HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/09/2002 B A K E R S F I E L D
David Cbuch, Chair
Sue Benham
Mike Maggard
Staff: John W. Stinson
MEETING NOTICE
URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMII'rEE
of the City Council - City of Bakersfield
Monday, September 9, 2002
1:00.p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room, Suite 201
Second Floor- City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. ADOPT JULY 15, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
4. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding space needs and City
Hall expansion - Tandy
B. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding removal of trees in
City right-of-ways - Stinson
5. NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding arterial/collector
(Brundage Lane) - Hardisty
6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS
7. ADJOURNMENT
S:~lOHN\Council Committees\Urban Dev2002\ud02sep09.doc
DRAFT
B A K E R S F IE L D
Ala~'Tandy, City Manager Sue Benham
Staff: John W. Stinson Mike Maggard
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMI'FrEE MEETING
Monday, July 15~ 2002, 1:00 p.m.
~ity Ma-nager's Conference Room - City Hall
1. ROLL CALL
The me¢-ting was called to order at 1:04 p.m.
F,'esent: Councilmembers David Couch, Chair; and Sue Benham
Councilmember Mike Maggard (arrived at 1:12 p.m.)
2. ADOPT JUNE 10, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
Adopted as submitted.
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
4. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. Discussion and Committee. recommendation regarding space needs and
City Hall expansion
City Manager Tandy gave a brief update on the different space needs and
expansion plans reviewed by the Committee to date, including the proposal to build
a new City Hall in Central Park. At the last meeting there was a suggestion from
the Committee that staff meet with development interests to see what they might
have to say about potential redevelopment activities in and around the Central Park
area if the City were to make an investment there.
Economic Development Director Kunz reported Councilmember Benham and staff
met with about two dozen developers, builders and interested parties on June 26th.
They reviewed the Central Park plan. Most were in favor of a new Civic Center/City
Hall idea, but not necessarily at that location. However, it was discussed that the
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT DRAFT
URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE .MEETING
Monday July 15, 2002
Page - 2-
Central Park site would present a redevelopment opportunity to extend the
downtown area.
Pauline Larwood, Smart Growth Coalition, spoke regarding a master plan for
coordinating development in the downtown area.
'City Manager Alan Tandy explained another idea from one of the Committee
members was for staff to explOre a lower-cost option of purchasing an existing
building downtown, and to analyze what term that would give for growth, review
the feasibility and how it relates to the leases we have put out, and obligations
on such a building.
Staff focused on the Borton Petrini & Conron building to use as a hypothetical
example. The City is not negotiating for the building and it rs not commercially
for sale. The owner may consider responding positively to a request from the
City if there were an agreed price. This is not the only building in the downtown
that could be c_onsidered, but was chosen for comparison purposes because of
its close proximity to City Hall.
Public Works staff prepared a slideshow for discussion with a layout of how the
departments might fit in the buil(~'ng. This would be a necessary step for. any
building the Committee might want to consider to be able to visualize how to
utilize the space. Jack LaRochelle presented the slides and different scenarios
of how divisions might be located, which included also using the existing
buildings the City owns: City Hall, Police Department and Development Services
buildings.
The City Manager explained the advantage of buying an existing building is the
cost, which would be about one-fifth to one-tenth of building a new City Hall.
The space plan to purchase an existing building would give all dePartments
room for reasonable growth for a minimum of 10 years.
The Committee expressed interest in buying an existing building as a lower-cost
plan to meet space needs, but also wanted to explore .how such a site might be
expanded in the future to allow for future growth. Staff was requested to check
for other buildings in close proximity to City Hall, which may be available, and
provide the Committee criteria such as how close to City Hall an additional
building would need to be to allow for cohesiveness and walking distance.
The Committee requested staff to bring back all the plans that have been
reviewed over the last few months for a final comparison before sending a
report and recommendation to Council.
DRAFT
URBAN DI=VI=LOPMENT OOMMI'I-I'EE MEETING
Monclny ,July 15,
Pnge - 3 -
B. Discussion and'Committee recommendation regarding removal of
trees in City right-of-ways (This item heard first)
Assistant City-Manager John Stinson handed out pictures of trees that were
being severely trimmed in the parkway on Truxtun Avenue by a tree trimming
firm. The City's Urban Forester went out to the site and asked the trimmers to
stop. The concern is aggressive trimming eliminates the shade provided by the
trees.
