Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-27-2006 TC MinutesCITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 27, 2006 MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Lopes, Linda Hauss, Don Dollar, Ben Parker and Sara Young STAFF PRESENT:Ron Combs, Todd Beights, and Lisa Woske PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no public comments. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 27, 2006 Mr. Dollar noted that the trees for Creekside Mobile Home were coming from Oregon. The minutes were approved as amended. 2.TREE REMOVAL REQUESTS -- 385 HATHWAY (Redwood) The applicant discussed the request, noting the property was in disrepair when it was purchased three years ago. Since property improvements began, the health of the redwood seemed to be failing and there was major undergrowth visible. He discussed the Planning Dept. requirements for the proposed two units and stated a concrete patio with the current design would surround the tree. He felt the tree was a poor specimen and was competing with the palm trees. He stated the parkway had camphor trees and would like to replace the tree with another camphor. He noted the existing camphor had been butchered by PG&E trimming. Mr. Combs reported that the CDD did not show any ARC requirements regarding having to retain the tree and that the tree has declined in health. Mr. Dollar was concerned about the deep sewer trenching on the California Blvd. side of the property and Mr. Combs agreed it would be detrimental to the tree. Mr. Lopes and Ms. Hauss felt the tree was in poor health and could be replaced. Mr. Dollar stated that a replacement camphor needed to be planted in the back or else it would cause sidewalk damage with its roots in front. Ms. Hauss moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required a replacement 15-gallon tree to be selected from the Master Street Tree List and planted within 45 days of issuance of permit. Mr. Dollar seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. -- 530 SERRANO (Eucalyptus) Marcie Zundel, applicant’s rep and neighbor, read a letter from the owner which stated that he felt the tree was too tall and presented major hazard and safety issues and was growing too close to the houses. She agreed with the hazard concerns, stating there had been limb damage to the tile roof on one of the properties in the past. She also noted there was a large amount of litter and debris from the tree and that the tree was impacting the power lines. She felt the liability issues were too costly to allow the tree to remain. Mr. Lopes double-checked that the tree was 15’ from the owner’s house and determined there had been no receipts for damages submitted. Mr. Dollar determined that the tree had not been trimmed recently. Mr. Combs stated the tree appeared to be in good health and was about 60 years old. He agreed no evidence of recent pruning was visible. The Committee felt there needed to be submitted receipts for damage repair to support the undue hardship finding. Mr. Lopes felt a certified arborist’s report would allow closer inspection to see the true health of the tree and the viability of corrective pruning as a mitigative measure. Staff noted there was a letter submitted from the owners at 535 Serrano, which stated they did not favor removing the tree and felt the tree was an asset to the neighborhood and that pruning would be a good step. Mr. Parker felt the wide breadth of the tree limbs indicated the tree had structural strength. Ms. Young and Mr. Parker stated they could not make the findings necessary to approve for removal, based on the current submitted application and felt there needed to be receipts provided to support hardship. Ms. Hauss and Mr. Dollar agreed and felt pruning would mitigate the safety issues. They felt the tree showed no signs of failing or distress and noted it was a significant skyline tree. Mr. Lopes agreed there was no compelling reason to allow for removal at this time of application. Mr. Lopes moved to deny the request, as he could not make the findings necessary for removal. Mr. Parker seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Lopes noted the owner could re-apply with more supportive removal evidence, e.g. damage receipts and/or a certified arborist’s report. -- 1710 SOUTHWOOD (3 pines) The applicant discussed the request and stated neighbors had complained about the trees and the sidewalk intrusion and damage. He stated the two of the trees lean and one of them is lifting out of the ground. He stated there was undue hardship due to the physical damage the roots were causing and interference with the drainage system. He noted the property was heavily planted. Mr. Combs agreed with the damage assessments and stated one of the Aleppo had signs of disease and that one of the trees loosening from the ground. Bernie Troy, neighbor, was concerned about the tree on Harmony falling on his home, stating a twin tree had already fallen and that currently, branches were weighing down his deck railing. Mr. Dollar stated the Southwood hill was so steep, pinecones could roll onto the street and create a hazard. He determined that