Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysis & HEPB ResoStaff: QR Application Received: 5/29/15 CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT Staff Report & Recommendations To: Members of the City Commission From: Quatisha Oguntoyinbo-Rashad Chief of Environmental Resources Certified Arborist Municipal Specialist #FL-6287-AM LIAF Certified Landscape Inspector #2013-0137 Applicant: HABITUS LLC Appellant: Patrick & Loreto Doucet Subject Property: 3985 Loquat Avenue, Miami, FL 33133 Permit Application: BD15-006663001 APPEAL This is an appeal of a decision rendered by the Historic and Environmental Preservation DESCRIPTION: Board, Resolution R-15-049, to uphold the Planning and Zoning's decision to require the removal and replacement of two (2) Ficus aurea trees located, in part, on the subject property. BACKGROUND: On March 11, 2015, the subject property received a Code Compliance citation which includes the unauthorized root and canopy pruning of two (2) Ficus aurea trees that's shared between 3985 and 3981 Loquat Avenue. The root pruning was as a result of the installation of a drain field and the canopy pruning was performed in order to provide clearance for construction equipment for the approved new development. The City approved plans for the Tree Permit did not depict a drain field to be installed or proposed canopy pruning. On April, 30, 2015, the City conducted a site visit to assess the Ficus trees that sustained damage due to construction activities. As a result of the City's inspection and findings, the owner of 3985 Loquat Avenue was required to obtain and after - the -fact Tree Permit which was received on May 29, 2015. As part of the permit review, the City rendered a decision requiring that the two (2) Ficus trees numbered 13 and 14 be removed and replaced based on the following: 1. Prior to the recent root and canopy pruning, Ficus trees number 13 and 14 were rated in Fair condition by Certified Arborist, Orlando Montero, in a report prepared and dated May 16, 2014. City Commission — October 22, 2015 Page 1 of 6 2. The recent substandard root and canopy pruning on 3985 Loquat Avenue included removal of roots two feet away from the trunk of the two trees which was not in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 Standards and Best Management Practices. Historically, the Ficus trees received substandard root pruning, on 3981 Loquat Avenue, which also was not in accordance with ANSI A300 Standards and Best Management Practices. The amount of root system remaining is not adequate for the stability of these trees and poses a significant risk of failure. In accordance with ANSI A300 Standards, the minimum protection required for the root zone of these trees are 35ft for tree # 13 and 64ft for tree #14. 3. Due to the installation of the drain field and existing conditions on the neighboring property, there are no large significant support roots existing nor is there sufficient room to establish and restore the anchoring stability needed for trees of these sizes. A destabilized trees increases the probability of failure which poses a life safety concern to persons and property. The City's decision to require the removal replacement of the trees was appealed to the HEPB. The appeal was denied by HEPB on July 7, 2015. Subsequently, the HEPB's decision was appealed to City Commission. Since the HEPB ruling, the owners of the subject property have taken voluntary actions to implement a restoration plan with the intention to preserve and alleviate the life safety issues and risks that Ficus trees #13 and #14 pose on people and property. On October 5, 2015, the City was provided with a copy of this plan titled "Updated Tree Mitigation and Restoration Plan", prepared by Certified Arborist, Ian Wogan, on September 30, 2015. On October 21, 2015, the City received two (2) letters from independent structural engineers on the installation of the support systems. The "Updated Tree Mitigation and Restoration Plan" described the following implementations to address the following: • Installation of helical piles, ratchet strap tie -downs and root barriers to "brace" the roots • Cabling of the branches and a proposal to substantially reduce and thin the canopy of the trees encroaching onto 3981 Loquat Avenue • The two (2) opinion letters from Structural Engineers state that the trees do not pose an imminent risk of failure. City Commission — October 22, 2015 Page 2 of 6 ANALYSIS: While there have been great efforts to preserve and eliminate any risks, the implemented restoration plan is not sufficient and does not provide the safe useful life expectancy of the Ficus aurea trees due to the following: Tree Risk Assessment An advanced tree risk assessment that provides an extensive analysis on specific tree parts, defects, targets and site conditions, has not been performed. An advanced assessment includes but it not limited to detailed information such as an evaluation of structural defects; target analysis, decay testing in the trunk and upper canopy; root and root collar excavation; health evaluation; storm/wind