No Bookmarks Exist.
Order. 00:00:00
It's Tuesday, June 18th, 2024 at 4:00 PM. Let's do a roll call. 00:00:02
Commissioner Gorman, Commissioner Myers, President, Chair Walking Stick, present Vice Chair Lee, Secretary Dunn, Commissioner 00:00:14
Wooden, President and Commissioner Person will not be attending this evening. 00:00:22
Thank you. 00:00:31
Approval of the agenda. 00:00:33
I motion to approve. 00:00:38
All in favor, aye? 00:00:41
Commissioner, subcommittee and staff announcements. Are there any Commissioner announcements? 00:00:45
None. 00:00:52
OK, staff announcements. 00:00:53
Chair walking service, no announcements tonight. I would just like to remind the commissioners on just that we've had some 00:00:57
requests from members in the virtual audience to speak loudly and clearly into the microphones and to keep the microphone four or 00:01:03
five inches away from your, you know, your face and just be aware if you can hear yourself in the room. And if you can't, they 00:01:09
probably can't hear you online or in the recording. So thank you. 00:01:15
Thank you. 00:01:22
Council liaison announcements, afternoon chair, walking stick and members of the BRC. One quick thing to report would be that the 00:01:26
Council at our last meeting discussed a budget for the next fiscal year 2425 and in it we contemplated the hiring of both a city 00:01:36
Forester as well as a city engineer to work within the Public Works department. That those items will be finalized. 00:01:46
Probably come September, that's the expectation is that it's those two items will come back as well as some other funding 00:01:56
priorities such as the sidewalk extension at Lighthouse and Fountain, which will be discussed tomorrow night at City Council. 00:02:04
Have a good meeting. Thank you. 00:02:13
Thank you, Councilmember Coletti. Let's reach out to general public comment. 00:02:16
And looking at budget and so on. So part of the review tomorrow says that they will be looking at the three improvement and 00:02:48
management plan as one of their goals. So Title 12 review by the BNRC is supposed to go to council after two reviews, although you 00:02:56
know it's going to go on to more than that. The council wants to transition to a full time forester and there was just a request 00:03:03
for qualifications for. 00:03:11
20 hour part-time arborist and I don't know if that's on hold or not, but it seems to me like that should be on hold until this is 00:03:19
determined. Also in that goal is to plant and maintain 150 native trees on public property and public right away. And I do know 00:03:27
that there were a bunch of trees planted on Arbor Day. I don't know the the actual species and I should have checked on that, but 00:03:35
some of the trees here in town are being replaced with ginkgo and Bradford pear along the street trees. 00:03:43
What I'm sending around are pictures of Grand Avenue. As an example, the block between Lighthouse and Laurel has ginkgo trees 00:03:51
fairly new. There's a new ginkgo tree outside at the entrance to the police station right now. And then there are also the 00:03:59
Bradford pair. And there's Bradford pears in the one picture there in front of Artesana Gallery. There's three of them actually, 00:04:07
that were planted in 2010, just prior to the US Open. They were hoping for something really nice looking. 00:04:16
Well, as you can see, they're down to almost nothing. They're almost dead. There are. And the on the block between Laurel and pine 00:04:24
are for Bradford pair. Two of them aren't in good condition and two of them are in terrible condition. They're just infested 00:04:32
something awful. And I just don't know why we're putting in those trees. The city's putting in some. I think they're also 00:04:40
requesting new development people to put in Bradford pair. Bradford pair is now considered an invasive species in many states. 00:04:47
And a great deal of California because they're just not good. So I just wanted you to see that and see what has happened and if 00:04:55
maybe it should be. 00:05:00
Thought through a little bit more. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Moore. 00:05:06
Any other public comment? 00:05:13
We have three hands raised in the virtual audience. I'll start with Lisa Chiani. 00:05:17
Thank you. I just wanted to point out that it is black oyster catcher nesting season. I think I've mentioned that before, but it's 00:05:24
really getting going now. However, of the three pairs that I'm monitoring, two of them haven't found any suitable place to nest 00:05:31
yet. 00:05:38
The the third pair, the ones that I've been monitoring consistently for the last 10 years. 00:05:46
Is is the pair near Berwick Point and they've already had one nest fail that was down at the South and it near. 00:05:55
On the bluff near the trail near the the little fence for the 12th St. outcrop. If you're familiar with the area near the the 00:06:07
mural. 00:06:13
And I don't know why that failed. We usually don't know. However, because of the MOU, there's been protective fencing put it up, 00:06:20
although it's, it's at the northern end of the bluff and they've decided that that's. 00:06:28
Feels protected to them. I think it does keep people from walking right up to the edge. 00:06:36
However, they've decided to nest there right out in the open. So it's, it's a lovely opportunity to see them and, and I'm hoping 00:06:43
for the best, but and not particularly expecting that. So anyway, this will be a really good learning experience with, with the 00:06:53
little fencing. It's the kind that that's used at Perkins Park and it has some nice signs on it. 00:07:02
So. 00:07:13
I, I encourage you to, to get out there and, and see what's going on with them. OK, Thank you. 00:07:15
And now we have Inga, Lawrence and Dahmer. 00:07:25
Thank you, George, and thank you, Lisa. That's lovely to know that they're doing that. 00:07:30
As I was driving home today, which I have to go down central gonna do a hairpin curve doubling back on myself on sloth the one way 00:07:38
St. and that's all part of the beautification project that was done, you know down the middle of central with all the trees and. 00:07:48
Vegetation and. 00:07:59
And of course, the bull mounts right there at the intersection of 1st and Sloped. And as I'm going around my usual sideways, 00:08:01
because that's the grade of the beautification project to get to my house, I'm looking at the north side, the one that's the bulb 00:08:11
out that's right at 1:15 as you would go down 1st St. to get to Ocean View. So it'd be on the north side. 00:08:21
And it is the most brown ugly bushes that the weeds are as tall as they are. 00:08:31
In this ball belt, and I'm saying this is beautification, who was taking care of this? Obviously no one. 00:08:38
So I just wanted to bring that to attention because I just drove by it and I don't have a camera to snap a picture 'cause I don't 00:08:48
use a cell phone. So thank you. 00:08:54
And now we have Anthony Ciani. 00:09:04
Thank you. Good afternoon. 00:09:10
Crespi Pond is an environmentally sensitive habitat and it requires restoration. I request the BNRC to urge the City of Pacific 00:09:13
Grove to protect and restore the Crestview Pond environmentally sensitive habitat area as recommended in the biological assessment 00:09:22
and restoration of the dune habitat. 00:09:31
For the city of Pacific Grove, which is dated November. 00:09:40
2001 repaired by Rana Creek. 00:09:44
It says Crispy Pond should be maintained in the following appropriate percentages, 70% open water and 30% emergent agitation as at 00:09:49
a depth of about four feet. This will require periodic dredging and vegetation removal. 00:10:00
Between 2017 and 2024. 00:10:13
The amount of vegetation has more than doubled. It is it is eliminating the open water. If anything it's 70% vegetation and 30% 00:10:18
open water. 00:10:24
The local coastal program states that Crestview Pond is a wetland which supports significant patch of dense freshwater marsh 00:10:33
vegetation dominated by broad leaf cattails and California boulder ash. 00:10:41
Which also provides foraging and nesting habitat for local and migratory birds. 00:10:50
The policy bio four states preserve and maintain wetlands in the coastal zone as a productive wildlife habitat. 00:10:58
It isn't being done, is supposed to be done, as I understand periodically, and so I'm requesting that you urge the city or city 00:11:13
staff. 00:11:19
To immediately take care of it. I, I received, I think it was George sent me a copy of the last five years of water quality test 00:11:27
and the nitrogen in the water is out of sight along with some other chemicals that are harmful to the environment. And I think the 00:11:38
Monterey Bay Sanctuary people have noticed the same problem at Crespi Pond. 00:11:49
So please, please take care of it. Thank you. 00:12:00
Yeah. 00:12:06
We have no further hands raised in the virtual audience. Thank you. 00:12:10
Let's move on to the approval of the minutes. 00:12:16
I moved to. 00:12:21
Thank you. 00:12:23
2nd. 00:12:25
All in favor, aye? 00:12:27
