Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-17-2012 ph2 tree appeal 539 cerroro mauldo (2)counci lj acEnda REpoat Meeting Dat e 1-17-1 2 Item Numbe r PH2 C I T Y O F S A N L U I S O B I S P O FROM : Jay Walter, Director of Public Work s Prepared By :Ron Combs, City Arboris t SUBJECT :APPEAL OF TREE COMMITTEE DECISION TO DENY TREE REMOVA L APPLICATION AT 539 CERRO ROMAULD O RECOMMENDATIO N Adopt a resolution denying the appeal of the Tree Committee's decision to not allow the removal o f two palm trees at 539 Cerro Romauldo . DISCUSSIO N Backgroun d On November 28, 2011, Mary Parker filed a Tree Removal application for the removal of seve n palm trees at 539 Cerro Romauldo, citing multiple concerns . She proposed replacing the palm tree s with one crape myrtle tree . Mary Parker is the listed property owner (Attachment 1). The City Arborist reviewed the trees upon receipt of the removal application . The City Arborist ca n approve certain tree removals per Municipal Code Section 12 .24 .090 .D .1 . When tree removal is no t related to property development, the City Arborist may authorize a tree removal after finding any o f the following circumstances : a.The tree is a hazard to life or property, and removing it is the only feasible way to eliminat e the hazard b.The tree is dead or dying or damaged beyond reclamatio n c.The tree is causing severe root damage to public or private property, and removing the tre e is the only feasible way to eliminate the damag e However, in this case, the City Arborist was not able to approve the removal as no major defect , disease, or damage was noted to any of the seven trees . Per the City's Municipal Code Section 12 .24 .090 .D .2, when the City Arborist cannot authorize a tree removal, the Tree Committee shall review the application and may authorize removal if it find s one of the following circumstances : a.The tree is causing undue hardship to the property owner . Normal routine maintenance doe s not constitute a hardship, i .e ., cleaning of gutters, leaf raking, or root intrusion into a faile d sewer lateral, etc .; o r b.Removing the tree promotes good arboricultural practice ; or • c . Removing the tree will not harm the character or environment of the surroundin g neighborhood . PH2-1 • Tree Committee Appeal - 539 Cerro Romauldo Page 2 •Tree Committee Decisio n On Monday, November 28, 2011 the Tree Committee heard the removal request . All Tre e Committee members inspected the trees prior to the meeting . This is standard protocol for all tre e removal requests so that the members can make an informed decision at the public hearing . The Committee allowed the removal of three trees against the side of the house and one tree in the fron t for promotion of good arboricultural practices . Committee members agreed that the two remainin g skyline trees in the front area were an asset to the property and they could not make the necessar y findings for removal . The remaining tree was below the size limit requiring City approval fo r removal . (Attachment 2 ) There were no citizens, except the owner, at the Tree Committee meeting to speak either for o r against its removal . The Tree Committee denied two of the seven palms requested for removal . (Attachment 3 ) Appea l On December 8, 2011 the City Clerk's office received an appeal by the property owner of the Tre e Committee's decision of November 28, 2011 . That appeal was supplemented by additiona l information on December 27, 2011 (Attachment 4). In the appeal, the property owner identifie d that she wished to update her landscaping to reduce water consumption, pests, property damage, th e risk of injury, and yard waste . According to Municipal Code Section 1 .20 Appeals, the Council ca n consider any information they deem necessary to make their decision after the appellant is given th e opportunity to explain why the decision should be overturned . FISCAL IMPAC T There is no fiscal impact realized by the City in the denial of the appeal . ALTERNATIV E Uphold the appeal.The City Council could choose to uphold the appeal for tree removal, thereb y allowing the homeowner to remove their tree . ATTACHMENT S Tree Removal Applicatio n Tree Committee minutes Tree Committee decision lette r Tree Committee decision appea l Municipal Code Section s Resolution denying appeal Resolution upholding appea l t.\council agenda reports\201212012-01-17\ph1-5do cet wnadido tree appeal t weeter-wrnda,aeport-539 terror tree .docx • • PH2-2 4444..0g4fil I~u ~~~Ill!l11111 ATTACHMENT 1 -1 25 Prado Road . San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1 TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION . **If your tree removal is related to property development or a remodel, submit your request throug h the Planning Department at 919 Palm Street . as part of your Planning Application .** PLEASE NOTE :If your tree is approved fo r removal and posted, please call the office at th eend of your posting period to arrange to pick u pyour permit .The permit fee is $81 payable whe nyou pick up your permit (cash or check payable t o City of San Luis Obispo). *Please mark the tree/s proposed toberemoved with a large X with duct tape . **Tree removal applications must be received by the second Monday of the month to b e considered for the meeting on -the fourth Monday of the month . PLEASE FILL . OUT COMPLETELY . IMPORTANT :A tree removal application will onl ybe considered if accompanied by a *sketch/map* showing the street, structure(s) location an d location of all trees proposed for removal . Pleasedraw on the back of this form or fax on a separat e sheet of paper, along with your application . Address of tree(s) to be removed :Nearest cross street :e ((r Owner :~V1(,[/y rJ(W Telephone :_,i-5W-64f 7 Owner's Mailing Address :62 T .-maca444/f.0 Cda Zip Code :Q3'©S" -1'i/tee-Applicant (if other than owner): &i^00 Telephone :1;2SC-- /bt g (Ci 5 Applicant's mailing address :X)J(/3,23V Zip Code :93 gOC„ Tree species (Common names)6 Cato -.k y (Theyuhal (ti?vv l cdnS5 J Reasons for requesting removal : d ro-sth Ai-54471 1 C acw►W#'4 -he.i-o -pre,,Replacement tree planting proposed (REQUIRED):W r u c~tr u v ~(n 1-¢-81~i"tali f SG T , 0(A)iV)Ar i s ~[et'iq* Application will a consider & only if entirely filled out and signed by owner .If consideration of thi sapplication goes to Tree Committee, you or your agent are required to attend the meeting and will be notified .*If lane closure is required to perform the tree removal work, an encroachment permit must be obtained from -the City Public Works -Department at 919 Palm Street .* Tree Removal permit is valid for-6 month s* Any required "replacement trees" must be installed within 45 days after removal . MAIL OR FAX completed form to : City Arborist, 25 Prado Rd ., San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 , Phone : 781-7220 Fax : 542-986 8 Owner : Applicant : Date : _ Date : The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of it services, programs and activities . Telecommunications Device fo rthe Deaf (805) 781-7410.P H 2-3 Rev . 5-11 ATTACHMENT 1 -2 I • • ATTACHMENT 2 -1 TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES (EXCERPT ) MONDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 201 1 Corporation Yard Conference Roo m 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obisp o MEMBERS PRESENT : David Hensinger, David Savory, Suzan Ehdaie an d Matt Ritte r STAFF PRESENT : Ron Combs, Barbara Lync h TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION S 1 . 539 CERRO ROMAULDO (6 palms) Mary Parker, applicant, discussed the removal request, noting that the variou s palms were crowding the fence, impacting the foundation, and dangerously leaning . She reported that she wanted to re-landscape with drought-tolerant plant s and that she did not feel replacement tree plantings were necessary, as the propert y was heavily planted . Mr . Combs reported that the trees were relatively healthy and he could not mak e the findings necessary to approve the removal within his purview . Mr . Hensinger moved to separate the tree removal discussions and consider th e three by the house as one action item and the three in the front as a separate actio n item . Mr. Savory seconded the motion . The motion passed unanimously . Mr . Hensinger felt the trees against the side of the house were too close to th e building and the fence and agreed that the site was heavily planted . The Committee agreed with his comments . Mr . Hensinger moved to approve the removal of the three trees by the side of th e house, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and did .not require an y replacement plantings . Ms . Ehdaie seconded the motion . The motion passed unanimously . Mr . Hensinger felt the three palms in the front area were healthy, were an asset t o the property, and improved the skyline . PH2-5 ATTACHMENT 2 -2 Mr . Savory agreed the trees were an asset to the property and skyline, but felt th e front yard tree on the side of the walkway was misshapen and could be removed . Ms . Ehdaie agreed with Mr . Savory . Mr . Savory moved to approve the removal of the one front yard tree on the side o f the walkway, based on promoting good arboricultural practice . He could not mak e the necessary findings to remove the two other proposed trees on the application . Mr . Ritter seconded the motion . The motion passed unanimously . • • • PH2-6 • ATTACHMENT 3 November 30, 201 1 Mary Parke r 539 Cerro Romauld o San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5 Your application for tree removal at 539 Cerro Romauldo,has been reviewed b y the City of San Luis Obispo Tree Committee . After careful consideration of th e facts provided by you and an on-site inspection of the tree(s), the Committe e members have voted to approve your request for removal of 4Palmtree s (specified on permit ).2Palms along the frontage weredenied .The "Publi c Notice" must remain up for ten (10) days to allow members of the public to appea l the Committee's decision to the City Council . After this posting period, if no appea l is filed, a tree removal permit will be issued . You will need to call 781-7220 t o arrange to pick up and sign for the permit . If an appeal is received, the City Counci l • will hold a public hearing on the appeal within 45 calendar days of receipt of th e appeal . You will be notified both of the appeal and of the subsequent meeting b y the City Council . Please note that you are required to plant (one) 15 gallon replacement tree a s noted on your permit .If you have any questions regarding this process, you ma y contact Ron Combs at (805)781-7023, Monday through Friday . Respectfully , Ron Comb s Urban Foreste r commapp r • PH2-7 ATTACHMENT 4 -1 Date Receive d RECEIVED DEC C •aty ofMaimsan Luis o81spo Filing Fee :p m:66*l0 Dt7 Paid 3 N/A *REFER TO SECTION 4 APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCI L SECTION 2 . SUBJECT OF APPEAL 1.In accordance with the procedures set forth in Title 1, Chapter 1 .20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (copy attached),I hereby appeal the decision of the: 7Leew,A9,deg,. (Name of Officer, Committee or Commission decision being appealed) 2.The date the decision being appealed was rendered ://•4C .40// 3.The application or project was entitled :/ A{,ems /qe.vn 3 t 4.I discussed the matter with the following City staff member:Rod i ds()4r4 re)s-lam on ff,,29,0Z(:9 ,/ (Staff Members Name ar(d Department)(Date) 5.Has this matter been the subject of a previous appeal?If so, when was it heard and by whom : SECTION 3. REASON FOR APPEA L Explain specifically what action/s you are appealing and why you believe the Council should consider you r appeal . Include what evidence you have that supports your appeal .You may attach additional pages,if necessary. This form continues on the other side. Page 1 of 3 PH2-8 SECTION 1. APPELLANT INFORMATION /71 4 A).r'6Name to cm Phone Representative's Name Mailing Address and Zip Cod e Title Phone Fax F2x ca l 6-3q C.e.g,40/?ldo (loos Mailing Address and Zip Cod e eels : IMO .a3 I z • ATTACHMENT 4 -2 Reason for Appe a 4-4 l continue d #,c 0747 1 i 7TH det-0 1 e a~.1 /Q p wLD d 4- / 1 (~&42 `tiJ /A)o„)-(D.1,veJJt J s g, ,o a-1 /1 Pfdea. b /9-r/e.ice,~•y!~-1 #ee . Ste .i -/so .Jdddea~ks Div 44f<. /./ <S m 4 c o,J q ,20 .d 02o //4=ge„a,.4 deie,ks c)-C-4 This item is hereby caiendared for D k4 !Jk,VU1k12-'f I cc : City Attorney City Manage rDepartment Head IAA{Advisory Body Chairperson I Tr'. Advisory Body Liaison R.o,J 8 SClerkoriginal} a/. CITY 2— 8109 Page 2 of 3 PH2-9 ATTACHMENT 4 - 3 • Tree Removal Applicatio n Supplemental Lette r September 26, 201 1 As requested by : Mary N. Parke r 539 Cerro Romauld o San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5 805.544 .8047 805.440 .2312 (cell) m n pa rker(&pacbell. net Index : 1 .Owner letter Pagel-4 2 .Site photos Page 5 - 7 •3 .Support letter from neighbor Page 8 4.Information letter from Brezden Page 9 5 .New York Times Article Page - 10 -1 1 6 .Tree Removal Plan Page 12 • 1 PH2-1 0 • • • ATTACHMENT 4 -4 Dear San Luis Obispo Tree Committee : I have lived at 539 Cerro Romauldo since 1983 . It is my plan to continue to live in thi s house. I support the tree committee and the work you do . In order to continue to beautify my property, I have saved enough resources and have been working with a loca l contractor and landscape design expert to help me develop a landscape plan that will b e pleasing, enhance the neighborhood, and help save water resources . As a part of this landscaping I would like to remove the palm trees in my yard.. The palm trees should b e removed for these specific reasons : (1) it will allow me to conserve water, (2) it wil l reduce pest habitat in the area, (3) it will reduce the amount of damage to persona l property and potential injury in the neighborhood, (4) it will reduce the amount of waste I am sending to the landfill . CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS : My property currently contains 9 trees (excluding the palms) which I have planted . The trees I have planted include : 3 Birch 2 Orange 2 Appl e 1 Apricot (new tree with tag) 1 Fig (new tree with tag) REASON FOR PALM TREE REMOVAL Water conservation : I would like to do my part to conserve water by landscaping my yard with drought tolerant bushes and shrubs . Removal of these Palm trees will allow me to water my yar d less. Pest Control : Per a letter from Brezden Pest control, showing that Palm trees are a haven for rats an d other pests . Removal of the Palm trees would reduce the habitat for pests in the area . Please see the attached letter from Brezden Pest Control . Non Native Species: The palm trees are not native and do not provide shade . They do not provide an imag e suiting to the neighborhood . Reduce Landfill waste : Palm fronds do not biodegrade easily and are not allowed in the City Green Waste . Because they are so fibrous, fronds cannot be chipped or shredded .so must be put into the landfill. The bulk of just a single frond will over-fill my curbside garbage container , which I seldom manage to fill otherwise . 