load analysis. An advanced tree risk assessment only reflects the condition of the tree at the time of the assessment. It does not address the following risk(s) remaining after mitigation: Significant Canopy Reduction and Root loss Reduction in canopy to reduce the weight may help mitigate potential failure(s). This would require large pruning cuts of branches. This type of injury would allow fungi decay to enter the tree progressing its decay which would add further instability to the trees. This cannot be mitigated by support systems such as cabling. Significant root loss creates instability in the tree(s) and is an activity that likely causes good primary infection courts for pathogens. As a result, decay most likely will progress from the bottom of roots upward creating more instability. This cannot be mitigated by support systems such as ratchet straps and helical piles. Support Systems (cabling and bracing) The support measures can possibly reduce the likelihood of failure, of specific parts, but the reinforcement can also change the tree's response to wind loads. Reinforcement of the trunk and branches can cause the loose canopy to work against each other causing branch failure in a strong enough wind storm Support systems such as cabling cannot mitigate existing and future wood decay which will further the instability of the trees Currently there is only cabling and bracing on the side of 3985 Loquat Avenue. At minimum, cabling should be installed on both 3985 and 3981 Loquat Avenue. The Certified Arborist's report, prepared by Ian Wogan, does not ensure that the support system installed will alleviate the entire tree falling over (rotational or hinge rootball failure). Structural Engineer's Opinion Structural Engineer's opinion does not confirm the stability of the upper canopy with weak or decayed branches and wind response to this. The letter does not give an opinion on the tree's stability during hurricane wind storms. The opinion is only in regards to stability "only during non -hurricane winds". City Commission — October 22, 2015 Page 3 of 6 Root Barriers Installed Drain field conflict- The roots of a Ficus aurea are very invasive as they seek out water sources, causing problems with plumbing pipes, sewer connections and drain fields. This will be a "feeding" ground for the roots as they proliferate and will likely need future pruning to address this conflict causing repeated stress on these trees. Root barriers most likely will not address this conflict. Galvanized Cables The cabling system poses a danger of people and/or animals running into cables such as these. This portion of the property will have to be fenced off in perpetuity. The same for the adjacent property. STAFF FINDINGS: In accordance with National Standards and Best Management Practices, and in Staffs view and opinion, the severe reduction of the roots and canopy, caused by the construction activities, in conjunction with the existing root conditions on the adjacent lot, the two(2) Ficus trees have been negatively impacted which has comprised the stability of the trees. National Standards require 35-64ft of supporting roots for trees of these sizes and approximately 2-4ft remain. Similarly, the substandard canopy reduction only on 3985 Loquat Avenue has comprised the stability of the trees by creating an imbalance. Even with the support systems installed by the property owners, there remains an unacceptable level of risk and liability. Regrettably, due to the foregoing, removal and replacement is in the interest of public health, safety and general welfare and would avoid liability. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on the analysis provided and in the opinion of the City, an unacceptable level of risk, liability, injury and/or damage to property due to the comprised stability of the two (2) Ficus trees. Subsequently, the two (2) Ficus aurea trees should be removed and replaced in accordance with the Tree Replacement requirements set forth in Chapter 17 of the Tree Protection Ordinance. Therefore, the Appeal of Tree Permit Application BD15-006663-001 should be Denied. In accordance with Sec. 17-6 Tree Replacement, of the City Code, Tree replacement chart. The tree replacement chart 17.6.1.1, shall be used to determine the total number and size of trees that shall be planted as replacement trees for all trees permitted to be removed. The replacement trees are based on the diameter in inches (DBH) of the trees to be removed. To determine the required replacement trees, calculate the total sum in inches of the diameters of all trees to be removed. This sum will result in one single number in inches that represents the combined total of the diameters of all trees to be removed. Diameter measurement shall be rounded up to the nearest inch. In accordance with the size specifications of the two (2) Ficus trees, the tree replacement options are as follows: City Commission — October 22, 2015 Page 4 of 6 Total diameter of tree(s) removed (146" DBH total) Total number of replacement trees required (2" DBH minimum each; 12' OR Total number of