Loading...
Agenda Packet - 1999-05-04 AM Rural Lake Grove Neighborhood Plan • Steering Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, May 4, 1999 10:00 to 12:00 noon Courtroom, I°`Floor 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego,OR 97034 For Information: 697-7422 I. Roll Call II. Approval of Minutes III. Discuss approach to commercial lands and trees IV. Discuss Neighborhood Meeting week of June 3 V. Discuss City website 11, VI. Set Next Meeting VII. Adjourn Members Ken Sandblast, Chair Greg Springate Laurie Hilliard Peg Trippe Laurie Mahar Mary Ellen White Cathy Shroyer Jane_h/Rurlkgrv/agenda5-4-99 A COOPERATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN THE 01N, RURAL LAKE GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO • RURAL LAKE GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN 1111 STEERING COMMITTEE Meeting April 20, 1999 CALL TO ORDER • The meeting was called to order at approximately 10:00 AM on Tuesday, April 20, 1999, in the Human Resources Conference Room of City Hall, by Chair Ken Sandblast. The meeting was then relocated to Marsee Baking across from City Hall due to a bomb scare evacuation. II. ROLL CALL Committee members present were Chair Sandblast, Laurie Hilliard, Cathy Shroyer, Greg Springate and Mary Ellen White. Staff present was Jane Heisler, Project Planner, City of Lake Oswego Planning Department. III. DISCUSS GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN Members discussed the Neighborhood Meeting held on April 8, 1999 at the Lake Grove School Library. IV. DISCUSS COMMENT CARDS RECEIVED AT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Several "no"responses were received on the questionnaire regarding rezoning. Other comments included enhancing existing pathways,keeping transit, concerns about speeding on Lake Forest Blvd and a desire for more mid-block pathways. Members discussed how to identify and protect tree groves in the neighborhood. Staff indicated that the City's inventory did not cover most of the unincorporated neighborhood and was based on quality of wildlife habitat. The neighborhood could come up with its own criteria if it wanted to keep tree groves intact for aesthetic or safety reasons. V. DISCUSS CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT FOR REMAINDER OF PLANNING PROCESS Staff indicated that the comment sheet would be on the City's website (www.ci.osweeo.or.usl in about a week. The Committee discussed different options for addressing the issue of commercial encroachment including determining a study area, drawing a"line" beyond which no additional commercial would be allowed or developing policies for encouraging • certain uses but not others within specified areas. It was determined that staff would Minutes of Rural Lake Grove Neighborhood Plan Steering Committee Page 1 4-20-99 • discuss this with the City Attorney to get an idea about what would be legal from a land use standpoint. The Committee discussed the question of how to pose the tree protection issue to the neighborhood. It was decided that each member would think about this issue and the group would come up with a consensus as to how to approach it. At the next meeting, draft language would be drafted on trees and on commercial lands. The rest of the plan issues would be summarized for the neighborhood's information and included in a mailing to the neighborhood. Draft copies of the plan would be available at that time and residents could request them from Committee members. After a comment period, a full draft plan would be distributed to residents. A flyer will go out the week of May 13 with the above information and will announce a neighborhood meeting the week of June 3. VI. DISCUSS COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, COUNTY BOARD INVOLVEMENT Staff indicated that she had adjusted the work program to include one additional County checkpoint(in addition to adoption) and that the Committee should consider other points at which to communicate with the County regarding the draft plan. Although the County receives all Steering Committee meeting notices, there should also be contact with the elected and appointed officials. Cathy Shroyer mentioned that beginning in May, 1999, the County Board will be meeting with the public the second Wednesday of every month. The Committee discussed this as a forum for communicating with the County Board and letting them know that the plan is being developed and what the issues are. VII. SET NEXT MEETING The next meeting with staff and the Steering Committee will be on May 4, 1999. VIII. ADJOURN Chair Sandblast adjourned the meeting at approximately 11:35 PM. Respectfully submitted, Jane Heisler Project Planner • Minutes of Rural Lake Grove Neighborhood Plan Steering Committee Page 2 4 4-20-99 4 • 0°'LAKE °swEc° Planning Department Memorandum °A RGOS • To: Rural Lake Grove Neighborhood Plan Steering Committee From: Jane Heisler, Project PlanT*I,, Subject: Commercial and Tree Policies Date: April 29, 1999 At its April 20, 1999 meeting,the Steering Committee discussed how to pose the tree protection issue and the approach to commercial uses,to the neighborhood. It was decided that each member would think about these issues and the group would try to arrive at a consensus at the 4111 next meeting and begin to develop draft language. Staff has put the following thoughts together for informational purposes to try to address some of the questions that came up at the last meeting. Commercial: Ron Bunch has indicated that you can"draw a line"that prohibits commercial expansion within the neighborhood but it should be based on"sufficiency"of existing commercial land within the community. This sufficiency argument was made during the West Lake Grove Design District, to argue for additional office commercial and some neighborhood commercial land, but not other kinds of commercial. That sufficiency analysis should probably be examined by the Steering Committee. Ron said he would supply us with a copy. Bear in mind, however, that if at some time it was determined that additional land was needed, then a legislative amendment could be proposed to change the boundary. A clear demarcation between commercial and residential lands can be established,but a property owner desiring to change the boundary must have a right to a process to do so. Another option would be to indicate on a map and with policies, an area that would be a study area for whatever uses the neighborhood deems appropriate. Additional language could also be included to reinforce commercial in certain areas only The following are merely suggestions: "The area shown on the map in Figure will be studied for appropriateness and feasibility as medium to high density residential/special use housing and attendant low- • intensity commercial uses primarily to serve existing and new residential uses in the neighborhood, due to its location near an employment center as well as its proximity to transit service and I-5." "Support commercial zoning only in areas where commercial zoning exists or in areas that are appropriate given the City-designated Town Center, Main Street and Employment areas shown in Figure ." Tree Protection: Trees are one of the most significant components of the character of the Rural Lake Grove Neighborhood. The groves of trees that exist form a visual,and sometimes biological, unit. Individual trees in the tree groves can be important to prevent erosion , maintain soil stability and protect adjacent trees or existing windbreaks. As the Steering Committee has discussed, portions of the neighborhood that lie within the City limits are currently protected by the City's Tree-cutting Ordinance for individual trees and by the Sensitive Lands component of the Zoning Ordinance for tree groves. Within the unincorporated County, tree cutting is not regulated. Currently in the City, however, any single family property that is not divisible into three or more lots can remove all the trees on the lot with a$7 permit and no criteria to disallow the request. This would include nearly all lots in the Rural Lake 1111 Grove Neighborhood. A change that the City is examining would require a higher level of review in all circumstances except when a residentially zoned single family homeowner requests to remove no more than two trees in a twelve month period,each less than 12 inches in diameter. The Steering Committee is faced with two issues: 1)Clearly stating the policy approach for the Neighborhood Plan and 2) Suggesting an implementation strategy for the neighborhood. The first issue is perhaps the simplest, since the neighborhood has clearly stated that it values its trees and a majority would like some form of protection. Some suggested plan policy language could include: (Goal) "Protect,maintain and restore the wooded character and vegetation resources of the Rural Lake Grove Neighborhood." (Policy) "Require a tree-cutting permit for large individual trees and large trees that are part of a grouping of trees, on any type of lot,to protect the wooded character and promote the integrity of existing tree groves." (Policy) 0 "Ensure that the City of Lake Oswego and Clackamas County enter into an intergovernmental Agreement to maintain and administer the City's tree-cutting requirements in the unincorporated • v portion of Rural Lake Grove." The specifics of implementing this large-tree protection approach, have been discussed by the Steering Committee. From a practical standpoint, if the goal is to get the City and County to adopt something for the unincorporated area that would be administered by the City, it may be unlikely that the City would adopt something much different from the City's own approach. • Two, separate and distinctly different approaches, could result in confusion. The code changes that the City is currently examining would target the sizes of trees and parcels that would offer protection to the neighborhood's trees and groves. These may not be adopted for several more months. The proposed policies are an attempt to identify and address some of the concerns that neighborhoods have had about casting a broader net to include large trees on lots that can't be divided. This concern led the Lake Grove Neighborhood in their plan,to develop a separate set of standards for the issuance of tree permits, which has led the City to develop the new proposed standards so that a consistent set of standards can be applied City-wide. That said, there may be some aspects of the proposed tree-code revisions (attached and, subject to change) that the neighborhood may feel are too stringent or do not fit the neighborhood. For example, one suggested change to the current tree code is to require an arborist's report for all Type II permit requests related to tree health. The level of scientific testing that has to be done will determine the time an arborist spends on evaluating a tree and,hence,the cost. A simple visual inspection could be very inexpensive (if the problem is obvious), or, it could be several 1111 hundred dollars for a tree on which problems are less obvious. I look forward to discussing these policy issues at the next meeting. Attachments: 1. Tree Code Amendment Highlights Memo 2. DRC/PC Memo 3. Tree Code Proposed Amendments Jane_h/rlg/rlg draft policies-comments • NEMORANDtim • O,LAKE Osw ` TO: Development Review Commissioners Planning Commissioners FROM: Morgan Tracy, Associate Planner Stephanie Fiereck, Code Enforcement Specialist NEWS DATE: April 26, 1999 SUBJECT: Tree Code Amendment Highlights The proposed Code revisions to Chapter 55 respond to the City Council's direction to address the issues raised in the Natural Resources Advisory Board's memo of December 18, 1998. The following identifies the issues raised in NRAB's memo, and describes what changes to the Code are proposed to address each of those issues. 1. Require Arborist Reports for all Type II permit requests related to tree health. First, the category for "dying trees" was deleted, leaving tree health related requests only for removing dead and hazard trees. Staff feels confident that a dead tree can be identified without a certified arborist report; however, hazard trees are more subjective. As it stands, the City may • require an arborist report. Language was added to enable staff to request not only a report substantiating the request, but also providing alternative recommendations to alleviate the hazard apart from removal of the tree [LOC 55.02.080(2)(b)]. 2. Violations and Mitigation NRAB wanted to require uniform mitigation (tree replacement) for any Type II tree removal. Current standards leave more discretion for imposing mitigation. A new section (LOC 55.02.082) was added to require mitigation based on a minimum one for one tree replacement. NRAB wanted to emphasize that mitigation was a positive and not punitive component of the code. The penalties section was largely re-written to require a person found in violation of the tree code to satisfy the mitigation requirements as if a permit had been properly issued, in addition to fines that are directly related to the severity of the violation. Refer to LOC 55.02.130(4). To promote education related to the values of trees and the permitting program, a provision was added to allow a 25 percent reduction of the imposed fine if the person found in violation attends an "approved tree education course." 3. Clarify Emergency Trees from Hazard Trees Language was amended in both LOC 55.02.080(2) and LOC 55.02.035(3)(a) to better distinguish between what constitutes an "Emergency" from a "Hazard." Additional reporting requirements were added and an independent oversight review provision was added for "Emergency trees." 4. Notice Requirements for Type II permits Three issues were identified with the current notice procedures. NRAB wanted to expand the • required notice for Hazard and Dead trees. NRAB also proposed door hangars for notifying \\pub_wks\data\common_p\morgan_t\netdocs\projects\trees\code revisions\summary memo.doc abutting neighbors. Third, Major and Minor development proposals are not subject to the same notification procedures as tree cutting permits when tree removals are involved (i.e. notice is provided through standard Notices Mailed to property owners within 300 feet). 4111 The proposed amendments require notice for all Type II permits [LOC 55.02.075(1)]. Door hangars were discussed but seemed ineffective and would require increased staff time to either hang them or verify that they were distributed by the applicant. Instead, post card type notices will be sent to all adjacent properties, LOC 55.02.075(4). Thirdly, changes were made to LOC 55.02.035 requiring a site plan indicating the proposed tree removals and flagging of trees in the field. This site plan would be mailed along with the Major or Minor Development notice of application. This enables members of the public to determine which trees will ultimately require removal as part of the development proposal. 5. Type II permit triggers. NRAB, in concert with the recently adopted Lake Grove neighborhood plan, desired to limit the applicability of Type I permits. Currently, any single family property (with some restrictions) that is not divisible into three or more lots can remove all the trees on the lot with a $7 permit and no criteria to disallow the request. LOC 55.02.042 was changed so that Type II permits are required in all circumstances except when a residentially zoned single family homeowner requests to remove no more than two trees, each less than 12 inches in diameter. 6. Dying and diseased trees The provisions for "dying" and "diseased" trees were deleted from the code. Staff and NRAB concur that the "dying" category is far too broad and could include trees that will be in the process of dying for many years. Diseased trees will be considered part of trees not dead or hazardous. In cases of fast spreading blight where the delays associated with a two week notice process would be possibly detrimental to other nearby trees, emergency tree permits could be an alternative. 7. Removals on single family lots in Commercial or Industrial Zones NRAB was concerned by the inequity caused when non-conforming single family homes apply for tree cutting permits. Currently they are automatically Type II permits subject to the Type II permit fees. NRAB and staff believe that the Type II criteria are still relevant and that tree removals in commercial and industrial zones should be scrutinized. However, the fees should be similarly applied as if the property were in a residential zone. No code changes are necessary to achieve this, and a separate fee resolution will be presented to Council including other proposed fee changes. • \\pub_wks\data\common_p\morgan_t\netdocs\projects\trees\code revisions\summary memo.doc MEMORANDUM fa t"�°s TO: Development Review Commissioners � v`'o w� j ° Planning Commissioners WP1 ri FROM: Morgan Tracy,Associate Plannerilei . Stephanie Fiereck, Code Enforcement Specialist 49' °1WO" DATE: April 21, 1999 SUBJECT: Draft Tree Code Amendments Attached is a draft of proposed changes to the Tree Ordinance(LOC Chapter 55), in order to: a) strengthen the Type II Permit Process b) increase notification requirements c)amend the tree replacement requirements d)streamline the Type II permit administration process e) limit the applicability of Type I Permits • These changes are prompted by the City Council's request for a review of the process and procedures currently used by the City to review and approve tree removals. The Natural Resources Advisory Board, working with staff, developed recommendations which were then presented to the Council at their worksession on January 26t1, 1999. The Council directed staff to prepare appropriate Code revisions to respond to these recommendations and to bring these back at a later date. Staff, in developing the attached Code amendments, has also identified that tree protection issues deserve additional consideration. The current language in Chapter 55 addresses the regulation of tree removal but not tree protection. The City has long relied on its stringent enforcement of the tree removal chapter to ensure that trees are not damaged or destroyed during development. The proposed changes in the attached draft contain tougher penalties for illegal removals. However, once a tree has 1 ,been removed, it cannot be restored. Repeatedly, staff has witnessed careless equipment operators 7d1D undacountless hours of careful site planning and project conditioning with a single overzealous excavation near a protected tree. Staff believes the best way to protect and preserve the wooded character of the City is to develop and codify tree protection measures to be implemented during site grading and construction. Although this was not a part of the original charge from Council, staff feels this is an important part of a complete forestry program. If the respective commissions believe similarly that tree protection ordinances are needed, staff will present this issue to the Council to gain further direction and return later with proposed revisions. • \\pub_wks\data\commonjlmorgan_t\netdocs\projects\trees\code revisions\drc pc memo.doc TREES §55.02.135 • CHAPTER 55. TREE S ARTICLE 55.02. TREE REMOVALS 55.02.010. Purpose. 55.02.020. Definitions. 55.02.030. Tree Removal Without Permits Prohibited. 55.02.032 Tonnine of Trees Prohibited 55.02.035. Tree Removal in Conjunction With Major or Minor Development Permit. 55.02=8110—(Repealed by Ord Rio 1139See 1;05 18 71 Ord Ne 3059See. I 06-16 92.) 55.02.042. Classification of Permits. 55.02.050. Application for Permits. 55.02.060. Fees. 55.02.01. ilt�euIcd. 55.02.065. Review of Permit Applications. 54.02.071. r.Ln4e4, 55.02.075. Notice Requirements for Type II Tree Removal Permits. 55.02.080. Criteria for Issuance of Type II Permits. • 55.02.085. Request for Public Hearing on a Type II Permit. 55.02.120. (4eepealedl by-Ora No 1Qm, 09 15 81 > 55.02.125. Evidence of Violation. 55.02.130. Penalties. 55.02.135. Mit+gatioe-Restitution Required for Violations. 55.02.400 Legislative History. (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-1 • 55.02.135 TREES 55.02.010. Purpose. • The purpose of this slater article is to regulate the removal of trees in order to preserve the wooded character of the City of Lake Oswego and to protect trees as a natural resource of the City. (Ord. No. 1429, Sec. 1; 05-18-71. Ord. No. 2059,Sec. 1;06-16-92.) (Ord.No.2097,Amended, 12/20/94) 55.02.020. Definitions. l. "Certified Arborist"means a Person who has met the criteria for certification from the International Society of Arboriculture and maintains his or her accreditation. 4-2. "City Manager"means the City Manager or the City Manager's designee, except where the context expressly requires otherwise. 23. "Person"means any individual or legal entity. 34. "Removal"means to cut down a tree or remove all or 50%or more of the crown,trunk, or root system of a tree; or to damage a tree so as to cause the tree to decline and/or die. "Removal" includes but is not limited to damage inflicted upon the root system by the application of toxic substances,the operation of equipment and vehicles,storage of materials,change of natural grade due to unapproved excavation or filling, or by the unapproved alteration of natural physical conditions. "Removal"does not include normal trimming or pruning of trees but does include topping of trees. 45. "Single family dwelling" for the purpose of this ordinance includes the privately owned yards of any of the following: a detached home,a townhouse,a zero-lot line dwelling,or condominiums with limited common elements which are reserved for the use of specific unit. • 66. "Topping"means the severe cutting back of limbs to stubs 3 inches or larger in diameter within the tree's crown to such a degree so as to remove the natural canopy and disfigure the tree. 67. "Tree"means any woody plant having a trunk 5 inches or more in diameter, maximum cross section,at 4.5 feet above mean ground level at the base of the trunk. If a tree splits into multiple trunks below 4.5 feet,the trunk is measured at its most narrow point beneath the split. 7. "Tree Cutting Permit"means written authorization from the City for a tree removal to Proceed as described in an application. such authorization having been given in accordance with this chapter. (Ord.No. 1429, Sec. 1;05-18-71. Ord.No. 1631, Sec. 1;07-20-76.Ord.No. 2059, Sec. 1;06-16-92.) (Ord.No.2097,Amended, 12/20/94) 55.02.030. Tree Removal Without Permits Prohibited. I. No person shall remove a tree without first obtaining a tree removal cutting permit from the City pursuant to this Chapter. (Ord. No. 1429, Sec. 1;05-18-71. Ord.No. 2059, Sec. I;06-16-92.) (Ord.No.2097,Amended, 12/20/94) 55.02.032. Topping of Trees Prohibited. I. T000ine is prohibited in the City of Lake Oswego. Trees severely damaged by storms or other causes. or certain trees under utility wires or other obstructions where other pruning practices are impractical may (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-2 • TREES §55.02.135 • be exemoted from penalties for a violation of Type II permit reauirements at the determination of the City Manager. 2. If a utility.public agency.or other person who routinely tons trees in furtherance of public safety.such utility.public agency or other person may apply for and obtain a blanket topping exemption pursuant to this section based upon an arborist's or forester's report establishing a methodology for topping in compliance with this subsection. 3. The City.in granting anoroval for removal of trees in open spaces or undeveloped areas,may allow a tree to be topped to a designated height in order to maintain a"snag"for wildlife habitat. 4. Permits obtained for removals of trees shall not enable topping of trees unless said permit specifically authorizes the topping action. (Ord.No.2097.Enacted. 12/20/941 55.02.035. Tree Removal in Conjunction With Major or Minor Development Permit. 1. If a Major or Minor Development Permit applied for pursuant to LOC Chapter 49 would require or result in tree removal permit as defined in this Chapter,compliance with LOC 55.02.080 shall be a criterion of approval of such permit.Tree removals in conjunction with a Major or Minor Development Permit shall be considered in conjunction with such permit and shall be subject to the application,notice,hearing and appeal procedures applicable to the proposed major Maior or Minor Development pursuant to LOC Chapter 49. The required Notice for Maior or Minor Developments that would require or result in tree removals shall include a site plan indicating the location of any trees proposed for removal on the subiect • site. The proposed trees shall also be flagged with yellow flagging tape in the field. Such flagging to be maintained until a final decision on the orl'posal is rendered. The remaining application,notice,hearing and appeal procedures in Chapter 55 shall not apply to tree removals considered in conjunction with a Major or Minor Development request. Tree removals that have not been reviewed through either are not Major or Minor Development proceduresPeRffit shall be reviewed as provided in this Chapter. 