All right, let's move to our regular agenda. We have a tree appeal for 485 Ocean View View Blvd. 00:12:31
And we will start with just the meeting protocols. Mr. Fox will be right with you. OK. Thank you. 00:12:46
Chair walking stick, members of the Commission just to have a quick background per title 12 trees in the urban forest the. 00:12:57
Residents and businesses of Pacific Grove have the right to appeal decisions of the city arborist, and the power is given to the 00:13:06
Beautification and Natural Resource Commission to affirm, reverse or modify the action of the city arborist, and then, so acting, 00:13:14
apply the standards set out in the city ordinance and then further the action of the Beautification and Natural Resources 00:13:22
Commission may be appealed to the City Council after a decision is made in this body. 00:13:30
And pursuant to the City's policies on. 00:13:39
Public hearings, the appellant will be given 10 minutes to speak. Or actually first a staff report will be giving out, given on 00:13:43
the background of the tree or trees in question, and permit applications and arborist reports followed by the appellant will be 00:13:50
given 10 minutes to speak. 00:13:57
And others who are in support of the opponents position or against of the position will be given 3 minutes to speak and then at 00:14:05
the BNRCS discretion a very brief rebuttal or sub rebuttal may be allowed which will be followed by public comment or those 3 00:14:11
minute blocks of proponents. 00:14:17
For or against and then followed by Commission discussion and you'll have the, at your discretion, able to ask questions of both 00:14:25
the city staff, the arborist and the appellant. 00:14:31
And at that point, it'll be, it's part of your discussion. Make a, you know, a decision. 00:14:38
Thank you for that. I also just want to for everybody to understand that we all have the right to speak uninterrupted. Please have 00:14:44
respect for each other this evening, the right to be heard and this due process. So commissioners, please hold your questions and 00:14:52
comments until the designated time so the there's no interruptions during these presentations, OK. And then everybody in the 00:15:00
public forum including the appellant come to straight to the microphone here and at your designated time and speak very clearly. 00:15:09
Into the microphone so we all can hear what you have to say. So does everybody understand where we're at with this this evening? 00:15:17
OK, So let's get started. Mr. Go. I'm sorry. 00:15:22
OK, Commissioner Lee has a question about the protocol. 00:15:33
You said that. 00:15:40
OK. You said that this would if this, if Mr. Fox wants to take this further, he'd go to the City Council. But because this is a 00:15:44
historic property, I'm wondering if it would also go to the Historic Resources Commission. And because it possibly needs ACDP 00:15:51
since it's in the local coastal zone, if it would possibly instead be appealed to the Planning Commission. So I'm just wondering 00:15:57
how that. 00:16:04
Works. I believe your question will be answered by Mr. Go as part of his report. 00:16:12
OK. Thank you. 00:16:17
Mr. 00:16:20
Let me share my screen here. 00:16:25
OK, very good. Thank you. Chair walking six members of the BNRC. We're here to hear a tree appeal at 2 Trees actually at 485 Ocean 00:16:46
View, 1 Norfolk pine and one Coast Live Oak. 00:16:53
Way OK. 00:17:04
So any person may appeal, as George specified earlier, the decision of the city arborist, first to the BNRC and then ultimately 00:17:05
the City Council. That's why we're here today. These trees were denied by our city arborist public works department, and now we're 00:17:12
appealing to the BRC and then depending on the outcome today, could also go to the City Council. 00:17:20
The BNRC may affirm, reverse, or modify the action of the arborist in doing so. 00:17:28
The findings set forth in the PG Municipal Code 12.1 Zero .020 and the Urban Urban Forestry Standard shall apply now. There was 00:17:36
that question right now about the Planning Commission in the ARB Historic Resources Commission. That's not laid out in the appeal 00:17:43
process set forth in the Code. 00:17:51
So this would ultimately just go to the BNRC and then the City Council. That's how the appeal process is laid out. If the trees 00:17:58
are approved for removal, then the appellant applicant in this case would then have to talk to the Community development 00:18:08
Department because they are within the coastal zone. So then we would have to determine how a permit for the removal. 00:18:18
With coastal development permit would then be obtained, but a. 00:18:29
Approvals to remove the tree is the first step. That's what we're here for today. 00:18:33
So the recommendation today is to deny the appeal of Tree Tree Permit Application 24-023 and uphold the decision of the City 00:18:40
arborist denying the removal of 1 Norfolk Pine and one Coast Live Oak at 485 Ocean View Blvd. 00:18:49
So the applicant's findings are that the tree is too large for the space for the Norfolk pine and that the root system will make 00:19:01
it difficult to repair the retaining wall. 00:19:06
Upon review of the arborist report that was submitted in 2021, it doesn't specify any information about the health of the tree. It 00:19:13
just is strictly stating the removal based on the infrastructure associated with the property. 00:19:21
And then the coast Live Oak, it special supplies that the tree lodge itself adjacent to the wall that it's probably stemmed from a 00:19:31
seat at some point. 00:19:35
And its life, and that the root is applying pressure to the wall. 00:19:40
So then the city's findings, our findings when we went and evaluated the trees, is that the sub, the subject trees, the Norfolk 00:19:47
pine and the Coast Live Oak appear healthy and they're very well adapted to their surroundings. We went out there and did soil 00:19:53
probing around the wall and sure, we discovered some roots. Of course they're right there, but we didn't discover any roots that 00:20:00
were in contact with the wall. 00:20:06
While we are simply recommending is a Level 3 assessment, the previous report is outdated. 00:20:13
It's from 2021. Typically we wouldn't accept a report that was three plus years old on trees. We've expressed this to the 00:20:20
applicant, now the appellant, that we need updated information. We have not received that updated information, but the appellant 00:20:28
is exercising his right to appeal the process to the BNRC. We're here this evening. We're going on the findings that we have been 00:20:36
presented with the trees healthy. 00:20:44
And we feel there's remedial action that can occur with the retaining walls. Those retaining walls don't appear to have been 00:20:52
constructed at whatever date they were. I'm sure they were constructed many decades ago, but they don't appear to have any 00:21:00
structural rebar in them. It just looks like it's one monolithical pour of concrete. So any pressure against that is going to just 00:21:07
break out at those. 00:21:15
Those weak points, which would be like those corners, as we're seeing in the pictures, what we'll look at, we think that if those 00:21:23
walls were removed and we're making the assumption that the appellant wants to rebuild them, that roots could be either be cut or 00:21:30
shaved because of the distance. Now the oak tree is right next to that wall. There's a chance that that's going to have to be 00:21:38
removed, but we need an updated report. We need updated information on that tree. 00:21:45
Also, trees provide stormwater benefits, provide habitat for wildlife. They provide Pacific Grove and our community, Monterey 00:21:55
Peninsula as a whole from protections from climate extremes to help us meet our canopy goals. They're part of the ecosystem of the 00:22:03
neighborhood. These trees are massive. And there's a sister tree. 00:22:11
I'll get to that in a moment, but here's a picture of the retaining wall, which would be on the South side of his driveway. 00:22:20
And you could see how it's pushed out maybe 1015 feet away from the trunk of the tree. We feel that could be rebuilt with 00:22:27
retention of the tree. 00:22:32
Here's a close up of the tree and these are taken from the applicants apparent arborist report and we sure we see the roots. 00:22:39
Forming over that, I'm not really going to call that a retaining wall portion, but more of like a curb, the back end of the 00:22:49
driveway. We see them coming over the top of that, but we also feel that that's not creating an issue in our opinion. 00:22:59
This is the pine tree. I'm sure you have the red arrow of the pine tree. That's, excuse me, oak tree, the coast Live Oak. You sure 00:23:10
you see the red arrow pointing to the other tree? 00:23:16
It's my assumption from reading the information that the tree or the red arrow is pointed to was approved for removal. That's tree 00:23:23
402 two and the arborist report in 2001, but was never removed. Now it's I'm thinking that the applicant wants to remove the one 00:23:30
right above this crack. 00:23:38
