::::.:.: 5 ...:.:•:,..:.:•:.7.•.:•;.::,::::-:.•.; •m..,''‘.\-7%,\::.,..-., --•' 1-1'1 -•••-■ • 014 , ' '1 "i, ,...,,...:•:.:•:.:.:„ ,,,,...,, •.•:•:•:•:•:•:,:•,...:.::::„..... .,1.... ,4,, • iiii,ig-vzir.”- -; -,---- imi i 0 .:.0:::,wil: .o0.7::.::::::::::::::: :: ::-r.;::(. ..,.4N ,. ..., ..,44,_„••,,T,,,0.::::',.:;::,:i:;::::•:::.*:.:::,:i:i...:-•„,. „!••`N.,, , ...., i . ,.., w .-'‘Ze .. \.. :„..] -\,,,,,,."' 161.4,:..7;:-iformir ' L ....4._ 111-i.0 N:44:i ir■ .., ::::::::::::::•:•:.4: ', s 1 ;,'4 .4 0 li::::;:i:;:.:::::;:;:ii;4:;,,% . .• ' ,..:,.., ,lic .,, ,00.,::::::::::::::$ „ 60 e i .. . • ..„-A-4.,y.......- •,..::;:;::::::::::::::,z; R,- -,,,-:, / -.... -,•:: -1--.4-.1.zwRia7.6,i,:t -•.-- - , v:::::::::::::::::::::•:-nR' N .., . * eti ., ,..,ido, '..0 :::::::....:•:::.:::::: ..,, ,, ,, , ( * -I I!'•, -. •;,,,, f I ". -,''•-, ' *,.„... !,:: •4 cfo:::::::::;:;:•::•:':iii:•:::;5 e.‘, '',.... ., 1 • •. . • , .: / f ('N '',ek•iv, ref. . (:....:.:•:.:.:.:.:•:.:.:: • •\ s J i ) i • ‘.:'''•;e*, ,;,.• o ••• et-4*.V\\•,. --• • I „ p 4'....•,3-. -'• '. , - .) %,3,__ ,Lsi ■.7 ,.• , ) !1-----D--/-„_____H ,-•' 1 '''''''k,..i-.,' ■ § *fro il.1 s __- `4,i',.,,T,...4,--ce \ (i if ° 1, if f,f_ __. ' A. „ /..-• , - . .. .•...., - •,.“.4.■:' ,..■•.,. . /r,,,:.S,.. r. , ......- +-.• .... . Mr. Alex Hou January 30,2014 800 Hampton Rd. Appendix C OAK TREE LOCATION&IMPACT MAP PADATAIPROJECTS\13113028402 NENVIFtONMENTAWAK TREES\OARTREE 01-30-14Doc Mr. Alex Hou January 30, 2014 800 Hampton Rd. ,' -,,.':.,:;,,,*-1:-.;:4;..‘--,::'1';';',:44-2:':l'''''..di'141.7"424:171.: .''''-'jr'''4'.''' L •0 F a --,.",,,',•::i..�'� Y + f r � �_ Yom ? y+ r St y y _ < �4 e`i., " to 'Y.' � ' 'Y €4g, ' . .4'., ' .( 2 '4-- yy,� f '' EN j.4 .1, '' `L - -: + . •ar . 411 Si ) ; . .rd rl. _ ...' 1� » �1—tit. -e,a,,y '^��. ,�t �i T ••H Y q--7-;:'-'' y 't Bri ..- ►•`e' !Ail, ,4 .Hr , ' ee � t t �°� �� � � e iy a' 9 S � ]l+Fa . y.'A4. /4'.•'4'4~ �f''- l� t 1M..,4.14 - View of oak tree#5 1 ' j:A'.-• n ( 1 F C1 .a-, C p� ; ^ , q'.''4 v.-5 Z'!f It2` ' 2�' , �',0"`^ :. A . 1i! 1� a+s.y �� fly' '.. f , a xG - ti n (� »\ ':ASR _, e'Fk .,"yA',. 'I, ,T ,1:4Atl b q r v s u �rw ;y ��a E ,, x a ` 'Lk. • r t samwrou - r( _ - View of oak tree#6 P:\DATAW ROJECrSU3U3028.002\ENVIRONMENTAUOAK TREESIOAK1REE 01-30-14DOC Mr. Alex Hou January 30, 2014 800 Hampton Rd. Y ' 1,4 ,,: 1,T 4 -f..,,v, kLi . v f.i '. p " r 77•:* ti •„,+ ` • °'mot "' w. 1 • s*::: View of oak tree#3 } jam" c» y Sg i x b1 .y, Y eti ..tie.. wax •,. LP ,i x ti'.: .1b.. w AL ice. } k�.`.-1+'..,,`•,E"" K ."' „},1 .: ,+, ,1', ,- ?+, Wyk 5 . .'' 46' riis , T .4 i View of oak tree#4 NDATATROl ECT S\13\1302g-0021ENVIROMENTAL\OAK TREES\OAKTREE 01-30-14.DOC Mr. Alex Hou January 30, 2014 800 Hampton Rd. 4�a 'i s� 5 e ' S•TM r T' - ''-s T%� € r PYe4. �v d- / • ,R0 t om' Y� +}'l,i'S 3.�4,�,.y1;" t'f. ` �s+3a3 +e ... ':u.. _, __ - ,r,.•„,,�y• "g R .a s' W.,::,1.-';;-'!1"-- I uVr Y.T -11,-.(11+';:.:.t.- ,.z... ,, f i' w .w V ;� ,nr'^ a t r d F ''',,,,F4.t','-',.':.: ."?.-..'",.,:;...,-7..; ..-1-. ",..-;::.' ."....:,- ' .• p '� r ¢ Sri LA i i1e H ! �. x. p fit: '' . .f.1:1,044,•kl" •A.•' JC "` K1' - 11- 'p,. N TT ?, •�1 ,7` A � � � ry' l� �J 1�k l rl �.l f r t q ff `� (/ ry e"" , /,, . .A ,rte "' i '1 • View of oak tree#1 ,.,. rt. v 1' y 9 ) ":. i CS, T,X, '4 . Y N ! T'7�'N ,P s 1 , fin}} 3• • 1 J d3'F1 ',`1 a r E ,` r iff . . v<;:fib - View of oak tree#2 P:\DATA\PROJECFS\13\13028-002\ENVIRONMENTAL\OAK TREES\OAKTREE 01-30-14.DOC Mr. Alex Hou 800 Hampton Rd. January 30, 2014 Appendix B SITE PHOTOGRAPHS PA DATAIPROJECI SU3U3028-002 1ENVIRONMENTALOAR TREES1OAX REE_01-30-14.DOC 'FA{ ALIFokvi.;‘,I CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE % ARCADIA, CA 91007 PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) 1. Name or description of project: MP 14-04 2. Project Location— Identify street 800 Hampton Rd, between Fallen Leaf Rd & Santa Margarita Dr address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7 1/2' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 3. Entity or person undertaking A. project: B. Other(Private) (1) Name Jack Ng (2) Address 1729 Alta Oaks Dr. Arcadia, CA 91006 4. Staff Determination: The Lead Agency's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the Lead Agency's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. ❑ The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. ❑ The project is a Ministerial Project. c. ❑ The project is an Emergency Project. d. ❑ The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. e. ® The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: 15—Minor Alteration in Land Use Limitation f. ❑ The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: g. ❑ The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis: h. ❑ The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency. Name of Lead Agency: Date: 6/9/14 Staff: Tim Schwehr, Associate Planner Preliminary Exemption Assessment\2010 FORM "A" ,ate ar�rPies- Lit $ it „_„:„,„ I ... ii II 1 I i L f .» 1 ikl ' 1 1,...1.0 ti 1 11 1 11 1 M LA CA. el ± CU t • GL 1 Cii 1, °i ti LL M \ C } •M N 1 , H 11 ; co o 4., /,/ i;<<, n ” z - co 1 \\A_ / /7-,•- --- 00 m._... ! _ i 4.. , , z , , ,„ .