REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBJECT
Title
Proposed Project:
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: Appeal of a decision by the Director of Community Development denying a TREE REMOVAL PERMIT for one 32-inch diameter Deodar Cedar tree in the front yard.
Location: 1365 Fisher Hawk Drive (APN: 309-05-039), on a 15,892 square foot (0.36 acre) site
File #: PLNG-2026-0293
Zoning: R-0 (Low-density residential zoning district)
Applicant/Appellant/Owner: Michael Appio (Applicant/Owner/Appellant)
Environmental Review: Categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 (Class 1) and 15304 (Class 4).
Project Planner: Gino Victoria, 408-730-7430, GVictoria@sunnyvale.ca.gov
Report
REPORT IN BRIEF
General Plan: Low Density Residential
Existing Site Conditions: One-story single-family home
Surrounding Land Uses: One and two-story single-family homes
Issues: Appeal letter notes tree safety concerns and that the tree restricts the ability to enjoy reasonable use of the property.
Staff Recommendation: Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Director of Community Development to deny the Tree Removal Permit based on the Recommended Findings for Denial in Attachment 2.
BACKGROUND
The existing site is located within a single-family residential neighborhood and currently developed with a one-story single-family home, a detached garage, and a detached accessory structure. The lot is 15,892 square feet in size.
The applicant/appellant filed a Tree Removal Permit application on April 28, 2026, to remove one (1) Deodar Cedar tree located in the front yard, between two driveways.
The applicant’s reasons for removal cited in the application included broken gutters, roots under the foundation, and a desire to plant fruit trees.
A protected tree of significant size is defined as a tree 38-inches or greater in circumference measured at four and a half feet above grade per Sunnyvale Municipal Code (SMC) Section 19.94.030. The subject tree has a circumference of approximately 100.5 inches as measured 4.5 feet above grade; and therefore, qualifies as a protected tree.
Under SMC Section 19.94.060, one of the following standards must be met for approval of a Tree Removal Permit to remove a protected tree:
a) The tree is diseased or damaged;
b) The tree represents a potential hazard to people, structures or other trees;
c) The tree is in basically sound condition but restricts the owner's ability to enjoy the reasonable use or economic potential of the property, or unreasonably restricts an adjoining property owner's use or economic potential of the adjoining property. In the event this is the sole basis for the application, the following criteria shall be used to evaluate the application under this subsection:
1) The necessity of the requested removal to allow construction of improvements such as additions to existing buildings or incidental site amenities or to otherwise allow economic or reasonable enjoyment of property;
2) The topography of the land and the effect of the requested action on water retention and diversion or increased flow of surface water;
3) The approximate age of the tree relative to its average life span;
4) The potential effect of removal on soil erosion and stability where the tree is located;
5) Current and future visual screening potential;
6) The property has become over landscaped with trees so that they are too numerous, crowded, and unreasonably restricts the property owner's ability to use their land. In this event, selective removal can be approved in conjunction with acceptable arborist's practices;
7) The tree has outgrown its useful landscape value due to its inappropriate species, size and location, relative to the existing structures on the property;
8) Any other information the director of community development finds pertinent to the application.
The City’s ISA Certified Arborist, James LeMasters, inspected the tree on May 15, 2026, and found the tree to be in good health, he did not observe structural damage caused by the tree, and noted that the tree’s location in the center of the front yard provides adequate space for root expansion. Mr. LeMasters determined that it did not meet the criteria for removal and recommended its preservation.
Based on the City Arborist’s findings, staff’s site visit, and the City’s General Plan policies regarding maintaining and expanding the City’s urban tree canopy, the Director of Community Development concurred with the City Arborist’s recommendation in finding that the proposed project does not meet the criteria in SMC Section 19.94.060 in that conditions do not exist to justify the removal of a healthy and mature protected tree. The Director of Community Development issued a denial of the application for Tree Removal Permit on May 20, 2026. The City Arborist Tree Removal Permit Checklist and staff’s Site Visit Photos are included in Attachments 4 and 5.
The applicant/property owner appealed the Tree Removal Permit decision on May 29, 2026. See discussion below and the applicant’s Appeal Letter in Attachment 6.
Previous Actions on the Site
A Tree Removal Permit application was filed in 2011 (#2011-7665) for the removal of two (2) Deodar Cedar trees, one of the trees was approved for removal and the other was denied. The tree that was denied is the same tree that is currently proposed for removal. The combined Approval and Denial Letter for #2011-7665 can be found in Attachment 7.
EXISTING POLICY
The following are applicable policies from the City’s General Plan:
GENERAL PLAN COMMUNITY VISION GOALS
II. ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITY - To maintain and enhance the appearance of Sunnyvale, and to distinguish it from surrounding communities, through the promotion of high-quality architecture, the preservation of historic districts and structures, the maintenance of a healthy urban forest, and the provision of abundant and attractive open space.
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Urban Forestry
Policy LT-2.4 Maintain and regularly review and update regulations and practices for the planting, protection, removal, replacement, and long-term management of large trees on private property and City-owned golf courses and parks.
• LT-2.4a Strictly enforce Chapters 13.16 City Trees and 19.94 Tree Preservation to prevent the unauthorized removal, irreversible damage, and pruning of large protected trees.
Policy LT-2.5 Recognize the value of protected trees and heritage landmark trees (as defined in City ordinances) to the legacy, character, and livability of the community by expanding the designation and protection of large signature and native trees on private property and in City parks.
• LT-2.5a Expand community education on the value of trees and the benefits of tree planting and preservation.
