|
Project Title: |
532 Hemme Avenue Tree Permit |
|
County File(s): |
CDTP24-00080 |
|
Appellant: Applicant/Owner: |
Ryan Brown Mason Wodhams, MWAC (Applicant) / Bradley & Lesley Wolff (Owners) |
|
Zoning/General Plan: |
R-20 Single-Family Residential District / RL Residential Low Density |
|
Site Address/Location: |
532 Hemme Avenue in the Alamo area of unincorporated Contra Costa County (APN: 198-100-015) |
|
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Status: |
Categorical Exemption - Class 1: CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(h), Existing Facilities |
|
|
|
|
Project Planner: |
Diana Lecca, Project Planner (925) 655-2869 Diana.Lecca@dcd.cccounty.us |
|
Staff Recommendation: |
Deny the Appeal and Uphold the Zoning Administrator’s Decision (See Section II for full recommendation) |
I. PROJECT SUMMARY
This is an appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve a Tree Permit to allow the removal of three (3) code-protected Valley Oak trees (with diameters ranging between 15.4-inches and 50.2-inches) on the project site, due to poor health.
II. RECOMMENDATION
Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) staff recommends that the County Planning Commission:
A. DENY the appeal by Ryan Brown.
B. FIND that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA under Section 15301(h) of the CEQA Guidelines.
C. UPHOLD the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve Tree Permit CDTP24-00080 based on the attached findings and subject to the attached conditions of approval.
D. DIRECT staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.
III. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. General Plan: RL Residential Low Density.
B. Zoning District: R-20 Single-Family Residential District.
C. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): Categorical Exemption - CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(h), Existing Facilities, Class 1 exemption for maintenance of existing landscaping.
D. Previous Applications:
1. CDMS14-00004: This Minor Subdivision to create a three lot subdivision with a designated remainder of the former Westminster Retreat at 512 Hemme Avenue was approved by the Zoning Administrator on March 16, 2015.
2. CDLL15-00033: This Lot Line Adjustment to transfer a portion of the designated remainder of minor subdivision CDMS14-00004 to Parcel C of minor subdivision CDMS14-00004 was approved by the Zoning Administrator on September 16, 2025.
3. CDTP17-00036: A Tree Permit to allow the removal of two code-protected Valley Oak trees formerly approved for construction-work within the tree drip lines, for the construction of a single-family residence on Parcel B of minor subdivision CDMS14-00004, was approved by the Zoning Administrator on September 22, 2017.
4. CDLL21-00032: This Lot Line Adjustment to transfer the portion of Parcel C of minor subdivision CDMS14-00004 that was acquired under Lot Line Adjustment CDLL15-00033, to Parcel B of minor subdivision CDMS14-00004 was approved by the Zoning Administrator on October 7, 2021. The resultant Parcel B under CDLL21-00032 is the current project site.
5. CDTP22-00022: This Tree Permit for the removal of five code-protected cedar, walnut and oak trees and work within the drip lines of two oak trees for the construction of a detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on the project site was approved by the Zoning Administrator on August 24, 2022.
6. CDSU22-00131: This ADU Permit for construction of a detached ADU on the project site was approved by the Zoning Administrator on December 20, 2022.
IV. BACKGROUND
A tree permit application was accepted by the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) on January 2, 2025, for the removal of three (3) code-protected Valley Oak trees on the project site. The trees are in a riparian habitat area on the site and meet the criteria established in County Code Section 816-6.6004 for protected trees.
A Notice of Tentative Approval of a Tree Permit was sent to adjacent property owners on January 16, 2025, to inform them of the Zoning Administrator’s tentative approval of the Tree Permit for removal of the three code protected trees. On January 27, 2025, an appeal letter and accompanying $250 appeal fee were received by the CDD from Ryan Brown, property owner of the adjacent property at 70 Holiday Drive. The letter states concerns about the contribution of the trees to environmental health and natural beauty of the neighborhood, the habitat they provide for local wildlife, and their role in mitigating water runoff.
V. SITE/ AREA DESCRIPTION
The 1.81-acre project site is located on the north side of Hemme Avenue near its western terminus. The site includes a single-family residence and an accessory dwelling unit near the Hemme Avenue frontage.
R-20 single-family residential parcels border the project site to the north, east, south, and west. These parcels generally range from a half-acre to an acre in size, although a 3.71-acre parcel is immediately north of the project site. The East Bay Regional Park District’s Las Trampas Regional Wilderness is located to the west.
The site is Parcel B of the CDMS14-00004 minor subdivision, as modified by Lot Line Adjustment CDLL21-00032. The area acquired under the lot line adjustment is separated from the rest of the parcel by a drainage channel that flows from the Las Trampas Regional Wilderness eastward then northward towards La Serena Avenue. The channel is characterized by the oak woodland habitat that extends along much of the channel both on the project site and off site to the west and to the north of the site.
VI. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant requests a Tree Permit to allow the removal of three (3) code-protected Valley Oak trees (with diameters ranging between 15.4-inches and 50.2-inches that are located at the northeastern corner of the project site, within the oak woodland habitat, due to poor health.
VII. APPEAL OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S DECISION
A Notice of Tentative Approval of a Tree Permit was mailed on January 16, 2025 to property owners adjacent to the project site. The Notice advised of an appeal period extending through January 27, 2025. One letter of appeal was received from Ryan Brown of 70 Holiday Drive on January 27, 2025. The letter states concerns about the removal of the three code protected trees, considering the contribution of the trees to environmental health and natural beauty of the neighborhood, the habitat they provide for local wildlife, their role in mitigating water runoff, and the need to adhere to tree preservation regulations and guidelines. The appeal letter is included as Attachment E.
Following is a summary of the appeal points in the letter from Ryan Brown and associated staff responses.
A. Appeal Point #1: The trees contribute to the environmental health and natural beauty of the neighborhood. The trees provide significant benefits to the neighborhood such as shade during warmer months, reduce the heat island effect, and enhance the visual appeal of the vicinity.
Staff Response: The Arborist Report prepared for the CDMS14-00004 minor subdivision (Tree Preservation Report, 512 Hemme Avenue, Alamo, CA 94507; Traverso Tree Service, July 7, 2014) cataloged 194 trees on the minor subdivision site. The site plan included in Attachment C include 28 trees on the project site in the oak woodland habitat along the drainage channel. These trees are in the Traverso Arborist Report and include seven Valley Oak, four Arroyo Willow, four Black Walnut, five Buckeye, two Photinia, two Bay Laurel, two Hawthorn, and two Coast Live Oak trees. The project proposes to remove three Valley Oak trees (trees #82, 419, and 420 as inventoried in the Traverso Arborist Report.
The Arborist Report submitted by the applicant on January 2, 2025 (Tree Evaluation, Prepared for Bradley and Lesley Wolff, 532 Hemme Avenue, Alamo, CA 94507; Bob Peralta Arbor Consulting, April 18, 2024) assesses the health and structure of the three trees. In the report, the certified arborist identifies the three trees as showing signs of decay in the base of the trees and in the canopies and prone to limb or total tree failure. One tree is reported to have significant trunk decay of more than 60% of the trunk. The arborist states that this tree will fail and should be removed before it fail. The two other trees are growing next to each other and have developed half canopies that cannot be corrected by pruning. The arborist reports that the location of the trees in proximity to neighboring properties cause concerns for harming people and property.
As shown on the site plan in Attachment C, if the three Valley Oak trees are removed, four Valley Oak trees would remain, along with 21 other trees for a total of 25 of 28 trees remaining in the oak woodland habitat on the property. The remaining trees would maintain the neighborhood’s natural beauty, reduce the heat island effect, and provide shade in warmer months while allowing the property owners to enjoy and feel safe in their backyard.
B. Appeal Point #2: The trees provide habitat for local wildlife and their removal would disrupt the local ecosystem and compromise the biodiversity of the neighborhood.
