Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-29-2012 TC Minutes1 TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, OCTOBER 29, 2012 Corporation Yard Conference Room 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo MEMBERS PRESENT: David Savory, Matt Ritter, Suzan Ehdaie, Ben Parker, and David Hensinger STAFF PRESENT: Ron Combs PUBLIC COMMENT Sharon Seymour, 1295 Vista del Lago, asked about the status of the dead cypress behind her property and stated she was concerned about safety. Mr. Combs agreed to visit the site. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of September 24, 2012 Mr. Savory moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIONS 1. 304 Luneta Dr. (WITHDRAWN) 2. 219 Mission (2 eucalyptus) Ron Rinnell, applicant’s representative, discussed the damage to the walkway and the driveway and outlined the replacement landscape theme and the possibility of planting a Jacaranda. He submitted a letter from the neighbor who suffered property damage, stating that resident favored the removal. Gavin Payne, owner, discussed the neighbor’s property damage and reported that he has maintained the tree, but was still concerned with the poor structure/liability in windy times. He did not feel the tree was a main bird habitat. 2 Mr. Combs reported the good-sized trees had some root issues, but he could not make findings under his purview. Mr. Parker felt the tree on the right should be retained and suggested the applicant return with a landscape plan to better outline the removal request for the second tree. Shawn Collarman, Bunyan Bros., stated the tree had been topped and had large sucker growth. Ms. Ehdaie moved to approve one tree for removal and deny the removal request for the second tree, as she could not make any of the findings necessary for that approval. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3. 287 Highland (Pear) The applicant discussed the removal request, stating concerns about safety hazard and past major limb drops. She noted the roots had damaged sidewalks and the parkway and felt it was unsafe to park or walk underneath the tree. She discussed replacement with a Mayten tree. Mr. Combs reported the tree had a history of limb droppage and clarified that the item came before Committee because it was a street tree. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required two 15-gallon Mayten trees to be planted in the street tree wells within 45 days of tree removals. Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 4. 709 Leff (Magnolia) The applicant discussed the removal request, stating that an arborist told him the tree was “terminally diseased” and would fail. He was therefore concerned the tree was safety issue for pedestrians and residents on site. 3 Mr. Combs reported that it was a large tree with some dieback and that it would benefit from some pruning. He did not think failure was imminent. Mr. Rinnell, applicant’s representative, stated that the tree had diseased sections that would be difficult to cut out without possibly harming the structure. Mr. Ritter was concerned with the fact that the last time this removal request was on the agenda – even though the applicant was not present to speak at that time, and the item was continued – neighbors presented detailed information against the tree’s removal. There was some question as to notice postings and he was concerned that the property was not properly noticed and that those neighbors were unaware that the item was on the agenda again. Mr. Parker moved to continue the item until the November meeting to ensure that the property was properly posted. Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion. 5. 1376 & 1384 Vista del Lago (2 honey locusts) Mike Maguire, City SLO representative, discussed the removal request, stating the trees presented potential safety hazards for users of the newly installed “safe route to school” bike path, due to the sharp spikes on the trunks. He also discussed a concern that the root systems were damaged and that the trees’ stability was compromised. He discussed replacing the trees with two Canary Island pines. He reported that the neighboring Laguna Shores Homeowners’ Assoc. favored the removals. Mr. Hensinger suggested a possible “wrapping” solution to the trunk area so spikes were not exposed at path level. Danielle Lloyd, HOA Board member, stated the HOA was responsible for the maintenance of the trees and they were concerned about limb droppage and spike injuries. She felt the removals were a preventative/pro-active approach to potential liability. She stated her organization was also concerned about compromised root systems. They favored removal with a replacement species that would enhance the area. Sharon Seymour reported that the trees shed their spikes annually and that the wind carried the debris in the area. She felt with the pathway in place, liability exposure was now increased. 4 Paul Enz, 1376 Vista del Lago, adjacent property owner to the tree site, shared the concerns about root system issues and stated that if the trees fell, they would fall on his property. Mr. Combs discussed the miscommunication about retaining the trees and felt that while the roots had been severely cut, he did not feel that would necessarily cause the trees to topple. He did allow that the root severing could cause health issues for the trees in the future. Mr. Ritter stated he favored removal because the City, the HOA, and the affected neighbor request removal. He discussed the overriding generality of safety liability concerns, stating that concerns were often too widespread and not based in a reality of due diligence and mitigation measures. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required two 15-gallon replacement trees to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree removals. Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Parker suggested the City make arrangements to have the trees milled, as there was value in the wood. 6. 1513 Gulf (Modesto ash) Ron Rinnell, applicant’s representative, discussed the removal request and reported the tree was diseased. He also discussed the replacement planting plan. Mr. Combs stated he brought the item to Committee because it was a street tree. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and to allow applicant to implement the replacement planting plan as presented. Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 5 7. 496 Kentucky (3 trees) Brian Rolph, applicant’s representative, discussed the property development and the addition of a house on site. He discussed trees being in the way of the planned curb/gutter. He submitted a landscape plan and replacement sidewalk plan. He also noted PG&E had been topping and disfiguring the trees. Mr. Combs stated he brought the item to Committee because it was a development plan. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and to allow applicant to implement the replacement planting plan as presented. Mr. Parker seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 8. 2695 Meadow (pine) Marty Mohammed, applicant’s representative, discussed the development plan and the proposed planting plan including six trees. He was concerned about drainage issues and stated the tree was in the way of the building envelope. He stated tree debris was causing issues with the neighbor’s gutter. He reported that the new homeowners had requested the removal and that neighbors favored the removal. Mr. Combs stated he brought the item to Committee because it was a development plan. Mr. Hensinger moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and to allow applicant to implement the replacement planting plan as presented. Mr. Ritter seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 9. 591 Islay (Sycamore) There was no applicant or representative to speak to the item; the item was continued. 6 NEW BUSINESS 1. Tree Committee Advisory Body Goal Setting for 2013-15 Financial Plan The Committee agreed to refine the goals from last round to then re-submit them for Council consideration. Mr. Ritter discussed the need to move forward with the Committee request to add two more members to the committee. 2. Citizen Tree Planting Event: November 3 in the 1300 Block of Palm Street Mr. Combs discussed the event and the plan to plant 12 – primarily Camphor – trees. He invited Committee members to participate. OLD BUSINESS 1. Approve the July 23, 2012 Tree Committee Minutes Mr. Ritter moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Parker seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ARBORIST REPORT Mr. Combs discussed the successful free wood chip give-away program held at the Corporation Yard. The meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. to next regular meeting, scheduled for 5 p.m. on Monday, November 25, 2012. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary