Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/17/1988, 4 - REMOVAL OF TREES ALONG CALTRANS FRONTAGE OF MADONNA ROAD. IIII�II�IIIII^�I III MEETING GATE: II Illu City ofSanLUSS OBISpO May 17, 1988 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: David F. Romero ,/�7 Wayne A. Peterson Public Works Director City Engineer SUBJECT: Removal of Trees Along Caltrans Frontage of Madonna Road. RECOMMENDATION: By Motion, Reconfirm the Design of the Higuera Street Project Calling for Street Widening, Tree Removal, and Sidewalks. BACKGROUND: Questions were raised at the April 5th council meeting regarding the proposed removal of a row of pine trees along Caltrans frontage on Madonna Road. The trees are proposed to be removed in the very near future under a contract for the Higuera Street widening project. The trees are being removed to allow for a widening of Madonna Road as it approaches Higuera Street to permit one lane for right turns and two for left turns. One third of the traffic on Madonna Road is turning right. The plans call for extensive relandscaping of the area between the back of sidewalk and the new fence along the Caltrans parking lot. Reduced plans showing the project as proposed are attached as Exhibit 1 . The history of the trees is relatively long (Exhibit 7). The first notice engineering staff received was a verbal contact early in January 1987 from Toby Ross, expressing concern regarding the number of trees being removed. In response to this, staff reworked the plans and was able to save several additional trees (Exhibit 8). Some time later the engineering staff received ARC minutes (Exhibit 6) of this meeting, however, comments regarding the trees were general in nature and staff felt it had already responded to this direction. In mid-April of 1988 the Planning staff unearthed (from original tapes of the ARC meeting) a letter dated January 6, 1987 (Attached exhibit 5). This letter apparently was presented to the chair of the ARC for his review and approval, however, to our knowledge it was not forwarded to the Council or made available to the engineering staff. This letter to the council is the reason for this agenda item. Following is a discussion of the various alternatives that may or may not save the trees in question. Alternative One (Exhibit 1 ) Full Project This is the alternative which is included in the plans for the project that has been previously approved by the council, advertised, and a contract awarded to Madonna Construction. This alternative causes the removal of 13 pine trees and one walnut tree. The parkway will be replanted with 9 red flowering gums, 8 canary island pines, and 2 bradford pears. In addition the area between the +1W j�Ill city of San tui., osispo Ab COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT trees will be filled with lily of the nile, India Hawthorne, Escallonia 'Fradesii' , and Aaron's beard. The design of the landscaping was by Caltrans and engineering staff and made to be attractive and compatible with the existing landscaping on the remainder of the property. This alternative also provides for three lanes of traffic on the Madonna Road approach. This is important if we are to actually improve the traffic capacity of the intersection which is the reason for the project. The primary advantage of this alternative is that it will provide for the traffic needs now and in the future. It also will provide attractive landscaping for the Caltrans frontage. It takes advantage of the right-of-way for which the City has already expended about $50,000. Primary disadvantage of the alternative is that it causes the removal of moderately large trees which provide an attractive entrance to the City from highway 101 . Alternative Two (Exhibit 2) No Widening This is the alternative suggested by the ARC. It would leave the curbs in their present alignment until they approach the intersection of Higuera Street. At that point they would need to flare to the south to allow for a turning radius that can be negotiated by trucks. Precise design has not been done for this alternative but it appears that only five trees would be removed. Primary advantage of this project is the saving of nine pine trees. These trees were planted sometime in the last 20 years. They have a relatively short life span and grow very fast. The primary disadvantage of this alternative is that the capacity of the intersection is reduced by one-third over what was intended. Much of the goal of the project will not be achieved if the right turn lane is so shortened that the back-up from the left turn lanes prevents care from making a free right at Higuera Street. Back-ups on Madonna road will be about fifty percent longer than they would be with the design proposed in alternate 1 . In addition the City has expended about $50,000 to buy this right-of-way and agreed to make certain improvements to Caltrans' property. The improved landscaping along Madonna Road would not be achieved, and in the long run would be less attractive than the proposed improvement. Alternative Three (Exhibit 3) No Sidewalk This alternative is a variation on alternative one. In this alternative the sidewalks on the south side of Madonna Road are deleted. This alternative results in the saving of nine of the trees that would have been lost if alternative one was constructed. The primary advantage of this alternative is that traffic would be handled as in alternative one and oly five trees will be lost. There are two disadvantages of this alternative. The first is that much of the landscaping proposed to improve the appearance of Madonna Road would not be planted. The large Pine trees prevent the growth of the shrubs that are proposed to be placed along with the new trees in alternative one. The secf�nd� is that there would be no place for pedestrians to walk along the street. 4— ��u�i�i►�IINI��p��ui►�d�U city of san lues oBispo wMia; COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Without the sidewalk those pedestrians who wish to walk on the south side of the street would walk in the bike lane on the roadway, thus exposing the city to some liability. Alternative Four (Exhibit 4) Sidewalk Behind Trees This alternative is similar to alternatives one and three as far as the roadway is concerned The sidewalk would be constructed along the curb as far as it can be built without damaging trees and then continues behind the trees, along the proposed Caltrans fence. The principal advantage of this alternative is that traffic and pedestrian traffic could be handled as planned in the original project. In addition nine trees could be saved (5 would be removed). The primary disadvantage is that the property owner of the area where the sidewalk would go is Caltrans. They have indicated verbally (we have requested a written response but have not yet received one) that they would oppose the sale of this property to the City. If the city were to purchase this property cost would be approximately $100,000, plus condemnation expense. The landscaping also would not be constructed as planned and may be more difficult to design to achieve an attractive appearance. Also, while in all of the other alternatives the landscaping is to be maintained by the State, in this alternative the city would end up maintaining the area between the sidewalk and the street. Another disadvantage of all but the first alternative is, because we do have a contract for the project, changes in the work scope will cost an unknown amount if conducted by change order. A decision must be made soon or the question of saving the trees will become moot. One of the early items of most construction jobs is the removal of trees, buildings and other items considered for demolition. If the council wishes to pursue alternative 2, 3 or 4 we may have to delete much of the work proposed in this area so that it can be redesigned. The redesign will take considerable time in as much as it is a joint project with Caltrans, which generally moves along very slowly. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the council confirm that the project they approved for construction should be built per the approved plans and the trees in question should be removed. wap-d/higueratrees �-3 ♦ F-)T ` SCALE 1 = 40� Hil • €;z:. \ ♦ ♦ y( TREES TO BE '� �\ ♦. `♦ REMOVED ♦ �♦I Y ' 1 1 , / i ;� ;:: EXHIBIT 1 yx ..... � SCALE 40 • © �� X TREE TO B y V .... REMOVED ¥ , �m�& \ x ® �dx \� . & �3 - v = . �E �y + »« & \ \ A LT U R N AT W E 2 \ \ � \ EXHIBIT 2 OZ4- SCALE 1" = 40� ♦ ♦ • \��\\�� \`�� ��♦� �( TREES TO BE �. �� `♦� `. REMOVED ♦ ♦ , `e ♦ted ♦ 1 y y� ti ti sti C q 4d !/'11 LST E R U V// T O V E 3 • ``\ \\ • 1 1 1 1 � � r r ' EXHIBIT 3 Llrtf `♦ `N SCALE 1 = 40� • �\ �� `\ �( TREES TO BE `. \�\ `�\ �`♦ REMOVED \ ♦ \y Zp a4 c 9 ' i EXHIBIT 4 ��►II��IIIIII�IIII�IIII IIIII III � C4 of sAn tuis oBispo 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 January 6, 1987 TO: City Council FROM: Architectural Review Commission The Architectural Review Commission, at its regular meeting on January 5, 1987, approved the demolition of certain commercial buildings on the westside of Higuera Street, south of South Street (SLOMC 15.36.150). This was done under some duress to members of commission with reference to other elements included in the demolition and scope of work to be done in the area. It is the unanimous opinion of the members of this commission that the seven Monterey Pines and two Cedar trees at the south intersection of Madonna Road and Higuera Street be preserved and the west curb along Higuera Street (south of Madonna Road) and the south curb along Madonna Road (please see referenced drawing) be maintained as is. All members of the commission agreed that the destruction of these trees far outweighs the advantages that may be accrued by the inclusion of the right-turn lane off Madonna Road onto South Higuera. We feel great concern at the lost of these aesthetic units at one of the city's entrances which is already largely compromised by elements which cannot be improved. We collectively feel that mitigation measures as suggested by the city are inadequate and do not compensate for the loss. We respectfully bring this matter to your urgent attention. •�jyti.t G1'`'y"'�'.Y � ,�''� 7' �jO ted' _MIBIT 5 y-8 ARC Minutes ` January 50, 1987 '. Page 9 6. ARC 86�'148: 959 Los Cerros; new house on sensitive/site; R-1-PD zone; fihak1 review. w Pam Ricci, Associa Planner, presented the staff/�eport, j recommending final a roval. Ren Bohlen, applicant,\ orted staff's recommendation. Stan Bell, representative fo the subdivis narchitectural review committee, supported the proje t. Jay Farbstein, owner of adjacent �lbt, Indicated he had reviewed plans and supported the project. Richard Zweifel, another property owner�4' .n tract, indicated the scale and siting was acceptable to hi . Ren Kohlen noted that split-face block or sl stone would be used for the retaining wall. He ileo indicated tha black nylon chainlink fencing would be installs around the tennis cou S. Commr. Cooper suggests using a lighter color blue 3�qr the roofing. Commr. Baur moved grant final approval to the projec with color refinements to re to staff. Commr. Jones conded the motion. AYES: ur, Jones, Cooper, Field, Pinard, Rademaker NOES: one ABSENT: RNone VACANCY: One The motion passes. 7. ARC 86-145: 148-182 Higuera Street; demolish existing commercial structures; C-S zone. Pam Ricci, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the commission determine that the buildings are not l architecturally or historically significant. EXHIBIT 6 "1 ARC Minutes January 5, 1987 Page 10 The commission drafted a letter to the City Council noting their concern with the proposal to widen the right-turn lane from Madonna Road to South Higuera Street and the loss of trees. The commission felt mitigation measures were inadequate and would not compensate for the loss. Commr. Field moved to determine that the buildings to be removed are not architecturally or historically significant and approved their demolition. Commr. Jones seconded the motion. AYES: Field, Jones, Baur, Cooper, Pinard, Rademaker NOES: None ABSENT: None f VACANCY: One The motion passes. S. ARC 86-155: 578 Mitchell Drive; demolish existing residential structure; R-1 zone. Pam Ricci, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending approval of the demolition. Robert Evenson, applicant, was present but did not speak on the item. Commr. Field moved to determine that the existing house is of not historical, cultural, or architectural value and approved its demolition. Commr. Cooper seconded the motion. AYES: Field, Cooper, Baur, Jones, Pinard, Rademaker NOES: None ABSENT: None VACANCY: One The motion passes. MINUTES: Regular meeting of November 17, 1986. l On motion of Commr. Field, seconded by Commr. Cooper, the minutes of November 17, 1986, were approved as amended. 'y- / o April so, 1988 WOW ST. MOWN& ( x-258 summan of ae f wns -f kth b 6gqihftnnq Dim= concernrnq JmG on Cal Trans prepet , souf wAt eotar' W Mobnaa Rd. and ($ v= Sf. Nov 1985 N8q4hVS declara}-ron on K-298 by Tobq koss ;;!fan 5 1957 AI�6 discussed denw(,f nor► of �va�isurldrn ;fan 1981 himeerrnq learned from Toby C46 that' ARS had noncar tr s abocif ims beth mWed Tob Foss asked Ehglneer1h 10 hwdr design fv delraue, nuMber d` {tees berm removed fan -Mar 19s7 rneerri ng mada changQes per- T,9bi boss' rekvesf.. Cur 6 radw and NM-T w��( tale wet-P, deer¢aced. No dlreefwves were reeeiveA fron► ARC, feb 2 1983 Cwfr f Counal meaf r K 258 a d for advvr slnj Nnard expressed eahcern parove6at frees ...Feb 1909 pay& aornero asked 8vjilteerrrj what wac doh¢, 44 f re, _Fe6 00 006 $w(eif, keh Bruce searched for ARC mewuo ...Feb 16 19$$ mamo fram "66 }}Aw(eY i Vim Romero wrf� mays ... 