HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-24-2003 TC MinutesCITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TREE COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY, MARCH 24, 2003
MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Rice, Linda Hauss, Teresa Larson, and Steve
Caminiti
STAFF PRESENT: Ron Combs, Jay Walter, Lisa Woske
1. REVIEW MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 24, 2003
The minutes were approved as submitted.
TREE REMOVAL REQUESTS
1221 SAN CARLOS (Plum)
The applicant discussed the tree planted in the parking strip, stating they had to have their
sewer line snaked at least twice a year and that the tree was getting larger and would
encroach on the new sewer line they were installing. Also noted the fruit seemed to
invite neighborhood children to climb the tree to retrieve it and fruit also dropped on the
sidewalk, creating liabilities. The tree had a fungus and was displacing the sidewalk.
Mr. Combs agreed that there was internal decay and the tree was in decline and causing
some vertical displacement. He felt replacement was the best solution.
Mr. Caminiti suggested replacing the tree with two crepe myrtle trees.
Ms. Hauss favored removal, due to disease and decline,
Ms. Rice agreed, stating the tree did not have many good years left.
Mr. Caminiti moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good
arboricultural practice and undue hardship, and required two 15-gallon small tree species
replacement plantings (e.g. crepe myrtle) to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list
and coordinated with the City Arborist to be planted within 45 days of issuance of permit
and
Ms. Hauss seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
1451 TANGLEWOOD (Modesto ash)
The applicant discussed the removal request and stated they had to replace the driveway
due to root problems, which was very expensive, and that the roots were still causing
displacement to the sidewalk and creating hazards.
Mr. Combs agreed that there were significant root problems and the life span of the tree
was limited. He stated that the Street Dept. fixed all trip hazards.
Mr. Caminiti favored removal, based on undue hardship and that the tree was in decline,
and requiring replacement plantings.
The rest of the Committee agreed.
Ms. Hauss moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good
arboricultural practice and undue hardship, and required one 15-gallon replacement
planting to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and coordinated with the City
Arborist to be planted within 45 days of issuance of permit.
Mr. Caminiti seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
1388 CAVALIER (Eucalyptus)
The applicant submitted a petition of neighborhood support for removal of the tree. He
noted there were hairline cracks in the foundation. He clarified that the three existing
trees were planted in 2001 and agreed to replant a replacement tree immediately.
Mr. Combs estimated that the tree was only about 25% grown and that the roots and
limbs would get larger, but the tree would not get taller.
Karen Hale, neighbor, spoke against the removal and disputed the validity of the
submitted petition of support for the tree’s removal. She stated that the tree that had been
planted had been done so without the parameters of the CC&R’s of the area.
Mr. Caminiti was concerned about the extent of the opposition of the neighbors, plus the
fact that the staff had changed in the middle of dealings with the applicant request and
with the past dealings with Todd Martin, past City Arborist. He believed that the three
trees had been planted in good faith, based on applicant’s conversa-tions with Mr. Martin
and a statement from Mr. Martin to the appli-cant that in planting those three trees, the
removal permit for the eucalyptus would be dealt with favorably. He stated he’d favor
removal with replacement planting.
Ms. Hauss felt since the tree would just get larger in girth and cause future problems.
She was concerned that the three planted trees were not staked properly and stated she
could favor the removal request, if the existing trees were staked properly.
Ms. Larson agreed the tree was too close to the house and would get larger, so she
favored removal based on hardship.
Ms. Rice stated she could not make the necessary findings for removal approval.
Mr. Caminiti moved to approve the removal request, based on pro-moting good
arboricultural practice and undue hardship, and re-quired one 15-gallon replacement
planting to be placed in back of sidewalk, to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list
and coordin-ated with the City Arborist to be planted within 45 days of issuance of
permit. He further moved that the stump be ground to a mini-mum of 12” below finished
grade and that the existing three Mela-luca trees be single staked.
Ms. Hauss seconded the motion.
The motion passed, with Ms. Rice voting against.
1685 TANGLEWOOD (Coral)
The applicant discussed root damage and concerns about the roots affecting the
foundations of her house and her neighbor’s house. She said the limbs were brittle and
she was concerned about liability and damage. She stated pruning would be very
expensive.
Mr. Combs stated the tree was a large, beautiful, healthy specimen, with large roots and
sidewalk displacement.
Ms. Rice felt it was a skyline tree and stated she could not make the necessary findings
for removal. She suggested root pruning.
Mr. Caminiti stated that without evidence of structural damage to the houses, he could
not make the necessary findings for removal.
Ms. Larson felt the tree was too large for the area.
Ms. Hauss doubted that the foundation was impacted and would be interested in whether
the neighbor could present any evidence of hardship or structural damage.
Ms. Rice moved to deny the request, as she could not make the necessary findings for
removal.
Mr. Caminiti seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
3. NEW BUSINESS
There was general Committee discussion on Arbor Day activities and the judging of the
Art & Prose Contest on March 31, 2002 at 5 p.m.
4. OLD BUSINESS
There were no items discussed.
5. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. to the next regular meeting of April 28, 2003 at 5
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Woske
Recording Secretary