HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-24-2013 TC Minutes1
TREE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
MONDAY, JUNE 24, 2013
Corporation Yard Conference Room
25 Prado Road, San Luis Obispo
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ben Parker, Jane Worthy, Scott Loosley, and David
Hensinger
STAFF PRESENT: Ron Combs
PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments.
MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of May 28, 2013
Mr. Loosley moved to approve the minutes as submitted.
Ms. Worthy seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIONS
1. 1325 Aralia (Liquid ambar)
Shaun Collarman, applicant’s representative, discussed the root damage to the sidewalk,
driveway and tile in the entryway. He suggested changing the theme tree to a Chinese
pistache because the roots were not as invasive.
Mr. Combs agreed there were a lot of surface roots causing some hardscape and tile
displacement, but he could not make the findings necessary for him to approve the
removal.
Mr. Loosely felt the displacement was minor and that the tree was strong and healthy.
Mr. Hensinger stated he could not make the necessary findings for removal approval and
felt if the theme tree change were to happen, an organized replacement plan would need
to be in place.
Mr. Combs noted that if an HOA were involved, they would need to agree with any
removal requests.
2
Mr. Parker agreed with Mr. Hensinger and suggested root pruning while the HOA was
contacted about putting a replacement plan in place.
Mr. Hensinger moved to deny the removal request, as he could not make the necessary
findings.
Mr. Loosley seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
The Committee encouraged the HOA to put together a replacement plan for Committee
review.
2. 1355 Aralia (Liquid ambar)
Mr. Collarman reported that this removal request was identical to the previous request.
Mr. Loosley moved to deny the removal request, as he could not make the necessary
findings.
Ms. Worthy seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
3. 979 Osos (3 Eucalyptus and a Afrocarpus)
Chris Stier, applicant’s representative, discussed the large eucalyptus trees and the
damage the roots were causing throughout the lot. He noted limbs had dropped and that
root pruning was no longer effective and would affect the trees’ stability when the lot was
re-paved.
Mr. Combs stated they were healthy trees and he could not make the findings necessary
to approve the removal.
Bob Lombardi, property owner, reiterated that the roots were ruining the pavement and
that he and tenants were concerned about the liability of limb droppage and trip hazards.
He stated he was willing to replace the trees, but did not feel there was an appropriate
spot on site.
Ms. Worthy discussed the possibility of the applicant purchasing replacement trees and
donating them to the City’s tree inventory.
Ms. Worthy moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good
arboricultural practice, and required replacement purchasing of four 15-gallon trees to be
chosen from the Master Street Tree list and donated to the City.
3
Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
4. 1123 Pismo (Cedar)
Brian O’Kelly, property owner, stated the tree was too large for the spot and that the roots
were damaging the hardscape and foundation. He noted it was a historical property that
needed to be landscaped in coordination with the Cultural Heritage Committee.
Mr. Combs stated it was a large healthy tree that was causing significant hardscape
damage and lifting the foundation.
Mr. Loosley agreed there was evidence of structural damage.
Mr. Hensinger moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship on the
property owner, and required one 15-gallon replacement tree to be chosen from the
Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree’s removal.
Mr. Parker seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
5. 2875 El Cerrito (Redwoods)
John Kamner, owner, discussed the replaced water line and stated that the roots had been
cut and he was now concerned about the trees’ stability. He reported the massive roots
were damaging the driveway and threatening the house foundation. He also noted that all
irrigation had to be replaced due to root damage.
Mr. Combs reported that there was some hardscape root damage.
Ms. Worthy and Mr. Loosley agreed the trees were too large for the space.
Mr. Hensinger moved to approve the removal request for four redwoods, based on undue
hardship on the property owner, and required two 15-gallon replacement trees to be
chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree’s removal.
Mr. Loosley seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
4
6. Los Verdes Park 1 (Misc. trees)
Chris Stier, applicant’s representative, discussed the removal request in detail and
discussed the landscaping and replacement planting master plans. He stated the trees had
dieback, roots were causing structural damage and that removing the trees would allow
remaining trees to thrive. He did not feel that root pruning was feasible.