2. The Criteria contained in LOC 55.02.080 shall not apply to subsequent applications for tree removal permits for trees on property subject to a final land use action approved pursuant to LOC Chapters 48 or 49 if the removal of specific trees was reviewed and approved as part of the land use action pursuant to LOC 55.02.035(1).Removal of trees in violation of such land use approval,however,will be considered a violation of this chapter. 3. Except in cases of an emergency as provided in LOC 55.02.042(3),if the tree proposed to be removed has been required to be preserved or protected as a condition of approval of a land use action pursuant to the Lake Oswego Zoning or Development Code,the tree removal application shall be processed as an amendment to that land use action and shall be reviewed and approved by the body responsible for reviewing such land use actions. (Ord.No.2097,Enacted, 12/20/94) 55.02.042. Classification of Permits. Any person who desires to remove a tree shall apply for one of the following types of permits: 1. TYPE 4-I PERMITS are required for a property that: • (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-3 55.02.135 TREES a. Is located in a residential zone and is occupied by a sinele family dwelling. • 1. l lcrurr;t ] by� gle Family dwell., , , b. Is not located within an area or parcel that has been Placed on the Historic Landmark Designation List pursuant to LOC Chanter 58: and fc. Does not contain trees which: are-have been-epfessl-y protected lla a conditional of approval of development pursuant to the Lake Oswego Zoning or Development Codes are a Dart of the Heritage Tree Proeram per LOC 55.04 are located within an RC or RP sensitive land overlay zone are located within the Willamette River Greenwav(WRG)overlay zone or are located within the Osweeo Lake 25 foot special setback=and :..-1.:1:7 Yw,w List pursuant to LOC Chapter 58;or , If an applicant who otherwise aualifies for a Tvoe I Permit applies to remove more thank-two plead-trees • within any twelve month period or any tree greater than 12 inches in diameter subsection,the additianl-trees shall be subject to a-Type II Permit requirements. 2. TYPE II PERMITS are required for any parcel that: a. Does not aualifv as a type 1 Permit as described in LOC 55.02.042(1)above. r. apbr. art area;;or anstiGbrs u��l.r ,•��tirna r.,r , .;., and-righ s of way` 3. EMERGENCY PERMITS: (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-4 • • TREES §55.02.135 • a. If the condition of a tree presents an immediate danger of collapse and if such potential collapse represents a clear and present hazard to persons or property,an emergency tree removal permit may be issued without formal application for a Type I or II permit and the payment of a fee may be waived. For the purposes of this subsection,"immediate danger of collapse" means that the tree is already leaning,with the surrounding soil heaving,and there is a significant likelihood that the tree will topple or otherwise fail and cause damage before a tree removal permit could be obtained through the non-emergency process."Immediate danger of collapse"does not include hazardous conditions that can be alleviated by pruning or treatment. b. Emergency tree removal permits must be approved by the City Manager, or in the City Manager's absence, by the acting city manager. If an emergency situation arises at a time when the City Manager or acting city manager is unavailable,and such emergency creates a significant likelihood that the tree will topple or otherwise fail before such officials become available,the tree owner shall photograph the tree showing emergency conditions and then may proceed with removal of the tree to the extent necessary to avoid the immediate hazard. c. A person removing a tree as an emergency tree must first notify the City(Tree Hotline Phone No.) and state the address where the tree is being removed,the company performing the removal,alone with the property owners name and phone number. The City will contact the owner to review the evidence of the tree's condition. If the evidence is not clearly apparent to a layperson.the City may reouire the applicant hire a certified arborist to review the evidence to ascertain whether the tree presented an immediate danger of collapse. The company performing the removal shall not be eligible to provide this review. . If the evidence and information presented by the tree owner does not justify the emergency tree removal standards set forth in LOC Chapter 55,the • application shall be denied and the tree owner shall be subject to penalty pursuant to LOC 55.02.130 and the mitigation requirements of LOC 55.02.135. _..T__ (Ord.No.2097,Enacted, 12/20/94) bite. :- certain trees , .,.der utila„. e oti,er obstructions . ara atil.ar pr.snYns prnatiioto art,vmprdEtf6@1-m8'y' City-t r. 2. If a utility,publ:.�.S�..c,', zt :, 55.02.050. Application for Permits. An application for a tree Leval-cutting permit shall be made upon forms prescribed by the City. The application for a tree cuttingT-ype-II permit shall contain: 1. The number,size,species and location of the trees to be cut on a site plan of the property; • (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-5 • 55.02.135 TREES 2. The anticipated date of removal; • 3. A statement of the reason for cutting or removal; 4. Information concerning any proposed landscaping or planting or any new trees to replace the trees to be removed;and 5. Any other information reasonably required by the City. (Ord.No. 1429, Sec. 1,05-18-71. Ord.No. 1631, Sec.2;07-20-76.Ord. No.2059, Sec. 1; 06-16-92.) (Ord.No.2097,Amended, 12/20/94) 55.02.060. Fees. The application shall be accompanied by a filing fee._Fees shall be established by resolution of the City Council. (Ord. No. 1429,Sec. 1;05-18-71.Ord.No.2059,Sec. 1;06-16-92.) 55.02.065. Review of Permit Applications. 1. Review of permits shall be as follows: a. Tvne 1 Hermits shall be issued without further review upon application and demonstration by the applicant that the applicant's request qualifies as a Type I permit pursuant to LOC 55.02.042(1). b. Type II permits shall be reviewed and approved by the City Manager pursuant to LOC 55.02.075 • (Notice Reouirements)and 55.02.080(Approval Criteria). c. Emereencv permits shall be reviewed and approved by the City Manager pursuant to LOC 55.02.042(3). 2. The applicant shall have the burden of proving that his or her application complies with the criteria for approval of the applicable class of permit. (Ord.No. 2059, Sec. 1; 06-16-92.) (Ord.No.2097,Amended, 12/20/94) 1Ord.No.2091,Amended,(11.19/91:Ord.No.2097.Repealed. 12/20/91) 55.02.075. Notice Requirements for Type II Tree Removal Permits. 1. An applicant for a Type II tree 1-cutting permit subject to criteria under LOC 55.02.080(1)(aii),(2), and/or(3),r ep(4)shall post notice of application for a tree removal permit on the property in a location which is clearly visible to vehicles traveling on a public sweet and to pedestrians walking or biking by the property. (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-6 • TREES §55.02.135 • 2. The notice shall state that tree removal permits are pending for trees on the property marked by a yellow plastic tagging tape, shall include the date of posting, and shall state that any person may request that a hearing be held on the application by filing a written Request for A Hearing within fourteen days of the date of posting. 3. The applicant shall mark each tree proposed to be removed by tying or attaching a yellow plastic tagging tape to the tree at 4.5 feet above mean ground level at the base of the trunk. 4. On the date that the property is posted, the applicant shall send written notice via regular maila letter to the neighborhood association whose boundaries include the proposed tree cutting site and to all abutting properties. The list of abutting properties shall be compiled from the Lake Oswego City Address Atlas. For properties where no address is listed, notice will not be required for that property. 5. The applicant shall ertify that the property has been posted,the trees have been marked and notice has been mailed pursuant to this section. The tree removal permit or permits shall not be issued for fourteen days from the date of filing of the certificationa€fdavit to allow for the filing of a request for a hearing. The applicant I shall maintain the posting and marking for the full fourteen days. (Ord.No.2097,Enacted, 12/20/94) 55.02.080. Criteria for Issuance of Type II Permits. The applicant must comply with the following criteria to obtain a Type II tree removal-cutting permit. The City Manager may require a certified arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit. The three€etff categories of criteria are as follows: 1111 1. Dead of Dvinc Trees: Except as provided by subsection(b)of this section, a tree femoval-cutting permit shall he issued if the applicant demonstrates that a tree is dead-or-dythg. a. For the purposes of this section_+ i}—"Dead"means the tree is lifeless. able treatment e ' 4 be ed ram p nt as of the inn station or b. In order to provide for wildlife habitat and natural processes,the City Manager may require the retention of dead er-dying trees located in wetlands,distinctive natural areas,stream corridors,parks I or open space areas required to be preserved as a condition of development approval,unless the tree presents a potential hazard to persons or property. c. The City fray-shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal pursuant to 55.02.082. y the; :' Such mitigation requirements as-shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Hazard Trees: a. A hazard tree is a tree that is cracked.split, leaning or physically damaged to the degree that it is clearly likely to fall and injure persons or property. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning. b. The City may require the applicant submit a certified arborist's report to confirm the hazard Potential of the tree alone with recommendations to alleviate the hazard apart from removal.te • (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-7 • 55.02.135 TREES • c. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal pursuant to 55.02.082. Such mitigation reauirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 3. Trees that are Not Dead. Dying or Hazardous: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not dead, dying or dangerous-hazardous if the applicant demonstrates: a. The tree is proposed for removal for landscaping purposes or in order to construct development approved or allowed pursuant to the Lake Oswego Code or other applicable development regulations; b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters,protection of adjacent trees,or existing windbreaks; and c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the character, aesthetics,property values or property uses of the neighborhood. In making this determination,the City may consider any proposal by the applicant to mitigate for the loss of the tree by planting new trees or other vegetation. ;,,o„ f approF81 of the d. The City shall reauire the applicant to mitigate for the removal pursuant to 55.02.082. Such mitigation reauirements shall be a condition of anproval of the permit. 11110 m al c eke 1. o th rite of. t,. ti I o (Ord.No.2097,Amended, 12/20/94) 55.02.082 Mitigation Reauired For any tree that has been approved for removal.the applicant shall renlace the tree. The mitigation replanting reauirement may be satisfied in one of the following three options(in order of preference) a. Replanting on site. The applicant is reauired to plant either a 2" minimum caliper deciduous tree or a 6-8 foot tall evergreen tree for each tree removed. The tree shall be planted according to the specifications in Table 55-1. b. Replanting elsewhere. If and only if there is insufficient available room on the applicant's property. the applicant shall plant either a 2"minimum caliper deciduous tree or a 6-8 foot tall evergreen tree for each tree removed on property either in the applicant's ownership or control, in an oven space tract that is part of the same subdivision. or in a City owned open space. Such mitigation planting is subject to the anproval of the authorized property owners. If planting on City property. the City may specify the species and size of the tree. Nothing in this section shall be construed as an obligation of the City to allow plantinc trees on City property. c. Payment in lieu of planting. If no feasible alternative exists to plant the reauired mitigation tree. the applicant may nay into the tree fund an amount established by City Council. 55.02.085. Request for Public Hearing on a Type II Permit. 