2 PH2-11 ATTACHMENT 4 - 5 • Damage to Personal Property and Potential Injury in the Neighborhoo d The palms on the side of the house are damaging the fence between our properties . They also are very close to the gas line to my house . The trees in the front of my house hav e palms that fall during storms . These come down so hard that they have damaged vehicle s and broken roof tiles in the past . The branches of the palms are studded with thorns an d if they were to land on a person, they could cause personal injury to people walking o n the sidewalk. I have the support of my neighbor . My next-door neighbor is willing to allow access vi a her side yard, which is currently asphalt and is the only way to access the palms in m y side yard . My neighbor is planning on removing the asphalt . Without that access, th e maintenance of the palms would be even more costly and difficult if not impossible to manage . Neighborhood Characte r Removing the palms "does not harm the character or environment of the surroundin g neighborhood". In fact, the palm trees do nothing toward creating an attractive, cohesive , neighborhood character . They provide no visual interest from the sidewalk (when you are close to the palm trees, they give an appearance of large poles stuck in the ground), the y do not provide shade, and they are inconsistent with the types of trees commonly see n around my neighborhood . Their removal will allow me to be more in line with severa l drought tolerant yards that currently exist . Removing the palms will allow me to upgrade the appearance of my front yard and "be a better neighbor ." I think a Japanese Crape Myrtle (on the City Street Tree Master Lis t would be an appropriate replacement. MITIGATION : I would like to plant a Crape Myrtle tree to mitigate the removal of the Palm trees . I have looke d at the City Street Tree master list and Japanese Crape Myrtle would not be dangerous, ca n reasonably maintained, would not harbor rats, would create less waste and would provide shad e for my front yard . In addition the Crape Myrtle would be aesthetically pleasing and support th e need for less water in a drought tolerant landscap e ADDITIONAL INFORMATION : I have included several exhibits showing my home . I have included a letter from Brezden Pest control, outlining how Palm Trees harbor pests .A letter of support for the palm tree removal from my neighbor is also included .. I have included the November 2006 New York Times Article titled "City Says Its Urban Jungl e Has Little Room for Palms ." LA and Miami are moving away from palms citing the dangers o f 3 PH2-12 • • ATTACHMENT 4 -6 •Photos of the site : View of house from across the street — note pole appearance of Palm s If the tree grows it is possibl e that the narrow section of the trun k would not be able to suppor t the heavy crown. Note the narrowing of the trunk. y lulef _: 3"i',•ee rt•i j ilt' \.n .. iti the iI )Utt • 5 PH2-13 ATTACHMENT 4 -7 i9tire 2 ree on the East of the hous e itnn .e .3 ' acro‘v -pace hens een house ;Ind fenc e Note gas line 6 PH2-14 iEtutT 4 \ iew Loh; nei le,doo 's 'side `4 fence i .lure I.":-nd ding to the land fil l 7 ATTACHMENT 4 - 9 • To : The Tree Committe e From : Sandy Ahear n 537 Cerro Romauld o Re : 539 Cerro Romauld o I support the removal of the palm trees from 539 Cerro Romauldo . I live on the west side of th e property . The fronds from the palms have broken tiles on my roof when they fall . The trees ar e so tall resulting in fronds falling with great force . The falling fronds are dangerous . As the palm trees have gotten larger they are destroying the fence that separates our properties . Palm trees also harbor rats . I have a pest control service to manage the rats in my yard . I am currently developing a plan for my yard which will turn the area that is currently asphal t between the two properties into a garden area . This change will result in there being no access t o the palms . The palms on the side of the house cannot be accessed from 539 . The new landscape plan will be in line with the drought tolerant landscape in my yard, as well a s several houses on the street. • • 8 PH2-16 • Mary Parker September 15, 201 1 539 Cerro Romauld o San Luis Obispo, CA 93405-112 8 To whom this concerns , My name is John Brezden . I have owned and operated Brezden Pest Control located in Sa n Luis Obispo since 1980 . I started my pest control career in Anaheim in 1974 . I hav e witnessed many pest situations throughout the years and know firsthand that Palm Tree s are not immune when it comes to pest and rodent infestations due to the harborage area s and food supplies they offer. Rats climb palm trees to build their nests in the inviting dead fronds, also known as shag . This brown skirt that forms against the upper trunk of a palm tree provides shelter for bot h birds and vermin . Rats may readily climb palm trees to reach this shelter or nibble on th e fruits that form high above the ground . Rats and mice are important rodent pest s entering homes and warehouses for food and harborage . These rodents eat any kind o f food that people eat. They also contaminate 10 times as much food as they eat, with urine , droppings and hair. They can carry at least 10 different kinds of diseases including buboni c plague, murine typhus, spirochetal jaundice, Leptospirosis, rabies, rat bite fever, an d bacterial food poisoning . Many times rats bite sleeping children while trying to get bits o f food on the child that were not washed off before going to bed . Rats and mice also star t fires by gnawing matches and electrical wires in homes . The Norway rat, roof rat and hous e mouse are the most persistent rodent populations in need of control . Brezden Pest Control has performed bi-monthly rodent pest services for Mary Parker at her Cerro Romauldo residence in San Luis Obispo since 6/2007 . As part of our Intergraded Pes t Management program (IPM) our service Technicians pay special attention to areas of harborage and available food supplies in an effort to educate our Customers and eliminat e conditions known to lead to rodent infestation . Our Technicians are taught that Palm Tree sare at the top of the list when it comes as adverse situations that supply readymad eharborage and ample food supply from the fruits palm trees produce . Thank you so much , John Brezden 9 SERVING ALL OF SAN LUIS OBISPO & NORTHERN SANTA BARBARA COUNTIES PESTMANAOEUENTASSOOSrAi ONr Ono!/ PH2-1 7;..rw~ ai ..eN4n e • City Says Its Urban Jungle Has Little Room for Palms - New York limes http ://www .nytimes .co /2006/11/26/us/26palm .htnl%( ATTACHMENT 4 - 1 1 HOI`E PAGE MYTNES TODAYS PAPER VIDEO PeSST POPULAR TIES TOPIC S € ljc ;\ctu rk € intcs U .S . Subscribe: Digital! Horne Delivery L g M Register Now ING 3r DI sci7 °U .S .AINY T WORLD U.S . N .Y. / REGION BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY SCIENCE HEALTH SPORTS OPINION ARTS STYLE TRAVEL JOBS REAL ESTATE AUTO S POUTICS WASHINGTON EDUCATIO N 1 of 3 LOS ANGELES JOURNAL City Says Its Urban Jungle Has Little Room for Palm s By JENNIFER STEINHAUE R Pub1shed:Noweather26,2008 LOS ANGELES, Nov. 25 — The palm tree, like so much here,rose to fame largely because of vanity and image control, then met it s downfall when the money ran out . The Los Angeles City Council, fed up with the cost of caring for the trees , with their errant fronds that plung e perilously each winter, and with the fact that they provid e little shade, have declared them the enemy of the urba n forest and wish that most would disappear . The city plans to plant a million trees of other types ove r the next several years so that, as palms die off, most wil l be replaced with sycamores, crape myrtles and other tree s indigenous to Southern California . (Exceptions will be the palms growing in places that tourists, if not residents , demand to see palmy, like Hollywood and Sunse t Boulevards.) The department that supplies trees at the request of Lo s Angeles residents no longer offers palms, and the Sant a Monica Boulevard reconstruction project, which include s i,000 new trees, will feature a mere 40 palms . By slowly pushing out the palm, Los Angeles joins Miam i and other maturing cities that have determined they ca n live without their youthful indulgence . "They are iconic,"conceded Josh Kamensky, th e spokesman for Eric Garcetti, the council president . "They are also really bad for our city." Of the various varieties of palms, none is reall y indigenous to Los Angeles . In the mid-loth century, land barons relocating to Los Angeles and Hollywood from th e East decided that palm trees denoted the easy life, an d began planting them at their homes and offices, said Leland Lai, the president of the Palm Society of Souther n California, a research group that supports keeping the city lined with palms . Hotels and housing subdivisions came next,and the state's transportation authority planted the trees on public parkways "because they decided they were easy, fast growing and don't need a lot of water," Mr. Lai said . 10 More Articles In National a Today's Headlines Daily E-Mai l Eimrs Sign up fora rouxllp of the days top stories, sent awry morning . Sign U l See Sample I Privacy Policy MOST POPULAR E•M41LED SLOGGED SEARCHED VIEWE D I .Maureen Dowd :Egghead and Blockheads 2.Autistic and Seeking a Place in an Adult Worl d 3.The Education Issue : What if the Secret to Success Is Failure ? 4.Thomas L. Friedman : Israel : Adrift at Sea Alon e 5.Gail Collins: Rick Petry, UberTexa n 6.Ray's Pizza, the First of Many, Counts Down to Its Las t Slice 7.The Education Issue : My Family's Experiment in Extreme Schoolin g 8.News Analysis : Rupture With Vatican Reveals a Changed Ireland 9.A Mother's War on Germs at Fast-Food Playland s to . Editorial : Leadership Crisis Go to Complete List a PH2-18 9/18/2011 5 :35 1 1 Ent% Flores for The New York Times Pains in Echo Park, near davrpoe n Los Angeles. Wtlh the cost of maintenance going up, the city has decided to start replacing its pai n trees. SIGN IN TO E-MkL TH6 PRIN T REPRINTS J.EMI*Flores for The New York Thos Pane,Ike these on Sunset Boulevard, are Los Angeles loans. City Says Its Urban Jungle Has Little Room for Palms - New York limes hap ://www .nytimes.com/2006/11/26/us/26palm.html%( ATTACHMENT 4 - 1 2 But as it turns out, palm trees, particularly Mexican fan palms, feature big, spiky frond s that fall off the trees in the Santa Ana winds that sweep through in winter . The palms cloak cars, and occasionally pedestrians, said city officials, who also say that palm tree s do not clean as much carbon monoxide from the air as do shadier trees . Palms are hard to care for,so hard that the city has a line in its tree-trimming budge t just for them . Last year, it was approximately $385,000,but proper care dictates a n expense of about $630,000 per year, said Nazario Sauceda, the assistant director of th e bureau of street services in the city's Department of Public Works . Many of the trees planted in the 1950s "are getting toward the end of their lives," Mr . Lai said. "Some are 8o to too feet high and 70 years old, and these are not self-cleanin g palms," which means they need maintenance to remove old fronds . Last year, the city removed nearly 8,000 cubic yards of dried palm fronds from th e public right of way, Mr. Sauceda said. Date palms, which make a bit less of a mess, have become prohibitively expensive t o import, mostly from the Middle East, because Las Vegas has snapped them all up . And with only 18 percent of the city shaded (the national average is 28 percent), Los Angele s wants trees that shelter people from the sun . 'This is an issue of the image of Southern California," Mr . Lai said. "And not so muc h an issue of the provision of oxygen ." It is unlikely that the rest of the world will start to associate Los Angeles with, say, th e jacaranda . For Americans looking for personal reinvention, palm trees are part of the physica l evidence that Los Angeles is the right place to be, up there with the Hollywood sig n peeking out from Beachwood Canyon and swimming pools that shimmer in October. The trees are also used in many company logos, including that of Jet Blue's frequen t flyer program, which features the skyline of New York and the palms of Los Angeles . "While the palm tree is closely identified with Southern California," Jenny Dervin,a spokeswoman for JetBlue, said in an e-mail message, "it also evokes some of our islan d destinations — Puerto Rico, Aruba, Dominican Republic — so we maybe able to survive this episode." Mr. Lai suggested that the city's actions might be rash and that it investigate the use o f palm trees that are easier to care for than the Mexican fan variety . Trees are so integra l to the image of Los Angeles, he said, that they are worth the bother . "Hawaii has a lot of coconut tree liability problems because they fall on people's heads ," he said."But the people there have said, That is something that we have to accept '" More Articles in National s e'L ,Get 50% Off The New York Times & Free All Digital Access . Ads by Google what's this? Plant Nurser y Baron Brothers Nursery, Supplyin g Premium Plants, Trees and Much More www.BaronBrothers .com Related Searche s • Trees and Shrubs Los Angeles (Calif ) INSIDE NYTIMES .COM • • Reflections on 911 1 10 Years Late r eXctu ork arm You(M) Browse Personal Storie s ADVERTISEMENTS wrnreus.com ARTS Jusbn Timberlake. Is there arrfling he can't do?nylimescomlarts SAVE 54%EneNcwilortcetmw s ON HOME DELIVERY OF THE WEEKENDER SUBSCRIBE NOW ' 1 1 2 of 3 PH2-19 9/18/2011 5 :351 ATTACHMENT 4 - 13 • TREE REMOVAL PLAN FOR 539 CERRO ROMAULD O 25 '0 25 '50 'I I -N - GRAPHIC SCALE i 12 PH2-2 0 12 "0 PALM TO BE REMOVE D 15 "0 PALM TO BE REMOVE D 12"0 PALM TO BE REMOVE D 24 "0 PALM TO BE REMOVE D TREES PLANTED BY CURRENT RESIDENT :9 TREES (FUTURE) PLANTED BY CURRENT RESIDENT :1 PALM TREES TO BE REMOVED :7 PROPOSED JAPANESE CRAP EMYRTLE TREE TO BE PLANTE DBY CURRENT RESIDEN T 6 "0 BIRCH TREE PLANTED B YCURRENT RESIDEN T 3 "0 BIRCH TREE PLANTED B YCURRENT RESIDEN T 8"0 BIRCH TREE PLANTED B Y12"0 APPLE TREE PLANTED I4., " ' ►'CURRENT RESIDEN TBY CURRENT RESIDEN T 6"0 ORANGE TREE PLANTEDBY CURRENT RESIDEN T 9 "0 APPLE TREE PLANTED B YCURRENT RESIDEN T 2"0 APRICOT TREE PLANTEDBY CURRENT RESIDENT 1 "0 FIG TREE PLANTED B YCURRENT RESIDEN T 8"0 ORANGE TREE PLANTE DBY CURRENT RESIDENT • • ATTACHMENT 4 - 1 4 city of san tuts OBiS O 25 Prado Road • San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1 • November 30, 201 1 Mary Parke r 539 Cerro Romauld o San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5 Your application for tree removal at 539 Cerro Romauldo,has been reviewed b y the City of San Luis Obispo Tree Committee . After careful consideration of th e facts provided by you and an on-site inspection of the tree(s), the Committe e members have voted to approve your request for removal of 4 Palm trees (specified on permit ). 