replacement trees required (4" DBH minimum each; 16' minimum height) minimum height) 1 Quantity of On -site replacement trees or Quantity of Off -Site* replacement trees 50 or 25 2 Or Tree Trust Fund Contribution $50 000 or a combination of all three *Applicants planting trees off -site must enter into an agreement with the City, as approved by the Planning & Zoning Department to plant the excess number of replacement trees on public property within the City Commission District of the subject property. An Approval should be considered upon the following conditions being met: 1. The owner of 3985 Loquat Avenue is to provide the City with a complete, detailed and comprehensive maintenance and restoration plan in perpetuity for the life of the Ficus aurea trees. Said Maintenance and Restoration Plan shall include, but not be limited to a detailed plan illustrating the support systems implemented in accordance with approved engineering and ANSI A300 Standards and Best Management Practices; the work schedule to ensure the safe useful life expectancy of the trees for health and vigor; mitigation readjustment plan after each wind event and expansion and/or decay of branches; appropriate pruning of dead, decayed and/or dying branches; the individuals responsible to perform and ensure this work is completed; Level 3 Risk Assessment evaluation; necessary cabling bracing on 3981 Loquat Avenue 2. Applicable permits to install the necessary support systems, e.g. Building and/or DERM permits. 3. A Tree Replacement Plan Agreement committing to the required replacement of the tree(s) should any of the following take place: a. Any of the Ficus trees die due to negligence b. The tree(s) fail, fall or tree parts failure warranting their removal c. A request for removal of the Ficus tree(s) due to "hazardous" conditions from the Owner or its successors d. A request for removal of the Ficus tree(s) due to conflicts with underground utilities such as the drainfield 4. A General Liability Insurance Coverage Plan approved by the City's Risk Manager City Commission — October 22, 2015 Page 5 of 6 5. A Hold Harmless Agreement that indemnifies, defends the City from any and all legal claims as a result of any property damage, personal injury or death caused from the failure of the trees or tree parts. The hold harmless must be in the form of a Covenant Running with the Land and in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The hold harmless should also include a section releasing the City from any claims the Owner might now have. REFERENCES: American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 Standards Best Management Practices Fite, Kelby and Thomas Smiley, E. (2008) Best Management Practices; Managing Trees During Construction. Champaign, IL: International Society of Arboriculture. Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 5: Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plan Maintenance -Standard Practices Thomas Smiley, E., Matheny Nelda, and Lilly Sharon (2011) Best Management Practices; Tree Risk Assessment. Champaign, IL: International Society of Arboriculture. Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 9: Tree, Shrub, and Other Wood Plant Management — Standard Practices Nelda Matheny and James R. Clark (1998) Trees and Development -A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees during Land Development by International Society of Arboriculture Watson, Gary and Himelick, E.B. (2005) Best Management Practices; Tree Planting. Champaign, IL; International Society of Arboriculture. Special companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 6: Tree, Shrub, and other Woody Plan Management Standard Practices (Planting and Transplanting) City Commission — October 22, 2015 Page 6 of 6 Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board File ID 15-00795 Resolution: HEPB-R-15-049 July 7, 2015 Item HEPB.2 Mr. Todd Tragash offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD DENYING AN APPEAL BY LORETO DOUCET, OF A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT AT 3985 LOQUAT AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA. Upon being seconded by Ms. Gary Hecht, the motion passed by a vote of 6-0: lAt) Mr. Timothy Barber Yes Mr. David Freedman Yes Mr. Gary Hecht Yes Mr. William E. Hopper, Jr. Yes Ms. Lynn B. Lewis Yes Mr. Hugh Ryan Absent Mr. Jordan Trachtenberg Absent Mr. Todd Tragash Yes Megan Schmitt Execution Date Preservation Officer STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE ) Personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, Megan Schmitt, Preservation Officer of the City of Miami, Florida, and acknowledges that she executed the foregoing Resolution. SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS—t DAY OF ` 2015. Vc /l t SY, 'rv1..1;1i ( D Print Notary Name Notaryublic State of Florida Personally know x or Produced I.D. Type and number of I.D. produced Did take an oath or Did not take an oath •{ My Commission Expires: Pa;17: VANESSATRUJILLO MY COMMISSION it FF 229944 �`�.? EXPIRES: July 11, 2019 ,4;jah$1 Bonded Thru Nota,yPubNc Underwllers