Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-27-2009 TC PacketA city o� sAn Luis oBIspo 25 Prado Road * San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 TREE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA MONDAY, July 27, 2009 at 5:00 pm Corporation Yard Conference Room 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Committee about items not on the agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address. Comments limited to five minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to staff, and if action by the Committee is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of June 22, 2009. TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIONS 1. 284 N. Chorro 2. 1408 Johnson 3. 1680 San Luis Drive 4. 1149 Atascadero St. 5. 1401 Chorro NEW BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS ■ Update on Mayor's Quarterly Advisory Body Meeting held on July 9, 2009 ON -GOING BUSINESS ARBORIST REPORT LIAISON REPORT 1. Update on Ca. Regional Urban Forest Council Meeting hosted on June 24, 2009 2. Heritage Tree Update 3. Tree Regulations 4. Tree Committee directions and planning ADJOURN to next regular meeting scheduled for Monday, August 24, 2009, at 5:00 p.m. in the Corporation Yard Conference Room, 25 Prado Road. dTL /O The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. v Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. TREE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA MONDAY, JUNE 22, 2009 Corporation Yard Conference Room 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo MEMBERS PRESENT: Matt Ritter, Craig Kincaid, and David Savory STAFF PRESENT: Keith Pellemeier and Ron Combs PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of May 26, 2009 Mr. Kincaid moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Ritter seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIONS 1. 920 DEL RIO (Pine) There was no applicant present to speak to the item. Staff agreed t contact the applicant to determine whether the request would come back to Committee at a later date. 2. 3190 FLORA Staff stated that the applicant had withdrawn the application for removal. 3. 1521 OSOS (Palm) Steve Soenke, applicant's representative, discussed the development plans and stated the tree is in the way of required parking spaces. He noted there were several other trees on the property. Mr. Combs reported the tree was in fair health and noted that no replacement planting plan had been proposed. 2 Mr. Savory did not think the removal would harm the character of the neighborhood and did present a minor hardship to the owner. He favored removal with a replacement plan requirement. Mr. Kincaid agreed the tree was in failing health and felt it was too large for the location. He also requested replacement planting. Mr. Soenke agreed that some small species trees would be agreeable to be planted on site. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required one 15-gallon small species tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of issuance of permit. Mr. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 4. 2342 MEADOW (Five eucalyptus) Rebecca Ellis, owner, discussed the previous uprooting of trees next to her property and was concerned about the safety hazards the trees presented and noted a concern for their failing health due to insect infestation. She stated the large trees were encroaching on the walkway and posing a threat to the house. She preferred to do a staggered removal. Mr. Combs reported the large trees were relatively healthy but agreed they were growing in the wrong location and posed potential liability due to limb breakage and uprooting. George Ellis, owner, reiterated a desire to remove the five hazardous trees and discussed keeping the smaller, straight -growing trees so as not to "clear cut" the property. Mr. Combs suggested that if the removal request was granted, the remaining trees for significantly safety pruned. Frank Little, neighbor, stated he strongly favored the removal request for the trees and agreed with the liability issues in such a windy area and stated concerns for his property protection. Mr. Kincaid agreed the trees were a hazard. Mr. Kincaid moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship and promoting good arboricultural practice and required no replacement planting. Mr. Ritter seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3 5. 1529 OSOS (Date Palm) Ron Rinnell, applicant's representative, stated the tree was too large for the property and posed a hazard, while being a high maintenance specimen that had become increasingly expensive to maintain. He requested removal with replacement of a more suitable tree. He also noted the sidewalk and fence showed minor damage. Mr. Combs reported that it was a healthy tree, with a fair amount of debris that could be pruned out. Mr. Kincaid felt the tree was growing in the wrong location. Mr. Ritter felt the tree was significant to the area and that proper pruning would mitigate hazard concerns. He noted another large palm had already been removed. Mr. Savory agreed with Mr. Ritter's comments. Mr. Savory moved to deny the request, as he could not make the necessary findings for removal. Mr. Ritter seconded the motion. The motion passed, with Mr. Kincaid voting against. 6. 1730 SANTA ROSA (Palm) Marsha Nelson, owner, discussed desire to re -develop the property and stated that to do so in any usable space/design configuration, the tree would be in the way of either construction or required parking. She stated her backyard was virtually unusable as it was. She discussed the large amount of landscaping and property improvements she has made on site. Curt Illingsworth, applicant's representative, discussed the odd size of the lot itself and stated that all feasible development solutions had conflicts with the tree in place. Mr. Combs stated it was a large, healthy tree and he could not make any of his specific findings for removal. Mr. Kincaid felt the tree was growing in the wrong location on site. Mr. Savory felt it was a theme tree for the area, but noted minor fence damage and understood how the development conflicts posed hardship to the owner. 0 Mr. Ritter agreed with the comments and stated he had spoken with Brian Lavelle in the Planning Dept., who said that possible variance scenarios might be able to be worked out if a development plan was brought forth, depending on the proposed design. Mr. Pellemeier agreed that the Planning Dept. should be the first stop in this process to proceed with the actual plan before determining the actual need to remove the tree. Eric Meyer, 1242 Buchon, felt the tree had historical merit and did not feel it should be proposed for removal until the development plans were moving forward. The applicant agreed to withdraw the removal request at this time. 7. 17 TREES (CITY OF SLO/APPLICANT) Mr. Pellemeier made a presentation on behalf of the Public Works/Street Dept. for approval to remove 17 trees in Area 4 to allow sidewalk/infrastructure repairs and to approve the replacement tree planting proposals. He stated there were up to 34 trees that were being evaluated for retention or removal, based on the viability of the trees surviving repairs and the need/cost-effectiveness of on -going repair work surrounding retentions. He noted that there were staff discussion notes accompanying each tree removal request listed. ■ 2138 BEEBEE (Elm) Ryan Guthrie, 2126 Beebee, agreed that the sidewalk needed repair but did not favor such a large specimen being removed. Mr. Meyer stated the sidewalk installation project took place eight years ago and the trees were already well established in the area and encouraged the infrastructure be worked around saving the trees. Mr. Combs reported the tree were in moderate health and had been topped by PG&E. The tree had some evidence of internal decay, a leaning canopy, and felt that the root pruning required for the necessary repair work would leave the tree unstable. Mr. Savory agreed there was damage. Mr. Ritter felt in general and specific to that neighborhood, trees were more important than sidewalks. He felt that any replacement plantings should be the same distinctive species. Mr. Pellemeier strongly believed the corner tree needed to be removed, due to the liability issues and that the re-establishment of another tree would better serve the long- term urban forest. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required three 15-gallon replacement trees: one small species chosen from the Master Street Tree list and two American elms. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ■ 874 CHURCH (Shamel ash) Jim Handle, owner, stated the sidewalk had already been repaired in the past and did not agree the tree needed to be removed. He felt any trip hazard could be ground down and suggested raised pervious concrete material could be used. Mr. Combs reported it was a large, healthy tree that could double in size. He discussed the current Street Division guidelines regarding materials allowed for repair work at this time. Mr. Ritter moved to deny the removal request, as he could not make the findings necessary to approve the removal. Mr. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ■ 1040 ISLAY (Camphor) Tom Callahan, owner, discussed the landscaping around the tree and stated the tree provided a key canopy for the area. He favored removal only after he experience undue hardship issues at this property. Nancy Dwyer, 1035 Islay, did not feel undue hardship had been presented and felt the healthy tree was a significant asset to the area. Mr. Meyer felt the tree offered significant character in the area and repairs should be made while retaining the tree. LeeAnn Singleton, 1052 Islay, had planted camphors on her property and felt this tree should be retained. Mr. Combs reported that the tree was in moderate health. 0 Mr. Ritter moved to deny the removal request, as he could not make the findings necessary to approve the removal. Mr. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ■ 1401 CHORRO (Ficus) David Dawson, owner, supported the removal due to numerous safety issues and liability potential from the tree and sidewalk damage. He felt all three trees were out of scale to the property and favored removing at least two, if not all three, as all had contributed to damage on his property and to the city's property. He suggested a Crepe myrtle as replacement species. Mr. Combs reported the trees were very healthy but were causing problems. He stated the first tree was the one causing the problems and the only one requested for removal; the remaining two trees would be pruned by the city. Mr. Pellemeier noted that the remaining two trees' removals could be discussed with staff at a later date. Mr. Ritter moved to approve the request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required replacing the tree with one 15-gallon Crepe myrtle. Mr. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed. ■ 2036 PRICE (Carob) Mr. Ritter moved to approve the request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and replacing the tree with two 15-gallon small species trees to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed. ■ 420 BRANCH (American elm) Mr. Ritter moved to approve the request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required replacing the tree with one 15-gallon American elm. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. 7 The motion passed. ■ 2142 STORY/563 BRANCH (2 Shamel ash) Mr. Ritter moved to approve the request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and required replacing the tree with two 15-gallon trees: the one for Story street to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list; the Branch street replacement should be American elm. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed. ■ 694 CHURCH (Pepper) Mr. Ritter moved to approve the request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and replacing the tree with one 15-gallon tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed. ■ 640 LEFF (Camphor) Mr. Ritter moved to approve the request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and replacing the tree with one 15-gallon tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list. Mr. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed. ■ 841/885/897 LEFF (5 Liquid ambers) Mr. Ritter moved to approve the request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and replacing the trees with five 15-gallon trees to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed. ■ 1632 OSOS (Acacia) Mr. Ritter moved to deny the removal request, as he could not make the findings necessary to approve the removal. Mr. Kincaid seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ■ 1042 PACIFIC (Liquid amber) Mr. Ritter felt the damage was minor and that the tree was appropriate to the area, but not the location. He did not favor removal at this time. Mr. Kincaid moved to approve the request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice, and replacing the trees with one 15-gallon tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list. Mr. Savory seconded the motion. The motion passed, with Mr. Ritter voting against. NEW BUSINESS — Mayor's Quarterly Advisory Body Meting — July 9, 2009 Mr. Ritter agreed to attend. — Language for Motion samples The language was approved as submitted for efficient motion -making. ON -GOING BUSINESS — Heritage Tree Update There was staff discussion on the Heritage Tree program and the Cal Trans Grove project. ARBORIST REPORT Mr. Combs reported that he had approved nine removals since the last meeting report. 0 LIAISON REPORT Mr. Pellemeier discussed his meeting with S.O.D. (Save Our Downtown) and the need for educating the public on the aspects of the Downtown Plan. The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. to next regular meeting scheduled for Monday, July 27, 2009, at 5:00 p.m. in the Corporation Yard Conference Room, 25 Prado Road. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary `-- J 9-2009 10:54A FROM:LANDMRRK LANDSCAPE C (805) 349-8824 From:Eckert Investments MAY-29-2009 OB:30A FROM LANDMARK LANDSCAPE C C805) 349-8824 may 1t va 1uuua cire MUM srsa Va. TO:95429868 0610512009 15:12 T0:96(357596 ouu #01 urw e G e F-17- ® - of san luis OBI 25 Prddo Road e San bait Obispo; CA 23401 REMOVAL P.2 #381 P.0021002 P. 2 M UMQUAANT? A trot mmoval applkatlon wlil only WAGE N91-13 rf yOUP tFS* is approved far be considemd if sceowq=1zd 'by n &WM0 removal and posted; please tall the office at the showhsg the slant, stsmmlairo(s) location and and of vw Posting period to amave to pick up location of alt Im" W"oxd for removal. rigase year permit. T a aerinitfat. is.."I bmbia when draw an fM back of this farm ar fax an a separate you pick up your permit (cosh or check payable to sheet of paper, stony with your applicaften. City of yen Luis Obhpo). ' Omar: -E� &d- owaves MAR Addrsrss - j A49COnt (if 01100 than owl AispikwWs meiling adds "S.. Location of trca(s): -' {�r�ff T/'f! �` YS 7 N• tdearest arose streets.