Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-24-2005 TC MinutesCITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2005 MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Lopes, Ben Parker, Linda Hauss, Don Dollar and Sara Young STAFF PRESENT:Ron Combs, Todd Beights, and Lisa Woske PUBLIC COMMENTS: Roger Suiker, 1616 Phillips, asked how replacement tree plantings were monitored. Mr. Combs responded that there was not currently a monitoring procedure, but the need for implementing one is being discussed by staff. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2005 Mr. Dollar noted that the minutes did not reflect that he was in attendance at the meeting. The minutes were approved as amended. 2.TREE REMOVAL REQUESTS - 683 MITCHELL (Live oak) Vinicio Muracchiolo, pending new property owner, noted there was no foundation to the house and the tree was growing against the rear wall, where he wanted to install a perimeter foundation. He stated such construction would kill the tree. He submitted a letter from the current owner, requesting that the tree be removed. Mr. Combs agreed that the foundation in the existing footprint would kill the tree, which was medium-aged in good condition. Mr. Parker suggested noted the tree could add significant value to the property and it could be retained if the existing house itself were to be removed. He did agree that if the house were staying in its present location, the tree would have to be removed. Ms. Hauss confirmed that the sale of the property had gone through. Mr. Parker moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship to the property owner. Ms. Young seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Parker moved to require a 15-gallon street tree to be planted within the street tree easement, chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of issuance of permit. Ms. Hauss seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. -2710 AUGUSTA (One Aleppo pine; one Monterey pine) John Ferguson, owner, submitted a footprint and discussed the plan to move the house forward on the lot, noting the trees were in the way. He also stated a neighbor was concerned that one tree was leaning over her house. He wanted to replace them with two street trees. He stated he intends to split the lot, but had no permit yet. Mr. Combs said both trees were in fairly good health, but were leaning. He suggested they could be properly pruned. Mr. Lopes noted a letter submitted by Barbara and Alan Frank, 2725 Augusta, who did not favor removing the tree. Ms. Hauss and Mr. Dollar were concerned that the application for removal was premature as no permit has been approved. They preferred to consider the request once the permit was issued, but would support a conditional removal approval at this time. Mr. Lopes moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship, conditioned on the applicant submitting evidence of an approved building permit to move the location of the house. He also required two 15-gallon street trees to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of issuance of permit in the front yard area. Mr. Parker seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. - 711 GROVE (2 Podocarpus) David Morgan, applicant, was concerned with keeping the property safe for young children and felt the trees posed a hazard. He planned to professionally prune and shape the large tree on the corner. He also noted that the two Podocarpus shaded the property too much, were unattractive, and did not allow for any lawn or landscaping. He preferred to landscape with shrubs or smaller, thinner tree species. The Committee determined that the dbh did not require a permit, so the item was withdrawn. Mr. Suiker did not favor removal and noted that a lot of trees in that neighborhood had already been removed and the character of that area needed to be protected. - 668 SERRANO (8 Eucalyptus) Mr. Lopes noted that Mr. Beights had not heard back from senior staff at the CDD yet on the original tree requirements for that site permit. Elaine Floyd, owner, discussed the trees and cited notes from Sunset Western Guide discussing the messiness, brittle condition, and need for spacing in deep soil, which they did not have. She submitted a bill for auto body repair from a limb falling on a car, a $1300 bill for a large tree falling in January 2004, pictures of large fallen limb on her property, and a bill for the chipping costs for that limb. She submitted pictures of driveway damage from roots. She reiterated that the trees were a pedestrian hazard and property liability. Mr. Combs noted that the CDD intern who had researched the original permit could not find clear evidence on the intent. Mr. Beights stated that the CDD would come back to staff with interpretation on the conditions and requirements regarding tree retention and the street easement. Dan Pronsolino, 667 Serrano, was concerned with the liability of nearby residences and vehicles. He was concerned that utility lines interfered with the limbs. He questioned the liability if the city denied the removal request and their responsibility if something occurred. He felt the trees met the conditions for hazardous removal and noted that the financial risk was large, regardless of who is liable. John Snetzinger, 510 Serrano, agreed with the hazard potential and reported that he avoids driving past the trees whenever possible due to the excessive littering and dropping limbs. He agreed there was a large, primarily senior, pedestrian population that walked by those trees daily. James Anderson, 671 Serrano, agreed that while the trees may provide habitat for some wildlife, he did not believe there was a large population of birds in those particular trees and that there were plenty of other trees for roosting in the area and that the habitat did not outweigh the hazards. Ms. Hauss confirmed that the trees were all in a hazardous fall line. Ms. Hauss moved to continue to a date uncertain and directed staff to consult with CDD to come back to staff with legal determinations on imposed conditions affected by removing the stand of trees. She urged city staff to provide the information as soon as possible and to notify Ms. Floyd when information was received. Mr. Lopes seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.. - 313 PATRICIA (California sycamore) There was no applicant to speak to the item. Mr. Combs noted the tree was a native species. Ms. Hauss felt the brick/step construction could be reworked to mitigate any trip hazards. Mr. Dollar moved to deny the request, as he could not make the necessary findings for removal. Ms. Young seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. - 1500 LIZZIE (Misc. trees) Carol Florence, applicant representative, discussed the original EIR for the tentative tract map and the trees that had been identified for removal. She reported that now several other trees needed to be removed and the revised tract map had been worked on in coordination with Neil Havlik, Natural Resource Manager. She noted the trees were mainly eucalyptus, with some oaks, and stated that the removal request for two oaks on Lot 5 had been withdrawn from the application. The Committee discussed the individual lot removal plans. Mr. Havlik discussed the background on the request and the mitigations and site plantings of Coast Live oak and Bay oaks, which were included, along with some California sycamores. Mr. Lopes was concerned with the large sycamore at the intersection, believing that significant root cutting would take place when the culverts were installed. Mr. Havlik agreed the tree might be compromised. Mr. Combs stated that any time large roots were cut, a tree would be adversely affected. However, he said that 85% of the root system of that tree would be intact and that safety pruning could mitigate concerns as well. Mr. Dollar was concerned that the general construction activity would need a tree protection plan for some of the trees, e.g. the oaks on Lot 7. The Committee clarified that they were reviewing trees within setback designations. Mr. Havlik estimated that approximately 50 trees would be removed and stated the applicant was willing to replace them on a 1:1 basis. Mr. Lopes moved to approve the removal request for trees outside the setbacks within Lots 1-7, excepting the two oaks on Lot 5, one oak on Lot 6, and 4 oaks on Lot 7 as indicated. He required replacement plantings to be provided on a 1:1 ratio for any trees removed that were 6” dbh or larger and required that two replacement trees be provided in addition to the required street trees on Lots 1-7, with the remainder of required replacement trees to be planted in the open space lot. Mr. Parker seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Parker was concerned about the stand of eucalyptus at the back of the development, feeling they needed to be safety pruned. Mr. Havlik stated that would be addressed at the ARC level and agreed there was also a need for continual clean up and maintenance for fire prevention mitigations. 3.NEW BUSINESS There was no business to discuss at this time. 4.OLD BUSINESS Mr. Lopes recapped the recent City Council meeting item regarding the Duban application. Mr. Combs discussed the Young Tree Care Workshop. 5.ON-GOING BUSINESS A work session was set for November 3, 2005 at the Corp Yard to review the Master Street tree lists. The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. to the next regular meeting of November 28, 2005. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske Recording Secretary