56w1 first design versus revrsed Qeugn and wwfarlKI ex(sfu l ho. of trees ftiro W no. of 1 tee ;;;April 5 1988 Crf� �Council meefirl - K-258 coMyttcf 6waroW "m4 del( X11 W Gyp fk& Slf6Ject A441K � 1 EXHIBILT '7 ��► ►►iiuiu�►►fliii���i►illl�lllilp� '►'�'�� I IIIcity of sAn WIS OBISPO I 1 091 ViW 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 February 17, 1988 MEMORANDUM TO: John Dunn FROM: Dave Romero SUBJECT: Tree removal and replacement on the H.iguera Street widening proiect At the Council meeting of February 9, Councilperson Pinard questioned staff regarding trees to• be removed along the Madonna Road frontage of the Caltrans property. This report is in response to her inquiry. The original submittal indicated that 20 of the 26 trees along this road would be removed, with six being retained. We find no firm direction from ARC to save any specific number of trees -- merely to save as many as possible. Subsequent to the meeting we reworked our plans and were able to save ten trees rather than six, with 16 to be removed. Approximately four other trees could have been saved, however Caltrans requested that they be removed since they would be so close to the sidewalk that they might not survive. To replace the 16 trees being removed, we will plant 23 trees plus an additional ten trees on the other side of the street and at the intersection. For the overall job we will remove these 16 trees but will replant 91 new trees, all of which will be of specimen size. treeremoval/dfr#9 jj EXHIBIT 8 February 16, 1988 MEMORANDUM TO: David F. Romero, Director of Public Works FROM: John W. Hawley, Supervising Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Higuera Street Widening Project - K25C Tree Improvement Per your request, the following is a summary of the "tree improvements" which are a part of the Higuera/Madonna Street Widening Project: 1 . Caltrans property, intersection of Higuera/Madonna: Current existing No. of Trees = 26 a. Trees proposed to be removed: This Project = 16 b. Trees saved = 10 a. Trees proposed to be removed: 20 Original wider row (before ARC comments) b. Trees saved = 6 a. New trees to be planted in row = 23 b. New street trees at intersection (N & S sides) = 10 TOTAL = 33 Trees C. Increase in 17 trees at this intersection. Intersection after this project = 43 (compared to 26 that now exist) 2. Overall project: a. New street trees (Madonna, Higuera & South) = 53 h. Other new trees (Caltrans at Intersection & 101 ramps = 38 c. TOTAL = 91 New Trees jh5/K25cmemo bw �1 - /3 r>� i In The Superior Court of The State of California In and for the County of San Luis Obispo AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION No. ---- City - - - - STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) )} ss. County of San Luis Obispo I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the CITYRIN TUE cAIA,M X_ _V8 TUESDA7:00 P.M 7�1_ County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not. 7:0o P.M. The San Luis Obispo City Council will hold public hear- interested in the above-entitled matter ings on Tuesday, May 17, 1988, beginning at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Cham- _ I am now, and at all times embraced bers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, on the items listed below. Hearings will be in the publication herein mentioned was, the principal clerk heard in the order shown on the agenda (approximate time for each hearing is of the printers and publishers of the SAN LUIS OBISPO shown in parenthesis). The public is welcome to attend and comment. The Council may also discuss other busi- COUNTY TELEGRAM-TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general cir- ness Items before or after those items. The reports, including rec- culation, printed and published daily, Sundays excepted, at ommendation by staff, will be available for review in the City Clerk's Department on the City of San Luis Obispo in the above named county and the Friday before the meet- ing. For more information, please contact the City State; that notice Clerk's Department at 549- 7103 or visit us In Room N1 of City Hall, 990 Palm Street. You may also listen to the meeting on Cal Poly radio station KCPR FM 91.3. APPEAL - REXALL SIGN— to consider an appeal of a decision by the Architectural of which the annexed clipping is a true printed copy, was Review Commission to deny request for a variance for published in the above-named newspaper and not in any freestanding pole sign at supplement thereof — on the following dates, to-wit: 717 Marsh Street (Rexall PP g Drug)(30 min.) 1988-89 BUDGET—review of the 1988-89 budget (final adoption to be continued to June 6)(10 min.) COUNTY HAZARDOUS 5-7-88 WASTE MANAGEMENT--to consider the draft San Luis Obispo County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (5 _. min.) Pam Voges,City Clerk that said newspaper was duly and regularly ascertained and May 7, 1968 dv59391 established a newspaper of general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on June 9, 1952, under the provisions of Chapter 1, Division 7, Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California. IR E C E I V E I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the fore- MAY 1 1 1988 going is true and correct. CITY CLERK SAN LUIS Oeispo.CA (Si ature of Principal Clerk) Date 5-7-88 19_ - rr m � � a a Q A O <, m911 N o D Q Z CD o P K m ® N v O C1 n 3 H