�`'!l'�( Tree epeeist: 9ptanical name(s): Reasons far rsgnesting itepiraeaaikerrt fret piss po'epased' bes. ft YORP y6s0 W91 Coernors rsmne(s): d &..— d * Appliefftion will bf mr�sidersd- j rntirai� filled out and signed by ownw. if cWaklom ion of this application -Sots to Tree Committee, you air your aft am required to attend the meetingand will be notffied. " if Ions ckwurs is required to per-forn the tree removal work, on encroachwAt perna must be obtained from the City POW Wor W dgWtment at W palm Street. r x Any required *replatemarit trtae"' must bs installsd within 445 day& of Issuance of permit".. Since tm removal permits ore good for d mnths, you nwy wah to hold off picking up your permit M1111 you art sureyou wi It tic able fa install the repiacematst tme(s) within the 45 doy period. MAS(, OR FAX eo Phones 781-7220 Ciwtrer: AppliCeNtr - the Dad i10* 721-1 rform tot City Arboris}, 25 Prado Rd.. San Lois Obispo, CA 934M. 542-9"8 =., bate: Date; ZU or clrlal Lti fACrIHr� 1bE diwbroa (6 �A Atit lE�ltl. ! and �advitlns. ><alseomar�raiwAlat�a r%crrae QO! t ce Iles it Ck 5?� �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �IIIIIII� II G�/>��/S�'�.yr�xc� q�e D��3a�09 Z' 7 6 25 Prado Road • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION **If your tree removal is related to property development or a remodel, submit your request through the Planning Department at 919 Palm Street as part of your Planning Application.** IMPORTANT: A tree removal application will only be considered if accompanied by a *sketch/map* showing the street, structure(s) location and location of all trees proposed for removal. Please draw on the back of this form or fax on a separate sheet of paper, along with your application. PLEASE NOTE: If your tree is approved for removal and posted, please call the office at the end of your posting period to arrange to pick up your permit. The permit fee is $43 payable when you pick up your permit (cash or check payable to City of San Luis Obispo). Tree removal applications must be received by the second Monday of the month to be considered for the meeting on the fourth Monday of the month. Owner: &&4& Telephone: Owner's Mailing dress: / s ®, Zip Code: Applicant (if other than owner): Telephone: Applicant's mailing address: Zip Code: Location of tree(s). Nearest cross street: %3�®� Dog in yard? Yes No Tree species (Common names): Reasons for requesting removal: * Application will be considered only if entirely filled out and signed by owner. If consideration of this application goes to Tree Committee, you or your agent are required to attend the meeting and will be notified. * If lane closure is required to perform the tree removal work, an encroachment permit must be obtained from the City Public Works Department at 919 Palm Street. * Any required "replacement trees" must be installed within "45 days of issuance of permit". Since tree removal permits are good for 6 months, you may wish to hold off picking up your permit until you are sure you will be able to install the replacement tree(s) within the 45 day period. MAIL OR FAX completed form to: City Arborist, 25 Prado Rd., San Luis Obispo, CA 93401, Phone: 781-7220 Fax: 542-9868 Owner: , Date: J�(j —,/V Applicant. Date: The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of it services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. Rev. 5-09 Ace Tre Care Cont. 98 D e Brown Owner PO BOX 414 IiI ARROYO GRANDE, CA 93421 805-234-1799 cell WE-7992A ISA Certified Arborist acecertifiedtree Luis oBIspo CA 93401 care.com _ Will only be considered if accompanied by a sketch/map showing the street, structure(s) location and location of all trees proposed for removal. Please draw on the back of this form or fax on a separate sheet of paper, along with your application. .APPLICATION PLEASE NOTE: If your tree is approved for removal and posted, please call the office at the end of your posting period to arrange to pick up your permit. The permit fee is $40 payable when you pick up your permit (cash or check payable to City of San Luis Obispo). Owner: r JVe AV+JV Telephone: S'q3- 77c10 Owner's Mailing Address: 1690 S4VI LIAs JrL 510, CA Zip Code: 92q© Applicant (if other than owner): bgdiai 2roWrn Telephone: i4%q-1Z0I Applicant's mailing address: (��IH��QiZRo1fc7 �Rf{NDE,C/i 93'�21 Zip Code: Location of tree(s): j Z(o S.a n Lu k j) rr , Nearest cross street: Calt�O f ny bog, in yard? Yes F No LIS"i Tree species: Botanical name(s): Common name(s): Q�2rCNS G9-40.11q L04A Live Q�k Reasons for reQuestina r (Ira ✓Ifi * Application will be considered'only if entirely filled out and sighed by owner. If consideration of this ` 01rC4 r application goes to Tree Committee, you or your agent are required to attend the meeting and will be notified. * If lane closure is required to perform the tree removal work, an encroachment permit must be obtained from the City Public Works Department at 919 Palm Street. * Any required "replacement trees", must be installed within'45 days of issuance of permit". Since tree removal permits are good for 6 months, you may wish to hold off picking up your permit until you are sure you will be able to install the replacement tree(s) within the 45 day period. MAIL OR FAX completed form to: iNong: 781-72aO Fax: 542-9868 onwe dt Owner: Applicant: City Arborist, 25 Prado Rd., San Luis Obispo, CA 93401, .)ate: ,' /22 -0 Data: The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of it services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. n w `a.. �e eo n I�IIIIIII�I , :gip �Illl)IDI . Ill rr�' :9 25 Prado Road • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION **If your tree removal is related to property development or\a remodel, submit your request through the Planning Department at 919 Palm Street as part of your Planning Application.** IMPORTANT: A tree removal application will only be considered if accompanied by a *sketch/map* showing the street, structure(s) location and location of all trees proposed for removal. Please draw on the back of this form or fax on a separate sheet of paper, along with your application. PLEASE NOTE: If your tree is approved for removal and posted, please call the office at the end of your posting period to arrange to pick up your permit. The permit fee is $43 payable when you pick up your permit (cash or check payable to City of San Luis Obispo). Tree removal applications must be received by the second Monday of the month to be considered for the meeting on the fourth Monday of the month. Owner: \9c- `z—L Owner's Mailing Address: Applicant's AfiaiNg address: Location of tree(s): I Nearest cross street: Tree species (Common names): /- for requesting removal: P Telephone. ,, - Zip Code e one: Zip Code: Dog in yard? Yes 0 A /T * Appl' cation will be considered tnly if entirely filled out and signed by owner. If consideration of this application goes to Tree Committee, you or your agent are required to attend the meeting and will be notified. * If lane closure is required to perform the tree removal work, an encroachment_ permit must be obtained from the City Public Works Department at 919 Palm Street. * Any required "replacement trees" must be installed within "45 days of issuance of permit". Since tree removal permits are good for 6 months, you may wish to hold off picking up your permit until you are sure you will be able to install the replacement tree(s) within the 45 day period. MAIL OR FAX completed form to: City Arborist, 25 Prado Rd., San Luis Obispo, CA 93401, Phone: 781-7220 Fax: 542-9868 9 Owner: bate: ,, J Applicant, Date: The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of it services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. Rev. 5-09 \A u� iiilllllllll11111111lllllll 6 �h 25 Prado Road • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION **If your tree removal is related to property development or a remodel, submit your request through the Planning Department at 919 Palm Street as part of your Planning Application.** IMPORTANT: A tree removal application will only PLEASE NOTE: If your tree is approved for be considered if accompanied by a *sketch/map* removal and posted, please call the office at the showing the street, structure(s) location and end of your posting period to arrange to pick up location of all trees proposed for removal. Please your permit. The permit fee is $43 payable whe;.n draw on the back of this form or fax on a separate you pick up your permit (cash or check payable to sheet of paper, along with your application. City of San Luis Obispo). Tree removal applications must be received by the second Monday of the month to be considered for the meeting on the fourth Monday of the month. Owner: C I T L/ O L / (^'� �l -.Telephone: Owner's Mailing Address: Os {fro-d "R, G�- Zip Code: Applicant (if other than owner): ire irk-k t t c vKe- L,�- r Telephone: Applicant's mailing address: Zip Code: Location of tree(s): 14 D Nearest cross street: Ca C 1,Zrro -k `��SM C) Dog in yard? Yes a No Tree species (Common names): `t- t GU S it Ai Ck Reasons for requesting removal: TA\T S+<,CA J� CU V,0K Ac etor A-tfy T -7 Replacement tree planting proposed (REQUIRED): * Application will be considered only if entirely filled out and signed by owner. If consideration of this application goes to Tree Committee, you or your agent are required to attend the meeting and will be notified. * If lane closure is required to perform the tree removal work, an encroachment_ permit must be obtained from the City Public Works Department at 919 Palm Street. * Any required "replacement trees" must be installed within "45 days of issuance of permit". Since tree removal permits are good for 6 months, you may wish to hold off picking up your permit until you are sure you will be able to install the replacement tree(s) within the 45 day period. MAIL OR FAX completed form to: City Arborist, 25 Prado Rd., San Luis Obispo, CA 93401, Phone: 781-7220 Fax: 542-9868 Owner: C o�— Date: Applicant: Dater 023 D The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of it services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. Rev. 5-09