2 Palms along the frontage were denied .The "Publi c Notice" must remain up for ten (10) days to allow members of the public to appea l the Committee's decision to the City Council . After this posting period, if no appea l is filed, a tree removal permit will be issued . You will need to call 781-7220 t o arrange to pick up and sign for the permit . If an appeal is received, the City Counci l • will hold a public hearing on the appeal within 45 calendar days of receipt of th e appeal . You will be notified both of the appeal and of the subsequent meeting by the City Council . Please note that you are required to plant (one) 15 gallon replacement tree a s noted on your permit .If you have any questions regarding this process, you may contact Ron Combs at (805)781-7023, Monday through Friday . Respectfully , Ron Comb s Urban Foreste r commapp r The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities .Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410 . • PH2 ATTACHMENT 4 - 1 5 December 27, 201 1 To: San Luis Obispo City Counci l From : Mary N . Parker Re : Appeal to the City Council — Tree Removal RECEIVE D DEC 2 201 1 SLO CITY CLER K SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATIO N At the tree committee meeting November 28, 2011, the committee approved removal of all but two pal m trees from my front yard . I am appealing the decision on the remaining two trees . The committe e concluded there was not enough evidence to support removal of the trees based on undue hardship o r good arboricultural practices (see attached Meeting Minutes). My appeal includes a Certified Arboris t Report as additional evidence supporting the removal of the trees based on environmental, safety an d cost-of-maintenance factors . Removal of the palm trees is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of Ordinance No . 1544.From Section 12 .24.090 Tree Removal : A.Policy. The city values trees as an important part of the natural and economic environmen t and efforts shall be made to preserve them whenever possible and feasible . When reviewin g requests for tree removal permits, the city shall discourage removing desirable trees an d shall consider approving removal of desirable trees only as a last resort alternative for th e applicant. The City's Tree Removal Policy is to protect "desirable" trees . The Purpose and Intent of the Tre e Ordinance (Section 12 .24 .0110, below) indentifies the desired effects of the tree regulation . Per this Section of the Ordinance, the palm trees are not desirable trees : From Section 12 .24.010 Purpose and Intent : B.This chapter establishes policies, regulations and specifications necessary to gover n installation, maintenance, removal and preservation of trees to beauty the city, to purify th e air, to provide shade and wind protection, add environmental and economic values an d preserve trees with historic or unusual value . D. It is the policy of the city to encourage new free planting on public andprivate property and to cultivate a flourishing urban forest with an emphasis on native and drought toleran t species. . •Beautify the city : I am doing my part to beautify the city by improving my front yard . My proposal includes planting replacement trees that are native and drought-tolerant . •Purify the air : Palm trees filter less carbon monoxide from the air than many other tree species (se e the New York Time article, attached), and their excessively high foliage do little to filter dust an d particulates from the air near the ground . •Provide shade and wind protection :These tall palm trees offer no protection from sun or wind . They are a hazard in windy conditions due to falling fronds and seeds . •Add environmental value :Removing the palms would be environmentally beneficial . The Fan Palm is invasive in this area (see Arborist Report). Furthermore, palms contribute to our landfill problem s PH2-22 • ATTACHMENT 4 - 1 6 (see NYT article). Fronds are not accepted in the green waste, and their hard fibrous stalks rui n shredding machinery . Their entire bulk goes directly to the landfill and does not biodegrade . •Economic value :Removal of the palm trees is an economic benefit to the City because it reduce s landfill waste and creek bed maintenance (see Arborist Report). Removal will not decrease the value of my property because I will be adding new trees and significantly improving the front yard at th e same time . Besides, I have no intention of selling my home where I have lived in since 1983 . •Preserve trees with historic or unusual value :The only thing unusual about my palm trees is their height, however, this height is not an asset (see Arborist Report and NYT article). Neither has bee n designated as a Heritage tree, and neither species is on the Master Tree list . •Emphasis on native and drought-tolerant species :My new drought-tolerant plants will struggle t o flourish in the re-landscaped yard if they have to compete with the Queen Palm . The palm i s incompatible with drought-tolerant landscaping because it requires so much water and fertilizer t o keep healthy (see Arborist Report). Falling fronds are a real danger to people and property (see NYT article and Arborist Report), and th e problem was inadequately considered at the tree committee meeting . There is a school and baseball fiel d directly across the street, and many people park and play near these trees each day . Maintenance of palm trees to prevent falling fronds exceeds the "normal routine maintenance" associated with other types o f trees . Pruning costs at least $500 biannually (see Arborist Report), and even this cannot guarantee that n o fronds or seeds will fall . I am retired, on a fixed income, and cannot afford this ; nor can I afford th e liability of accidents . My original permit application proposed one 15-gallon replacement tree in exchange for removing all th e palm trees from my front yard (see attached Application). If I am allowed to remove these last two palms , I am willing to plant an additional replacement tree, also from the Master List . By removing all the palms , planting two replacement trees from the Master List, I will improve my front yard in a manner consisten t with the broader intent of the Ordinance . Thank you , Mary N . Parker Enclosures : Appeal to the City Council form Arborist Report Photos, annotated for Appea l Tree Removal Plan, annotated for Appea l Ron Combs lette r Tree Removal Permit Tree Committee Meeting Minute s Correction to Minutes / /~Tree Removal Application and Supplemental Letter :~()b M 71 a I /.06-,tD !1 New York Times article (submitted