The Committ'ee reviewed the current Section of the Municipal Code relating to
Street Trees. Staff is proposing updating this Section to reflect the suggestions
by.the Committee. Currently the jurisdiction for street trees is under the Public
Works Director. It has been discussed that th'"e oversight should be with the
Urban Forester when related to care of trees. The property owner/tenant-has the
responsibility to maintain the trees in the parkway, but there are no 'tree care
sta~,dards included in this Section of the Code. St~ff will be prop{3sing ways-to
define this section to prevent over-trimming or other practices which may injure
trees. Also, there are no provisions in the current ordinance (.only commercial
developments covered in another section) that require the replacement, of trees
damaged in the parkways by improper cutting, pruning, or watering practices.
Urban Forester Paul Graham suggested an educational effort and meeting with
the local tree trimmers to explain the City's goal of increasing the tree canopy.
Staff is preparing educational materials and will bring draft samples to the next
meeting.
Public Works Director Rojas suggested the idea of an annual permit for tree
trimmers who work in public right-of ways to allow an opportunity to handout
educational materials. It could be for minimal or no charge.
Renee Nelson spoke regarding educational materials for tree trimmers.
The Committee requested educational materials be provided for their review at
the next meeting and that staff prepare a draft ordinance regarding an annual
permit for commercial tree trimmers working in City right-of-ways.
5. NEW BUSINESS
6. COMMI3'rEE COMMENTS
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 2:12 p.m.
DRAFT
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday July 15, 2002
Page - 4-
Attendance - staff: City Manager Alan Tandy; Assistant City Manager John W.
Stinson; Assistant City Manager Alan Christensen; City Attorney Bart Thiltgen;
Development Services Director Jack Hardisty; Economic Development Director
Donna Kunz; Public Works Director Raul Rojas; Assistant Public Works Director
Jack LaRochelle; Urban Forester Paul Graham; Assistance Recreation and Parks
Director Allen Abe; Real Property Manager Don Anderson.
bthers: Pauline Larwood, Smart Growth Coalition; Mark Smith, Grubb & Ellis/ASU;
Harvey May, TAG; Jimmy Yee, Yankee Communications; Jeff Williams, Williams
Development; Greg Bynum, Bynum and Associates; Renee Nelson; Joe Colombo;
and James Burger, reporter, The Bakersfield Californian.
cc: Honorable Mayo~ and City Councilmembers
B A K E R. S F I E L D
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
July 26, 2002
TO: Urban Development Committe~/~
FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager f-/ ~
SUBJECT: Space Needs I City Hall Alternatives
At the Urban Development Committee meeting of July 15th, it was requested that a
broad-based summary be done of the major altemates that have been discussed to
date for City Hall. Also requested was cdteda to be used in the process of deciding
what existing buildings might be considered if the "buy an existing building alternate"
was considered. Councilmember Benham also requested that master planning be
incorporated in the process. This memorandum attempts to serve all these purposes.
Part I - Ran.qe of Alternatives Considered
A) $100,000,000 to $110,000,000
This contained several variations. All were building a single complex (or two,
with one for Police) that would meet long-term growth needs. Some included
building on the current site with a two to three year temporary relocation. Some
included building north of the County Administrative building. Variations had
Police at one location and City Hall at another.
Ballpark cost estimates on these alternates run $10 million to $11 million a year
for 20 years to retire the debt service. That would be equivalent to not adding
new positions in the City for four years.
B) $50,000,000 - $60,000,000 for Central Park
This alternate avoided most land costs, temporary relocation costs and moving
costs by building a large new complex for all operations except Police in Central
Park. The park land would be replaced. This alternate is further from the core of
downtown, but would spur redevelopmen!of that area.
~ Urban Development Committee
Space Needs / City Hall
July 26, 2002
" Page 2
Ballpark costs estimates on this are $5 million to $6 million a year= in debt service,
or the equivalent of two years without staff increases.
C) $10,000,000 - Purchase of an existinq buildinq
This alternate examined the issue in terms of using the Borton, Petrini Building
as an example. As the process evolves, other buildings will be considered.
Although only a ten-year plan, the additional acquisition of a land pad for a
second tower "down the road" can make this alternate work for the long-term.