Staff Response: As shown on the aerial photo in Attachment B, the greater oak woodland habitat along the drainage channel includes the trees in the Las Trampas Regional Wilderness east of the project site and the trees north of the site on an adjacent property. As discussed above, a total of 28 trees are on the subject property in the vicinity of the channel. With the removal of three Valley Oak trees, 25 of the 28 trees would remain in the oak woodland habitat on the property including four Valley Oak trees, to continue to provide habitat onsite for local wildlife. In combination with similar habitat on adjoining properties, the effect of the proposed tree removal on the local ecosystem and biodiversity would be less than significant.
C. Appeal Point #3: The trees are important in mitigating water runoff and removal of the trees would contribute to risk of flooding in the area.
Staff Response: Elevations in the area start at 380 feet at the eastern edge of the Las Trampas Regional Wilderness to 360 feet north of the project site. Thus storm runoff flows from the Regional Wilderness eastward onto the site then northward off the site. Notably, the slope of the site is pronounced closer to Regional Wilderness and is relatively gentle in the location of the three trees. The 25 trees to remain are located west of the three trees and would continue to lessen the intensity of runoff in the onsite drainage channel. Further, only one tree (#82) is directly adjacent to the channel, while the other two trees (#419, 420) are southeast of the channel. Thus, the attenuation of the severity of storm runoff would continue with the removal of the three trees, thereby minimizing the risk of increased flooding.
D. Appeal Point #4: The project should adhere to the tree preservation regulations and guidelines.
Staff Response: The proposed removal of three Valley Oak trees is subject to the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance, County Code Chapter 816-6, and the three trees are protected trees pursuant to County Code Section 816-6.6004. Accordingly, approval of a tree permit is required to remove the trees and on January 2, 2025, a tree permit application was accepted by the CDD. Staff has evaluated the application materials per the Tree Ordinance and on January 16, 2025, mailed a Notice of Tentative Approval of a Tree Permit to property owners adjacent to the project site. On January 27, 2025, Mr. Brown submitted an appeal within the appeal period for the Notice.
VIII. STAFF ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
A. General Plan: The project site is located within the RL Residential Low Density 2045 General Plan land use designation. The primary land uses allowed in the RL designation include single-family residences and the buildings and structures accessory to residential uses. The removal of three Valley Oak trees due to poor health on the 1.81-acre project site will not change the density of residential development for this site and the use of the site remains consistent with the residential uses allowed within the RL land use designation. The proposed tree removal maintains the health and viability of existing landscaping in the oak woodland habitat on the site, and the site remains residential in nature. Since no element of the project changes the residential use of the site, the proposed project is an appropriate activity on the property.
B. Zoning: The project site is located within the R-20 Single-Family Residential District. The intent of the R-20 District is to provide for the orderly development of low density, single-family residential uses, accessory structures, and uses normally auxiliary to them. The project involves removing three trees due to poor health, which is consistent with the residential uses allowed in the R-20 District.
C. Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance: The project is subject to County Code Chapter 816-6 (Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance) due to the removal of trees that are code-protected pursuant to County Code Section 816-6.6004. In the Peralta Arborist Report, the certified arborist states that the three trees (identified as trees #82, 419, and 420) have decay in the base of the trees and in the canopies and prone to limb or total tree failure. One tree is reported to have significant trunk decay of more than 60% of the trunk. The arborist states that this tree will fail and should be removed before it fail. The two other trees are growing next to each other and have developed half canopies that cannot be corrected by pruning.
IX. CONCLUSION
The applicant requests a Tree Permit to remove three (3) code-protected Valley Oak trees that are in poor health in order to preclude tree failure and the potential to harm people and property. Staff finds that the proposed tree removal is consistent with the RL Residential - Low Density 2045 General Plan land use designation, complies with the intent and purpose of the R-20 Single-Family Residential District, and meets the criteria for granting a tree permit. Therefore, staff recommends that the County Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve Tree Permit CDTP24-00080, based on the attached findings and subject to the attached conditions of approval.