the Harmony tree had been pruned recently. Ms. Hauss was concerned that the central leader on one of the pines had been topped or snapped off. She felt corrective pruning could mitigate Mr. Troy’s concerns. Mr. Parker felt the two Aleppo on Southwood could be removed, and felt the Harmony tree might also have some rot at the base. Ms. Young noted the lean on the two Aleppo was of concern and she favored removal. She agreed the Harmony tree might have decay. Mr. Lopes favored removing the leaning trees, especially in light of the lifting. He felt the Harmony tree was a skyline tree and could be safety pruned. He felt a certified arborist could determine if there was root rot. Mr. Parker moved to approve the removal of Trees #4 and #5, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and he denied the removal of Tree #3, as he could not make the necessary findings for removing that tree. He did not require any replacement plantings for the removals. Ms. Hauss seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Parker told the applicant that he could return with a removal request for Tree #3 if he had a certified arborist report supporting reasons for removal. -- 1625 Royal Way (Cedar) The applicant discussed the large tree and the potential for property damage, with the tree being so close to the house. Mr. Combs stated the tree was vigorous and healthy and would get much larger. He felt the species could withstand heavy winds and wet soils. He stated the block wall and planter had evidence of damage. Ms. Young agreed that the wall had damage and that the limbs were encroaching on the neighbors’ property. She felt the tree was too large for the yard. Ms. Hauss felt the tree was a skyline tree and favored pruning at this point in time, but agreed the large size of the tree would pose problems in the future. She did not want to set a precedent of removing trees now to avoid future problems and felt the wall damage was minimal. Mr. Dollar agreed with Ms. Hauss and felt pruning could mitigate the branch liability. Mr. Lopes felt the wall would be ruined in the future and agreed that the tree needed maintenance now. Ms. Young moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship and promoting good arboricultural practice, and did not require replacement planting. Mr. Parker seconded the motion. The motion passed, with Mr. Dollar and Ms. Hauss voting against. -- 705 GRAND (Sycamore) Mr. Lopes and Ms. Hauss stated they had not been able to view the tree. Rae Fleming, EOC rep, stated the neighbors had complained about the constant littering of the tree and the debris falling on cars in their parking lot. She stated the tree had been pruned recently but she felt the tree was too large for the site and would just keep growing. She stated EOC could not afford the liability if property was damaged. Mr. Combs reported it was a large healthy tree planted next to a creek, and that someone had lifted/pruned some branches up already. Mr. Dollar determined that the tree did help stabilize the creek bank. He felt the large healthy sycamore was part of the riparian bank and a skyline tree. He felt significant corrective pruning would mitigate the limbs overhanging. Mr. Combs felt the tree could handle approximately 30% pruning. Mr. Parker agreed with the need for true structural pruning on the tree, which he felt was a major asset to the property and necessary for creek stabilization. Ms. Young and Mr. Lopes agreed that the issue seemed to be more of a maintenance one rather than safety. Mr. Parker moved to deny the request, as he could not make the necessary findings for removal and that the healthy tree could be extensively pruned and maintained to mitigate liability issues. Mr. Dollar seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS STREET TREE REMOVAL PROPOSAL Mr. Combs discussed the origin of the Street Dept. removal proposal and stated they were modeling the proposal for the large project along the lines of the South Oceanaire project, which included getting public opinion and input. Mr. Beights stated the Street Dept. had continual problems with the trees on the proposed list and would replace the removals. Mr. Combs felt some of the trees could be retained and root pruned and the sidewalks could be re-aligned to mitigate some problems. Mr. Dollar felt CEQA needed to be resolved before considering this proposal. Mr. Lopes moved to encourage staff to pursue the proposal and stated he appreciated their approach to include neighbor input. He agreed CEQA needed to be addressed and that there needed to be adequate postings. He requested the replacements be planted in a timely manner. Ms. Hauss seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. MASTER STREET TREE LIST Ms. Young stated the Tree List she had drafted needed another column to indicate allergens. Mr. Dollar noted that Monterey Cypress, Evergreen Maple, Chitalpia, and Tristania had been added in and that Chinese Elm had been dropped. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. to the next regular meeting scheduled for Tuesday, April 25, 2006. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske Recording Secretary