Ballpark of costs on this is $10,000,000. If that were a 20-year debt service, it
would be around $1.0 million per year. At that level of total cost however, we
have the capacity to do it through a combination of cash and interfund loans -
keeping the true cost to around the $10 million without doubling it to cover
interest costs. On that basis, the payment would come from deferring other
capital improvements - no significant long-term negative impact on the General
Fund would occur.
Part II - Criteria to be used in Reviewing Building Alternative-~
A) Locations
This alternate requires that basic City facilities continue to be served in the
current City Hall, Annex building (Public Works) and the Development Services
Building. In order to not run the public all over town when they are seeking City
services and to keep departments in reasonably close proximity, a new building
needs to be in close proximity to the other City buildings. Generally - the closer,
the better. For evaluation purposes, we can go out to 1,000 feet or 3+ City
blocks. It should be recognized however, that the closer, the better for public
convenience and efficiency. Locations across the railroad tracks and future
Centennial Corridor would be unsuitable for access.
B) Availability
If it is not available to the City, it does not matter.
C) Suitability for City Offices
A warehouse or building designed for purposes other than office space which
must be remodeled, or a building that is well along in its useful life would not
serve the City's needs. Thus, the age of structure, cost to convert, and in the
end, how well it serves the public are key factors.
D) Parkin.q
Needs for both employees and the public are substantial and must be available
either from existing facilities or those acquired with the building.
~ Urban Development Committee
Space Needs / City Hall
: July 26, 2002
--' Page 3
E) Cost
In this case, cost of purchase, remodel, parking - the complete package. In most
cases, this will only be possible to establish later in the process - when finalists
are identified and negotiations actually occur.
F) Size
To be a ten-year plan, nothing less than 40,000 square feet should be
considered.
G) Lon_cl Term
Is there, in connection with the building, a means to make the plan last longer
than ten years - a vacant parcel where a second toWer could be built, or another
building nearby, for example?
A matdx of existing buildings and, to the extent information is known, how they fit the
above criteda follows:
Building Av~iilability .Location / SuitabilityParking Cost Size Loner-Term
Distance to Option
City Hall
Washington Yes 300 feet + Good Good To be 40,000 Very Good
Mutual 155 spaces determined sq. ft.
Borton, Potentially 250 feet + Very Good Good To be 50,000 Very Good
Petrini 134 spaces determined sq. ft.
Bank of Not on the 300 feet + GoOd Excellent To be 115,000 N/A
America market - 362 spaces determined sq. ft.
Fully leased
Great Yes 600 feet + Fair Fair for To be 70,000 None
Western building determined sq. ft.
size
133 spaces
Haberfelde Potentially 450 feet + Fair Poor To be 70,000 None
35 spaces determined sq. ft.
Evaluation of Criteria
Washington Mutual is available, close, suitable, and has parking. It medts further
consideration.
Borton, Petrini is potentially available, close, suitable, and has parking. It merits further
consideration.
Urban Development Committee
Space Needs / City Hall
July 26, 2002
Page 4
Bank of America is very large, double the square footage we are looking for, is not on
the market, and is fully leased. Therefore, it medts no additional consideration.
Great Western is a fine building, but is a considerable distance and would need major
changes and remodel. Staff recommends it be dropped from further consideration.
Haberfelde is a fine building and is fairly close, but would need significant change and
remodel, and has inadequate parking for our needs. It is recommended to be dropPed
from further consideration.
Part III - Comprphensive Plan
The terminology "Comprehensive Plan" means different things to different people. To
some, it may mean that all operations, growth rates and potential charges have been
looked at long-term when deciding on a course of action. In this case, we believe we
are trying to do just that. The $10 million option is shorter term than the $100 million
option, but an effort is being made to extend the term of the plan to 20 to 30 years. All
departments are involved and vadous options are being reviewed.
To others, a comprehensive plan may mean a broad:based guide to how all functions
within an area fit, how redevelopment efforts are accounted for, whether support
Services, such as food service are in the proximity, and relationship of streets, utilities,
etc. to such facilities. We believe we have considered the vadous alternates in
accordance with the General Plan - at least as well as the alternates are defined today,
and that effort will continue as refinements and alternate selections occur.
Finally, some use "comprehensive plan" as a control mechanism. A governmental
decree that a very specific use will be the one use allowed on a certain parcel, for
example. While the City of Bakersfield has good quality planning and development
standards, such control mechanisms are not in keeping with our downtown economy or
its community philosophy. Unless there is huge demand, such controls restdct
progress, they do not encourage it.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Urban Development Committee report to City Council that a
detailed exploration of Alternate III - Purchase of an existing building be undertaken by
staff in accordance with the cdteria outlined. Such an assignment would include
refinement of costs, phasing, integration with other City facilities, a financing plan and
related work.
Building Size Parking Adaptability_ Availability
Borton Petrini 55,000 134 good lease (portion)
Washington Mutual 43,000 155 fair lease (portion) or purchase
Bank of America 115,000 362 good lease (portion)
Haberfelde 70,000 35 fair lease (portion)
Great Western 70,000 133 extensive lease (portion) or purchase
DATE: September 6, 2002
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM: Stan Ford, Director of Recreation and Parks
By: Paul Graham, Urban Forester
SUBJECT: CONTRACTOR ANNUAL PERMITS IN TREE ORDINANCE
The Urban Development Committee requested that staff prepare draft ordinance language
which would require commercial tree companies have a City issued permit to work within
the Public Right-Of-Way. The draft ordinance language has been prepared with discussion
to briefly address permit issuance and insurance requirements, work standards in public
right of ways, permit fee and administration, and contractor education.
The proposed ordinance language would require all private contractors performing tree
trimming work within the public right of way to have a city permit. This permit would be
issued on an annual basis and be valid for one calendar year along with several other
requirements. We would require the contractor to add the city to their insurance on an
"additional insured endorsement" for liability coverage of one million dollars, as we require
for encroachment permits. The Urban Forester would provide the contractor city adopted
information on tree maintenance standards and require the contractor to provide his
signature that he has received and understands these standards.
The tree trimming standards required by the city permit will be outlined in the associated
technical manual which-explains Best Maintenance Practices (BMP's) and standards for
tree care in public rights of way. The purpose of the manual is to provide a readily
available document that states in clear language the requirementS for tree care to those in
the trade and to developers and property owners needing to know the standard.
Staff is not currently recommending that property owners who perform their own tree
trimming be required to have a permit. We anticipate very few homeowners trimming their
own trees due to the required equipment needed to trim trees as well as disposing of
trimmings. This is the primary reason why tree contractors are called in to trim homeowner
trees. To require a home owner to obtain a permit to trim their own tree would also be a
very difficult enforcement issue.
It is estimated a $20.00 proposed fee for the permit would cover the cost of processing the
permit. This proposed new fee would have to be added to the Cost Recovery Program and
approved by Council for its enactment.
Staff expects that initially the potential for permit violations is going t° 5e high but over
time violations should diminish. Staff will be drafting several educational letters to notify
local tree contracting professionals of the upcoming change and prepare them for the
transition. This would include the tree technical manual, instructions for obtaining an
annual permit, and educational material for professional developmer~t.. We would also
propose to schedule a meeting with the local tree contractors to dilscuss their ideas
regarding this permit issue prior to adoption.
The street tree ordinance, BMC Chap. 12.40, is currently under review by the Metropolitan
Bakersfield Tree Advisory Ad-Hoc Committee. The committee began reviewing the
ordinance and other tree related documents in May of 2001 and expect the review to be
completed date by mid-September 2002. At that time the committee will submit their
recommendations of ordinance Changes and a technical manual for trees and their care to
the Urban Development Committee for their review.
Chapter 12.40
STREET TREES
Sections:
12.40.010 Title.
12.40.020 Definitions.
12.40.030 Establishment of comprehensive plan.
12.40.040 Jurisdiction and control.
12.40.050 Duties of adjacent owners to maintain.
12.40.060 Interfering with planting or caring for trees prohibited.
12.40.070 Killing or injuring trees prohibited w Harmful substances.
12.40.080 Inspection and removal.
12.40.090 Duty of private owners m Removal of hazardous trees
Charging costs of work done by city.
12.40.095 Permits for commercial tree contractors.
12.40.100 No liability upon city.
12.40.110 Types prohibited.
12.40.010 Title.
This chapter shall be known as the "tree ordinance" and may be cited as such.
(Prior code § 12.36.010).
12.40.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the words set out in this section shall have the
following meanings:
A. "Directo¢' means Director of Recreation and Parks or designee.
AB. "Parkway" means and includes that area between sidewalks and that portion
· of streets ordinarily used for vehicular travel, or any other public area. adjacent to
sidewalks and streets ordinarily and usually used as and for planting areas.