in original application ) Tree Removal Plan (submitted in original application) PH2-2 3 • • • ATTACHMENT 4 - 17 • GREENVALE TREE, COMPANY Arborist Repor t For:Mary Parker Location :539 Cerro Remauld o San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5 Plant ID Fan Palm Queen Pal m Problem Fan Palm hazard due to falling debris and invasiveness of specie s Queen Palm trunk narrowing and restriction, high water use . Fact/Observations ■The Fan Palm is quite tall and probably 50 years old . Fan palms produc e one to two rows of dying/dead fronds per year that if left will likely fal l within three to five years after dying . Fan palms are listed by th e California Invasive Weed Council as invasive in riparian environments . .Queen palm has a noticeable narrowed area in the midsection . Queen Palms require water at least three times per week to retain health and vigor (per UC standards) CONCLUSION S Fan Palm –Under normal growth conditions this palm will have one to two row s of dead or dying fronds per year . Each frond weighs from 2 to 4 pound s depending on water content . Fronds tend to completely defoliate in three to fiv e years after dying and drying out . If not physically removed before defoliation th e old (dead) fronds will fall . With this palm, so close to the street and sidewalk , approaching 65 to 70 feet, damage or injury from falling debris is likely . An arborist with a high lift (lift should exceed 60 feet) should trim off the dead o r dying fronds at least every two years . The tree should only be accessed with a lift P H 2-24 • • } • • ATTACHMENT 4 - 1 8 because climbing with spikes will wound the palm and potentially open the tree t o disease . Current cost for trimming this one particular tree and hauling the frond s and seed heads to the landfill (palm waste cannot be composted) is $500 .00 . Thi s cost may be a burden to someone, particularly if on a restricted income . Even i f fronds are trimmed off, in strong winds debris such as flowering parts or seed s can fall and cause injury or damage . I would not suggest parking or walkin g beneath this tree in a windstorm when there are dry dead fronds on the tree. This fan palm is also on the invasive plant list in riparian environments . Greenvale Tree Company, and other tree companies, have worked for the Sa n Luis Obispo Natural Resources Department removing both Fan Palm and Canar y Island Palm seedlings from creek areas. Since there are creeks in th e neighborhood this palm may contribute to seedlings that can choke the creek bed s and removal of these seedlings may be costly for the city . Seeds can be spread b y animals that feed on the seeds or inhabit the canopies such as birds, rats an d opossum . Rats have been noted to inhabit this particular fan palm . Queen Palm –This palm has an unusual deformity in its mid section . Thi s deformity is typical of a palm's response at a certain period in its life to havin g been consistently over-pruned for a period of time, or having been stored at a nursery for an extended time in a "crowded" position . In both cases the trunk caliper is not allowed to fully develop and a "restriction", or narrowin g occurs .The palm can function normally for many years . However, as it gets olde r and the weight of new growth increases, this narrowed area becomes a wea k point. Queen Palms have been noted to physically fail at this point and as a resul t are subject to windthrow (per notes from Dr . Ann Chase, Chase Research laboratories IPM Conference, Cal Poly). Queen Palms are fast growers and are big demanders of both water and fertilizers . The UC Extension recommends watering the tree every three days, perhaps mor e in extreme heat, wind or dry period. Winter recommendations are every two days . Fertilizing is somewhat more ambiguous with recommendations anywhere from 2 times per year to 5 times per year . Dr. James Downer, a palm expert for th e Venture UC Extension service, has stated that of all palm species Queen Palm s demand the most Nitrogen. Nitrogen is leachable and increases the Nitrate level s of Aquifers and surface water. RECOMMENDATION S It is my recommendation that these two trees be removed . The Fan palm has the real potential to be a hazard through falling plant parts . At the height of the tree and weight of fronds real injury or damage can occur . The cost to maintain this tall tree is also a real burden to the owner and that cost i s PH2-25 ATTACHMENT 4 - 1 9 likely to increase in coming years . Furthermore the invasiveness of this plant i s real and the probability of seedlings starting in the nearby creeks will add expens e to the city . The Queen Palm has a deformity that is real and as the tree grows will become a weak point. In addition the demand for water and fertilizer does not make for a good fit with drought tolerant landscaping . In my opinion as a Certified Arborist it would be best if both palms were removed. ISA Certified Arborist, #926 2 California Pest Control Advisor, #7063 1 Member California Invasive Plant Counci l *Recommendations are made on sound arboricultural and horticultural research and experience . There may be othe r factors unseen, or from another point of view that can be considered as influential . PH2-26 • • Queen Palm is unhealthy . Trunk is narrowed and may no t be able to support growth . Canopy is also in the powe r lines to the house . PH2-28 ••ATTAC\IT 4 - 2 2 PROPOSED JAPANESE CRAP E MYRTLE TREE TO BE PLANTED BY CURRENT RESIDEN T TREE REMOVAL PLAN FOR 539 CERRO ROMAULD O -N - Ambi--A-W F17Y Arr.eA ) PH2-29 ATTACHMENT 4 - 2 3 city ol:san Luis osispo • 25 Prado Road • San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1 November 30, 201 1 Mary Parke r 539 Cerro Romauld o San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5 Your application for tree removal at 539 Cerro Romauldo,has been reviewed b y the City of San Luis Obispo Tree Committee . After careful consideration of th e facts provided by you and an on-site inspection of the tree(s), the Committe e members have voted to approve your request for removal of 4 Palm tree s (specified on permit ). 2 Palms along the frontage were denied .The "Publi c Notice" must remain up for ten (10) days to allow members of the public to appea l the Committee's decision to the City Council . After this posting period, if no appea l is filed, a tree removal permit will be issued . You will need to call 781-7220 t o arrange to pick up and sign for the permit . If an appeal is received, the City Counci l will hold a public hearing on the appeal within 45 calendar days of receipt of th e appeal . You will be notified both of the appeal and of the subsequent meeting b y the City Council . Please note that you are required to plant (one) 15 gallon replacement tree a s noted on your permit.If you have any questions regarding this process, you ma y contact Ron Combs at (805)781-7023, Monday through Friday . Respectfully , Ron Comb s Urban Foreste r commappr The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and tiff i . Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805)781-7410.3 • ATTACHMENT 4 - 2 4 city of san Luis ornsp o Public Works Department . 