I really don't have a lot of information on that because I don't have an updated arborist report providing me with this 00:23:46
information. 00:23:50
I'm struggling. We're struggling as public works to allow removal with the limited information. 00:23:54
Here's a picture of the Norfolk pine, and the Norfolk pine on the left is the the one that's before us tonight. But you can see it 00:24:04
has what we'll call like a sister tree. We're making the assumption that these two trees were planted at the same time. They're 00:24:10
beautiful, they add. 00:24:15
They add to the ecosystem of these neighborhoods. And here is just another view of the two Norfolk Pines. 00:24:22
That concludes our report again. 00:24:33
We've been before the BNRC with other trees where we've had litany of information that we could present to the BRC that we can 00:24:37
review, just don't have that information here. We feel that the basis for removal is strictly on some structural defects that have 00:24:46
occurred on the property, which we think can be rendered. Have we seen trees cause structural damage to properties before? 00:24:56
And have we been down this path before? Yes, we have. And when those Level 3 assessments have occurred, great example was 1059 00:25:06
Jewel Ave. where the IT was a city tree and we pulled up the driveway and we said we think we could shave these roots. And as we 00:25:12
did our Level 3 assessment, we determined we couldn't and the tree needed to be removed. I took that all the way to City Council 00:25:18
at that time, requested to save the tree, got further information, went back to City Council and said we feel this tree now needs 00:25:24
to be removed. 00:25:31
That we can't safely trim these roots and have the tree be here. That could be the situation here, but I don't have the 00:25:37
information to base. 00:25:42
Are synopsis upon, so that's what we're asking for is more information if the. 00:25:47
Applicant, property owner, appellant wants to remove those walls. We could dive in there, look at it. We'd be happy to do that and 00:25:57
make our determination maybe with their contract in arborist about what can be pruned, what could be shaved, maybe some 00:26:04
architectural aspects that can be occurred to retain the tree. But right now we just don't have the findings and the information 00:26:11
to allow removal myself. Mr. Weisman, our city arborist, are here for any questions. Thank you. 00:26:19
I'd like to hold questions from commissioners until the very end, so write down anything that you might have a question for, and 00:26:28
we'd like to hear from Mr. Fox next, please. 00:26:32
Chairman, Walking Stick and Commissioners, for your attention. I just a point of order. Could we please have the identification of 00:26:42
the last speaker? He did not identify himself. 00:26:47
Sure. Of course. I'm Daniel Going, Public Works Director, Deputy city manager. Thank you. 00:26:53
I'm sorry, I couldn't copy that. Daniel Go. The last name spelled Ghost. 00:26:59
This will be a fairly brief actually, just quoting from the City of Pacific Grove Title 12 section. 00:27:15
12.20 Point 040, subsection well. 00:27:26
And acceptable criteria for. 00:27:32
Removal of a protected tree, subsection A2. The tree is causing or projected to cause significant damage to hardscape foundations, 00:27:37
driveways, retaining wall, patio. 00:27:44
I didn't hear anything in Mr. Cosby report that disputes that there has been damage to the retaining wall. 00:27:53
He seems to argue that well, if the retaining wall were rebuilt. 00:28:01
In some fashion or other that it would be able to withstand. 00:28:07
The pressure from the tree or something like that outside in the code here. The code doesn't say that, that's part of the decision 00:28:13
making. 00:28:18
So as far as I'm concerned, we clearly meet the criteria for removal of the tree as stated in the code. If public works or other 00:28:24
entities think there ought to be additional factors to be considered, like how can the retaining wall be built or other things 00:28:31
that they think ought to be in the code, that's up to the City Council to decide that. But it's not up to this body to read 00:28:39
anything more into this code. 00:28:46
And what is here? 00:28:54
And so most of Mr. Goe's comments really irrelevant and inappropriate. 00:28:56
So I think I'll rest my case at that point. 00:29:02
Thank you, Mr. Fox. 00:29:08
We will move on to public comments I. 00:29:11
For or against? 00:29:16
We have a hand raised, two hands raised in the virtual audience. I'll start with Anthony Gianni. 00:29:23
Thank you. Good afternoon again. 00:29:32
I'm a registered architect in the state of California. I've been an architect for over 40 years and clearly those retaining walls 00:29:37
do not have the necessary reinforcing that would be required today. 00:29:44
Moreover, there's a good chance it's not the trees, that it's hydraulic pressure created by water infiltrating from rains etcetera 00:29:52
or irrigation the soil and then causing hydraulic pressure which are greater than anything the roots would do. 00:30:02
That's number one. Number two, just in response to the comment by the applicant. 00:30:11
As Mr. Go said, if he's going to proceed on the basis of applying for a permit to take the tree down, he's going to need a coastal 00:30:20
development permit. 00:30:25
And the coastal development permits in the appealable zone of the coastal zone and he would have to comply with policies in the 00:30:31
land use plan and the implementation ordinances. 00:30:38
And in there in answer to his thought or question or point. 00:30:46
Is the requirement to investigate all reasonable alternatives that would avoid damage to the environment and a reasonable 00:30:54
alternative would be to replace the retaining walls and support the soil? 00:31:02
I've sent you letters. 00:31:11
That have described the importance of the trees as part of the aesthetic scenic quality of the area as part of the tree canopy as 00:31:15
part of the larger neighborhood as Mr. Go said ecosystem is particularly Greenwood park. So with that, I'll just suggest that you 00:31:25
deny the application and make that recommendation to the City Council. 00:31:35
If it goes to City Council, thank you. 00:31:45
And now we have Lisa Gianni. 00:31:52
Thank you. So we're looking at two healthy trees the owner wants to remove. One native coast Live Oak and a non-native landmark 00:31:57
Norfolk Island pine. And then there's a third tree mentioned somewhere #401 I don't know where that factors in, but in any case, 00:32:04
healthy trees should. 00:32:12
Should not be no healthy trees should be removed. According to Title 12 and according to the cities Local Coastal Program LCP land 00:32:20
use plan. The property is in the coastal zone and furthermore it's in the historic Pacific Grove retreat and across the street 00:32:28
from Greenwood Park, which is an important natural area recognized in the LCP. The LCP protects native trees such as coast live 00:32:35
oaks and also PGS overall tree canopy. 00:32:43
As natural resources habitat and part of the scenic retreat, there is no justification for removing any of these trees. The issues 00:32:51
with the so-called retaining wall stem from the lack of reinforcement in the walls. Steel reinforced walls can be constructed 00:32:58
without removing the trees. If BNRC has any problem denying the peel, the project should be taken. OK, and you've covered that 00:33:05
that that's going to be. 00:33:12
That anything. 00:33:21
From B and RC would be appealed to the City Council, but I'd ask you to please deny this appeal, including both the North Hook 00:33:23
Island Pine and Coast Live Oak #402 and if the arborist is going to subsequently approve removal of 402. 00:33:32
A coastal development permit. 00:33:43
Will will definitely be required according to Policy bio 19 in the LCP. 00:33:46
Thank you. And just just to reiterate the the Norfolk Island pine is an extraordinary tree. It's got it's got a partner tree and 00:33:55
it's just a marvelous place that the red shouldered Hawks really like to roost in. 00:34:05
So thank you. 00:34:17
And now we have Tom Makeman. 00:34:23
Aye, thank you. 00:34:29
I think the city's got the right position on this one. It's in Norfolk Pine. We don't have many of them. They're gorgeous. They 00:34:32
live a long time. Somebody wanted to take one down on Caledonia in about 10 years ago because it was slightly leaning. And in that 00:34:39
case, the arborist explained how Norfolk Pines are not Monterey Pines. They hold the water differently, They grow differently. 00:34:46
They where they have different weight systems and the neighbors that want to take them down, I think for the owner that wanted to 00:34:52
take them down. 00:34:59
It was thinking of the Monterey Pines that were coming down in the storms. 00:35:07
This is not This is a Norfolk point. It is beautiful. It does have a partner nearby. 00:35:11
And while trees don't live forever, concrete. 00:35:17
Retaining walls aren't intended to live forever either. And if this one is breaking up, I think Tony Changi may be on the right 00:35:23
track here. But with the rains we've had the last couple of years, that could be outflow. That could just be a very, very, very 00:35:30
wet lawn that's put a lot of pressure on reinforced. 00:35:37
Wall that's ready to be replaced and updated. 00:35:46
Don't really know, and we won't really know unless we follow the city's recommendation and do the Level 3 assessment. If that's 00:35:49
the case, that wall can be replaced, the trees can be saved and we can just hang on to the beauty that's there. We're going to 00:35:55
hang on to the the tree. 00:36:02
Benefit that's there and everything will be fine, but without the Level 3, I think we're right if we're if we're shooting, we're 00:36:09
shooting blanks until we really know what the situation is. I would urge you to uphold the the I'm sorry, deny the appeal, uphold 00:36:16
the denial and side with the city on this one. Thank you. 00:36:23
And now we have Inga, Lawrence and Dahmer. 00:36:35
Thank you. 00:36:40
Chair and Members, I am absolutely in compliance with the city's denial this time. I. 00:36:42
This Norfolk Island, The two Norfolk Island Pines really are. Well, I happen to be partial because I have a gorgeous one that has 00:36:50
been living in my backyard for over 70 years. My grandfather planted it as Renata. You know, her family probably planted hers long 00:36:59
ago. And my goodness, retaining walls unreinforced 1. 00:37:07
Retaining walls do not last. They crumble. You build around them, you do whatever. 00:37:18
I've had to change slightly. 00:37:23
An enclosure, because my son's out there and Yep, that route is the Norfolk Island Pine. And it's like, OK, we just enlarge this, 00:37:28
we are not going to mess with that. And yes, Norfolk's have long taproots. They are incredibly sturdy. They are incredibly 00:37:36
beautiful. When I'm out at sea, I can see mine and Renata's. Excuse me, Mr. Fox's. 00:37:45
From the sea they are landmarks. This is a coastal city and unfortunately I think the applicant only looked at one very small 00:37:56
section of code, not what he could do about it to save the tree, and there is no information. 00:38:05
But our city code is, you know, our local coastal program, the LCP. 00:38:15
Takes precedent over any city code if they are in conflict. So I suggest that the applicant read the LCP and understand that which 00:38:23
is the latest document we've got. Whereas our city code, many parts of it need revision in the Planning Commission's working on it 00:38:33
and the General plan. However, the LCP was certified in 2020. 00:38:43
And yes, we don't have any information further on this these trees, but a retaining wall working around it, This is a historic 00:38:54
property. That's an easy thing to do. And I suggest the applicant look into the ways to save the trees rather than chop them down. 00:39:04
We need those trees. Pacific Grove deserves those trees and one little crumbling retaining wall. 00:39:14
Does not, does not condemn trees to death. 00:39:24
Thank you very much. 00:39:30
We have no further hands raised in the virtual audience. 00:39:38
I. 00:39:41
Any public comment from a. 00:39:44
The public forum in room. 00:39:47
OK, I'd I will OfferUp a rebuttal if anybody has anything to say. The appellant or the city? 00:39:52
OK. 00:40:02
Let's move on to Commission questions, comments and discussion. Who would like to start? 00:40:03
Commissioner Lee, thank you. Mr. Go, do you have the engineering capability to address that question that's been raised about the 00:40:11
hydrostatic pressure that could build up behind the wall and possibly be the cause for the retaining wall failure? Like how, how 00:40:17
would the city go about that? 00:40:24
With this, Commissioner Lee, with this being on private property, I don't think the city would take any action. It would be the 00:40:33
responsibility of the property owner to hire a structural engineer and determine the best way to make those improvements within 00:40:42
their private property. If it was a public location, we would retain the services of a structural engineer and start determining. 00:40:52
Options. 00:41:03
With that wall. 00:41:04
And then I had a question for Mr. Fox. There seems to be confusion about what tree is 4/02, which one of the oaks in Mr. Onos 2021 00:41:07
report, he refers to the seedling that got planted right next to the wall and the trunk is actually touching the wall and that was 00:41:15
the one that was approved for removal and then in your 2000. 00:41:24
24. 00:41:33
Application you referred to the one in the corner directly or not directly but across from the Norfolk line. So I think we need to 00:41:35
know are you planning? 00:41:40
For both those trees, are you asking for both those trees to be removed or can we clarify? 00:41:47
Thank you for your question. 00:41:56
As you heard. 00:41:59
The one that's farther from the corner. 00:42:01
Is already approved. We've not taken it out because we intend to hire a contractor to take them all out at the same time and we'll 00:42:04
save quite a bit of money if we do them all at the same time. So as you correctly point out, the trees that are the subject of 00:42:12
this appeal are the one on the South side of the retaining wall, which is the Norfolk Island line and the one that's directly 00:42:20
across the driveway in that corner. And neither of those were approved in 2021. 00:42:27
Have I covered your question? 00:42:35
Yes. And so you're. 00:42:37
Application in 2021 wanted to remove all four trees and so now your plans are to keep the the one oak that's kind of further back 00:42:42
toward the neighbors house. 00:42:46
We've tried to raise the issue of that tree in this application. OK. 00:42:51
Thank you. 00:42:58
Any other Commissioner comments? 00:43:08
Questions. 00:43:11
I think most of my questions have been answered at this point. I know I. 00:43:13
Retaining healthy trees is a priority for the city and I understand common causes of retention. Wall and driveway failures can be 00:43:20
due to improper drainage and that can be including on the entire overall properties, water drainage system, ocean salt air 00:43:28
especially improper construction from the beginning, ground shifting, not having weep holes, all of those things. The weight of 00:43:36
the wet soil I know that can place weight and not seeing evidence of direct routes being the primary cause. 00:43:44
I say we uphold. 00:43:54
The city's determination. 00:43:56
Thank you, Commissioner Gorman. 00:43:59
Commissioner Myers. 00:44:07
To me. 00:44:09
That's my opinion also, but. 00:44:12
I would suggest that you need an updated report really before anybody can do anything. 00:44:15
The information that you have provided is three years old, three plus years old. 00:44:23
My opinion is deny the appeal. 00:44:31
And. 00:44:34
As Mr. Go suggested, any further action that you wish to take on this, have an updated report with the Level 33 assessment. 00:44:37
Thank you. 00:44:51
OK, I my thoughts are that the bottom line is that we don't have updated arborist reports, A Level 3 arborist assessment to see if 00:44:54
the roots truly are the problem, and seemingly there have been no other options explored for attempting to keep the tree and work 00:45:02
around it or work with it. I've done a lot of research on Norfolk Pines. I think you have a really special tree, but I'm not here 00:45:09
to convince you of that. And. 00:45:17
I probably spent more time. 00:45:25
On that than I should have but it is a really beautiful tree and Hardy they they. 00:45:28
Live a long time like Tom Aikman was discussing and their stability and strength can uphold coastal conditions in this ever 00:45:36
changing climate that we have going on and you know every tree that we have here in our community has a purpose and even though 00:45:43
the Norfolk pine isn't a. 00:45:49
Native tree. 00:45:57
It cohabitates well in our Mediterranean type climate and. 00:46:00
It has its purpose. 00:46:06
Captain Cook in the 1700s planted them everywhere that he he landed because he thought that they they would make good masts. So 00:46:09
the way I look at it is you have one of the one of the masts of Pacific Grove on your property. It's really a wonderful special 00:46:17
tree. But I'd like to see us work together, Mr. Fox, to protect the trees and maintain their healthy status and see you get the 00:46:25
retaining wall and driveway work done that you need. 00:46:32
But my my thought is to uphold the denial of the permits. 00:46:42
I'd like to make a motion. 00:46:49
Thank you to uphold the denial. Do I have a second second. 00:46:51
All in favor. 00:46:58
Aye, aye. 00:47:00
All opposed. 00:47:01
That's unanimous. 00:47:03
OK. 00:47:07
Well, that is our meeting this afternoon. 00:47:09
Our next meeting is July 16th, 2024, Tuesday at 4:00 PM. Is there a motion to adjourn the meeting? 00:47:14
My motion to adjourn. 00:47:24
All in favor, aye. Thank you for everything this evening. 00:47:27
Thank you. Thank you for your time. 00:47:33
Link
Start video at
Social
Embed

* you need to log in to manage your favorites

My Favorites List
You haven't added any favorites yet. Click the "Add Favorite" button on any media page, and they'll show up here.