1. Any person may request a hearing on a Type II removal permit by filing a written Request for Hearing, along with the applicable hearing fee established by resolution of the City Council,within fourteen days (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-8 • • TREES §55.02.135 • of the filing of the affidavit of posting pursuant to LOC 55.02.075. Failure to file within the fourteen day appeal period shall preclude such a request. 2. An applicant for a tree removal permit may appeal denial of a permit or conditions imposed on approval by filing a written notice of intent to appeal,along with the applicable filing fee established by resolution of the City Council,within fourteen days of the date of decision on the permit. 3. Requests for hearing and appeals shall be heard by the Development Review Commission(DRC),which shall hold a public hearing on the request or appeal. The City shall send written notice of the hearing to the applicant,the person requesting the hearing if different from the applicant,and to the recognized Neighborhood Association for the area in which the subject property is located,at least ten days in advance of the hearing. 4. The DRC shall hear testimony from the applicant, followed by those in favor of the application,those opposed to the application (beginning with the person who requested the hearing if different from the applicant),and concluding with rebuttal by the applicant. Any person may testify before the DRC. Following the close of the public testimony,the DRC shall determine,based upon the evidence and testimony in the record, whether or not the application complies with the criteria contained in LOC 55.02.080. The minutes of the hearing shall contain the DRC's reasons for approving, denying or modifying the application. 5, A decision of the DRC shall not become final for ten days from the date of the hearing. Any person who appeared before the DRC either orally or in writing may appeal the decision to the City Council by filing a written notice of intent to appeal, along with an appeal fee established by resolution of the Council, with the City Recorder within ten days of the date of the DRC hearing at which its decision was made. The minutes of the DRC meeting,along with any written staff reports or testimony,shall be forwarded to • the City Council. Written notice of the appeal hearing shall be sent at least ten days in advance of the Council hearing to those persons who appeared before the DRC. The hearing before the City Council shall be on the record established before the DRC and only persons who appeared before the DRC orally or in writing may testify. The appellant shall testify first, followed by persons in favor of the appeal, persons in opposition to the appeal(beginning with the applicant if different from the appellant, and concluding with rebuttal by the appellant. The Council's hearing and decision shall otherwise comply with subsection 4 of this section. The decision of the Council shall be final. (Ord.No.2097,Enacted, 12/20/94) 55.02.105 Exairation of Tree Cutting Permits A Tyne I or Type II tree cutting permit properly issued shall remain valid for no more than 60 days from the date of issuance. A 60 day extension shall be automatically granted by the City Manager if requested in writing before the expiration of the permit. No additional extensions beyond the first extension shall be granted. Permits that have lapsed are deemed void. Trees removed after a tree cutting permit has expired shall be considered a violation of this Chapter. • (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-9 • 55.02.135 TREES • 55.02.125. Evidence of Violation. 1. If a tree is removed without a tree removal permit,a violation shall be determined by measuring the stump. A stump that is 22 inches or more in circumference or 7 inches or more in diameter shall be considered prima facie evidence of a violation of this chapter. 2. Removal of the stump of a tree cut without a tree removal permit prior to the determination provided in subsection 1 of this section is a violation of this chapter. 3. Proof of violation of this chapter shall be deemed prima facie evidence that such violation is that of the owner of the property upon which the violation was committed. Prosecution of or failure to prosecute the owner shall not be deemed to relieve any other responsible person. (Ord. No. 2059, Sec. l;06-16-92.) (Ord.No.2097,Amended, 12/20/94) 55.02.130. Penalties. I. The removal of a tree in violation of this chapter,or the breach of any condition of a permit granted under this chapter, or the violation of any other provision of this chapter shall be a civil infraction as defined by LOC 34.04.105(1), enforceable pursuant to LOC Article 34.04. The unlawful removal of each individual tree shall be a separate offense hereunder. Failure to comply with a condition of approval shall be a separate infraction each day the failure to comply continues. 2. Removal of a tree in violation of this chapter is hereby declared to be a public nuisance,and may be abated by appropriate proceedings pursuant to LOC Article 34.08. 3. A person who removes a tree subject to the Type I or Type II permit requirement may obtain a 1111 retroactive permit by demonstrating compliance with the applicable criteria. Permits applied for retroactively shall be subject to a triple permit fee. In addition,the applicant shall pay a penalty per tree in an amount established by resolution of the City Council and shall be subject to the mitigation requirements of LOC 55.02.135. 4. Upon request of the City Manager or direction from Council,the City Attorney may institute appropriate action in any court to enjoin the removal of trees in violation of this chapter or to require the replacement of trees removed as required by LOC 55.02.135. 5. Upon discovery of a violation of this Chanter.the builder.developer.tree service,or other person hired under contract to nerform the work shall provide evidence that he or she possesses a valid City Business or applicable Metro License. Any person conducting business without proper license pursuant to LOC 20.02.025 shall be cited in accordance with LOC 20.06.300. A builder,developer, or tree service holding a City Business License who performs work in violation of this Chanter' is subject to Business License revocation to-a-proceedings to-setnsidef pursuant to LOC 20.02.085. 