Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-23-2011 TC Minutes1 TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, MAY 23, 2011 Corporation Yard Conference Room 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo MEMBERS PRESENT:David Hensinger, Ben Parker, and Matt Ritter STAFF PRESENT:Ron Combs PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of April 25, 2011 Mr. Combs noted that the number of 15-gallon trees to be replanted at 247 Foothill was three, not thirteen, along with seven 24” box trees to be replanted. Mr. Hensinger moved to approve the minutes as amended. Mr. Ritter seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIONS 1.452 LAWRENCE (Silver maple) Kevin Cooper, applicant, discussed the removal request and stated he wanted to replace them with two Western redbuds. He was concerned about the decay evident causing limb breakage and weakening the integrity of the tree. He stated the tree had caused sewer line issues and submitted receipts for sewer repair done. He reported the roots created issues with the water line and sidewalk displacement. He was also concerned about the tree interfering with abandoned power lines and utilities. Mr. Combs agreed the tree had issues and that decay was evident. Mr. Parker moved to approve the removal request based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required a replacement planting of one 15-gallon tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of original tree removal. Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. 2. 366 FERRINI (Elm and Valley oak) Thomas von Engel, applicant, discussed the removal request and the severe pruning issues and continual limb breakage that had caused damage. He noted it was impossible to grow a lawn. He was concerned about the wind damage to the 2 elm tree and stated it was too large. He said the Valley oak is leaning too far on the neighbor’s side and was concerned about that liability and noted that part of the root base had been severed. Mr. Combs reported it was a medium-sized elm with pruning issues and that the oak had a co-dominant main branch that could fail. He noted the roots were slightly damaged. He felt the oak tree was too close to the structure. He stated that both trees created a good canopy. Mr. Parker felt the elm could be removed with affecting the surrounding area, but noted that the oak was fairly visible from the street. He did not feel structure impact was imminent. Mr. Hensinger agreed with Mr. Parker.Mr. Ritter felt the oak was in a bad spot. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request of both trees based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required replacement plantings of two 15-gallon trees to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of original trees’ removal. Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. 2.1126 WISTERIA LANE (Eucalyptus) The applicant discussed the removal request, stating that the tree had doubled in size and had a huge limb break off. She felt the tree was dangerous and was concerned about the limbs in high winds and the liability that posed. She reported that the neighbor favored the removal and submitted a letter of support from Andrew Wright. Mr. Combs reported that the healthy tree would get larger. Mr. Parker noted that litter and potential liability were not reasons for removal. He questioned whether hawks were nesting in the tree. Mr. Hensinger felt it was a vigorous tree in the wrong spot and would favor replacement with a more suitable species. Mr. Ritter noted eucalyptus were a “self-pruning” species and agreed this tree was in a high use area that did pose liability issues in light of past signs of limb failure. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and to replace it with one 15-gallon tree to be chosen from 3 the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of original tree removal. He further stipulated that the removal take place as of October 2011 to ensure that an active nest is not disturbed. Mr. Parker seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Combs agreed to check with Neil Havlik before issuing permit. 3.794 BUCHON Mr. Combs reported that the application for removal had been withdrawn. 4.1440 HIGUERA (Redwood) Randy Ramsay, applicant, discussed a branch falling and damaging a car. He felt it was a fine tree in the wrong spot. He stated that six to eight limbs fall annually, even though he annually has it pruned. He was concerned about liability to his property and that of his neighbors. Greg Bell, area resident, felt that it was a majestic redwood in the area and a native skyline asset. He felt removal would set a precedent and did not feel it should be removed. Susan Biezak, area resident, did not favor removal and submitted a letter of protest discussing the living entity of the tree, its nature and spirit, and believe that it was too much of an asset to be cut down. Mr. Combs reported that the large tree was healthy and he could not make his necessary findings for removal. Mr. Parker stated it was the only significant tree in the area and has been well maintained and he felt removal would harm the character and environment of the neighborhood. Mr. Ritter and Mr. Hensinger agreed with him and thanked Mr. Ramsay for maintaining the tree so well. Mr. Parker moved to deny the removal request, as he could not make the necessary findings. Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. 5.1300 MADONNA ROAD (8 misc. trees) Julie Galvin and Jeff Meyer, applicants, discussed the commercial development update plan and the need to re-define the perimeter and re-align the main entrance, 4 which necessitated the tree removals. They stated an overall plan would be submitted to the ARC. They also discussed previous re-landscaping efforts and improvement plans. John Tacoma, general contractor, discussed the details of the improvements planned and stated he could not create an ADA-compliant ramp by the bus shelter without removing landscape. Mr. Hensinger appreciated the applicants working to retain the large eucalyptus trees. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request of both trees based on promoting good arboricultural practice and supported the implementation of the new landscape plan as submitted by applicants. Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Combs reported that he was attending the Urban Forest Division sponsoring of an ISA “Tree Risk Assessment” course. OLD BUSINESS The Tree Committee reviewed the list of approved trees for updating. Mr. Ritter was concerned about the narrowing diversity in species represented for replacement plantings and the overall urban forest. He suggested Committee members each come up with five to ten new species to add to the approved list and email their suggestions amongst staff and Committee. ARBORIST REPORT Mr. Combs distributed a new version of the removal permit for review. The meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. to next regular meeting, scheduled for 5 p.m. on Monday, June 27, 2011. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary