Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-22-2007 TC MinutesCITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TREE COMMITTEE CORPORATION YARD MONDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2007 MEMBERS PRESENT:Michael Boudreau, Craig Kincaid, and Sara Young STAFF PRESENT:Keith Pellemeier, Barbara Lynch, and Ron Combs PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. 1.APPROVAL SEPTEMBER 24, 2007 MINUTES The minutes were unanimously approved as submitted. 2.TREE REMOVALS 3860 MITCHELL (Redwood) The applicant discussed the close proximity of the redwood to the house and requested removal approval with replacement planting; he stated he wanted to use the redwood wood for mulch and various other site projects. He stated that the limbs needed continual pruning. He was concerned with future damage caused to the foundation and wanted to remove the tree before it caused problems, since the tree will just get larger. He also discussed ADA requirements for the property. Mr. Combs noted that the new slab required the need for root pruning. He said the tree was fairly healthy, was about 20 years old, but agreed root disturbances could have a future affect on the house, as it was too close to the structure. Mr. Kincaid noted it was a nice specimen in a fairly barren area. Ms. Young felt the tree would get huge. Mr. Boudreau favored removal due to constant maintenance hardships and probable damage concerns. TREE COMMITTEE MINUTES PAGE TWO Mr. Boudreau moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship on the property owner, and required one 15-gallon replacement tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of issuance of permit; he also required the stump grinding of the removed tree. Mr. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 752 PALM (Olive) There was no applicant or representative to speak to the item. The Committee agreed to withdraw the item from the agenda and require the applicant to re-apply for removal at a later date. 3170 FLORA (Liquid amber) The applicant discussed the two trees, citing root damage to the driveway and sidewalk. He said the sewer cleanouts needed to be replaced due to root intrusion and he had paid for several sewer repair bills. He stated the new growth was too close to the house and presented a trip hazard and caused extensive littering. Mr. Combs stated there was a small parkway area for the fairly healthy trees. Les Kangas, audience member, discussed various website links and articles that were available, outlining suggestions for mitigation measures for root issues and damage caused by tree without resorting to removals. He did not favor removal in that area. Mr. Boudreau determined with staff that alternative mitigation measures, e.g. rubber sidewalks, were too expensive to institute during these budget times. Mr. Combs agreed that the city budget had limited resources and that some other suggestions discussed in Area 2 included bulb-outs and ramping. He felt these two trees could withstand root pruning. Mr. Kincaid moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship on the property owner, 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. TREE COMMITTEE MINUTES PAGE THREE Mr. Boudreau seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 308 SAN MIGUEL There was no applicant or representative to speak to the item. The Committee agreed to withdraw the item from the agenda and require the applicant to re-apply for removal at a later date. 968 TORO (Ficus) The applicant discussed the ficus in the sidewalk area and stated there had been roots in the sewer line several times, resulting in many plumbing bills. He stated he had replaced the lateral and the city had already previously replaced the sidewalk, which was now lifting again. The lifting kept pushing the water meter and broke the water line. Mr. Combs stated it was a healthy ficus with a history of causing sidewalk damage. He discussed the concept of active replacement plans for healthy urban forests and staggered planting. Mr. Boudreau expressed frustration with the fact the when the trees were mature enough to be presenting the desired effect, e.g. canopy, they were also large enough to create problems. He felt the city either needed to commit resources to tree wells and mitigation or start phased replacement plantings. Ms. Young moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship on the property owner, 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. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS 1.Update on Quarterly Advisory Body Meeting TREE COMMITTEE MINUTES PAGE FOUR There was discussion about the report that needed to be submitted, including information on Committee work re ordinance review, Arbor Day efforts, and the Heritage Tree contest. Mr. Pellemeier agreed to send Ms. Young a template for the report. OLD BUSINESS 1.Arbor Day Mr. Combs reported that the city was applying for Tree City USA status and that the information for schools regarding Arbor Day efforts and contests would be sent out shortly. The Committee agreed to tentatively schedule Arbor Day for Saturday, April 26, 2008. 2.New Tree Removal Application Form The Committee and staff discussed the changes made to the removal application form, highlighting the need for development plans to be reviewed by the Planning Department prior to applying for removal requests and that applicants needed to identify the agreement for replacement planting and suggested species. ON-GOING BUSINESS 1.Tree Ordinance Update Review and Confirm the Outline for the Tree Ordinance Revisions The Committee finalized the outline listing of sections/topics of the ordinance. (See Attachment A) After much discussion about direction and efficiency of process, it was agreed that Staff would re-format/paste in existing ordinance sections to reflect the order as outlined in Attachment A and bring the document back for further review and comment by the regular January 2008 meeting, if it was not available for the November 26, 2007 meeting. It was agreed that there would be no December, 2007 regular Tree Committee meeting held. TREE COMMITTEE MINUTES PAGE FIVE ARBORIST REPORT 1.Neighborhood Planting Mr. Combs reported that there would be a neighborhood tree planting held in the 1500 block of Higuera that would include 24” box London Plane trees. Date TBD. 2.Multiple Street Tree Removal Project Mr. Pellemeier reported that he had revisited Area 2 with the Street Dept. and two more trees were able to be retained and two more could be retained if bulb- outs were agreed to by those property owners. He agreed to keep the Committee updated on the progress. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Pellemeier discussed the progress being made on the relocation of the Mission Silk Floss tree. He reported that the crane company was concerned about probable damage caused to the Mission plaza surface because of the equipment’s weight; a larger crane than expected was needed due to the size and location of the tree. There was also the strong likelihood of sub-surface damage due to the equipment weight. He said the crane company wanted the City to sign a waiver re the possible damage that could be caused. Mr. Pellemeier did not think that moving the tree to the new location was now feasible in light of the likelihood of surface and sub-surface damage and those potential problems could not be mitigated in any reasonable process. He felt the tree should be removed, a different large-species specimen be planted in the Chorro St. planter, and that there be off-site mitigation measures explored to offset the removal of the tree. He stated that the removal request would be brought back to Committee for further review. The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. to the next regular meeting scheduled for Monday, November 26, 2007 at 5 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary ATTACHMENT A – New Tree Regulations/Ordinance outline 1.Purpose and intent 2.Definitions 3.Responsible for Enforcement (including Tree Committee, Arborist, ARC) 4.Include graphic of what area constitutes Street Tree area 5.Tree Planting (including Master Lists and discussion of permit/right of way) 6.Tree Removals 7.Appeals 8.Enforcements/penalties 9.Tree Maintenance (including responsibilities of property owner, the City, utility companies, and when a Certified Arborist is required) 10.Street Tree/Hardscape Damage Responsibility 11.Emergencies 12.Preservation and Protection 13.Heritage Trees