Order. 00:00:00
It's Tuesday, June 18th, 2024 at 4:00 PM. Let's do a roll call. 00:00:02
Commissioner Gorman, Commissioner Myers, President, Chair Walking Stick, present Vice Chair Lee, Secretary Dunn, Commissioner 00:00:14
Wooden, President and Commissioner Person will not be attending this evening. 00:00:22
Thank you. 00:00:31
Approval of the agenda. 00:00:33
I motion to approve. 00:00:38
All in favor, aye? 00:00:41
Commissioner, subcommittee and staff announcements. Are there any Commissioner announcements? 00:00:45
None. 00:00:52
OK, staff announcements. 00:00:53
Chair walking service, no announcements tonight. I would just like to remind the commissioners on just that we've had some 00:00:57
requests from members in the virtual audience to speak loudly and clearly into the microphones and to keep the microphone four or 00:01:03
five inches away from your, you know, your face and just be aware if you can hear yourself in the room. And if you can't, they 00:01:09
probably can't hear you online or in the recording. So thank you. 00:01:15
Thank you. 00:01:22
Council liaison announcements, afternoon chair, walking stick and members of the BRC. One quick thing to report would be that the 00:01:26
Council at our last meeting discussed a budget for the next fiscal year 2425 and in it we contemplated the hiring of both a city 00:01:36
Forester as well as a city engineer to work within the Public Works department. That those items will be finalized. 00:01:46
Probably come September, that's the expectation is that it's those two items will come back as well as some other funding 00:01:56
priorities such as the sidewalk extension at Lighthouse and Fountain, which will be discussed tomorrow night at City Council. 00:02:04
Have a good meeting. Thank you. 00:02:13
Thank you, Councilmember Coletti. Let's reach out to general public comment. 00:02:16
And looking at budget and so on. So part of the review tomorrow says that they will be looking at the three improvement and 00:02:48
management plan as one of their goals. So Title 12 review by the BNRC is supposed to go to council after two reviews, although you 00:02:56
know it's going to go on to more than that. The council wants to transition to a full time forester and there was just a request 00:03:03
for qualifications for. 00:03:11
20 hour part-time arborist and I don't know if that's on hold or not, but it seems to me like that should be on hold until this is 00:03:19
determined. Also in that goal is to plant and maintain 150 native trees on public property and public right away. And I do know 00:03:27
that there were a bunch of trees planted on Arbor Day. I don't know the the actual species and I should have checked on that, but 00:03:35
some of the trees here in town are being replaced with ginkgo and Bradford pear along the street trees. 00:03:43
What I'm sending around are pictures of Grand Avenue. As an example, the block between Lighthouse and Laurel has ginkgo trees 00:03:51
fairly new. There's a new ginkgo tree outside at the entrance to the police station right now. And then there are also the 00:03:59
Bradford pair. And there's Bradford pears in the one picture there in front of Artesana Gallery. There's three of them actually, 00:04:07
that were planted in 2010, just prior to the US Open. They were hoping for something really nice looking. 00:04:16
Well, as you can see, they're down to almost nothing. They're almost dead. There are. And the on the block between Laurel and pine 00:04:24
are for Bradford pair. Two of them aren't in good condition and two of them are in terrible condition. They're just infested 00:04:32
something awful. And I just don't know why we're putting in those trees. The city's putting in some. I think they're also 00:04:40
requesting new development people to put in Bradford pair. Bradford pair is now considered an invasive species in many states. 00:04:47
And a great deal of California because they're just not good. So I just wanted you to see that and see what has happened and if 00:04:55
maybe it should be. 00:05:00
Thought through a little bit more. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Moore. 00:05:06
Any other public comment? 00:05:13
We have three hands raised in the virtual audience. I'll start with Lisa Chiani. 00:05:17
Thank you. I just wanted to point out that it is black oyster catcher nesting season. I think I've mentioned that before, but it's 00:05:24
really getting going now. However, of the three pairs that I'm monitoring, two of them haven't found any suitable place to nest 00:05:31
yet. 00:05:38
The the third pair, the ones that I've been monitoring consistently for the last 10 years. 00:05:46
Is is the pair near Berwick Point and they've already had one nest fail that was down at the South and it near. 00:05:55
On the bluff near the trail near the the little fence for the 12th St. outcrop. If you're familiar with the area near the the 00:06:07
mural. 00:06:13
And I don't know why that failed. We usually don't know. However, because of the MOU, there's been protective fencing put it up, 00:06:20
although it's, it's at the northern end of the bluff and they've decided that that's. 00:06:28
Feels protected to them. I think it does keep people from walking right up to the edge. 00:06:36
However, they've decided to nest there right out in the open. So it's, it's a lovely opportunity to see them and, and I'm hoping 00:06:43
for the best, but and not particularly expecting that. So anyway, this will be a really good learning experience with, with the 00:06:53
little fencing. It's the kind that that's used at Perkins Park and it has some nice signs on it. 00:07:02
So. 00:07:13
I, I encourage you to, to get out there and, and see what's going on with them. OK, Thank you. 00:07:15
And now we have Inga, Lawrence and Dahmer. 00:07:25
Thank you, George, and thank you, Lisa. That's lovely to know that they're doing that. 00:07:30
As I was driving home today, which I have to go down central gonna do a hairpin curve doubling back on myself on sloth the one way 00:07:38
St. and that's all part of the beautification project that was done, you know down the middle of central with all the trees and. 00:07:48
Vegetation and. 00:07:59
And of course, the bull mounts right there at the intersection of 1st and Sloped. And as I'm going around my usual sideways, 00:08:01
because that's the grade of the beautification project to get to my house, I'm looking at the north side, the one that's the bulb 00:08:11
out that's right at 1:15 as you would go down 1st St. to get to Ocean View. So it'd be on the north side. 00:08:21
And it is the most brown ugly bushes that the weeds are as tall as they are. 00:08:31
In this ball belt, and I'm saying this is beautification, who was taking care of this? Obviously no one. 00:08:38
So I just wanted to bring that to attention because I just drove by it and I don't have a camera to snap a picture 'cause I don't 00:08:48
use a cell phone. So thank you. 00:08:54
And now we have Anthony Ciani. 00:09:04
Thank you. Good afternoon. 00:09:10
Crespi Pond is an environmentally sensitive habitat and it requires restoration. I request the BNRC to urge the City of Pacific 00:09:13
Grove to protect and restore the Crestview Pond environmentally sensitive habitat area as recommended in the biological assessment 00:09:22
and restoration of the dune habitat. 00:09:31
For the city of Pacific Grove, which is dated November. 00:09:40
2001 repaired by Rana Creek. 00:09:44
It says Crispy Pond should be maintained in the following appropriate percentages, 70% open water and 30% emergent agitation as at 00:09:49
a depth of about four feet. This will require periodic dredging and vegetation removal. 00:10:00
Between 2017 and 2024. 00:10:13
The amount of vegetation has more than doubled. It is it is eliminating the open water. If anything it's 70% vegetation and 30% 00:10:18
open water. 00:10:24
The local coastal program states that Crestview Pond is a wetland which supports significant patch of dense freshwater marsh 00:10:33
vegetation dominated by broad leaf cattails and California boulder ash. 00:10:41
Which also provides foraging and nesting habitat for local and migratory birds. 00:10:50
The policy bio four states preserve and maintain wetlands in the coastal zone as a productive wildlife habitat. 00:10:58
It isn't being done, is supposed to be done, as I understand periodically, and so I'm requesting that you urge the city or city 00:11:13
staff. 00:11:19
To immediately take care of it. I, I received, I think it was George sent me a copy of the last five years of water quality test 00:11:27
and the nitrogen in the water is out of sight along with some other chemicals that are harmful to the environment. And I think the 00:11:38
Monterey Bay Sanctuary people have noticed the same problem at Crespi Pond. 00:11:49
So please, please take care of it. Thank you. 00:12:00
Yeah. 00:12:06
We have no further hands raised in the virtual audience. Thank you. 00:12:10
Let's move on to the approval of the minutes. 00:12:16
I moved to. 00:12:21
Thank you. 00:12:23
2nd. 00:12:25
All in favor, aye? 00:12:27
All right, let's move to our regular agenda. We have a tree appeal for 485 Ocean View View Blvd. 00:12:31
And we will start with just the meeting protocols. Mr. Fox will be right with you. OK. Thank you. 00:12:46
Chair walking stick, members of the Commission just to have a quick background per title 12 trees in the urban forest the. 00:12:57
Residents and businesses of Pacific Grove have the right to appeal decisions of the city arborist, and the power is given to the 00:13:06
Beautification and Natural Resource Commission to affirm, reverse or modify the action of the city arborist, and then, so acting, 00:13:14
apply the standards set out in the city ordinance and then further the action of the Beautification and Natural Resources 00:13:22
Commission may be appealed to the City Council after a decision is made in this body. 00:13:30
And pursuant to the City's policies on. 00:13:39
Public hearings, the appellant will be given 10 minutes to speak. Or actually first a staff report will be giving out, given on 00:13:43
the background of the tree or trees in question, and permit applications and arborist reports followed by the appellant will be 00:13:50
given 10 minutes to speak. 00:13:57
And others who are in support of the opponents position or against of the position will be given 3 minutes to speak and then at 00:14:05
the BNRCS discretion a very brief rebuttal or sub rebuttal may be allowed which will be followed by public comment or those 3 00:14:11
minute blocks of proponents. 00:14:17
For or against and then followed by Commission discussion and you'll have the, at your discretion, able to ask questions of both 00:14:25
the city staff, the arborist and the appellant. 00:14:31
And at that point, it'll be, it's part of your discussion. Make a, you know, a decision. 00:14:38
Thank you for that. I also just want to for everybody to understand that we all have the right to speak uninterrupted. Please have 00:14:44
respect for each other this evening, the right to be heard and this due process. So commissioners, please hold your questions and 00:14:52
comments until the designated time so the there's no interruptions during these presentations, OK. And then everybody in the 00:15:00
public forum including the appellant come to straight to the microphone here and at your designated time and speak very clearly. 00:15:09
Into the microphone so we all can hear what you have to say. So does everybody understand where we're at with this this evening? 00:15:17
OK, So let's get started. Mr. Go. I'm sorry. 00:15:22
OK, Commissioner Lee has a question about the protocol. 00:15:33
You said that. 00:15:40
OK. You said that this would if this, if Mr. Fox wants to take this further, he'd go to the City Council. But because this is a 00:15:44
historic property, I'm wondering if it would also go to the Historic Resources Commission. And because it possibly needs ACDP 00:15:51
since it's in the local coastal zone, if it would possibly instead be appealed to the Planning Commission. So I'm just wondering 00:15:57
how that. 00:16:04
Works. I believe your question will be answered by Mr. Go as part of his report. 00:16:12
OK. Thank you. 00:16:17
Mr. 00:16:20
Let me share my screen here. 00:16:25
OK, very good. Thank you. Chair walking six members of the BNRC. We're here to hear a tree appeal at 2 Trees actually at 485 Ocean 00:16:46
View, 1 Norfolk pine and one Coast Live Oak. 00:16:53
Way OK. 00:17:04
So any person may appeal, as George specified earlier, the decision of the city arborist, first to the BNRC and then ultimately 00:17:05
the City Council. That's why we're here today. These trees were denied by our city arborist public works department, and now we're 00:17:12
appealing to the BRC and then depending on the outcome today, could also go to the City Council. 00:17:20
The BNRC may affirm, reverse, or modify the action of the arborist in doing so. 00:17:28
The findings set forth in the PG Municipal Code 12.1 Zero .020 and the Urban Urban Forestry Standard shall apply now. There was 00:17:36
that question right now about the Planning Commission in the ARB Historic Resources Commission. That's not laid out in the appeal 00:17:43
process set forth in the Code. 00:17:51
So this would ultimately just go to the BNRC and then the City Council. That's how the appeal process is laid out. If the trees 00:17:58
are approved for removal, then the appellant applicant in this case would then have to talk to the Community development 00:18:08
Department because they are within the coastal zone. So then we would have to determine how a permit for the removal. 00:18:18
With coastal development permit would then be obtained, but a. 00:18:29
Approvals to remove the tree is the first step. That's what we're here for today. 00:18:33
So the recommendation today is to deny the appeal of Tree Tree Permit Application 24-023 and uphold the decision of the City 00:18:40
arborist denying the removal of 1 Norfolk Pine and one Coast Live Oak at 485 Ocean View Blvd. 00:18:49
So the applicant's findings are that the tree is too large for the space for the Norfolk pine and that the root system will make 00:19:01
it difficult to repair the retaining wall. 00:19:06
Upon review of the arborist report that was submitted in 2021, it doesn't specify any information about the health of the tree. It 00:19:13
just is strictly stating the removal based on the infrastructure associated with the property. 00:19:21
And then the coast Live Oak, it special supplies that the tree lodge itself adjacent to the wall that it's probably stemmed from a 00:19:31
seat at some point. 00:19:35
And its life, and that the root is applying pressure to the wall. 00:19:40
So then the city's findings, our findings when we went and evaluated the trees, is that the sub, the subject trees, the Norfolk 00:19:47
pine and the Coast Live Oak appear healthy and they're very well adapted to their surroundings. We went out there and did soil 00:19:53
probing around the wall and sure, we discovered some roots. Of course they're right there, but we didn't discover any roots that 00:20:00
were in contact with the wall. 00:20:06
While we are simply recommending is a Level 3 assessment, the previous report is outdated. 00:20:13
It's from 2021. Typically we wouldn't accept a report that was three plus years old on trees. We've expressed this to the 00:20:20
applicant, now the appellant, that we need updated information. We have not received that updated information, but the appellant 00:20:28
is exercising his right to appeal the process to the BNRC. We're here this evening. We're going on the findings that we have been 00:20:36
presented with the trees healthy. 00:20:44
And we feel there's remedial action that can occur with the retaining walls. Those retaining walls don't appear to have been 00:20:52
constructed at whatever date they were. I'm sure they were constructed many decades ago, but they don't appear to have any 00:21:00
structural rebar in them. It just looks like it's one monolithical pour of concrete. So any pressure against that is going to just 00:21:07
break out at those. 00:21:15
Those weak points, which would be like those corners, as we're seeing in the pictures, what we'll look at, we think that if those 00:21:23
walls were removed and we're making the assumption that the appellant wants to rebuild them, that roots could be either be cut or 00:21:30
shaved because of the distance. Now the oak tree is right next to that wall. There's a chance that that's going to have to be 00:21:38
removed, but we need an updated report. We need updated information on that tree. 00:21:45
Also, trees provide stormwater benefits, provide habitat for wildlife. They provide Pacific Grove and our community, Monterey 00:21:55
Peninsula as a whole from protections from climate extremes to help us meet our canopy goals. They're part of the ecosystem of the 00:22:03
neighborhood. These trees are massive. And there's a sister tree. 00:22:11
I'll get to that in a moment, but here's a picture of the retaining wall, which would be on the South side of his driveway. 00:22:20
And you could see how it's pushed out maybe 1015 feet away from the trunk of the tree. We feel that could be rebuilt with 00:22:27
retention of the tree. 00:22:32
Here's a close up of the tree and these are taken from the applicants apparent arborist report and we sure we see the roots. 00:22:39
Forming over that, I'm not really going to call that a retaining wall portion, but more of like a curb, the back end of the 00:22:49
driveway. We see them coming over the top of that, but we also feel that that's not creating an issue in our opinion. 00:22:59
This is the pine tree. I'm sure you have the red arrow of the pine tree. That's, excuse me, oak tree, the coast Live Oak. You sure 00:23:10
you see the red arrow pointing to the other tree? 00:23:16
It's my assumption from reading the information that the tree or the red arrow is pointed to was approved for removal. That's tree 00:23:23
402 two and the arborist report in 2001, but was never removed. Now it's I'm thinking that the applicant wants to remove the one 00:23:30