25 Prado Road . San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-731 4 TREE REMOVAL PERMI T Applicant ql" a//A'J Phone 3 -509 7 Applicant's Address g Cc,r70 Ra,let tIJdO S'/® Location of Tree(s) S'u'edea-124/r/0/7 . Tree Species DBH /2 'a9 Pe/%/:f (Botanical name) 1 /(Common name ) //. .9 >,V or a r Date Posed for Appeal ,9-Zq—//to – Reason for Removal Reviewed by Tree Committee Yes .>< No Date ,//-$°// Comments Requirements 7 'o ,Q'//iife-/.P17 Xre3n 7076 7"t0 Bird nesting season is typically March 1 through August 15 . It is your responsibility t o ensure that no birds are harmed and an active nest is not destroyed or disturbed in th e removal of your tree(s). SLO County maintains a list of qualified biologists or wildlife experts at www .sloplanning .or g Applicant /fl iCJLL/' Date - City Arborist dam/ , Date /029//. Cost :_ $81 .00 . Make checks payable to City of San Luis Obisp o G :\Asset-Manazetnent\Trees\Fo(ms\TREE REMOVAL PERMIT form .doc PH2-3 1 ~ii~!iiu!IIIIII ATTACHMENT 4 - 2 5 1 TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTE S MONDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 201 1 Corporation Yard Conference Roo m 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obisp o MEMBERS PRESENT : David Hensinger, David Savory, Suzan Ehdaie an d Matt Ritter STAFF PRESENT :Ron Combs, Barbara Lync h PUBLIC COMMENT Sandra Lakeman, retired Cal Poly professor, was concerned about th e beautification of the downtown area and supported the efforts of Save Ou r Downtown . She did not favor removal of any healthy downtown trees, especiall y the signature ficus species . MINUTES : Approval of Minutes of October 24, 201 1 Mr . Savory moved to approve the minutes as submitted . Mr . Hensinger seconded the motion . The motion passed unanimously . 1.-1)0141 p n TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION S 1 . 539 CERRO ROMAULDO (6 palms ) Mary Parker, applicant, discussed the removal request, noting that the variou s palms were crowding the fence, impacting the foundation, and dangerousl y leaning . She reported that she wanted to re-landscape with drought-tolerant plant s and that she did not feel replacement tree plantings were necessary, as the propert y was heavily planted . Mr . Combs reported that the trees were relatively healthy and he could not make the findings necessary to approve the removal within his purview . Mr. Hensinger moved to separate the tree removal discussions and consider th e three by the house as one action item and the three in the front as a separate actio n item . Mr . Savory seconded the motion .PH2-32 • • • • • EvA of ret .evu't+ • ATTACHMENT 4 - 2 6 2 The motion passed unanimously . Mr . Hensinger felt the tree against the side of the house were too close to th e building and the fence and agreed that the site was heavily planted . The Committee agreed with his comments . Mr . Hensinger moved to approve the removal of the three trees by the side of th e house, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and did not require an y replacement plantings . Ms. Ehdaie seconded the motion . The motion passed unanimously . Mr. Hensinger felt the three palms in the front area were healthy, were an asset t o the property, and improved the skyline . Mr . Savory agreed the trees were an asset to the property and skyline, but felt th e front yard tree on the side of the walkway was misshapen and could be removed . Ms . Ehdaie agreed with Mr . Savory . Mr. Savory moved to approve the removal of the one front yard tree on the side o f the walkway, based on promoting good arboricultural practice . He could not make the necessary findings to remove the two other proposed trees on the application . Mr . Ritter seconded the motion . The motion passed unanimously . 2 .308 SAN MIGUEL (Aleppo pine ; Italian Stone pine ) Shaun Collarman, applicant representative, discussed the removal request, noting in specific the Aleppo's poor structure and history of broken limbs and th e significant lean of the Stone pine . He stated removals would allow nearby oaks t o thrive . Mr . Combs reported that the Aleppo had a hanging limb and agreed the Italia n Stone pine was leaning . However, he reported that the trees were relativel y healthy and he could not make the findings necessary to approve the removal within his purview . Mr. Hensinger agreed the pines were crowded and the oaks could fill in if th e pines were removed. Mr. Savory agreed . ATTACHMENT 4 - 2 7 Correction to Tree Committee Meeting Minutes dated November 28, 2011 . • In appealing the case for the removal of the (2) palm trees in the front yard of 539 Cerr o Romauldo, an error was discovered in the meeting minutes . In summarizing the arguments presented by the resident Mary Parker the minutes showed th e following :"(Mary Parker] did not feel replacement tree plantings were necessary, as th e property was heavily planted." CORRECTION : The planting plan submitted by Mrs . Parker shows (1) Crape Myrtle tree to b e planted . It was the intention of the resident to provide a replacement tree . In addition, i t should be clear that "heavily planted" was in reference to the (9) trees that Mrs . Parker ha d planted while residing at 539 Cerro Romauldo . Mary Parker • 539 Cerro Romauld o San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 • PH2-34 ATTAc HMb Y4 -2 8 25 Prado Road . San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIO N **If your tree removal is related to property development or a remodel, submit your request throug h the Planning bepartment at 919 Palm Street . as part of your Planning Application .** IMPORTANT :A tree removal application will only PLEASENOTE :If your tree is approved fo r be considered if accompanied by a *sketch/map*removal and posted, please call the office at th e showing the street, structure(s) location and end of your posting period to arrange tO pick u p location of all trees proposed for removal . Please your permit .The permit fee is $81 payable whe n draw on the back of this form or fax on a separate you pick up your permit (cash or check payable to sheet of paper, along with your application_City of San Luis Obispo). **Please mark the tree/s proposed tobe removed with a large X with duct tape . **Tree removal applications must be received by the second Monday of the month to b e considered for themeeting on "thefourthMonday of the month . PLEASE FILL. OUT COMPLETELY . Address of tree(s) to be removed :,39 00/PC)RWk -(.L& Nearest cross street :re(Ct y~Dog in yard? Yes I,NoJ Owner:/`l(Telephone :y~-eja.7 Owners Mailing Address :,S c .l),i(2sXgyyfmitch Zip Code :gS g OS Applicant (if other than owner):&t tee,el.(1()Telephone :95.S'"--/(6 ~C4*".5 ) •Applicant's mailing address :3~Zip Code :93 y~( Tree species (Common riames)6 fair\3 kill .Cv rr,Otie j mSS) MAIL OR FAX completed form to :City Arborist,25 Prado Rd ., San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 , Phone : 781-7220 Fox : 542-9868 Reasons for requesting removal : "~I r...i ~~4 of9cvrr`.SOrsiev'Jt 4C)7.twde r l;-he ItoReplacement tree planting proposed (REQUIRED):W i t ti'N 0051.1-el. O(aNpAr t*tS 1 ,~(r ,*Application will Be consider id only if entirely filled out and signed by owner .If consideration of thi s application goes to Tree Committee, you or your agent are required to attend the meeting and will be notified .