E,C. "Public place" means and includes streets, avenues, highways, alleys, parks,
parkways, sidewalks, sidewalk spaces, or any other place open to or for the use of the
public.
CD. "Sidewalk" means and includes that portion of a street, other than the
roadway, set apart for pedestrian travel.
DE. "Street" means and includes any way or place, of whatever nature, publicly
maintained and open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular or pedestrian
travel.
(Prior code § 12.36.020).
12.40.030 Establishment of comprehensive plan.
A. It is for the best interests of the city that a comprehensive plan for the planting
and maintaining of trees within the city should be developed and established, and this
- - Page 1 of 4 Pages - -
chapter is adopted for the purpose of providing for such a plan, and for the purpose of
establishing regulations relating to the planting and maintaining of trees in the streets
of the city and other public and private places therein.
B. The city planning commission is charged with the duty of determining the types
and varieties of trees for planting along the streets. Such determination shall be made
by the. commission after consultation with city urban forester. When such determination
has been made, the commission shall report its determination in writing to the city
council in a report to be designated "Official Tree Planting List, Bakersfield, California."
Said report shall be placed on file .in .the office of the city clerk, and after such filing, the
same shall be the official determination of the commission. Thereafter said commission
may= from time to time, file subsequent reports covedng the same subject, each of
which shall be complete in itself and each shall also be filed in the office of the city
clerk. The latest of such reports so filed shall constitute the official list until supplanted
by a subsequent list.
C. The director of pub!is ';~rks shall from time to time, at the request of the city
council, prepare plans which shall designate, by means of a complete map of the city
streets, a uniform method of street tree planting, the zoning of certain streets for certain
types and varieties of trees, selecting suitable types for residential areas and special
types of trees for nonresidential areas. Such plans shall show the intervals between
said trees, and the place where each tree is to be planted. The director ''~ "'
shall submit such plan or plans to the city council for its approval or modification,
together.with the recommendation of the city planning commission.
D. When the uniform plan in its odginal or modified form is adopted by the city
council, it shall become the tree planting plan for the streets of the city, and shall be
strictly adhered to in all future street planting projects. The director cf pub!!c ,;~rks and
the city planning commission shall develop such plans together. Copies of such plans
shall be made and kept on file in the office of the city clerk where they may be obtained
by the public. (Pdor code § 12.36.030).
12.40.040 Jurisdiction and control.
The director "'v, pub!!c ..... ..v,,.w~'o v, ''~ +~'~.,,v ,.i+.,v,.~ shall have full jurisdiction and control of the
designation of types and varieties, planting, setting out, locating and placing of all
trees, shrubs and plants in the streets, parks, parkways and public places of the city,
and shall likewise have supervision, direction and control of the removal, relocation and
replacement thereof; provided, however, that in making such determinations and
exercising sUch control, he shall be limited to the trees, shrubs or plants designated on
the then current official tree planting list. (Prior code § 12.36.040).
12.40.050 Duties of adjacent owners to maintain.
It is made the duty of all owners, agents, tenants or other persons having
possession or control of real property within said'city to properly cultivate, care for and
maintain all trees, shrubs and plants now or hereafter planted or set out within any
parkway or public place immediately adjacent to their respective real properties,
subject, however, to the general supervision, direction and control of said director ef-
pub!icwcrks. (Prior code § 12.36.060).
12.40.060 Interfering with planting or cadng for trees prohibited.
- - Page 2 of 4 Pages - -
No person, firm or corporation shall interfere with the director of pub!!c works or
persons acting under his authority while engaged in planting, mulching, pruning,
trimming, spraying, treating or removing any tree, shrub or plant in any street, park,
parkway or public place within the city, or in the removing of any stone, cement or other
substance from about the trunk of any tree, shrub or plant in any such street, park,
parkway or public place. (Prior code § 12.36.070).
12.40.070 Killing or injuring trees prohibited -- Harmful substances.
A. No person, firm or corporation shall, in any way, harm, injure, destroy or kill any
tree, shrub or plant growing-upon any street, park, parkway or public place, by any
method whatsoever.
B. No person, firm or corporation shall cause, authorize or allow any brine water,
oil, liquid dye or any other substance deleterious to tree or plant life, to lie, leak, pour,
flow or ddp on or into the soil about the base of any tree, shrub or plant in any street,
park, parkway or public place in the city at a point from which such substance may, by
lying upon or by flowing, dripping or seeping into such soil injure, destroy or kill such
tree, shrub or plant.
C. No person, firm or corporation, without the approval of the director '-~ "',~-~;"
works, shall place or maintain any stone, cement or other substance which might
impede the free access of water or air to the roots of any tree, shrub or plant in any
street, parkway or public place in the city.
(Prior code § 12.36.080).
12.40.0'80 Inspection and removal.
A. The director -,~, ~.._,,~""~'" ..... ..~,,.w~'o may inspect any tree, shrub or plant upon any
street, park, parkway or public place of the city, to determine whether the same or any
part thereof constitutes a hazard .or an impediment to the progress or vision of anyone
traveling on said street or public places.
B. If the director "~, ~.-~,,~""~'" ..... ..~,,.w'~o determines that any tree, shrub or plant is
hazardous to the traveling public or impedes the progress or the vision of said public
on any such street or public place, he may cause the same, or such parts thereof as
are hazardous or impeditive, to be trimmed or removed so as to remedy such
hazardous or impeditive condition. (Prior code § 12.36.090).
12.40.090 Duty of private owners -- Removal of hazardous trees -- Charging
costs of work done by city.
A. It shall be the duty of every person, firm or corporation having charge or control
of any lot or premises, either as owner, agent, lessee, tenant or otherwise, to trim or
cause to be trimmed, or remove or cause to be removed, all trees, shrubs or plants or
any part or parts thereof, growing or standing on said property, which may constitute a
hazard or an impediment to the progress or vision of anyone traveling on any street or
public place.
B. Whenever it comes to the attention of the director ''~l ~..l.~[''i"'li"' ,,:.~"~l'~.c..._, ,.. that any tree,
shrub or plant growing or standing on any private property constitutes a hazard or an
impediment to the progress or vision of anyone traveling on any street or public Place,
he shall give notice of such hazard or impediment to the owner or occupant of said
- - Page 3 of 4 Pages - -
premises together with a request to remove or correct such condition. Such notice and
request may be given either by .personal service or by mail, to the owner or occupant or
other person in charge or control of said premises, or by posting notice upon said
property and mailing a copy thereof to the owner or occupant. The owner or occupant
of said premises shall, within ten days after the service or posting and mailing of said
notice, remove or cause to be removed, such hazardous or impeditive condition.
C. Should any person, firm or corporation fail, neglect or refuse to conform with the
provisions of this chapter, the director ''~v, ,.._,,v'-"~'~; .... .._,,.v~'o shall have the power to carry out
such provisions and the cost thereof shall be charged to and become a valid claim
against such person, firm or corporation, recoverable in any court of competent
jurisdiction. (Prior code § 12.36.100).
12.40.095 Permits for commercial tree contractors.
All contractors that perform any type of work or maintenance on trees within the
streets, parks, pathways and public places of the city are required to obtain a
city-issued permit from Director pdor to performing said work. The cost of said permit
shall be set by resolution by the City Council and the permit does not supplant the
requirement for an encroachment permit.
12,40.100 No liability upon city.
Nothing contained in this chapter shall be deemed to impose any liability upon the
city, its officers or employees, nor to relieve the owners of any private property from the
duty to keep any tree, shrub or plant upon his property, or under his control, in such a
condition as to prevent it from constituting a hazard or an impediment to the progress
or vision of anyone traveling on any street or public place within the city. (Prior code §
12.36.110).
12.40.110 Types prohibited.
It is unlawful for the owner, lessee, agent, tenant or any other person having charge
or control of any lot, piece or parcel of land within the city, to plant, grow or permit to be
planted or grown any female Populus fremontii wats tree or trees commonly known as
female cottonwood trees or trees which bear seeds of a cottony, wingy or downy
nature; the fruiting variety of Morus albo and Morus nigra tree or trees, commonly
known as the fruiting variety of mulberry tree; or any Ailanthus tree, commonly known
as tree of heaven within said city. (Ord. 2738 § 1, 1982: prior code § 12.36.120).
.,.
S:\COUNCIL\Ords\12.4Q CityT tees2, Redlinewpd
- - Page 4' of 4 Pages - -