Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-26-2004 TC MinutesCITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, JULY 26, 2004 MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Rice, Jim Lopes, Laura Hauss, Pete Dunan STAFF PRESENT: Ron Combs, Lisa Woske, Todd Beights, Jay Walters 1. REVIEW MINUTES OF JUNE 28, 2004 The minutes were approved as submitted. 2. TREE REMOVAL REQUESTS „ 1729 GARDEN (Pepper) This was a continued item. The applicant did not have any additional discussion regarding the removal request. Mr. Lopes moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and that doing so would not harm the character of the neighborhood 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. Ms. Rice seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. „ 1052 ISLAY (Avocado) This was a continued item. Martha Stewart, 1053 Islay, objected to the removal and felt it was a healthy, skyline tree and was a significant tree in the neighborhood. She noted the entire driveway was in disrepair and did not feel the tree’s roots were causing the damage. Paul Taylor, neighbor, also opposed the removal. Mr. Combs discussed the feasibility of extensive pruning to mitigate applicant concerns for hazards and liability issues. Ms. Rice moved to deny the request, as she could not make the necessary findings for removal. She recommended the applicant consult with the City Arborist regarding pruning options. Ms. Hauss seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. „ 872 MORRO (Two eucalyptus) This was a continued item. George Sullivan, AT&T representative, discussed the two main trees on the AT&T property and the liability concerns and noted the Mayor had filed an application on behalf of the City to remove the city-owned trees on the property. Mr. Sullivan stated that AT&T agreed to remove the trees and plant replacement trees and landscaping. He felt the trees had already been pruned to their maximum ability. Mr. Combs noted the trees were reaching maturity and could present liability. Several Committee members felt they were significant trees to the area and did not want to “clear cut” the property. Mr. Dunan moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship to the property owner, and the quantity and placement of the replacement trees should be determined by the City Arborist. The motion died for lack of a second. Ms. Rice moved to deny the removal request, as she could not make the necessary findings for removal. Ms. Hauss seconded the motion. The motion passed, with Mr. Dunan voting against. „ 2945 McMILLAN Mr. Combs reported that this request had been postponed. „ 715 TANK FARM (22 trees) Mr. Combs recommended that this planning item be forwarded to the ARC for their recommendation. The applicant’s representative distributed new tree removal and landscape plans with the proposed building footprint. She stated they would be planting three times the amount of removed trees and discussed grading and parking lot issues. The Committee discussed the site plans and did not favor removal of existing trees already in parking spaces #20, #21, and #22. They felt #2 tree planting area could be altered to accommodate retaining the tree. They felt #11 and #12 Coast live oaks could be retained, as well as #15 and #16. Mr. Combs agreed to forward the Committee comments to the ARC. „ 266 CRAIG WAY (Two Liquid Amber) Chuck Crotser, owner, discussed the past remodeling and planting of city trees on the property. He stated the roots of the Liquid Ambers were lifting the parking apron and sidewalk areas and created on-going hazard and liability issues. Mr. Combs agreed that the roots had damaged the property and felt they were the wrong trees for the location. Mr. Lopes moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and 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. Dunan seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. „ 629 CERRO ROMAULDO (Pepper tree) David Bourne, applicant, discussed the backyard tree and stated the growth was out of control and interfering with the PG&E lines. He said a large branch was hanging over the house and over the Westside neighbor’s property; he stated that neighbor favored removing the tree. He reported it had been professionally pruned several times. Mr. Combs stated it was a non-native species and felt it was too large for the space and that with its removal, the nearby trees would fill in and thrive. Ms. Hauss moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required no replacement trees. Ms. Rice seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. „ 2036 SKYLARK (Three Bottlebrush) The applicant discussed the center tree and problems with needing the sewer line cleaned 8 times in the recent past and the hardship in maintaining the trees and dealing with the damage. He stated the sidewalk was cracking and lifting and that the trees were messy, costly to maintain, and that the neighborhood supported the trees’ removals. He questioned the Ordinance requirement of city pruning every 10 years. Mr. Combs discussed the ordinance language and stated that prior to the Ordinance, there were no street tree requirements or standards. He felt the trees were at their maturity, but fairly healthy. The Committee discussed the problems the trees were causing. Ms. Hauss moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and 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. Dunan seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Staff told the applicant about the Sewer Lateral Replacement program with the city. 3. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business to discuss. 4. ON-GOING BUSINESS Mr. Beights distributed Rosenberg’s Rules of order for Committee review. Staff discussed the Ordinance project start-up. Ms. Hauss felt the language needed to be simplified and responsibilities more clearly outlined. Mr. Lopes wanted more strict consequences listed for excessive pruning and incorporating pruning standards into the Ordinance. The Committee discussed staff reviewing similar cities’ Ordinance, ISA standards, and public education efforts. They discussed drafting an improved pamphlet or a binder for public education efforts and review. Creating a public education pamphlet re pruning and standards was added to the On- Going Business topic list. Staff also reported they had reviewed the Ordinance with CDD to determine removal review and language. Mr. Beights stated he would review the Ordinance with CDD and come back to the August 9, 2004 special Tree Committee work session meeting. The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. to the next regular meeting at 5 p.m. on Monday, August 23, 2004. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske Recording Secretary