• LT-2.5b Maintain and publicize a database of designated heritage trees. Require public noticing for proposed removal of heritage trees.
• LT-2.5c Emphasize tree relocation, site redesign, or special construction provisions over removing and irreparably damaging healthy heritage landmark trees and protected trees. Consider more than the economic value of a tree.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A decision to deny the appeal and uphold the Community Development Director’s decision to deny the Tree Removal Permit is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
However, if the Planning Commission grants the appeal, then the project would be subject to CEQA. A Class 1 Categorical Exemption for Existing Facilities would relieve this project from California Environmental Quality Act provisions (CEQA Guidelines Section 15301). Class 1 Categorical Exemptions consist of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination. Covered activities include, for example, the maintenance of existing landscaping, native growth, and water supply reservoirs. (Section 15301, subsection (h).) The project is also exempt from CEQA under the Class 4 Categorical Exemption in CEQA Guidelines Section 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land) as the tree proposed for removal is not a scenic tree.
DISCUSSION
Appeal
The applicant/property owner has appealed the denial of the Tree Removal Permit for the following stated reasons:
1. The tree represents a potential hazard to the property owner and residents if a limb breaks, falls, and damages the house.
2. The tree has restricted the owners’ ability to enjoy the reasonable use of the property. The tree roots have spread and impacts soil quality in over 25 percent of the usable yard, reducing the owner’s ability to use their land to plant fruit trees and vegetables.
3. The tree has outgrown its useful landscape value due to its inappropriate species, size and location relative to the existing structures on the property. The tree is not native and was planted in the late 1970’s for screening.
The appeal letter is included as Attachment 6.
Response to Appeal
As mentioned above, the subject Deodar Cedar tree is located in the center of the front yard and is several feet from the public sidewalk and street serving the neighborhood. Per Sunnyvale Municipal Code Section 19.94.030, protected trees are trees that have a circumference of 38 inches (12 inches in diameter) or greater, as measured 4.5 feet from the ground. The subject tree is 100.5 inches in circumference as measured 4.5 feet from the ground and qualifies as a protected tree.
Sunnyvale Municipal Code 19.94.060 includes criteria that must be met in order to approve the removal of a protected tree; however, the City’s certified arborist and community development staff found that the proposed project does not meet any of the criteria. A more detailed explanation is included in the Recommended Findings for Denial in Attachment 2.
Additionally, the proposed tree removal would not be consistent with the above General Plan policies in that the removal of a healthy and mature protected tree would contradict the city’s goal of preserving large canopy trees while increasing tree coverage in the city. Furthermore, granting of the appeal may also set a precedent for removal of other heathy, mature trees elsewhere in the city.
Fiscal Impact
No fiscal impacts are expected.
Public Contact
Public contact was made by posting the Planning Commission meeting agenda on the City's official notice bulletin board at City Hall, posting in the local paper (Sunnyvale Sun). In addition, the agenda and this report are available at the reception desk located on the first floor of City Hall at 456 W. Olive Avenue (during normal business hours), and on the City's website.
The City sent 73 notices to surrounding property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject site, in addition to standard noticing practices, including advertisement in the Sunnyvale Sun Newspaper.
As of the date of the staff report, staff has not received any letters, emails, or calls from the public.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Director of Community Development to deny the Tree Removal Permit based on the Recommended Findings for Denial in Attachment 2.
2. Grant the appeal and approve the Tree Removal Permit based on a finding that the proposed removal meets one of the standards in SMC Section 19.94.060 (to be articulated by the Commission as part of a motion), and subject to the Recommended Conditions of Approval in Attachment 3.
3. Grant the appeal based on a finding that the proposed removal meets one of the standards in SMC Section 19.94.060 (to be articulated by the Commission as part of a motion), with modified Conditions of Approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation
Alternative 1: Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Director of Community Development to deny the Tree Removal Permit based on the Recommended Findings for Denial in Attachment 2.
JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION
The tree is in healthy condition and does not exhibit disease or hazardous conditions. The subject tree contributes to the beautification of the neighborhood.
Levine Act
LEVINE ACT
The Levine Act (Gov. Code Section 84308) prohibits city officials from participating in certain decisions regarding licenses, permits, and other entitlements for use if the official has received a campaign contribution of more than $500 from a party, participant, or agent of a party or participant in the previous 12 months. The Levine Act is intended to prevent financial influence on decisions that affect specific, identifiable persons or participants. For more information see the Fair Political Practices Commission website: www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/pay-to-play-limits-and-prohibitions.html
An “X” in the checklist below indicates that the action being considered falls under a Levine Act category or exemption:
SUBJECT TO THE LEVINE ACT
___ Land development entitlements
_X_ Other permit, license, or entitlement for use
___ Contract or franchise
EXEMPT FROM THE LEVINE ACT
___ Competitively bid contract*
___ Labor or personal employment contract
___ Contract under $50,000 or non-fiscal
___ Contract between public agencies
___ General policy and legislative actions
* "Competitively bid" means a contract that must be awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
Staff
Prepared by: Gino Victoria, Assistant Planner
Reviewed by: Julia Klein, Principal Planner
Approved by: Shaunn Mendrin, Planning Officer
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity and Noticing Map
2. Recommended Findings for Denial
3. Recommended Conditions of Approval if Appeal is Granted
4. City Arborist Tree Removal Permit Checklist
5. Site Visit Photos
6. Appeal Letter
7. Approval and Denial Letter for 2011-7665
8. Arborist Memo