Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-27-2009 TC Minutes1 TREE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA MONDAY, JULY 27, 2009 Corporation Yard Conference Room 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo MEMBERS PRESENT:Matt Ritter, Craig Kincaid, Allen Root, Ellen Dollar, and David Savory STAFF PRESENT:Keith Pellemeier and Ron Combs PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of June 22, 2009 Mr. Kincaid moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIONS 1.284 N. CHORRO (Coast redwood) Steve Franzman, applicant’s representative, reported that the tree was in a poor location and too close to the foundation and high voltage lines. He stated PG&E would top the tree and ruin the shape, and noted there was a crack already in the foundation. He suggested a melaleuca as a replacement species. Mr. Combs stated it was a healthy native species and suggested that the CDD might have a landscaping plan in place for the site. He did not feel the foundation had been impacted yet, but could be in the future. He agreed that PG&E would be topping the tree. Ms. Dollar stated she was unable to view the tree and would be abstaining from the vote. Mr. Kincaid felt the tree was a healthy specimen with no real evidence of foundation damage, but was concerned about PG&E’s actions in dealing with the tree. Mr. Savory agreed with Mr. Kincaid’s comments and he did not think future foundation damage would be an issue. 2 Mr. Ritter was concerned with PG&E topping the tree and that it would grow to overpower the site. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required one 15-gallon tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of issuance of permit. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed, with Ms. Dollar abstaining. 2.1408 JOHNSON (Date palm) The applicant discussed the expense of maintaining the tree and at her elderly age, it had become too labor-intensive to handle. She said it was interfering with growing a lawn in the area and the dropping palm fronds were dangerous. Mr. Combs reported it was a healthy tree and noted the species was very messy with littering. There was Committee discussion about the costs of pruning vs. removal. Mr. Ritter and Mr. Savory spoke of alternate methods of labor to help maintain the tree and offered to help the applicant in finding cost-effective assistance in maintaining the tree. Mr. Kincaid moved to continue the item to the next regular meeting to allow the applicant time to investigate alternate financing methods for maintenance costs. The motion died for lack of a second. Ms. Dollar moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship to the property owner, and required one 15-gallo n tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of issuance of permit. Mr. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed, with Mr. Ritter and Mr. Savory voting against. Mr. Pellemeier reminded the Committee that maintenance was an on-going reasonable cost of owning a tree and that said maintenance did not present unreasonable hardship in itself, only if excess hardship has been demonstrated. 3.1680 SAN LUIS DR. (Coast live oak) David Brown, applicant’s representative, discussed the applicant’s concern of the tree overpowering the yard and the roots close to the building. He noted there were numerous trees still on site and that this removal could be replaced with a smaller species. 3 Mr. Combs reported that it was a healthy, mid-sized, mid-aged tree and noted the diameter growth was crowding the eaves of the utility shed. Mr. Savory stated he saw no evidence of visible damage. Mr. Ritter agreed it would eventually overpower the back yard. Mr. Kincaid discussed pruning as a mitigative measure. Mr. Root felt removal would not harm the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Savory moved to deny the request, as he could not make the findings necessary for removal. Ms. Dollar seconded the motion. The motion passed, with Mr. Root voting against. 4.1149 ATASCADERO (Podocarpus and fan palm) The applicant stated both trees were too large and difficult to maintain, even though they had previously been pruned. He noted his wife was allergic to the podocarpus and the trees had powdery mildew evidence. He felt the palm presented a liability due to its large fronds – one neighbor had already been injured – and the podocarpus was potentially dangerous because of a large split. He discussed the future house remodeling plans and plans for the landscaping. Mr. Pellemeier suggested that the project should go before the Planning Dept. prior to Tree Committee review. Mr. Combs reported the large podocarpus was healthy with double stems and that the palm was healthy. Mr. Ritter understood the allergy and liability issues, but felt the Planning Dept. should be reviewing the project first. Ms. Dollar agreed with Mr. Ritter. Mr. Kincaid felt the palm could be removed now and suggested the applicant come back at a later date to remove the podocarpus, once development plans were approved. Mr. Savory agreed with Mr. Kincaid. Mr. Kincaid moved to approve removal of the palm, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required one 15-gallon tree to be chosen from the Master 4 Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of issuance of permit. He further moved to deny the removal of the podocarpus, as he could not make the findings necessary for removal at this time. Ms. Dollar seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 5.1401 CHORRO (3 ficus) Mr. Pellemeier, City representative, discussed the background of the removal request and stated that the removal of all three trees would allow infrastructure repairs to be done. He stated the trees would be replaced. Sydney Dawson, property owner, supported the removal of all three trees, which had caused expensive repairs and presented a liability. He felt they should be replaced with medium-sized trees. Mr. Combs reported they were large, healthy trees and that root trimming would not be viable. He stated the sidewalks would need to be repaired more frequently if the trees remained. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required three 15-gallon tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of issuance of permit. Mr. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS There was no business to discuss at this time. OLD BUSINESS – Mayor’s Quarterly Advisory Body Meting – July 9, 2009 Mr. Ritter presented a recap of the meeting. ON-GOING BUSINESS There was no business to discuss at this time. 5 ARBORIST REPORT Mr. Combs discussed the status of the Cypress Plaza/Mobile Home park project. He reported the residents wanted to replace all five removed trees with Monterey cypress. The Committee agreed with the direction. Mr. Combs reported that he had approved nine removals since the last meeting report. Vangeli Evangelopoulas, Save Our Downtown representative, reported he had spoken with downtown business owners, who had expressed significant support for having large species downtown. Staff agreed to distribute the Downtown Tree Management plan document to Committee members. Steve Williams, City Tree Dept., discussed the plan to scatter/stagger ages of trees throughout the urban forest. LIAISON REPORT Mr. Pellemeier discussed Brown Act parameters. He also held highlight discussion on: 1.Update on Ca. Regional Urban Forest Council Meeting hosted on June 24, 2009 2.Heritage Tree Update: There was general discussion on suggested trees and approaching owners and encouraging participation in the programs. Need to outline benefits and advantages of participation. 3.Tree Regulations: Reported the Legal Dept. was still reviewing the Tree Ordinance changes prior to Council review. 4.Tree Committee directions and planning: Possible projects identified included updating the Heritage Tree pamphlet and working again on the Master Street Tree list. The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. to next regular meeting scheduled for Monday, August 24, 2009, at 5:00 p.m. in the Corporation Yard Conference Room, 25 Prado Road. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary