Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/16/2008, 4 - APPEAL OF TREE COMMITTEE DECISION TO ALLOW TREE REMOVAL REQUEST - 1374 Pismo counat ' �°- j ((�� Sept 16,2008 ac En V/d Repont mmNumLerit CITY OF SKAGNCCE LUIS OBISPO FROM: Jay D. Walter, Public Works Director Prepared By: Keith Pellemeier, Urban Forest Supervisor SUBJECT: APPEAL OF TREE COMMITTEE DECISION TO ALLOW TREE REMOVAL REQUEST CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution denying the appeal of the Tree Committee's decision to allow the removal of two Eucalyptus trees and planting of four Sycamore trees at 1374 Pismo Street, thereby allowing removal of the trees. DISCUSSION On July 10, 2008, staff received a tree removal application from Howard Nicholson owner of property at 1374 Pismo Street. (Attachment 2) The application was for the removal of two Eucalyptus trees located in the back yard. The removal request was based on claims that one Eucalyptus had several cracks, leaned 15 degrees and both trees had large branches overhanging their new buildings. The application stated they would replant with native Sycamore trees. Upon receiving Mr. Nicholson's application, staff inspected the trees. Staff noted that the Eucalyptus trees were large and that tree #1, as labeled in Attachment 2, did have a large crack that could affect its structural stability. In other words, there was a potential, but not immediate concern that the limbs would split off the trunk. After inspecting the trees, staff determined the eucalyptus trees did not meet the criteria for immediate removal as described in section 12.24.180 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. Per the Code, the City Arborist may only authorize a tree removal without further notice after finding any of the following circumstances: A. The tree is a hazard, and removing it is the only feasible way to eliminate the hazard; B. The tree is dead or dying or damaged beyond reclamation; C. The tree is causing severe root damage to public or private property, and removing the tree is the only way feasible to eliminate the damage. Due to the fact that neither of the eucalyptus trees met any of these criteria, the Arborist did not authorize the removal. When the City Arborist cannot approve removal the request is brought before the Tree Committee for their consideration. Municipal Code Section 12.24.180(C) (6) provides guidance for approval or denial of tree . removal requests by the Tree Committee. The Tree Committee reviews the application and may authorize removal if one of the following findings can be made: A. The tree is causing undue hardship to the property owner. B. Removing the tree promotes good arboricultural practice. C. Removing the tree will not harm the character or environment of the surrounding neighborhood. Tree Removal Appeal—1374 Pismo Page 2 The Tree Committee heard this removal request at its July 28, 2008 meeting. Mr. Nicholson was present. Also present to speak in support of Mr. Nicholson's application was Landscape Architect, Steve Caminiti, Bunyon Brothers Tree Services Owner, Ron Rinnell and Derek Schmidt, neighbor at 1343 Pismo. The Tree Committee members present were Chairpersons Sara Young, Ellen Dollar and Craig Kincaid. Mr. Nicholson stated they would plant four native trees to replace the two Eucalyptus trees. Ms Dollar suggested they plant a mix of Sycamores and possibly other native trees. Mr. Caminiti felt the trees were a hazard and their removal would not affect the skyline view of the remaining trees. The trees would be removed but the stumps will be left so there will be less disruption to the creek bank. Mr. Schmidt spoke in support of the applicants removal request and felt the property development would enhance the neighborhood. The Tree Committee discussed the application and Mr. Kincaid moved to approve the removal request based on promoting good arboricultural practice and that the proposed landscape plan would enhance the character of the environment. (Attachment 3) The motion passed unanimously (See Attachment 4 for the meetings minutes). Appeal of Tree Committees Action On August 6, 2008 the City Clerk's office received an appeal of the Tree Committee's decision from Robert F. Mueller. Staff received no other information from Mr. Mueller to evaluate the basis for his appeal and Mr. Mueller was not present at the Tree Committee meeting on July 28, 2008. Mr. Mueller's appeal indicates he is concerned with the cumulative effect of removals in the area. (Attachment 5) Staff felt that removing two eucalyptus trees and replacing them with four native species of trees would have a positive effect on the creek environment. The City Planner on this project felt removing the Eucalyptus trees and replacing them with native trees would be a benefit to the City, and to the creek and wildlife habitat. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the City for denial of the appeal. The cost of removing the two Eucalyptus trees and planting four Sycamore replacement trees, if the appeal is upheld, will be bome by the applicant. ALTERNATIVES ' Uphold the Appeal. The City Council could choose to uphold the appeal presented by Mr. Mueller thereby denying the removal of the two Eucalyptus trees. The Council would need to make at least one of the findings in Section 12.24.180(C) (6) listed above. 1 i Tree Removal Appeal—1374 Pismo Page 3 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1. Vicinity Map Attachment 2. Tree Removal Application July 10, 2008 Attachment 3. Landscape Plan Attachment 4. Minutes (Excerpt) of July 28, 2008 Tree Committee meeting. Attachment 5. Appeal to the City Council received August 6, 2008. Attachment 6. Resolution denying appeal of the Tree Committee. Attachment 7. Resolution upholding appeal of the Tree Committee. g:tte aporm-agendasmimrtes\nr12W71padm4wWgick tree removal appeal.doc12191sardaynazlwlick tree appeal-car.doc 13$2 PISMO ATTACHMENT` % ��✓ 7 . '%, 137H Pismo 0 v$ys S, i � i CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO a information contained in this database is intended for informational use only. This information is provided for the convenience of users, GEODATA SERVICES Dut does not necessarily constitute precise property ownership or legal descriptions of any property,and should not be relied upon as an 955 MORRO STREET ficial property record.The City of San Luis Obispo makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of this data;however,the accuracy of this SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 93401 material is not guaranteed and users assume responsibility for independent verification of any and all information contained hereinpriorto se or reliance upon such information for any official purpose.The City.San Luis Obispo disclaims any responsibility or liability for any direct 805 781-7167 Dr indirect damages resulting from the use of this data. 9/5/2008 13:30 Att t 2 25 Prado Road i San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 rA`CO lv TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION SV �1`�LI0 `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/mae removof and posted, please call the office at the showing the street, structures) 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 $41 payable when 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: Pee] lx<44Ys© Telephone: S7E.3 3p6� Owners Mailing Address: owleft6gign L374�ia,wn Zip Code: Q'3gp/ Applicant (if other than owner): Telephone: Applicant's mailing.address: - Ua M HAt7WEY GT. SCO Zip Code: 43 :0 Location of tree(s): "earest cross street: Dog in yard? Yes No i 1 - Tree species (Common names): a_ ��e. ,.,� _ • -k-f;o i D e 4 Reasons for requesting removal: # l — s" L . • Repincementtree netting proposed: l�Jq,,� a✓� „ „ it * Application Will be considered only ff entirely filled o t and signed by owner. If co i tion 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 bepartment 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 pickingup 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 - rase: Orate: '7A 14f Applicant: U bate: 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.5-08 •n•�IUZ• ••iGL I% t v Y�'� atel••�.• I - f SAI,. / j j I � 4 �/ K r Vf � 1Y'• 1 . 4 f t ` I , 1,-;­ 17. T vl4'„ dud ti2�� jh F� t � I � ow A: EE, y i tit r 5 AkO f„ i�.:.l pp� ♦1 � - V *t • t 1 S .meq wo •1 `T t Yi♦ ..�� 1,. fi :: t� •` it�1Y'I pYC'� M1 �: I � 77 d J s h� y y I t Iq { ' '' +✓Nab 1 � 1 4:) 1 ir i. Krd VA" \ xFli•� F SF �� if I it `l f ' !g Th•. t`l1pjiR .v Flit t z14: lt 01 a t P � iF 1 7• �l .l'. r 'w > it n l J .t s . s , ,F� y r p/L f a ti/ ../` .F � a�•"i/, ��. SR r_.V�.4 y ATTACHMENT 3 iH all . I � T 1 Z �R O fit IP ------------ - I fs $ 4 �„9 : w k: — ; ^ ! Gl Pe a 5 g € F $ a8 £o ( t fit t a SS i ��'�-- §�S N; • : lit a d� i� Oil 4 • �� 58:.: }A i z Ota oi yy _ s S•.. it. i io'y"i 9i g e� � �t g gal;( y}e� o oCo e g d �:S 5 gg G i•. 3� s i 4g t ,is / F D^� yyg asp •� 3 cics;-Z: ucrwye�z o�"� O O dF•Y II.OdG1, eee �" STEVEN P.GAMINITI PIDmo 90reet Projc&t / � PLANTING PLAN . . . 1 1914 t 1986 Pismo Street • a gen WID Obispo,Ga.99401 }} b w.•..wwwwin..w #i s Attachment 4 i i 1374 PISMO (Two Eucalyptus) Howard Nicholson, applicant, discussed the removal request and submitted a landscaping plan. He stated the Tree#1 was cracked a dangerously leaning and felt the tree posed a liability hazard. He stated Tree#2 might have had its roots compromised with previous excavation when a third tree had been removed. He noted the branches were hanging over structures and that nothing grew underneath the trees. Mr. Combs reported they were large specimens and that Tree#1 did have a large crack in the bark that could be structural. He was concerned about the creek bank stability being compromised with removal. Ron Rinnell, Bunyan Bros., discussed the past excavation and the integrity of the tree, feeling it had been compromised. He discussed the weak V-crotch and liability issues. Derek Schmidt, 1343 Pismo, supported the removal request and noted these Were not native species-or street trees. He felt the property development would enhance the neighborhood and the removal of these trees would not create adverse issues. Mr. Combs noted that if the trees were removed, the stumps should be left to help stabilize the creek bank and the replacement trees as proposed should be- planted at top of bank. i Steve Caminiti, landscape architect, reported that the oak tree on site had been saved at great expense to the developer and that the two trees on the removal application were hazardous and that plenty of skyline attributes would be intact even if these trees were removed. He discussed the replacement plantings of California sycamores and two 24" box Coast Live Oaks, which would create a native environment. Mr. Kincaid moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and that the proposed landscaping plan would enhance the character of the environment. Ms. Dollar seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (J Attachment 5 page d of 3 Filing Fee: S100.007 uWaW Paid ''��aa6br� CM Of NIA : AVG 0 6 ?U09 c'n s {fitsPo �PEFER.TO SECTlON4 `SLO CITY CLERK APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL SECTION I. APPELLANTINFORMATION Name Mailing Address and Zip Code Phone Fax Representative's Name Mailing Andress and Zip Code Title Phone Fax SECTION 2 SUBJECT OF APPEAL 1. In accordance with the procedures set forth in Title 1.Chapter 1.20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal bode tcopy attached), I hereby appeal the decision of the:. (Name of Ofter.Committee or ConTsion declsion being appealed) 2. The date the decision being appealed%ias rendered: 3. The application or project was entitled: I/�i 7V Q/5 rv2 �) 4. 1 discussed the matterrft the"lowing City staff member. 1./,:' i k Tt-I t.^A Q�k4.✓ on (SUffs1iihibers Name and Depe (Date) S. Has thisr r been the subject of a previous appeal? If so,when was 9 heard and by whom: J 11 SECTION R REASON FOR APPEAL Explain specifically what acdWz you are appealing and why you believe the Council should consider your appeal. Include what'd you have that supports your appeal. You may attach additional papX if necessary. This farm continues on the other silo.. Pape 1 o13 T -d Z6ESLZ6 d I auolSuooy et.�gw93 d �� 8T :I0 80 90 9nd Aug OS 08 01: 18P Camb e Moonstone L P 9275397 P.2 Attachment 5 Page 2 of 3 Reason dbrAppeal continued c r ec. SECT/ON 4. APPELLANTS RESPONSIS/LTY The Sen Luis Obispo City Council values public participation In local govemment and encourages all fortes of citizen involvement. However.due to real costs associated with City Council consideration of an appeal,including public notification;all appeals pertaining to a planning application or project are subject to a filing fee of$10(f,which must accompany the appeal form. i Your right to exercise an appeal comes with certain responsibilities. If you file an appeal,please understand that n mmg be heard within 45 days from filing this form. You will be notified in writing of the exact date your appeal will be heard before the Council. You or your representative will be expected to attend the public hearing,and to be prepared to make your case. Your testimony is I I - to 10 minutes. A continuance may be granted under certain and unusual circumstances,. If you feel you need to request a continuance,you must submit your request in writing to the City Clerk. Please be advised that H your request for continuance is received after the appeal Is noticed to the public,the Council may not be able to grant the request for continuance. Submitting a request for continuance does not guarantee that it will be granted;that action is at the discretion of the City Council. I hereby agree to appear and/or send a representative to appear on my behalf when said app ed ibr a ublk hearing before the Chy Council. t—� --D fOgnature ofAppellard) (Date) Exceptions to the tack 1)Appeals of Tree CommWee deekions. 2)The above-named appellant has adeady Paid Ore City$100 to appeal this same awWtoI a City oWddai or Council adAmy body. - This imm 1s hereby calandWed fur /J, ,cYl.�t e�- �/c 2/0 C City Attomey cep�arbneattlead at�C fit! Advisory SWyy Chairperson .�ic e- Page 2of3 eros �� I2 Attachment 5 Page 3 of 3 08/06/2888 11:82 6055429868 CORP YARD PAGE 01/01 dti %C-'j3 S amu& k� P July S 2008 Robert F Mweer 604 Notdeteott Av Suirs 200 San Uift Obboo,CA 93401 80551107 3100 0<s 806 997 SISI Arlwrlet COParses LubOdbpe,Ca FAX te: 4419'668 . p is psrstit far raeasvdef trans 1374 Plants sk Basin Cmra1>dK etbabNe4 estlntiea of das stet.and;es efasittesd wub e@tar CNY prattke in dds Area. you s I I I I I KEITH PgLLEMEII=R upwowneawwwbwHmlewm n omem.m snsv,+pns.wam.et eanaeaa city O Asan hits 0131SPO Pratb •Ban 6ySllblpq WtD1• 14 . WaW 181.7012•FNI�araae • r�.Rl�atawegopryag ww�.yDdlY,aq t•a aesscae d i a�ose�eoW e7�a+e� dss=to an so env �• �3 C.Cl Z6ESLZ6 d l auo%suooN et,Jgwe0 dgt =i0 80 90 9nk1 Attachment 6 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. (2008 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL OF A TREE REMOVAL REQUEST AT 1374 PISMO STREET WHEREAS, the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo held a public hearing on July 28, 2008 and approved the applicant's request to remove two (2) Eucalyptus trees located in the back yard at 1374 Pismo Street, San Luis Obispo, California; and WHEREAS,on September 16,2008, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo held a public hearing to consider the appeal of the approval to remove two (2) Eucalyptus trees, and to replace the trees by planting four native trees, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings: That this Council,after consideration of the applicant's appeal,and the San Luis Obispo Tree Committee's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: a. The removal of two(2) Eucalyptus trees will promote good aboricultural practice. b. The tree is causing undue hardship to the property owner. c. Removing the trees will not harm the character of the surrounding neighborhood. SECTION 2. The appeal of the Tree Committee's decision to approve the tree removal request at 1374 Pismo Street is hereby denied. Upon motion of ,.seconded by and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2008. Attachment 6 page 2 of 2 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 2 Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Audrey Hooper City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jonathan P. Lowell City Attorney G.lSMffAVM%AWM asMinueasl CAR1200SIPmf Tmes11374 PIm TmaAppeaWWwh wormy-1374 Pism aw i 1 Attachment 7 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. (2008 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO UPHOLDING AN APPEAL OF A TREE REMOVAL REQUEST AT 1374 PISMO STREET WHEREAS, the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo held a public hearing on July 28, 2008 and approved the applicant's request to remove two (2) Eucalyptus trees located in the back yard at 1374 Pismo Street, San Luis Obispo, California;and WHEREAS,on September 16, 2008,the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo held a public hearing to consider the appeal of the approval to remove two(2)Eucalyptus trees. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings: That this Council, after consideration of the applicant's appeal,and the San Luis Obispo Tree Committee's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: a. The removal of two(2) Eucalyptus trees will not promote good aboricultural practice. b'. The tree is not causing undue hardship to the property owner. C. Removing the tree will harm the character of the surrounding neighborhood. SECTION 2. The appeal of the Tree Committee's decision to deny the tree removal request at 1374 Pismo Street is hereby upheld,and the removal request is denied. Upon motion of ,seconded by , and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2008. Attachment 7 page 2 of 2 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 2 Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Audrey Hooper City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jonathan P.Lowell City Attorney G:M04tepuM A 1_CARQO=Pa*a T ea11374 PJs TMeApPWNZeS0K"U0)dtl-1374 Rl .dw 09/05/08 Dear Sirs- I'm the owner of the property located at 1362 Pismo Street in San Luis Obispo. Howard Nicholson is in the process of building 4 units on the lot between my property and the train tracks. I wanted to let you know that I am definitely in favor of his request to remove the two eucalyptus trees located at the rear of his property. First of all, I'm concerned for the safety of his houses as well as mine. The species of tree that he is proposing to remove are known to have problems with limbs breaking off, as well as the increased fire hazard. They are not native to this area, and Howard is willing to replace them with sycamores and oaks. I'm sorry that I will not be able to attend the meeting scheduled for September 16th,but I wanted to let you know what I was thinking concerning Howard's project. If you have any questions of me, prior to the meeting, I can be reached at 748-5970. Sincerely, ad lsten FLED FILE MEETING AGENDA DA _ i;1- or ITEM #.t4 l RECEIVED SEP 0 8 2000 14A2p COP LI SLO CITY CLERK COUNCIL C�CDD DIR L'PA� CAO L�FIN DIR CRO C�FIRE CHIEF TORNEY 9.PW DIALE.R Al G S�?-UUCE CHF Q �pEA©9 ZREC DIR FUTIL DIR d. E HR DIR CAC) clke-tc-