right above this crack. 00:23:38
I really don't have a lot of information on that because I don't have an updated arborist report providing me with this 00:23:46
information. 00:23:50
I'm struggling. We're struggling as public works to allow removal with the limited information. 00:23:54
Here's a picture of the Norfolk pine, and the Norfolk pine on the left is the the one that's before us tonight. But you can see it 00:24:04
has what we'll call like a sister tree. We're making the assumption that these two trees were planted at the same time. They're 00:24:10
beautiful, they add. 00:24:15
They add to the ecosystem of these neighborhoods. And here is just another view of the two Norfolk Pines. 00:24:22
That concludes our report again. 00:24:33
We've been before the BNRC with other trees where we've had litany of information that we could present to the BRC that we can 00:24:37
review, just don't have that information here. We feel that the basis for removal is strictly on some structural defects that have 00:24:46
occurred on the property, which we think can be rendered. Have we seen trees cause structural damage to properties before? 00:24:56
And have we been down this path before? Yes, we have. And when those Level 3 assessments have occurred, great example was 1059 00:25:06
Jewel Ave. where the IT was a city tree and we pulled up the driveway and we said we think we could shave these roots. And as we 00:25:12
did our Level 3 assessment, we determined we couldn't and the tree needed to be removed. I took that all the way to City Council 00:25:18
at that time, requested to save the tree, got further information, went back to City Council and said we feel this tree now needs 00:25:24
to be removed. 00:25:31
That we can't safely trim these roots and have the tree be here. That could be the situation here, but I don't have the 00:25:37
information to base. 00:25:42
Are synopsis upon, so that's what we're asking for is more information if the. 00:25:47
Applicant, property owner, appellant wants to remove those walls. We could dive in there, look at it. We'd be happy to do that and 00:25:57
make our determination maybe with their contract in arborist about what can be pruned, what could be shaved, maybe some 00:26:04
architectural aspects that can be occurred to retain the tree. But right now we just don't have the findings and the information 00:26:11
to allow removal myself. Mr. Weisman, our city arborist, are here for any questions. Thank you. 00:26:19
I'd like to hold questions from commissioners until the very end, so write down anything that you might have a question for, and 00:26:28
we'd like to hear from Mr. Fox next, please. 00:26:32
Chairman, Walking Stick and Commissioners, for your attention. I just a point of order. Could we please have the identification of 00:26:42
the last speaker? He did not identify himself. 00:26:47
Sure. Of course. I'm Daniel Going, Public Works Director, Deputy city manager. Thank you. 00:26:53
I'm sorry, I couldn't copy that. Daniel Go. The last name spelled Ghost. 00:26:59
This will be a fairly brief actually, just quoting from the City of Pacific Grove Title 12 section. 00:27:15
12.20 Point 040, subsection well. 00:27:26
And acceptable criteria for. 00:27:32
Removal of a protected tree, subsection A2. The tree is causing or projected to cause significant damage to hardscape foundations, 00:27:37
driveways, retaining wall, patio. 00:27:44
I didn't hear anything in Mr. Cosby report that disputes that there has been damage to the retaining wall. 00:27:53
He seems to argue that well, if the retaining wall were rebuilt. 00:28:01
In some fashion or other that it would be able to withstand. 00:28:07
The pressure from the tree or something like that outside in the code here. The code doesn't say that, that's part of the decision 00:28:13
making. 00:28:18
So as far as I'm concerned, we clearly meet the criteria for removal of the tree as stated in the code. If public works or other 00:28:24
entities think there ought to be additional factors to be considered, like how can the retaining wall be built or other things 00:28:31
that they think ought to be in the code, that's up to the City Council to decide that. But it's not up to this body to read 00:28:39
anything more into this code. 00:28:46
And what is here? 00:28:54
And so most of Mr. Goe's comments really irrelevant and inappropriate. 00:28:56
So I think I'll rest my case at that point. 00:29:02
Thank you, Mr. Fox. 00:29:08
We will move on to public comments I. 00:29:11
For or against? 00:29:16
We have a hand raised, two hands raised in the virtual audience. I'll start with Anthony Gianni. 00:29:23
Thank you. Good afternoon again. 00:29:32
I'm a registered architect in the state of California. I've been an architect for over 40 years and clearly those retaining walls 00:29:37
do not have the necessary reinforcing that would be required today. 00:29:44
Moreover, there's a good chance it's not the trees, that it's hydraulic pressure created by water infiltrating from rains etcetera 00:29:52
or irrigation the soil and then causing hydraulic pressure which are greater than anything the roots would do. 00:30:02
That's number one. Number two, just in response to the comment by the applicant. 00:30:11
As Mr. Go said, if he's going to proceed on the basis of applying for a permit to take the tree down, he's going to need a coastal 00:30:20
development permit. 00:30:25
And the coastal development permits in the appealable zone of the coastal zone and he would have to comply with policies in the 00:30:31
land use plan and the implementation ordinances. 00:30:38
And in there in answer to his thought or question or point. 00:30:46
Is the requirement to investigate all reasonable alternatives that would avoid damage to the environment and a reasonable 00:30:54
alternative would be to replace the retaining walls and support the soil? 00:31:02
I've sent you letters. 00:31:11
That have described the importance of the trees as part of the aesthetic scenic quality of the area as part of the tree canopy as 00:31:15
part of the larger neighborhood as Mr. Go said ecosystem is particularly Greenwood park. So with that, I'll just suggest that you 00:31:25
deny the application and make that recommendation to the City Council. 00:31:35
If it goes to City Council, thank you. 00:31:45
And now we have Lisa Gianni. 00:31:52
Thank you. So we're looking at two healthy trees the owner wants to remove. One native coast Live Oak and a non-native landmark 00:31:57
Norfolk Island pine. And then there's a third tree mentioned somewhere #401 I don't know where that factors in, but in any case, 00:32:04
healthy trees should. 00:32:12
Should not be no healthy trees should be removed. According to Title 12 and according to the cities Local Coastal Program LCP land 00:32:20
use plan. The property is in the coastal zone and furthermore it's in the historic Pacific Grove retreat and across the street 00:32:28
from Greenwood Park, which is an important natural area recognized in the LCP. The LCP protects native trees such as coast live 00:32:35
oaks and also PGS overall tree canopy. 00:32:43
As natural resources habitat and part of the scenic retreat, there is no justification for removing any of these trees. The issues 00:32:51
with the so-called retaining wall stem from the lack of reinforcement in the walls. Steel reinforced walls can be constructed 00:32:58
without removing the trees. If BNRC has any problem denying the peel, the project should be taken. OK, and you've covered that 00:33:05
that that's going to be. 00:33:12
That anything. 00:33:21
From B and RC would be appealed to the City Council, but I'd ask you to please deny this appeal, including both the North Hook 00:33:23
Island Pine and Coast Live Oak #402 and if the arborist is going to subsequently approve removal of 402. 00:33:32
A coastal development permit. 00:33:43
Will will definitely be required according to Policy bio 19 in the LCP. 00:33:46
Thank you. And just just to reiterate the the Norfolk Island pine is an extraordinary tree. It's got it's got a partner tree and 00:33:55
it's just a marvelous place that the red shouldered Hawks really like to roost in. 00:34:05
So thank you. 00:34:17
And now we have Tom Makeman. 00:34:23
Aye, thank you. 00:34:29
I think the city's got the right position on this one. It's in Norfolk Pine. We don't have many of them. They're gorgeous. They 00:34:32
live a long time. Somebody wanted to take one down on Caledonia in about 10 years ago because it was slightly leaning. And in that 00:34:39
case, the arborist explained how Norfolk Pines are not Monterey Pines. They hold the water differently, They grow differently. 00:34:46
They where they have different weight systems and the neighbors that want to take them down, I think for the owner that wanted to 00:34:52
take them down. 00:34:59
It was thinking of the Monterey Pines that were coming down in the storms. 00:35:07
This is not This is a Norfolk point. It is beautiful. It does have a partner nearby. 00:35:11
And while trees don't live forever, concrete. 00:35:17
Retaining walls aren't intended to live forever either. And if this one is breaking up, I think Tony Changi may be on the right 00:35:23
track here. But with the rains we've had the last couple of years, that could be outflow. That could just be a very, very, very 00:35:30
wet lawn that's put a lot of pressure on reinforced. 00:35:37
Wall that's ready to be replaced and updated. 00:35:46
Don't really know, and we won't really know unless we follow the city's recommendation and do the Level 3 assessment. If that's 00:35:49
the case, that wall can be replaced, the trees can be saved and we can just hang on to the beauty that's there. We're going to 00:35:55
hang on to the the tree. 00:36:02
Benefit that's there and everything will be fine, but without the Level 3, I think we're right if we're if we're shooting, we're 00:36:09
shooting blanks until we really know what the situation is. I would urge you to uphold the the I'm sorry, deny the appeal, uphold 00:36:16
the denial and side with the city on this one. Thank you. 00:36:23
And now we have Inga, Lawrence and Dahmer. 00:36:35
Thank you. 00:36:40
Chair and Members, I am absolutely in compliance with the city's denial this time. I. 00:36:42
This Norfolk Island, The two Norfolk Island Pines really are. Well, I happen to be partial because I have a gorgeous one that has 00:36:50
been living in my backyard for over 70 years. My grandfather planted it as Renata. You know, her family probably planted hers long 00:36:59
ago. And my goodness, retaining walls unreinforced 1. 00:37:07
Retaining walls do not last. They crumble. You build around them, you do whatever. 00:37:18
I've had to change slightly. 00:37:23
An enclosure, because my son's out there and Yep, that route is the Norfolk Island Pine. And it's like, OK, we just enlarge this, 00:37:28
we are not going to mess with that. And yes, Norfolk's have long taproots. They are incredibly sturdy. They are incredibly 00:37:36
beautiful. When I'm out at sea, I can see mine and Renata's. Excuse me, Mr. Fox's. 00:37:45
From the sea they are landmarks. This is a coastal city and unfortunately I think the applicant only looked at one very small 00:37:56
section of code, not what he could do about it to save the tree, and there is no information. 00:38:05
But our city code is, you know, our local coastal program, the LCP. 00:38:15
Takes precedent over any city code if they are in conflict. So I suggest that the applicant read the LCP and understand that which 00:38:23
is the latest document we've got. Whereas our city code, many parts of it need revision in the Planning Commission's working on it 00:38:33
and the General plan. However, the LCP was certified in 2020. 00:38:43
And yes, we don't have any information further on this these trees, but a retaining wall working around it, This is a historic 00:38:54
property. That's an easy thing to do. And I suggest the applicant look into the ways to save the trees rather than chop them down. 00:39:04
We need those trees. Pacific Grove deserves those trees and one little crumbling retaining wall. 00:39:14
Does not, does not condemn trees to death. 00:39:24
Thank you very much. 00:39:30
We have no further hands raised in the virtual audience. 00:39:38
I. 00:39:41
Any public comment from a. 00:39:44
The public forum in room. 00:39:47
OK, I'd I will OfferUp a rebuttal if anybody has anything to say. The appellant or the city? 00:39:52
OK. 00:40:02
Let's move on to Commission questions, comments and discussion. Who would like to start? 00:40:03
Commissioner Lee, thank you. Mr. Go, do you have the engineering capability to address that question that's been raised about the 00:40:11
hydrostatic pressure that could build up behind the wall and possibly be the cause for the retaining wall failure? Like how, how 00:40:17
would the city go about that? 00:40:24
With this, Commissioner Lee, with this being on private property, I don't think the city would take any action. It would be the 00:40:33
responsibility of the property owner to hire a structural engineer and determine the best way to make those improvements within 00:40:42
their private property. If it was a public location, we would retain the services of a structural engineer and start determining. 00:40:52
Options. 00:41:03
With that wall. 00:41:04
And then I had a question for Mr. Fox. There seems to be confusion about what tree is 4/02, which one of the oaks in Mr. Onos 2021 00:41:07
report, he refers to the seedling that got planted right next to the wall and the trunk is actually touching the wall and that was 00:41:15
the one that was approved for removal and then in your 2000. 00:41:24
24. 00:41:33
Application you referred to the one in the corner directly or not directly but across from the Norfolk line. So I think we need to 00:41:35
know are you planning? 00:41:40
For both those trees, are you asking for both those trees to be removed or can we clarify? 00:41:47
Thank you for your question. 00:41:56
As you heard. 00:41:59
The one that's farther from the corner. 00:42:01
Is already approved. We've not taken it out because we intend to hire a contractor to take them all out at the same time and we'll 00:42:04
save quite a bit of money if we do them all at the same time. So as you correctly point out, the trees that are the subject of 00:42:12
this appeal are the one on the South side of the retaining wall, which is the Norfolk Island line and the one that's directly 00:42:20
across the driveway in that corner. And neither of those were approved in 2021. 00:42:27
Have I covered your question? 00:42:35
Yes. And so you're. 00:42:37
Application in 2021 wanted to remove all four trees and so now your plans are to keep the the one oak that's kind of further back 00:42:42
toward the neighbors house. 00:42:46
We've tried to raise the issue of that tree in this application. OK. 00:42:51
Thank you. 00:42:58
Any other Commissioner comments? 00:43:08
Questions. 00:43:11
I think most of my questions have been answered at this point. I know I. 00:43:13
Retaining healthy trees is a priority for the city and I understand common causes of retention. Wall and driveway failures can be 00:43:20
due to improper drainage and that can be including on the entire overall properties, water drainage system, ocean salt air 00:43:28
especially improper construction from the beginning, ground shifting, not having weep holes, all of those things. The weight of 00:43:36
the wet soil I know that can place weight and not seeing evidence of direct routes being the primary cause. 00:43:44
I say we uphold. 00:43:54
The city's determination. 00:43:56
Thank you, Commissioner Gorman. 00:43:59
Commissioner Myers. 00:44:07
To me. 00:44:09
That's my opinion also, but. 00:44:12
I would suggest that you need an updated report really before anybody can do anything. 00:44:15
The information that you have provided is three years old, three plus years old. 00:44:23
My opinion is deny the appeal. 00:44:31
And. 00:44:34
As Mr. Go suggested, any further action that you wish to take on this, have an updated report with the Level 33 assessment. 00:44:37
Thank you. 00:44:51
OK, I my thoughts are that the bottom line is that we don't have updated arborist reports, A Level 3 arborist assessment to see if 00:44:54
the roots truly are the problem, and seemingly there have been no other options explored for attempting to keep the tree and work 00:45:02
around it or work with it. I've done a lot of research on Norfolk Pines. I think you have a really special tree, but I'm not here 00:45:09
to convince you of that. And. 00:45:17
I probably spent more time. 00:45:25
On that than I should have but it is a really beautiful tree and Hardy they they. 00:45:28
Live a long time like Tom Aikman was discussing and their stability and strength can uphold coastal conditions in this ever 00:45:36
changing climate that we have going on and you know every tree that we have here in our community has a purpose and even though 00:45:43
the Norfolk pine isn't a. 00:45:49
Native tree. 00:45:57
It cohabitates well in our Mediterranean type climate and. 00:46:00
It has its purpose. 00:46:06
Captain Cook in the 1700s planted them everywhere that he he landed because he thought that they they would make good masts. So 00:46:09
the way I look at it is you have one of the one of the masts of Pacific Grove on your property. It's really a wonderful special 00:46:17
tree. But I'd like to see us work together, Mr. Fox, to protect the trees and maintain their healthy status and see you get the 00:46:25
retaining wall and driveway work done that you need. 00:46:32
But my my thought is to uphold the denial of the permits. 00:46:42
I'd like to make a motion. 00:46:49
Thank you to uphold the denial. Do I have a second second. 00:46:51
All in favor. 00:46:58
Aye, aye. 00:47:00
All opposed. 00:47:01
That's unanimous. 00:47:03
OK. 00:47:07
Well, that is our meeting this afternoon. 00:47:09
Our next meeting is July 16th, 2024, Tuesday at 4:00 PM. Is there a motion to adjourn the meeting? 00:47:14
My motion to adjourn. 00:47:24
All in favor, aye. Thank you for everything this evening. 00:47:27
Thank you. Thank you for your time. 00:47:33
scroll up