HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-26-2006 TC MinutesTREE COMMITTEE MEETING
TREE COMMITTEE
CORPORATION YARD
MONDAY, June 26, 2006
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Lopes, Katie Hall, Sara Young
STAFF PRESENT: Ron Combs, Todd Beights
PUBLIC COMMENT:
There were no public comments.
1. APPROVAL OF MAY 22, 2006 MINUTES
The minutes were approved as submitted.
2. TREE REMOVALS
2850 JOHNSON AVE (BLUE GUM EUCALYPTUS)
The owner spoke with Ron Combs before the meeting and informed him that he was
withdrawing his application at this time.
1374 & 1386 PISMO ST. (1 EUCALYPTUS, 2 OAKS)
Howard Nicholson, the applicant, was present. Mr. Nicholson applied to have 2 oaks and
one eucalyptus removed. He stated that the previous owner had applied for and was
granted a removal permit for one of the oaks.
Mr. Lopes asked Ron Combs if the permit was still active and Ron said that it was or had
just expired. If it is expired, Mr. Combs said he would renew it.
The proposed removals are in an area where 4 town homes are to be built. Mr. Nicholson
stated that the smaller oak is growing under a larger oak and that he would also like to
remove the one euc so that more light may enter that corner of the property. He is also
concerned that limbs could fall and pose a hazard. He stated that he wants to make the
larger oak a focal point with a retaining wall built around it. Mr. Nicholson also stated
that he is worried about another middle eucalyptus and will apply for another permit.
Mr. Combs did agree that the smaller, 20 year old oak, is being suppressed by the larger
one and that the euc is in the drip line canopy.
Mr. Lopes asked applicant if Neil Havlik had looked over the project concerning
proximity to the creek and Mr. Nicholson said that he had reviewed it and had made
notes as to the top of the bank and had suggested they plant replacement oaks in the
setback area.
Ms. Young stated that the large euc will cause problems with the building and that the
smaller oak is not in decline but is in conflict with the building footprint. She asked for
clarification of the 4-1 replacements that applicant proposed. It was agreed that it is 4
replacements for each removal. Ms. Young moved to approve the 2 removals based on
undue hardship and good arboricultural practices.
Ms. Hall seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
1829 MORRO ST. (PINE TREE)
Sally Kay, owner, was present. She is requesting to have a pine tree removed in her
backyard. She states that the tree is too large for the yard and is making the yard
unusable. The roots are pushing up the patio and the surface roots are tripping hazards.
She is also concerned about the garage foundation. She would like to replace with a
more suitable tree for that location.
Mr. Combs commented that the tree is tall, in decent shape and is a skyline tree but that
the roots will only get worse.
Mr. Lopes asked Mr. Combs if the roots could be pruned and Mr. Comb replied that the
tree is a little weak and it would make the tree susceptible to disease and pitch canker.
Mr. Lopes agreed the yard is too small for the tree and that the roots are probably
intruding into the neighbor’s yard.
Ms. Young thinks that root pruning would create problems if the homeowner is planning
on landscaping. She approves of removal based on undue hardship and a 15 gallon
replacement tree of the owner’s choice.
Ms. Hall seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
1260 DRAKE CIRCLE (1 CARROTWOOD)
Lucas Fresenius, landscaping contractor and applicant was in attendance. He stated that
the client, Terez Autrand, has 2 trees she would like to remove; 1 carrotwood and one
ash. The application only mentioned the carrotwood. One of the trees is dying at the top
has leaf loss. Committee members all were in agreement that they didn’t know the ash
was included on the removal because application only stated “carrotwood”. Mr.
Fresenius stated that this was his first attempt with the removal process.
Owner is requesting to plant palms and is questioning why it’s not an approved tree. She
has noticed them in the area. He feels she is also willing to keep the trees if she can not
plant palms. He agrees that pruning and irrigation on the ash would help. He also asked
when and how often the tree list is updated.
Mr. Combs explained that palms have problems with maintenance issues and litter and
that the tree list was last updated in 2003 and the committee is currently working on an
update. He stated that the carrotwood is multi-trunked and looks like it had been cut
down at one time and resprouted. He feels it should be removed based on good
arboricultural practices and wants it replaced with a 15 gallon canopy tree from the list.
Mr. Fresenius will have to re-apply for the ash tree if the homeowner decides she wants it
moved.
The motion passed unanimously.
3960 S. HIGUERA (CANARY ISLAND PINE)
Mr. Drake mentioned that he had applied last year to remove this tree and someone
objected. The large pine is messy and is back of the lot, near the fence and the sewer line
to the park. Residents are concerned about the size of the tree and would like it removed.
He says he can’t use his backyard because the patio is always dirty. If allowed to remove
it he would like to plant it with a more suitable tree for that location. He says there is
already a magnolia in the backyard.
Mr. Lopes asked why applicant feels it’s unsafe. He stated that if it fell it would fall on
the other coaches around his.
Mr. Combs stated that the tree is a large, healthy, multi-stemmed 20-30 year old Canary
Island pine. He did notice displacement of the rock work when he was on site. He
agreed that it was really close to their back fence.
Ms. Young agrees that they have a small patio and yard and that the tree is too large for
the space and is limiting use of the yard and that it should be replaced with a patio sized
tree.
Mr. Lopes would like to see a replacement tree planted in the triangular area in the front
and he also asked the homeowners where they see a replacement being planted.
The Drake’s stated that there was an Ornamental Plum that died and the Park
management removed it and management is responsible for replanting in that area. They
said they would check with their neighbors before replanting.
Ms. Young thinks that there is room for a couple of small trees, possible fruit trees, in the
front. She motioned for removal with replacement of 1-15 gallon patio tree.
Ms. Hall seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
1095 SAN ADRIANO (PINE TREES)
Mr. Page was in attendance. He estimates the trees are at least 25 years old and they are
planted on a slope. Each time it rains soil is washed away exposing the roots. The roots
are also causing cracks in the patio and retaining wall.
Mr. Combs commented that the trees have been hard pruned and agreed there are many
surface roots even though the trees seem healthy. He also noted roots penetrating the
grout line of the retaining wall and that it had been pruned several times. The tree is also
displacing the wooden fence.
Mr. Lopes agreed and said that there’s room for replacement trees elsewhere on the
property.
Ms. Young motioned to remove the trees based on good arboricultural practice and undue
hardship to the owners because of the surface roots and wall damage. She also stated to
replace them with 2-15 gallon trees in the front yard. Thinks maybe planting shrubs in
the back would help with the soil erosion.
Ms. Hall seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Discussed vacation schedules. Mr. Lopes was the only one that seemed to have a
conflict with one date and that was the meeting in October; he won’t be able to attend
that one.
He also stated that if members know they’re not going to attend they need to give at least
one days notice.
Mr. Lopes said that the committee needs to start looking for a new chairman.
OLD BUSINESS
1. Mr. Dollar sent an email and commented that tree list draft changes were not included
in the agenda packets. He suggested adding Box Elder and Black Walnut to the
creek/riparian crossing.
Mr. Lopes passed out his copy of the “Trees for Major Streets”.
After some discussion, the committee agreed to ad Box Elder, Sycamore and Big Leafed
Maple to the creek crossing area or riparian habitats.
Ms. Young will combine her list and Mr. Lopes and will send to Ron/Todd for inclusion
in next month’s agenda packet. She also asked the committee to please look over the list
and note spelling errors.
Once the list is done, the committee will discuss how to get it out for public review,
hopefully in July. Mr. Lopes thinks there should be at least 2 public meetings. He would
like to know: 1. What is the process/timeline for public review and approval? 2. Would
like to see if they could get a photo packet of proposed trees from West Coast Arborist.
Mr. Beights is compiling a dollar figure for tree grates and will be transferring salary
savings into CIP funds for the downtown project. The tree report was accepted by the
Council. Once the plan and estimates are finalized, they will return to the Downtown
Association to make them aware of the next step.
Mr. Lopes asked for dates to take to the Mayor’s meeting.
Mr. Combs will be creating a tour schedule for City Council members. Ron was
instructed to be looking at other options of saving the trees instead of removal. Someone
suggested cabling but Ron will show pros and cons of that process.
ON GOING BUSINESS
Hope to have ordinance changes by the fall.
Ron and Sara hope to have a meeting of the Urban Forest Group by mid July.
The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m. to the next regular meeting, scheduled for July 24,
2006 at 5:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted.
Sheila New, Temporary Recording Secretary