Penny Porter, HOA representative, supported the removal request and discussed the
landscaping plan.
Mr. Combs agreed with the issues outlined.
Mr. Loosley agreed with many of the issues stated but felt that more selective removals
would better serve the site.
Mr. Hensinger moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good
arboricultural practice, and required replacement planting of nine 15-gallon trees to be
chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree removals.
Mr. Parker seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
7. 1806 Huasna (Poplars)
Pete Barclay, property owner, reported that the tree was too large for the area and the
roots were too intrusive. He stated there had been past pruning and the sidewalk had
been replaced, but the roots were lifting it again, creating a trip hazard and breaking
through the new chip seal. He also discussed past sewer issues and limb droppage. He
would like to replace with a Chipalta species.
Mr. Combs agreed with the owner’s assessment.
Mr. Loosley noted there was some evidence of decay.
Mr. Loosley moved to approve the removal request, based on promoting good
arboricultural practice, and required replacement purchasing of two 15-gallon Chtalpa
trees to be planted within 45 days of tree removals.
Mr. Parker seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
5
8. 540 Buchon (Redwood)
Shaun Collarman, applicant’s representative, discussed the foundation issues and the
damage to the sidewalk and new driveway. He felt the tree was creating undue hardship
and submitted a contractor’s report attesting to the foundation damage.
Mr. Combs discussed the past pruning efforts and noted that this was the second time the
owner had submitted a removal application.
Ms. Worthy felt a lot of the driveway damage could be due to settling of soil and not due
to roots.
Mr. Parker felt the double-leader tree would grown larger and create more problems.
Mr. Parker moved to approve the removal request, based on undue hardship on the
property owner, and required one 15-gallon replacement tree to be chosen from the
Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree’s removal.
Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion.
The motion passed, with Ms. Worthy voting against.
9. 2047 San Luis Drive (Pines)
Nicki Anderson, applicant’s representative, stated the trees were too large for the area
and discussed the trees leaning towards the neighbor’s property, noting that the weight
was not balanced due to being topped for power lines and that the large cones dropping
were unsafe for children playing in the yard.
Shawn Ellis, Coastal Tree Experts, agreed that the backyard was dangerous for children,
due to the falling cones. He noted both trees had cracked limbs.
Mr. Combs reported he could not make the findings necessary for removal.
Mr. Hensinger moved to approve the removal request, as doing so would not harm the
character of the neighborhood or environment, and required two 15-gallon replacement
trees to be chosen from the Master Street Tree list and planted within 45 days of tree
removals.
Mr. Loosley seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
6
NEW BUSINESS
Slack-line Discussion re Ordinance Revision
Tim Ross submitted a detailed presentation regarding amendments he was proposing to
the City ordinance to allow additional park areas be accessible to slack lining with tree
protection. He asked the Committee to support these expansion efforts as the discussion
moved through the Parks/Rec Dept. and City Council.
He reported that for the past five years, slack-lining has become a popular local activity
and that no damage to trees will occur if the slack-line system is properly set up. He
reiterated his goal of having all the local parks open to slack lining.
Mr. Combs stated that staff supported Mr. Ross’ efforts to expand accessible slack-line
options throughout City parks if rules are established and followed.
Mr. Ritter moved that the Tree Committee find that slack lining does not conflict with the
City’s interest in preserving the urban forest when practiced as outlined in proposed
amendments to 12.20.150.
Mr. Hensinger seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS
Mr. Combs discussed the recent tree removals at Mission Plaza and the goal to keep
continuity with the lemon eucalyptus or possibly sycamores. He discussed staggered
planting.
ARBORIST REPORT
Mr. Combs reminded the Committee that someone needed to attend the Mayor’s
Quarterly Advisory lunch.
The meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m. to next regular meeting, scheduled for 5 p.m. on July
22, 2013.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary