HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-23-2017 TC Minutes Minutes
Tree Committee
Corporation Yard Conference Room, 25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo 5:00 pm.
Monday, January 23, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Tree Committee Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Tree Committee was called to order on Monday, January 23, 2017 at
5:00 p.m. in the Corporation Yard Conference Room, located at 25 Prado Road, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Matt Ritter.
ROLL CALL
Present: Alan Bate, Scott Loosley, Vice Chair Ben Parker, Jane Worthy, Chair Matt Ritter
Angela Soll, Rodney Thurman
Absent: None
Staff: Ron Combs, City Arborist and Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Re: 71 Palomar
Joanie Volmer thanks the Committee for their time and review of the item, noting many were
under the impression the Committee requested to review the item again before it went to the
ARC based on the Rincon report not being accurate. She was disappointed that secondary
review did not happen, as she did not favor removing the trees.
Allan Cooper discussed his submitted letter to the Committee and agreed with Ms. Volmer’s
comments, stating the city did not request a new Rincon report and allow the Committee to
review it as an item on this meeting’s agenda.
Cheryl McLean discussed her submitted letter to the Committee and reiterated the above
comments, stating the Committee should have had access to the Responses to Comments and
Attachment 8 of the Final Initial Study. She encouraged the Committee to continue discussing
the item.
Steve Williams stated the property was in a residential area and did not favor the proposed
development. He also agreed with David Brody’s letter regarding the negative impact of tree
removals in light of climate change.
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 2
Lydia Mourenza agreed with previous comments and asked the Committee to put the item on
their next agenda.
Dr. Edward Benson, 593 Luneta, valued the mature trees which were a wildlife habitat and did
not favor the proposed development.
Bob Mourenza discussed evidence of an owl habitat in the trees and felt that should be
protected.
Will Power did not agree with the development and felt the Committee should be initially
evaluating such permits. He felt key personnel of city management was too involved with permit
fees and politics regarding developments and mega complexes. He urged that the long-term
health of the city be protected.
CONSENT AGENDA CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. Consideration of December 12, 2016 Minutes
Mr. Loosley noted where his name was spelled incorrectly and that Item 2 address
should be listed as 1234 San Carlos.
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR BEN PARKER, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER SCOTT LOOSLEY, to approve the minutes of the Tree Committee for the
special meeting of Monday, December 12, 2016 as amended. Motion passed 6-0-on
the following roll call vote:
AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY
NOES: NONE
PUBLIC HEARINGS BUSINESS ITEM
2. Tree Removal Applications
- 990 PALM (4 eucalyptus)
Steve Williams, City representative, discussed the removal request and noted that
even though the trees look healthy, there was decay in the soil and the tall trees would
no longer be protected by the building wall and would ultimately fall. Pruning was not
an option.
Mr. Combs agreed there were structural flaws in the trunks and roots and shared the
City’s concerns.
Public Comments:
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 3
Chair Ritter opened the public hearing.
Mr. Power suggested bracing the trees against the AT&T building. Mr. Williams said
cabling/bracing would not mitigate falling.
Chair Ritter closed the public hearing.
Mr. Parker agreed with the fungal issues and the risk of falling.
Ms. Soll suggested a different replacement species other than jacaranda.
Mr. Thurman felt it was the wrong tree in the wrong place.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR PARKER, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER LOOSLEY, to approve the removal request based on
promoting good arboricultural practice and required replacement plantings with four
24” trees to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of
tree removals. Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY
NOES: NONE
- 1633 PEREIRA (Liquid amber)
Teresa De Martini, applicant, discussed the removal request and the hardship
maintaining the tree, as well as the root issues and curb/sidewalk damage. She was
concerned about accessibility issues for neighbors.
Mr. Combs reported that the tree was healthy and causing hardscape issues.
Public Comments:
Chair Ritter opened the public hearing.
Mr. Power felt the tree should be maintained instead of removed.
Chair Ritter closed the public hearing.
The Committee discussed the application, noting that the debris and damage posed
risks and that the tree had multiple leaders and included bark.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR PARKER, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER BATE, to approve the removal request based on promoting
good arboricultural practice and required replacement planting of one 15-gallon tree to
be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree removal.
Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY
NOES: NONE
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 4
- 4385 WAVERTREE
There was no one to speak to the item.
- 1050 E. FOOTHILL (2 redwoods)
Bill Van Horbek, Stenner Glen representative, discussed the removal request and
stated the trees were causing drainage issues and problems in the pool area.
Mr. Combs reported that he could not make the necessary findings for removal.
Public Comments:
Chair Ritter opened the public hearing.
Mr. Power felt the trees should be maintained instead of removed.
Chair Ritter closed the public hearing.
The Committee discussed the application. Members Thurman, Bate, Parker, and
Worthy agreed the debris and damage posed risks and that the trees were failing with
drought-stress, multiple leaders and included bark and that the lifting posed a safety
hazard.
Ms. Soll discussed possible mitigation measures to retain the trees and fix the
damage. Staff noted that would not be a long-term solution.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER THURMAN, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER WORTHY, to approve the removal request based on
promoting good arboricultural practice and required replacement planting of two 15-
gallon tree to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of
tree removals. Motion passed 6-1 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, THURMAN, WORTHY
NOES: SOLL
- 642 STONERIDGE (3 palms)
Larry Rutter, applicant, discussed the removal request and stated the trees were too
close to the residence and too large for the area. He was concerned they would impact
the utility box and noted the site was heavily planted.
Mr. Combs reported that the trees were healthy and he could not make the necessary
findings for removal.
Public Comments:
Chair Ritter opened the public hearing.
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 5
Mr. Power favored the removals.
Chair Ritter closed the public hearing.
The Committee discussed the application.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LOOSLEY, SECONDED BY VICE
CHAIR PARKER, to approve the removal request for only the two trees closest to the
house, based on promoting good arboricultural practice and required two 15-gallon
trees to be donated to the City. Motion passed 6-1 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN
NOES: WORTHY
- 2466 AUGUSTA (6 trees)
Marc Brazil, applicant’s representative, discussed the removal request and the safety
concerns, as well as the remodel plans, landscaping and pool installation.
Mr. Combs reported that the trees were healthy and he could not make the necessary
findings for removal.
Public Comments:
Chair Ritter opened the public hearing.
Mr. Power felt the trees should be retained and did not agree with the scope of the
development.
Chair Ritter closed the public hearing.
The Committee agreed to vote on the trees separately.
#1:
Members Thurman, Loosley and Bate felt decay was evident and it was not the best
tree to be at a driveway entrance.
Members Parker, Ritter, and Worthy favored retaining and pruning the tree.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER WORTHY, SECONDED BY CHAIR
RITTER, to deny the removal of Tree #1, as she could not make the findings
necessary to approve removal. Motion passed 5-2 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, WORTHY
NOES: BATE, THURMAN
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 6
#2:
The Committee agreed that the tree was infested and stressed and did not impede on
the development footprint.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LOOSLEY, SECONDED BY VICE
CHAIR PARKER, to approve the removal request for Tree #2, based on promoting
good arboricultural practice and required replacement to be implemented through the
proposed landscaping plan. Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY
NOES: NONE
#3
The Committee agreed that the tree had nice structure and minor decay and felt it
could be retained and pruned. They suggested the applicant come back to review
removal should the pool installation be approved and the tree remained in the way of
that feature.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LOOSLEY, SECONDED BY VICE
CHAIR PARKER, to deny the removal of Tree #3, as he could not make the findings
necessary to approve removal. Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY
NOES: NONE
#4 & #5
ACTION: MOTION BY CHAIR RITTER, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER
SOLL, to table action on Tree #4 & #5 removals until a pool permit is issued. Motion
passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY
NOES: NONE
#6
The Committee agreed it was not a good landscape tree and that it could be replaced
with a Coast Live Oak.
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR PARKER, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER LOOSLEY, to approve the removal request for Tree #6, based on promoting
good arboricultural practice and required replacement to be implemented through the
proposed landscaping plan. Motion passed 7-0 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: BATE, LOOSLEY, PARKER, RITTER, SOLL, THURMAN, WORTHY
NOES: NONE
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of January 23, 2017 Page 7
NEW BUSINESS
Discuss revisions to the Master Street Tree List
Mr. Combs discussed potential revisions to the Master Street Tree list, reporting that Doug
Forest had been reviewing the document and made some corrections and suggestions for
Committee review. The Committee members agreed to provide staff with any individual
revisions and suggestions for on-going discussion.
OLD BUSINESS
Tree replanting replacement enforcement
Mr. Forest discussed revisions to the language regarding enforcement measures to determine if
replacement plantings take place as ordered. The Committee members agreed to provide staff
with any individual revisions and suggestions for on-going discussion.
ARBORIST REPORT
There was discussion on ordinance revisions and a streamlined process for staff and
Committee regarding reviewing development plans regarding tree removals and landscape
plans between agencies. The Committee agreed to forward any comments to staff.
COMMITTEE COMMUNICATIONS
There was general discussion about how the Rincon report pertaining to 71 Palomar failed to
come back to the Committee for review prior to the ARC meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Tree Committee is
scheduled for Monday, February 27 at 5:00 p.m., at the Corporation Yard, 25 Prado Road, San
Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE TREE COMMITTEE ON FEBRUARY 27, 2017
REVISED MARCH 16, 2017 TO ACCURATELY REFLECT ROLL CALL