The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/05/1998, 1 - APPEAL OF TREE COMMITTEE DECISION TO DENY TREE REMOVAL REQUEST council -�- j acEnba Report hmN.Aft CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Michael McCluskey,Public Works Director ' PREPARED BY: Todd Martin, City Arborist SUBJECT: Appeal of Tree Committee decision to deny tree removal request CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution denying the appeal of the Tree Committee's decision to deny the removal request at 794 Meinecke Street DISCUSSION: On February 21, 1998, City staff received a tree removal request from Mr. Orville Young of 794 Meinecke Street,in San Luis Obispo. The request was for the removal of one Monterey pine tree located in the front yard of this address. The request was based on the assertion that the tree posed a hazard to both pedestrians and vehicular traffic on Chorro Street. City staff inspected the tree and determined it did not meet the criteria for tree removal as described in Section 12.24.180 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The applicant was notified of this by letter on March 2, 1998,and that the removal request would be placed on the March 23'Tree Committee agenda for consideration. Mr. and Mrs. Young were not present at this meeting. Municipal Code Section 12.24.180 C-6 provides guidance for approval or denial of tree removal requests. One of the following criteria must be met before a removal request can be approved: A) Does the existence of the tree cause undue hardship to the property owner? B) Does the removal of the tree promote good arboricultural practice? C) Will removal of the tree not harm the character or environment of the surrounding neighborhood? The Tree Committee members present at this meeting included Chairperson Ron Regan, Steve Caminiti, Curt Mingsworth,Jane Worthy and Barbara Murphy. After taking into consideration the concerns of the applicant and their own observation regarding the tree,the members voted unanimously to deny the removal permit. Council Agenda Report—Appeal of Tree Committee-794 Meinecke Street Page 2 The decision was based on the following facts: 1) The tree appears to be in good health 2) The tree is a skyline tree in a neighborhood with few sizable trees 3) The tree does not present a threat to pedestrians or traffic Based on these findings,the committee felt the removal request did not meet any of the criteria necessary for approval. Mr. and Mrs. Young were notified of this by letter on March 24, 1998. On April 2, 1998,the City Clerk's office received an appeal from Mr. and Mrs. Young. The basis of the appeal was a concern regarding the safety of the tree. The applicants feel the tree is prone to uproot,possibly resulting in property damage or injury to pedestrians FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City for either denial or approval of the appeal. The cost of the tree removal, if the appeal is upheld, is borne by the applicant- ALTERNATIVES: pplicantALTERNATIVES: Adopt a resolution upholding the appeal. Attachments: Resolution denying appeal of the Tree Committee Resolution upholding appeal of the Tree Committee Appeal to the City Council received April 2, 1998 March 23, 1998 Tree Committee Meeting Minutes Tree Removal Application dated February 21, 1998 Arborist's letters to applicant Photographs (In Council Reading File) I:Council Agenda Report n94 Meinecke appeal RESOLUTION NO. (1998 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL FORA TREE REMOVAL REQUEST AT 794 MEINECKE STREET NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Finding: That this Council, after consideration of the applicant's appeal, and the San Luis Obispo Tree Committee's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon,make the following finding: a. Removing the trees would not promote good arboricultural practice. SECTION 2. The appeal is hereby denied. Upon motion of . seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 1998. Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: Bonnie Gawf,City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Q1114441..-40- /11J,IG. rgens I fitpkttomey _ /-3 RESOLUTION NO. (1998 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO UPHOLDING AN APPEAL FOR A TREE REMOVAL REQUEST AT 794 MEINECKE STREET NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Finding: That this Council, after consideration of the applicant's appeal, and the San Luis Obispo Tree Committee's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon,make the following finding: a. Removing the trees would promote good arboricultural practice. SECTION 2. The appeal is hereby approved. Upon motion of ,seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 1998. Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: Bonnie Gawk City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J .Jo ens I ity rney �ii��I�III��BIII DDI►I�►�II� ►r - -I�� cityo sAn luis oBispo EiiAPPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL In accordance with the appeals procedures as authorized by Title, 1, Chapter 1.20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals from the decision of Tree Conmittee rendered on 3/23/98 which consisted of the following (i.e., explain what you are appealing and the grounds for submitting the appeal. Use additional sheets as needed.) See attached letter The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with: on Name/Department (Date) Appellant: Name/Tltle Mailing Address (& Zip Code) Home Phone Work Phone Representative: Name/Tttie Mailing Address (& Zip Code) For Official Use Only: -/ Calendared for �/S Date & Time Received: c: City Attorney City Administrative Officer RECEIVED to the following department(s): T &A77A - APR _0 21998 SLO CITY CLERK Original in City Clerk's Office 794 Meinecke San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93405 City Clerk's Office City Hall RECEIVED 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401 APR 0 21998 Subject - Tree Removal SLO CITY CLERK Our request for a permit to remove a very large and to Monterey pine tree was denied by the City Arborist and the Tree Committee. This tree is on our property at the corner of Meinecke and Chorro, on the 45 Chorro side, a rental, near the driveway for both sides. Our tenant parks in this drive- way and is in and out several times a day. Chorro is an extremely busy street at all hours, and during peak traffic periods cars are backed up from the stop sign to our driveway. Cars park in front of 45 Chorro during the day and overnight. Many pedestrians also use the side- walk on Chorro. The roots of this tree are very close to our foundation. We are very concerned about the safety of the public should this tree fall. The power line to the street light and a transformer and high voltage wires are also in reach of this tree. Because of the very soggy soil and location of the tree as well as the shallow roots of Monterey pine trees, we believe this tree could fall and cause much damage. In previous years, a loquat tree and a white birch tree on this side fell, as well as tree roses from time to time, and this year a hibiscus. A Meinecke Street neighbor's very tall Palm tree lost the top on a windy night but fortun- ately no cars were in the area. We have lived in our home for over forty years and have tkied to maintain our property in an attractive and safe manner. We agree to replace the pine tree with a smaller and safer tree if necessaey. Respectfully requested Orville B. and Margaret S. Young l��o CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 23, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Caminiti, Ron Regan, Curt Illingsworth Jane Worthy and Barbara Murphy STAFF PRESENT: Ron Combs, Lisa Woske 1. MINUTES The minutes of the February 23, 1998 regular meeting were approved as submitted. 2. TREE REMOVALS -- 794 MEINECKE (Monterey pine) Ron Combs reported that the tree was healthy at this point, but was highly prone to disease. The Committee discussed the application and while they understood it was prone to disease, they agreed that it was presently a healthy specimen and a skyline tree. Ron Regan moved to deny the removal request, as the findings could not be made. Barbara Murphy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. - - 3383 SEQUOIA (Two eucalyptus) Mr. Combs noted that one of the trees had severe root pruning and appeared to be unstable and was leaning dramatically. Curt Illingsworth reported that a neighbor had expressed concern about the tree falling on their property. �-7 return completed form to, City Arborist 25 Prado Road ��u�IIIIII�IIIII��IIII�I�I��II�III IIIISLO, CA 93401 I Cit SMwigOBISPO 25 Prado Road • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION FORM Applicant: G' v --1z S. G u Telephone: S q3 -S V6� Address: 7'9-1/?�c�%r/P� P 'T L.� . Zip: CC0A'Ve� gf 'G'l�e,e,ro ' �ie ,;• e� k �✓� �� P,d�;a� P o wtiE .E.. Location of tree(s) Please indicate nearest cross street: ��io rzl2 ( �Q .z.ro /fie.'✓ec co cue Important: A tree removal application will only be considered if accompanied by a plot plan showing the location and species of any tree proposed for removal. Tree Species:, T.,�Srr✓? �,✓ e— Botanical name Common name Reasons for removing: M,•rx�lf';Plz Z., X c4j t ,',q ti/ of 0/9,e y rf?eeJ` .7r 'aa n_ .kl ON .tTi2L'e7r // cJr D 2 20 i Compensatory replacement proposed: V� 2 s 9 Bs�'ory — ria 4 z / g 4cgu�T 7"l,�eT.Jo� ar el /7ioa �.SF P/i ✓ �: �w ra .4 a d /�2oZA4 Al, /f�Q ieel l Comments:/,lj, s--S Z,Qrood, Applicant/Owner. e—� Date 9 2 (plot plan attached) � — iremovalirm/tm#2 ILIIAllII city of sAn tuis oBispo 25 Prado Road • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 March 2, 1998 O.B. and Margaret Young 794 Meinecke San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Your application for tree removal at, 794 Meinecke , has been reviewed by the City of San Luis Obispo Arborist. Since the existing conditions did not allow the City Arborist to make a favorable finding regarding removal of the tree(s), the matter has been forwarded to the City of San Luis Obispo Tree Committee,pursuant to City Ordinance No. 1153, Section 12.24.180. The Tree Committee,which is comprised of five members,will review your application and inspect the tree(s) in question. The members will then take up the issue at the next Tree Committee meeting scheduled for, March 23, 1998 at 5:OORm _ in Conference Room A at the City Corporation Yard, 25 Prado Road. A copy of the agenda will be sent prior to the meeting. You are encouraged to attend the meeting. At the meeting, the City Arborist will provide a brief overview of the circumstances starrounding your proposed removal of the trees, after which you will be given an opportunity to explain your reasons for requesting the removal. The Committee members will then address your concerns and deliberate the facts to detemune whether they should,in fact, grant or deny your request or provide you with other options. Any decision rendered by the Tree Committee can be appealed to the City Council if you are not satisfied with the Tree Committee's decision. If you have any questions regarding this process,you may contact Todd Martin at (805) 781-7023, Monday through Friday. Sincerely, Y66& IVOA-AIIII Todd Martin City Arborist t=lteom _ /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. /—/� IIIII cityosAn vuis oBigo sname 25 Prado Road • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 March 24, 1998 O.B. and Margaret Young 794 Meinecke San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Your application for removal of a tree at 794 Meinecke was reviewed by the City of San Luis Obispo Tree Committee on March 23,1998. After careful consideration of the facts provided by you and an on-site inspection of the tree,the Committee members have voted, in compliance with Municipal Code Section 12.24.1 80.C.6,to deny your request based on the following findings: ■ a. The tree is not causing undue hardship. ■ b. Removal would not promote good arboricultural practice. ■ c. Removal would harm the character of the environment of the surrounding neighborhood. The decision of the Committee is final unless an appeal, in accordance with Municipal Code Section 1.20.020 - 1.20.050, is filed with the City Clerk's office within ten(10) days of the Committee's decision. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by a decision of the Committee. (The period to file an appeal is extended to November 10, 1997, due to this notice being delayed.) You are reminded that the Tree Ordinance(#1153 - 1989 Series), Section 12.24.131,Protection of Trees,reads in part: C. No person shall willfully injure, disfigure, or intentionally destroy by any means any tree growing within the planting area or elsewhere within the jurisdiction of this ordinance, except with permits described elsewhere in this chapter. G. Any person deemed responsible for damaging a tree or removing a tree without a permit as described in this ordinance shall be liable for damages to the city in an amount equal to the value of the tree plus costs incurred to assess damages. Tree values shall be established according to evaluation standards of the International Society of Arboriculture. If you have any questions regarding this matter,you may contact Todd Martin at(805)781-7220, Monday through Friday, 8:00-5:00. Respectfully, Todd Martin City Arborist to City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. 1�/O 1 1 1 r . is r Ir - s r`��14r�lf.!Cj, y --'_'� � �1 � 1 +! • \� �' � l' 'dal1.2. J�4 yam• .ten .i � O w' rll2 5P } t 1 n '•x n e i; P ? d — �-. -.. � •-=--,�-.'m-„_....._..:....sw.4r� �w 1' I E,��, rte_ a�..�x•-.s;�-, � '-� � ��_ -'�- �- �x1s � -��,a`��r"'�r_.r� _”` �'' �•z-'" �_ . : d4xr b �' I: 4 : e r `� t :c" _ _—'= "•� �s -x'_s e r-''e—m'_•—';� "r�}rT 7.v* cti:_es:_�� m •r-� '�Mi� ..�•,. Irl a ;.-•^ c s ''_�.�_ _� z z C'�^�T o_ � �•i. � - far .raT' � -� tyrw`�1 r- ,�`yw }�� "C'7C. er.F � v _��-e �- ��..'^iv:: �.�c.—e„Q•.y7z.� {�y�-3"�-'--.. , a�-�r�_"'r' - a•�Py3.r��`u R_ t r _ c f yT s "� � su-�--s'=•4.a �•—a:.. .—; _o' _ F" a1f. y n•, c .gra,. _ r� t •" - n -xA _ � x � arra` , §txa }r�`�': �.� ° - � �....T-.,-1^-�-,� r.•ea.P 1� Fy�Na��'��`rp�tt � ,F A j r IR 1 �,' •Ptti' c �f' xs —ivy C _ iart. r, - iF .+.5,e �� ysr ,L, G .�,-- _•ems r _ 'aeF (C`�f�', d+L6 a r '! .Q s5_ y y _ _r—sem i F - .,>_. .% ,+ zG rr~ s n•.�a� _ 'E ',.r =c=.5='$_"E a '� "' x _ y- Nr A Po,em`�'i9. 1� � �e Ste,'-i� � --..�_ �; �-��`Cq_�.z�a_-z"��r Smc c�grz � �•s-�.`, �f'�M±'. f '"'Argy eJFc�v 'm'" -.7r� 2 �• ry:,('Jt° A �', 4� r •xzr:-.+• .:=Pr _r--_ =+ '.z..F s-.. � "Jwyei IS. > fk,€•?x' �Cr -xs- Tam+ J y,q,Jr it•erJa IY•�, - ,,..�r,. Y iti %.x. a. .im 1.a{�'W*Sl �"c'. i � :'R,, -K_� '.r t- �;:5? x -4� ^t�:.. GS-4�.�i1�'!,�ga9•cY 1 �• a y a • P. 1"1�;s a 5,4.. ^I P•j I _j Val r tr ?Lw S.cE'Vh x. _ "•.r-aye c•a:,�,� ..�, ..� �,.,•ra' e--•y:Ir..�-f�+ ri'f.�+v-�:wb �::�...d�, a i.,,: .ern, .,t �:: �; " L,' ' �'. n w� ' r.. n d r w,f r y�\ � ' . � i! _ � � +� 4 _ �� tom/ - ` w{.• ' f . �i �' K: 4 - Via. -} �'- n„�e :"` _._`y�, 1._ ��...,,,��;;; U. .�. -1 ' � ~- I -. i., r.�� / _r.5.f P I' � '"' . ' J .. _ ~, ',�`. Y.^ .f�. �T _ �i � `v�� a l,1J j..... � r '�,i- � I '`� �1 .-. 11 f mac 7 • •} .. - �, Y .,,,^b - p ai 1 �. ILS � ly,Tr+ :r �,r. f. �. t �. �I �{ 11,,11 � , [. + -� y�, .:p . . - ��111 may. Y 1 ' C �� 4. .. S 4 1'.r' A �i � ..7 �[ Yi .n-Y 1.' :Y - 7�, _ _ ' - C• 4 yh d c� � � e�-+.-v ',� ,. J... , 1 ,ham•. S V� fir` a -Ir a J1.5 ' x �' � �;:, _ � _^� o -=�_ ..mss 2' r✓ - i- -'T �^.2�-•e x r',��- .n � �� a x;-' shy . sem-.�_ _s-,-T_.•4�•�_ -e .� . Cy _ ��, rte'. 1 _ - - - -.1 •_ _- .�-' v _ L 1 c ." 3 Fi- •_ ._-_ a .SII !t r �_ _ _ ,_ t' a —•-_ 7`N, r firms•, ,.y?J _ _ Ii 4 T-7, d" � Awl L y r J C � -.,:9i � i � �'-•' t :'.'�_ RSA a'`� 77 nC' '.F �'� �• _tet __ _ _ _ � _ - . r 'il e-�-T e � �, - _ -Q Fy � i �Fi '_'rcr Y-�._ �' r •� 2 t:•� ' ., -• xs T_ '_'-c=�:-'�.s -sem=_--'. 'I'S' I t N. . . •_�`�'a =L _ .s_ _ _ �_,s-"]i -act .c- j -i :S�`i — _T _ -- - - _ 8.' ..may � f.t f•I I ,. . _pry _��• /' _`l�+�_ rZl I }- i yn .I oll 4-1 + S S •C^� C 1•f� �_ l� _S 1, y I .} J,ft F Y1 Y 17 wl .1r I^ •.ln 1:^ LV