The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-20-2002 TC Minutes• CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, MAY 20, 2002 MEMBERS PRESENT: Linda Hauss, Laura Rice, Teresa Larson, and Steve Caminiti STAFF PRESENT: Ron Combs, Lisa Woske MINUTES The minutes of the April 22, 2002 regular meeting were approved as submitted. 2. REMOVALREQUESTS ■ 1606 SANTA ROSA (Avocado) The applicant submitted pictures, stating the tree was too large and difficult to maintain, littering the area with limbs and hard fruit that had already caused expensive damage to a parked car. I le was concerned about liability issues. Mr. Combs noted that the tree was leaning into the shed, but was a healthy tree and that the removal posting had been appealed. Mike Dauss, neighbor, stated the tree cross-polinated his avocado tree and was concerned with the look of the property if the large tree was removed, especially with apartment buildings being screened by the existing tree. He also felt that the area would be too shady for anN replacement planting to grow. The applicant stated that the shed was not permanent and could be moved away from the tree, but that would not allow two cars to park on site and that parking was at a premium in the area. He stated that when the shed was installed by the tree, it was not anticipated the tree would grow into a lean. Ms. Rice stated she favored moving the shed and pruning the tree. Ms. Hauss a, -need that growing something else in the area would be difficult in the shaded location and that the screening effect for the apartment buildings would take a long time to be achieved. • Mr. Caminiti did not feel he could make the findings, since the shed could be moved. He suggested pruning the canopy back to behind the shed to mitigate fruit dropping and damage. Ms. Hauss moved to deny the removal request, as she could not make the necessary findings. Mr. Caminiti seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ■ 3960 S. MGUERA (Redwood) The applicant discussed the large tree which had damaged the driveway and sidewalks, as well as the foundation of the mobile homes. He also felt the roots presented a trip hazard. Mr. Combs stated the tree had a double -leader and would grow much larger. The Committee discussed the item and agreed with the evidence of root damage, felt the tree was too I arge for the location and were concerned that it would only grow bigger. Mr. Caminiti moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboriutlturai practice and based on undue hardship, requiring no replacement planting. Ms. Hauss sc�:onded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ■ 1130 ORCUTT (Two eucalyptus) The applicant discussed the damage to the parking lot and the trip hazard created by the broken pavement. He requested a replacement planting with a deeper -rooted species. Mr. Combs discussed the damage to the parking lot and suggested planting a replacement tree in the site where a previous street tree had been removed. Mr. Caminiti agreed with the site damage and felt a replacement planting would be an improvement to the property. Ms. Hauss agreed with the hazard caused by the roots. Ms. Rice sug_ested that when the parking lot was re -done, more room be left to allow a replacement tree to grow properly. Ms. Larson agreed with comments and favored replacement planting out on the street. 0 Mr. Caminiti approved the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and hased on undue hardship, and required two 15-gallon trees to be planted in the removal urea and one 15-gallon tree to be planted in the street parkway. He required the trees to b�: chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted in deep -root planters 45 days from issuance of removal permit. Ms. Rice seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ■ 1353 PISMO (Walnut) The applicant discussed the tree being overgrown, tangling in the wires and stated limbs had come down and brought down utility wires in storms. She wanted to extend the sidewalk and re -landscape the area. Mr. Combs slated the tree was healthy and that pruning would help it withstand storms and wind and strengthen the tree against littering. Mr. Caminiti noted that any plans for extending the sidewalk would need to be approved by the City acid that approval might determine the need for removal. Ms. Hauss discussed pruning the tree to mitigate power line interference. Ms. Rice noted the tree camouflaged the wires and utility pole and suggested pruning. Ms. Larson i;�ovcd to deny the removal request, as she could not make the necessary findin es. Ms. Rice seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ■ 1300 BLOCK OF PISMO (California pepper) The applicant noted that the non-native tree had not been maintained when she bought the property and .hat it hung over the neighbor's property and the public right-of-way. She was concerned with the liability issues due to a weakened tree structure. She discussed potential site development plans and stated there were several oak saplings on the property. Shc also submitted a doctor's report which stated she was allergic to pepper. Mr. Caminiti noted that any curb/gutter/sidewalk installation would adversely affect the dripline and viability of the tree. Mr. Combs suited there was decay in the 60+ year old tree, that the tree was structurally defective and it needed cabling. He noted the species was prone to insect infestation. The Committee agreed the tree was in severe decline and had not been maintained. Ms. Larson moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and requiring no replacement planting. Mr. Caminiti seconded the motion. The motion I :issed unanimously. ■ 1203 BUCHON (Date palm) The applicant stated the tree had become too large for the area and was concerned about root damage to the neighbor's sidewalk and foundation. He stated the water service lines were very close to the tree and that there was a nearby oak which would thrive if the palm was removed. IIe reported the need for annual significant maintenance and was concerned th:,t the fronds were too close to the neighbor's water heater vents. Deb Fclan, 17IS Toro, stated the palm was a wildlife habitat. She stated the property line goes right thrOwgh the tree and that the neighbors seemed to be out of town and might be unaware of tl.- removal. She raised the question of legality due to dual ownership. Mr. Combs slated the healthy tree would get much bigger. Mr. Caminiti favored removing the tree due to crowding of the oak and the hardship is damage to the property. He did feel the neighbor needed to go on record supporting the tree's removal. Ms. Hauss and Nls. Larson agreed. Mr. Rice star, d the since palm roots don't usually expand, damage to the water lines was unlikely. Shr did agree that the neighbor needed to be specifically notified as to the removal request. Mr. Caminiti moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and based on undue hardship, contingent upon written support from the neiLhbor for the tree's removal. He required no replacement planting. Ms. Hauss s� 'onded the motion. The motion l .used, with Ms. Rice voting against. 3. OLD BL.�INESS A property representative re -capped the landscaping improvement plans for the Madonna Plaza area and the removal requests. He stated the goal was to be consistent with the thematic landscaping of the general property. Mr. Combs .�, id the Committee discussed the use of 15-gallon sized trees vs. 24" box trees, as we] I .is use of the London Plane species, which are prone to anthrachnose. Mr. Ca niniti suggested Mr. Combs meet with the representatives to discuss particular species choices. Ms. Hauss nerved to approve the 20-tree removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and replacing them with 20 24" box trees, the species to be coordinated �, ith Mr. Combs. Mr. Camino i seconded the motion. The motion { .Nsed unanimously. 4. HUASNA TREE PLANTING Mr. Combs rc-capped the proposed re -planting schedule. 5. REVIEW OF DRAFT RESOURCE CONSERVATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN Glen Matteson, City Planner, discussed the details of the draft. He reported that City Council had requcstcd that the Tree Committee review the policies for pertinent information regarding "urban forestry." He stated there was a focus on open space and wildlife habitats, as well as ecological and energy issues. Mr. Combs sated he'd investigate grant money and funding for milling and mulching of the removed urces and the recycled elements. The Committee members agreed that they needed more time to review the Resource Conservation Element and continued discussion to a future meeting. The mcetim, .,djourned at 7:30 p.m. to the next regular meeting of June 29, 2002 at 5 p.m. Respectful]y' submitted, Lisa Woske Recording Secretary 0