6. Any arborist, landscaper,contractor, or tree service that has performed any tree removal in violation of this chapter or submitted a falsified report for the criteria required in this chapter, shall not be considered a responsible bidder for any City contracts for a period of two years from the date of violation or report. 7. The rights,remedies and penalties provided in this chapter are cumulative,are not mutually exclusive, and are in addition to any other rights, remedies and penalties available to the City under any other provision of law.(Ord.No. 1429, Sec. 1;05-18-71. Ord.No. 1880, Sec. I;02-07-84. Ord.No.2059, Sec. 1,06-16-92.) (Ord.No.2097,Amended, 12/20/94) (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-10 4 TREES §55.02.135 i 55.02.135. Mitigation-Restitution Required. 1. If a tree is removed in violation of this chapter,the owner of the property shall be responsible for ealacinc the lost value of the tree.As soon as a violation is determined,the City shall notify the property owner in writing regarding the mitigation-restitution requirements of this section.Within thirty(30)days of the date of mailing of this notice,the property owner shall enter into a mitigation-restitution plan approved by the city.The-mitigation-This plan shall provide for: a. Replacement of the tree removed in violation of this chapter with a substantially similar tree,taking into consideration site characteristics, including the suitability of size of the tree at maturity in relation to the tree's placement on the site. If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed is not reasonably available in the local commercial market,the City Manager may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value.If a replacement tree of the size of the tree removed is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable,the City Manager shall require replacement with more than one tree.The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper of the tree removed by the caliper of the largest reasonably available or viable replacement trees. No one tree shall be less than-142 inches in caliper. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property,the City Manager shall require one or more of the replacement trees to be planted on other property within the City or the remaining balance of caliper inches must be paid into the city's Tree Fund at a cost per caliper inch established by resolution of City Council. b. A replacement plan providing for the planting and maintenance of the replacement tree or trees.The replacement plan shall provide that if any replacement tree dies within three years of planting,the • property owner shall replace the tree. The City Manager may require the posting of the bond or some other form of guarantee to ensure compliance with the mitigation plan. 2. Failure to enter into a mitigation-restitution plan as required by this subsection or failure to comply with any condition of that agreement shall be civil infraction as defined in LOC 34.04.105(1),enforceable pursuant to LOC Article 34.04._Such failure shall be a separate infraction each day the failure to comply continues. In addition,the City Manager may refuse to accept any development permit application for the subject property or stop work on any development approved for the subject property under LOC Chapters 48 or 49 until an acceptable mitigation plan has been executed or complied with.(Ord.No. 2059,Sec. 1;06-16-92.) (Ord.No.2097,Amended, 12/20/94) • (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-11 • 55.02.135 TREES 55.02.400 Leaislative History 1. Ordinance 1429—Enacted: May 18. 1971 Summary: This ordinance established the rules and regulations pertaining to tree removals in the City. Effect: 2. Ordinance 1631—Enacted:July 20. 1976 Summary: 3. Ordinance 1807—Enacted:September 15. 1981 Summary: 4. Ordinance 2059—Enacted June 16. 1992 Summary: 5. Ordinance 2097—Enacted December 12. 1994 Summary: This ordinance established a new classification of permit for single family property when not nartitionable into three or more lots. Also established a procedure for"volume removals" 6. Ordinance 7t—Enacted Summary: This ordinance revised sections of Article 55.02 to require Type II permits for any tree greater than 12" diameter or when more than 2 trees are removed in a single year. Editorial changes to defmitions and criteria. Established an expiration period for permits and mandatory mitigation requirements. Strengthened penalties against contractors and landscape crews. Abolished"volume removal"process. • Create a new article.Article 55.08 to prescribe tree protection measures during site development. ARTICLE 55.08. TREE PROTECTION 55.08.010. Purpose 55.08.020 Definitions 55.08.030 Applicability 55.08.040 Site Analysis.Submittal Requirements 55.08.050 Tree Protection Plan Required 55.08.060 Reouired Measures for Tree Protection 55.08.070 Exceptions 55.08.080 Inspections 55.08.090 Penalties 55.08.010. Purpose. The purpose of this article is to prescribe preventative protection measures to avoid damage to trees during site development. 55.08.020. Definitions. (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-12 S TREES §55.02.135 • This article hereby incorporates the definitions of Article 55.02. in addition to the following; 1. "Tree Protection Zone"means the area around a tree or group of trees in which no grading,access. stockpiling or other construction activity may occur. 2. "Dripline"means an imaginary vertical line extending downward from the outermost tips of the branches to the ground. 3. "Best Management Practice"means 35.08.030. Applicability This article is applicable to any ministerial,minor,or maior development that involves grading or other r site work with a potential for impacting trees located both on and off the subject site. 55.08.040. Site Analysis. Submittal Requirements Any application for ministerial,minor,or maior development approval that is also subject to this article shall include documentation and illustrations that clearly depict: 1. Location of all trees on the site and within 15 feet of the site. Trees shall be identified by species,caliper (diameter at breast height size),approximate age,and general condition. Condition shall be rated as GOOD, FAIR, • POOR,or DEAD. 11111 (Rev.01/17/95;bp) 55-13