The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12/06/2005, - EUCALYPTUS AT 1681 PHILLIPS LANE �CS//L�J l/liC.i s Roger Sulker and Michele Abba 1666 Phillips Lanee San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 tr To: Tree Committee Members and Staff Date: November 28,2005 Re: Eucalyptus at 1681 Phillips Lane Cc: Christine Mulholland On April 25,2005,one of the tree removal requests was for a eucalyptus at 1681 Phillips Lane. At the meeting(as stated in the minutes)the removal was denied The recommendation of Ms. Young and Mr. Lopes was that the tree be pruned We recollect in particular that Ms. Young suggested the limbs be trimmed as a preventative measure on the side of the tree that concerned Robert Gonzales—one of the removal applicants'representatives. He was concerned that limbs could fall on his mother's rental property. Please see below the result of the"trimming." �jI� aD r h_O� ✓`. 1 _ °Y before after We do not see how this devastation came to pass, and would like to close any loopholes that would enable such a thing to happen again. Gonzales and Thomas DeBartollo.the Phillips Lane property owner, have made a mockery of both the Tree Committee and the neighbors who spoke and wrote in favor of the tree. We understand concerns over falling limbs and liability,but if Gonzales and DeBartollo had simply proceeded as instructed by the Committee, it would have been a mute point. Instead,they violated many city polices:(The following appeared under"street trees,"and should apply to any tree that meets the Tree Committee's criteria warranting a Tree Committee meeting) 12.24.130 Protection of trees. A.No person shall trim,prune or cut any street tree unless such work conforms to this chapter and is performed in accordance with all International Society of Arboriculture standards.In no case shall more than one-third of the tree canon be removed. 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 chapter,except with permits described elsewhere in this chapter. 2.Place building material,equipment or other harmful substance near any tree,which might cause injury to the tree. 3.Post any sign on any tree,tree-stake or guard,or fasten any guy wire,cable or rope to any tree. tree-stake or guard. Ni I G.Any person deemed responsible for damaeine a tree or removiri a tree without a hermit as described in this chapter shall be liable for civil domaees to the city in-the amount adopted,by resolution,by the city.council or.forthevalue of the tree as determined by methods established by the International Society of Arboriculture,whichever is ereater as determined by the city arborist For their violations,Gonzales and DeBartollo are liable for civil damaees as indicated in "G."There should be other consequences to be suffered by such individuals who act in blatant disregard of the Committee. Monetary funds are a start, but are not sufficient. Violating individuals should not be allowed to acquire building permits, and other deterring factors. Both property owners in this case–ten Phillips and Mill—do not even reside at the-properties. The properties are rentals. Most importantly,tree topping(stumping in this case would be a more appropriate term)should be completely prohibited. Since tree services can't be counted on to trim responsibly, it should become a city policy; otherwise,or in addition,the city should provide a list of reputable tree services from which homeowners can choose. Though the Phillips Lane eucalyptus was not removed, for all intents and purposes it has been given a death sentence. A tree service was used,but no reputable service would have reduced this tree to a stump as the Bunyon Bros. Tree Service did. We found precisely what they did under"Negative tree pruning" on a Web page of pruning rules (http://www.cvwd.org/lush&eff/Ish&ef28.htm): Tree topping;also called heading or hat racking,refers to the removal of major portions of the tree crown by cutting branches to stubs or to the trunk.This type of negative pruning is most conspicuous with the work done on eucalyptus and mulberry trees. This mutilation results in clusters of stems emerging below the stub cuts,weakening the branches making them vulnerable to breakage and excessive growth.This stubbing also upsets the entire growth pattern of the tree,roots and—over a period of time—a general decline in effectiveness and depreciation in tree value by 20 to 50 percent. Topping creates openings for invasion of rotting organisms,starves the tree and causes excessive ,stems-which are weak and increase wind resistance. If the tree survives, it will never recover to its original grandeur, and it will be incredibly weakened, ironically creating unstable limbs unlike it ever had before. Finally,if a tree such as this eucalyptus didn't meet the"heritage tree" criteria,then another category, such as"significant tree" should be created. It can't be emphasized enough what has been lost in this tree that was once so majestic, which had a perfectly formed crown, and which was a host to a plethora of life, especially many birds. We sited at the April 25 meeting a pair of hawks. If they had been nesting, it's likely State law was violated as well. We had been looking into nominating.the eucalyptus tree on Phillips Lane for the California Registry of Trees (www.ufei.org/BigTrees/). The Phillips eucalyptus rivaled many of the registry's representative specimens. The city is in danger of becoming a city of small trees. We're losing large, mature trees at an incredible rate. Though removed trees are supposed to be replaced, we have not seen evidence of that happening in other cases;and wonder if it ever will if it's not enforced. When large trees are replaced, it's likely to be done with much smaller trees. We won't have much of a legacy to leave future generations,certainly not"a flourishing urban forest"—another policy set forth by the city. We ask that the Tree Committee: 1. collect the civil damages owed them from Gonzales and DeBartollo; 2. not allow Gonzales and DeBartollo and other violators to obtain building permits; 3. allow the Phillips Lane eucalyptus be given a chance to regain life in its now limbless stump; 4. institute a"no topping"policy for all trees,perhaps even develop a list of reputable tree services from which individuals must choose, 5. add a"significant tree" category in addition to"heritage tree"to help preserve other meritorious specimens, fostering the longevity of larger trees in our community; 6. monitor the process of tree replacement,enacting consequences for those who do not follow through in planting as dictated by the Committee. council memo ansum /x�t- -- cfit aTrsa ui ot�i . a, mRist aft .n ae aatmeR: M DATE: December 5, 2005 TO: City Council FROM: Paul Brown, Council Member�> SUBJECT: Dalidio Property Committee As Council members know, I accepted an invitation by Supervisor Lenthall to serve on a committee to discuss ideas for a different project on the Dalidio property. I want Council members to know that in accepting this invitation, I made it very clear that my participation is from the perspective of a downtown businessperson and resident .and should in no way be interpreted as representing the views of the City Council. I also made it very clear to the committee at its first meeting that my views are only my views, and do not represent the City Council in any fashion. In addition, should this project end up before the City Council again, notwithstanding the committee's position, I will evaluate the matter on its merits and based upon the information presented to the City Council. With the Council's concurrence, under the Communication section of our agenda, I would like to occasionally provide you with updates on the progress of the committee, as it unfolds in the coming months. In order to avoid any Brown Act problems, these updates will be general and, of course, I shall not be looking for Council direction since I am not representing the City Council in the committee meetings. Ontirlin Cornmince