*If lane closure is required to perform the tree removal work,an encroachment permit must be obtained from " the City Public Works bepartment at 919 Palm Street . *Tree Removal permit is valid for-6 months *Any required "replacement trees" must be installed within 45 days after removal . "-)4' • Owner ; Applicant : Date :_'.3. 1( Date : The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of it services, programs and activities . Telecommunications Device fo r the Deaf (805) 781-7410. Rev . 5-1 1 PH2-35 I ATTACHMNT4 - 29 0 PH2-36 Municipal Code Sections Attachment 5 -1 •12 .24 .090 Tree removal . A . Policy . The city values trees as an important part of the natural and economic environment and effort s shall be made to preserve them whenever possible and feasible . When reviewing requests for tre e removal permits, the city shall discourage removing desirable trees and shall consider approving remova l of desirable trees only as a last resort alternative for the applicant . B . Permits for Removal . Removing any tree in the city shall require a tree removal permit, except a s otherwise provided in this chapter . C . Tree Removal Not Related to Property Development . 1.Removing a tree in all zones except as otherwise provided in this chapter shall require a permit issued by the public works department . 2.An application for a tree removal permit issued by the public works department shall include : a.A site plan showing the location and species of any tree proposed for removal ; b.All information to support the reason for removal ; c.Any other pertinent information to the request, including documentation of property damage . D . Removals for Tree Health or Hazard Mitigation . 1 . The city arborist may authorize a tree removal upon receipt of a removal application withou t the need for a permit from public works upon finding any of the following circumstances : a.The tree is an imminent hazard to life or property, and removing it is the only feasibl e way to eliminate the hazard ; b.The tree is dead or dying or damaged beyond reclamation ; c.The tree's roots are causing severe damage to public or private property, and removin g the tree is the only feasible way to eliminate the damage . 2 . When the city arborist cannot authorize a tree removal, the request shall be reviewed by th e tree committee, which may authorize removal if it finds one of the following circumstances : a.The tree is causing undue hardship to the property owner . Normal routine maintenance does not constitute a hardship, i .e ., cleaning of gutters, leaf raking, pruning or root intrusio n into a failed sewer lateral, etc .; o r b.Removing the tree promotes good arboricultural practice ; o r • • PH2-37 Municipal Code Sections Attachment 5 - 2 •c . Removing the tree will not harm the character or environment of the surroundin g neighborhood . 12 .24 .180 Appeals . A.In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 1 .20,any person aggrieved by an act or determination o f the staff in exercising the authority herein granted shall have the right to appeal to the tree committee , whose decisions are appealable to the city council . B.Appeals received by the city clerk within ten calendar days from the date of determination or act shal l cause the public works director to withhold tree removal permits and stop any construction or demolitio n activity affecting the subject tree until the appeal is heard and a decision is reached . (Ord . 1544 § 1 (part), 2010) • • PH2-38 ATTACHMENT 6 -1 •RESOLUTION NO .(2012 Series ) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O DENYING AN APPEAL TO THE TREE COMMITTEE DECISIO N TO DENY A TREE REMOVAL REQUEST AT 539 CERRO ROMAULD O WHEREAS,the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo held a public hearing o n November 28, 2011, and denied the Property Owner's request to remove two palm trees located i n the front yard at 539 Cerro Romauldo, San Luis Obispo, California ("Property"); an d WHEREAS,on January 17, 2012, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo held a public hearing to consider the appeal of the Tree Committee's decision to deny the removal of tw o palm trees at the Property , NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Lui s Obispo as follows : SECTION 1 .Findings :The City Council, after consideration of the property owner's appeal of the San Luis Obispo Tree Committee's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon , and public testimony, makes the following findings : a.The trees are not causing undue hardship to the Property, i .e . damaging curbs, gutter , •sidewalks and sewer plumbing . b.The removal of two palm trees located in the yard at 539 Cerro Romauldo will not promot e good arboricultural practice . c.The removal of two palm trees will harm the character or environment of the surroundin g neighborhood . SECTION 2 . The appeal of the Tree Committee's decision to not allow the property owne r to remove two palm trees at 239 Cerro Romauldo San Luis Obispo, California is hereby denied an d the property owner may not remove the trees . Upon motion of , seconded by and on the following vote : AYES : NOES : ABSENT : The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2012 . Mayor Jan Marx R PH2-3 9 • Resolution No . (2012 Series) ATTACHMENT 6 -2 Page 2 ATTEST : Elaina Can o City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM : /s/ J . Christine Dietrick J . Christine Dietric k City Attorney • • • PH2-40 ATTACHMENT 7 -1 • RESOLUTION NO . (2012 Series ) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O UPHOLDING AN APPEAL TO THE TREE COMMITTEE DECISIO N TO DENY A TREE REMOVAL REQUEST AT 539 CERRO ROMAULD O WHEREAS, the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo held a public hearing o n November 28, 2011, and denied the property owner's request to remove two palm trees located in th e front yard at 539 Cerro Romauldo, San Luis Obispo, California ("Property"); and WHEREAS, on January 17, 2012, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo held a public hearing to consider the appeal of the Tree Committee's decision to deny the removal of tw o palm trees at the Property , NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Lui s Obispo as follows : SECTION 1 .Findings :The City Council, after consideration of the property owner's appeal, from the San Luis Obispo Tree Committee's action, and staff recommendations and report s thereon, and public testimony makes the following findings : • a .The trees have the potential to cause damage to the Property due to falling frond s b .The removal of two palm trees in the yard at the Property will promote good arboricultura l practice . c . Removing the trees will not harm the character or environment of the surroundin g neighborhood . SECTION 2 . The appeal of the Tree Committee's decision to deny the property owner's request to remove two palm trees located in the front yard at 539 Cerro Romauldo, San Luis Obispo , California is hereby upheld, and therefore removal of the palm trees is approved with a replacemen t tree required to be planted as directed by the City Arborist . Upon motion of , seconded by and on the following vote : AYES : NOES : ABSENT : The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2012 . R PH2-4 1 • Resolution No . (2012 Series) ATTACHMENT 7 -2 Page 2 Mayor Jan Mar x ATTEST : Elaina Can o City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM : /s/ J . Christine Dietrick J . Christine Dietric k City Attorney • • • PH2-42