Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-24-2009 TC Minutes1 TREE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA MONDAY, AUGUST 24, 2009 Corporation Yard Conference Room 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo MEMBERS PRESENT:Allen Root, Ellen Dollar, and David Savory STAFF PRESENT:Barbara Lynch and Ron Combs PUBLIC COMMENT Craig Steffans reported that trees at the Creamery location downtown were being neglected and felt proper pruning would mitigate the decline of the trees. He asked that staff make a maintenance order request of the property owner. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of July 27, 2009 Julie Towery reported that neither the minutes nor the agenda had been posted on the website. Mr. Root moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIONS 1.1451 ANDREWS (Oak) The applicant discussed the volunteer oak that had grown between the street tree and the avocado. She stated the tree was crowded and was negatively affecting the health of the other two trees. She also reported the oak was growing over the top of the house and had become large enough to require a permit to remove it. She did not feel she should have to maintain a tree that was causing hardship, especially when it was a volunteer. Mr. Combs reported it was a young, healthy tree and he could not make his necessary findings for removal. Mr. Savory noted the avocado was failing and the magnolia was not in the best of health, but felt the oak was strong and healthy and was an asset to the neighborhood. 2 Mr. Root agreed with Mr. Savory’s comments, noting the oak was crowding the other trees, one of which was a required street tree. He favored removal of the oak to allow the street tree to thrive. Ms. Dollar felt the tree was healthy and a neighborhood asset and noted that the other magnolias in the area were in similar moderate health. She did not see evidence of undue hardship. Mr. Root moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice. The motion died for a lack of a second. Mr. Savory moved to deny the removal request, as he could not make the findings necessary for removal. Ms. Dollar seconded the motion. The motion passed, with Mr. Root voting against. 2.639 PISMO (Italian Stone Pine) The applicant discussed the large tree which was growing too close to the sidewalk, the sewer line, and the front of the house, noting the front porch and the house footings had damage. They stated the branches continued to fall and presented liability issues, while the sidewalk damage created a trip hazard. The applicant stated the tree was too large for the location and they were willing to plant a replacement tree. Mr. Combs reported the tree had several included branches; pruning could mitigate the liability. The roots had caused some displacement of the sidewalk and porch. He stated the tree would grow significantly larger. Ron Rinnell, Bunyan Bros., stated he did not feel the tree was structurally sound and pruning would only provide a temporary fix, as the tree would continue to cause damage. The tree was too large for the location. Ms. Dollar felt it was a large, beautiful tree. She did see slight evidence of damage but was not clear that the tree was causing any damage to the foundation. Mr. Savory agreed it was attractive and felt pruning would improve the overall look, but agreed there was front property damage. He suggested replacing it with two trees, if removal was granted. Mr. Root agreed it was too large for the area and favored the 2:1 replacement suggestion. 3 Mr. Root moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship, and required two 15-gallon replacement trees 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 unanimously. 3.1629 GARNETTE (Eucalyptus) Will Cobine, applicant’s representative, stated the tree was causing considerable damage to the fence and that the roots were exposed in the parking lot, creating liability. He felt the tree was too large for the site and agreed to plant a replacement tree. Fred Mastri, prospective site buyer, stated he did not favor removal of the tree. Mr. Combs reported that it was a healthy 70 year-old tree with large surface roots and agreed it was causing damage to the fence. He noted that if the tree fell, it would impact several mobile homes. Mr. Savory noted the fence was in great disrepair and needed to be replaced regardless. He felt the tree concerns could be mitigated with pruning. Mr. Root felt it was a healthy tree and agreed pruning would mitigate hazard concerns. Ms. Dollar felt it was an attractive skyline tree and felt that the prospective buyer’s desire to retain it should be considered. She agreed the fence needed to be repaired regardless. Ms. Dollar moved to deny the removal request, as she could not make the findings necessary for removal approval. Mr. Root seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 4.546 HIGUERA, SP. #21 (Aleppo pine) Steve Franzman, Greenvale Tree Co., applicant’s representative, discussed the large limb previously dropped and stated approximately half of the main trunk was now gone and felt the structure beneath would soon fail. He felt pruning would create too much topping, due to the amount of present decay. He also stated there was evidence of gall rust. Mr. Combs agreed with Mr. Franzman’s assessment and suggested if it were approved for removal, the applicant could plant something riparian. 4 Mr. Steffans, Space #25, stated he represented several neighbors from the park that favored retaining the tree. He suggested pruning should be attempted and felt proper maintenance of the tree would benefit its health. He felt the tree greatly improved the area. Jeannie Hanysz, Space #15, reported that there had been past neglect in maintaining the trees on behalf of the property owner. She stated too many trees had already been removed and the site needed the shade trees provided. Katherine Schmidt, Space #28, stated that branches were encroaching into the power lines. She felt pruning and sealing would mitigate decaying concerns. She agreed the entire property was becoming too barren. Mr. Root discussed the urban forest concept of tree-age planting/staggering and favored removal of the failing eucalyptus and requiring two replacement trees. Ms. Dollar agreed and felt two shade trees should be specifically chosen. Mr. Root 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 issuance of permit along the creek bank. He further suggested California sycamore as a species and that one tree should be planted at the removal site and one planted somewhere else on the property. Ms. Dollar seconded the motion, with the approved stipulation that the trees needed to be watered and maintained for five years and if either did not survive, they were to be replaced accordingly. The motion passed unanimously. 5.22 HIGHLAND (2 Italian Stone pines) Dan Culhane, applicant’s representative, stated both large, aging trees were interfering with the health and growth of the nearby native oaks. He was concerned about the liability of the trees should they fall. He agreed to replacement plantings. Mr. Combs reported the large trees were fairly healthy, but did have V-crotches that could split in the otherwise oak forest. Mr. Savory favored removal of the pine in the middle of the oaks and felt the other tree might be OK if one of the trunks were pruned. Mr. Root favored removal due to the setting and the native culture. He felt a landscaping plan would be sufficient for further site improvements. 5 Ms. Dollar moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required one two-gallon replacement oak tree to be planted within 45 days of issuance of permit. Mr. Root seconded the motion. NEW BUSINESS There was no business to discuss at this time. OLD BUSINESS There was no business to discuss at this time. ON-GOING BUSINESS Ms. Lynch reported that the tree ordinance revisions were in final legal review and would be moving on to Council approval stage. ARBORIST REPORT Mr. Combs reported he had removed 12 trees since last report, including nine dead Monterey pines. There was no report. The meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m. to next regular meeting scheduled for Monday, September 28, 2009, at 5:00 p.m. in the Corporation Yard Conference Room, 25 Prado Road. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary