Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - BC - 2003.02.06NOTICE `- B URLINGAME BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION FEBR UAR Y 6, 2003 5:30 P.M. CITY HALL Conference Room A 501 PRIMROSE ROAD B URLINGAME, CA A GENDA I. ROLL CALL H. MINUTES OF DECEMBER 5, 2002 MEETING M. CORRESPONDENCE IV. FROM THE FLOOR (At this time, persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter. The Ralph M. Brown Act prohibits the Commission from acting on a matter which is not on the agenda. Comments are limited to three minutes.) V. OLD BUSINESS A. Arbor Day - March 7' - Bayside Park - 10:00 A.M. B. Spring Garden Seminar/Saturday - March 15, 2003 - 9:30-11:30 A.M. featured speaker Matt Leddy - Department Head - Horticulture Department/CSM VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Appeal of the Denial To Remove a Redwood Tree @ 931 Park Avenue B. Criteria for Removal of City -Owned Trees VH. REPORTS A. Park Superintendent B. Chairperson C. Commissioners M =Y o CITY OF BURLLINGAME BURLtPtGAR9c PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT i + 850 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame, California 94010-2899 3 Telephone (650) 558-7300 Parks / Trees (650) 558-7330 �'4►ORAT6C` Fax (650) 696-7216 • E-mail: burlrec@aol.com Arl December 23, 2002 Mary Elsie Robertson 931 Park Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: APPEAL OF THE DENIAL TO REMOVE A REDWOOD TREE @ 931 PARK AVENUE - BURLLNGAI\/IE Your letter appealing the denial for tree removal at the above address, has been received at our office on December 20th. Your appeal will be placed on the February 6' agenda of the Beautification Commission meeting. Ifyou tivish, you may attend this meeting and address your concerns to the Commission. The Commission meets at 5:30 p.m. in Conference Room "A" at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame. Your neighbors are being sent copies of this letter, pursuant to City Ordinance, so they may attend the Commission meeting and make any comments. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (650) 558-7330. Sincerely, Tim Richmond Parks Superintendent Attachments CC: CC: Paul & Melita Aliamus 935 Park Avenue - Burlingame American General Finance C/O N/A Mary Kasaris TR 191 Estates Dr. - San Bruno 94066 \.- Robert Flanders Ronald Raff Family E 739 Laurel Avenue - Burlingame 952 Evergreen Way - Millbrae 94030 s Jc PROTECTED TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICATION PARS & .RECREATION DEPARTMENT. - 850 BURLINGAME AVENUE BURLIIVGAME, CA 94010 (650), 558-7330 The undersigned owner of the property at: , ADDRESS: q 31 - hi k Ayal u - . .,:..(print or type) hereby applies for a permit to rem,ove'or prune more than 1/3 of the crown or roots of the following protected tree(s): tJ SPECIES Ac) Gf��J CIRCUMFERENCEy C I LOCATION ON PROPERTY 6404 4 dq & D WORK TO BE PERFORMEDIYI-- REASON WORK IS NECESSARY S g ACk.. fli-W in (please use back of form for additional comments) NOTE: APHOTOGRAPH OWNER MARY ELSi6 Pb6MEE21V OF THE TREE(S) MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH THIS ADDRESS 121 1 PA Rk AVENvE .APPLICATION PHONE (69a) 34 ' P-9 FS PERMIT This permit allows the applicant to remove or prune the above listed tree(s) in accordance with the provisions of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 11.06). By signing this permit, the applicant acknowledges receipt of a copy of Chapter 11.06, and agrees to comply with its provisions and all conditions listed below; and that all appeals have expired or been r o �lVo lved. OWNER ��- A&c7t, CITY REPRESENTATIVE CONDITIONS: 24 - inch box size landscape tree(s) will be required and may be planted any where on the property. If conditions are not met within the allotted time as specified in Section 11.06.080, payment of $400 for each tree into the tree replacement fund will be required. NO replacements) required Contact the Parks Division at (650) 558-7330 when removals) completed �-' DATE PERMIT EFFECTIVE PERMIT EXPIRES A cnnmlr ofthic, per —it ind.�ut be a:'aiiable at tide *o h uke at all times when work is being performed The reasons for the request to remove the tree are as follows: 1. The tree is situated in a very small space at the back of the garden and over the years has grown upwards and outwards through the root system at an alarming rate. 2. The roots are pushing against the fence which separates the property and buckling my fence around the deck, as shown in the photographs. 3. Your memo mentions trees act as windbreakers, but in this area when our strong winds blow, often clocked at 45 m.p.h. this tree bends and sways in a most frightening way. I watch and worry that part of it will snap, even some of the very heavy branches and fall on my small, single story house or on my neighbor's home which is in close proximity to the tree. 4. I have paid to have the tree laced three times as the branches were so thick and heavy that they were leaning on my neighbor's garage . 5. I am a senior citizen who has had two cancer surgeries, have arthritis in both hands. Cleaning up after the storms and trying to keep the growth around the tree under control is becoming harder for me to do. 5. The expense of lacing, cutting back new growth, cleaning up as the tree continues to grow larger and fuller each year is difficult for me to handle on a limited income. 7. I feel the tree is hazardous as it is too large and too close to properties and I would not want to be liable for the considerable damage it could cause. MR CITY c� CITY OF BURLINGAME ?Arks,* URL.INGAME PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 850 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame, California 94010-2899 t Telephone (650) 558-7300 • Parks / Trees (650) 558-7330 Mce+ro[wr[e Fax (650) 696-7216 E-mail: burlrec@aol.com A November 1, 2002 Mary Elsie Robertson 931 Park Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF ONE REDWOOD TREE @ 931 PARgAVENUE - BURLINGAME I reviewed your request to remove a Redwood tree in the back yard at the above address and have made the following determination: 1) The Pine tree has reasonably good structure and health. 2) Cited reasons for removal do not fall within approval guidelines. 3) Therefore, the application has been denied. This decision may be appealed to the Burlingame Beautification Commission by filing a written appeal b A4*w"K"-18, 2002. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (650) 558-7330. Sincerely, Steven Porter City Arborist - (ISA #WC-3073) SP/kh LIM 931 Park Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010-2628 December 14, 2002 Mr. S. Porter City Arborist Burlingame Parks & Recreation Department Dear Mr. Porter, Thank you for granting me an extension until December 18th to submit this written appeal following the November 1st denial of my application to have the very large tree removed from my background. I am attaching a copy of the reasons for removal submitted with the permit application. With the present heavy rains and high winds I continue to be alarmed for the safety of my property and that of my neighbors. A very severe winter forecast does nothing to allay my fears of possible damage. In the attachment "City of Burlingame" Chapter 11.06, the final part of 11.06.010 states that the purpose and intent is for the reasonable economic enjoyment of private property. Removal of a tree is a costly expense, borne by the homeowner, as is the constant clean --up and lacing periodically to try to keep the growth of the tree under control. I am a senior citizen, in poor health, who has worked and saved hard to own my home and I would like to have some peace of mind knowing that as a responsible citizen I have taken every precaution to prevent damage to my and my neighbors' property. Attachmen Yours truly, 'a"- 0 - Mary Elsie Robertson FMO ''1 - The reasons for the request to remove -the tree are as foHows: 1. The tree is situated in a very small space at the back of the garden and over the years has grown upwards and outwards through the root system at an alarming rate. 2. The roots are pushing against the fence which separates the proper-tj and buci ing my fence around the deck;, as shorn in the photographs. 3. -7u.' 1rio !LeitaCr:J u., S act as 6v`u:dDI..,:.CeJ, GIi L-1 u=S ,,,.:.a, bJh:,T.l i1 G SUu :v::.i.:s blow, often clocked at 45 m.p h. tais tree b-ds and sways ha a most rgh g way. I watch a_nd worry that part of it will snap, even some of the very heavy- branches and fat oil my small, single story house or on my neighbor's horre which is in close nrOMMUty to the tee. 4. 1 have paid to have'he tree laced three tames as the Lrancnes were so thilex and heavy that they were leaning on my neighbor's garage. 5. I am a senior citizen vino has had two cancer surgeries, have artlaries --n both hands. Clearnng up after the storms and trying to keen the Srorat'i around the ter under control is becoming harder for me to do. b. The expense of lacing, cutting back new growth, cleanin- up as the tree continues to grow larger and fuller each year is difficult for me to handle on a limited income. 7. I feel the tree is hazardous as it is too large and too close to properties and I would not want to be liable for the considerable damage it could cause. 931 Park Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010-2628 November 9, 2002 Mr. S. Porter City Arborist Dear Mr. Porter, In response to your 11/01/02 memo regarding the denial of my application to remove the very large tree from my backyard, I would like to request an extension of one month, until ff=berl8th. rather than November 18th to submit a written appeal. The reason being: I took a very bad fall ten days ago and fractured my left knee. I had reconstructive surgery on November 1st and have only been home from the hospital for a few days. I am in a full leg cast and have a lot of pain and scheduled for several visits to the orthopedic surgeon in the next three weeks, which will not leave me sufficient time to prepare a written appeal by the November 18th deadline. I have been trying to reach you unsuccessfully by phone, however, I am sure you have been very busy with the damage caused in the area by fallen branches and trees. My friend who is helping me was unable to get out of her driveway on Friday because of large branches from street trees which fell near her home on Bernal and Adelaide. I cannot go out to inspect if the storm has caused any further damage to my property but the velocity of the wind and the heavy rains cause me a great deal of alarm. I would appreciate if you would call me at 344-2885 and let me know if you made an actual inspection at my address and the date of that inspection and if my request for an extension of one month until December 18th can be granted due to my current health situation. Yours truly, Mary Elsie Robertson �:: "1 '� I r F _ "h _ I �J�'' jr 9�' �'t�` �; r( � �. �f 1, • ��, _ l .,i' _ I f; $ `gib z f tJJi .d. } i i s �. + � /r•�. � 3 40 IN 77, j + ' "�3 -`�� � �` � y ``® {�ir ���� Y, �^�•ry: 1� �•Q C4•�°E4 1� 1.fc ,14 Paz, ��`��-`• �; �' y , •�" �, � � _ �,,f�ti� L �;�, r •� • : : L n r ` _ e ,I rs wo ,t °'=Y o� STAFF REPORT BURLINGAME TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: December 19, 2002 FROM: Parks & Recreation Director (558-7307) AGENDA ITEM # _ MTG. DATE SUB E BY APPROVED BY SUBJECT: TREE REMOVAL AT 1649 CORONADO WAY RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council conduct a public hearing and determine whether or not to uphold the recommendation of the Beautification Commission denying the removal of the City street tree at 1649 Coronado Way. BACKGROUND: Over the years the property owners at 1649 Coronado Way, the Manfreddis, have made a variety of requests for service to the tree. Most recently the requests have involved the roots of the tree. `-- The health and safety of the tree have never been an issue. Currently the Manfreddis wish to re - landscape their front yard with lawn as the dominant element. The City street tree at 1649 Coronado Way is a mature "Samuel Sommers" Magnolia, the dominant specie on the block. Similar to the rest of the neighborhood, there is no street channel at this address and the street tree lies on City planting strip that merges with the front yard of the property. Several residents in the neighborhood and elsewhere in the City have similar lawn/root problems that have been dealt with successfully. The Manfreddis requested removal of the street tree to facilitate the desired landscape design. The City Arborist met with the Manfreddis on several occasions and suggested techniques for keeping the tree and planting a new lawn. Those suggestions were unacceptable to the Manfreddis, who appealed the City Arborist's decision denying removal of the tree to the Beautification Commission. The Commission upheld the Arborist's denial, 6-0-1. The Manfreddis then appealed the decision to Council. Should Council decide to uphold the appeal and issue a permit, staff recommends that the Manfreddi's be required that they be responsible for the removal, stump grinding, replacement with a 24" box tree chosen from the City's planting list and all associated costs. BUDGET IMPACT: There is no budget impact if Council supports the denial of the Beautification Commission or upholds the appeal at the owner's expense. If Council upholds the appeal at the City's expense, a budget impact would result in a cost to the City of approximately $2,000 in time and materials. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Summary of service requests at 1649 Coronado Way 2. Photographs depicting tree 3. Beautification Commission minutes of December 5, 2002 4. Correspondence from Parks & Recreation Department staff MANFREDDI -1649 CORONADO WAY- BURLINGAME February 1991 - Request to trim Magnolia tree at 1649 Coronado & "tree across street to let �.. street light shine through". Tree was trimmed August, 1991 October 1992 - Request "tree by street light (Magnolia) to be 'windowed' to light up area at night". Resident informed "No Work Needed", October, 1992. October 1994 - Request to "trim/'window' tree to open up for street light". Resident informed "No Work Needed", October, 1994. April 1995 - Request for Magnolia to be "trimmed and thinned for street light". Tree was trimmed, April, 1995. June 1997 - Request to "trim, shape, open up for sunlight on lawn area ... prune roots in lawn". Resident informed "No Work Needed", June, 1997. October 1997- Request to trim because "crews are trimming Magnolia down the street; trim & open up for street light or she is going to sue!" There was no work record entered, but resident was informed that there was no work needed. April 1999 - Request to "trim & thin & pull back branches from neighbor's house. Tree was trimmed May, 1999. In May of 2001, the City Arborist denied resident request for removal. Resident then called Parks & Recreation Department to inform that City Councilman Coffey said the tree should be removed & replaced by the City due to the tree's roots". Administrative Secretary informed resident that the City Arborist would evaluate the tree and determine if removal is appropriate. If City Arborist were to deny the request for removal, resident could appeal his decision to the Beautification Commission. In June of 2001, City Arborist sent a letter to resident denying removal of the City Magnolia tree because: 1) Tree is a healthy, well formed specimen, 2) Tree has been trimmed every 4 years, 3) Roots in private lawn, under 2" in diameter can be removed by property owner or private contractor (over 2" diameter needs prior approval of City Arborist). Resident was further instructed that the arborist's decision could be appealed in writing to the Burlingame Beautification Commission. In September of 2001, Councilman Coffey notified the Parks & Recreation Department that resident had contacted him again with regard to removal of the Magnolia tree. On September 26, 2001, City Arborist responded to the resident in writing that his decision to not approve removal of the Magnolia was the same, but offered resident that he would be willing to meet on site with her and Councilman Coffey to discuss her concerns. Again he advised that she could appeal his decision to the Burlingame Beautification. On October 8, 2001, resident's nephew and attorney, David Lonich, contacts the City Arborist and requests a copy of the City's Arborist letter dated September 26, 2001 and asks that the City Attorney call him to discuss. After several attempts, on October 26, 2001, the City Arborist spoke with Mr. Lonich regarding lawn renovation at 1649 Coronado and pruning out roots in the private lawn area. The City Arborist indicated that he would meet on site with whoever was going to do the lawn renovation to advise with regard to root pruning. Mr. Lonich stated he would convey information to resident. On November 26, 2001, Councilman Coffee, resident and City Arborist met on site. The City Arborist conveyed that his decision to not approve removal of the magnolia was unchanged, but agreed to make �-' arrangements for the tree crew to trim the tree as per his specific instructions. On January 3, 2002, the City tree was trimmed as per the City Arborist's specific instructions. In July 2002, resident came into the Parks & Recreation Department and spoke to Parks Superintendent Richmond regarding removal of the City's Magnolia tree. On July 30, 2002, Superintendent Richmond sent a letter to the resident informing her of appeal procedures to the Burlingame Beautification Commission as well as appeal procedures to the City Council. On November 7, 2002, resident came to the Parks & Recreation Department to speak to Director Schwartz, Director Schwartz agreed to meet with the resident and the City Arborist on site to discuss her request for removal of the City's Magnolia tree. Meeting has been set for Monday, November 18'` at 2: 00 P. M. On November 18, 2002, Director Schwartz, Arborist Porter, and City Councilman Coffey, met with the resident and her husband to discuss removal of the City's Magnolia tree and root removal during lawn renovation. After the discussion, residents were encouraged to present their case to the Beautification Commission. Director Schwartz advised the residents to bring pictures of the tree to the Parks & Recreation by November 22nd so their item could be placed on the December 5"' Beautification Commission agenda. Residents agreed that they would do this. On November 25, 2002, Mr. Manfreddi delivered pictures of City Magnolia tree for appeal to the L- Burlingame Beautification Commission. Item will be placed on the December 5' agenda. On December 5, 2002, the Burlingame Beautification Commission voted 6 - 0 - 1 (absent) to deny your appeal for the removal of one City owned Magnolia tree at the above address. The Commission's decision was based on reasons stated by the City Arborist in his letter to you on June 1, 2001 that: 1) The tree is a healthy, well formed specimen; that, 2) The tree has been trimmed every 4 years; and that, 3) Roots that have invaded the private lawn area may be removed by the property owner. The Commission noted that the species is consistent with and of significant value to the neighborhood, and that the City Arborist outlined a plan, as he has with other residents, that allows for lawn to be planted under the tree. CITY CITY OF BURLINGAME URLINGAME PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 850 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame, California 94010-2899 .•„tT�•,,•• Telephone (650) 558-7300 Parks / Trees (650) 558-7330 Fax (650) 696-7216 E-mail: burlrec@aol.com December 6, 2002 Mr. and Mrs. Manfreddi 1649 Coronado Way Burlingame, CA 94010 6v! 619.2 - 7,?59/kl: yzz �) RE: APPEAL OF THE DENIAL TO REMOVE THE CITY OWNED MAGNOLIA TREE @ 1649 CORONADO WAY - BURLINGAME Dear Mr. and Mrs. Manfi-eddi: At it's December 5, 2002 meeting the Burlingame Beautification Commission voted 6 - 0 - 1 (absent) to deny your appeal for the removal of one City owned Magnolia tree at the above address. The Commission's decision was based on reasons stated by the City Arborist in his letter to you on June 1, 2001 that: 1) The tree is a healthy, well formed specimen; that, 2) The tree has been trimmed every 4 years; and that, 3) Roots that have invaded the private lawn area may be removed by the property owner. The Commission noted that the species is consistent with and of significant value to the neighborhood, and that the City Arborist outlined a plan, as he has with other residents, that allows for lawn to be planted under the tree. This decision can be appealed to the City Council in writing within 10 days of receipt of this letter. If you have any questions, you may contact our office at (650) 558-7330. Sincerely, H -._ Tim Richmond Parks Superintendent M M BURLINGAME BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 5, 2002 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Beautification Commission was called to order at 5:35 p.m. by Chairperson McGowan. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson McGowan, Ellis, Hesselgren, Lauder, Locke, and Webb Absent: Commissioner Carney Staff: Superintendent Richmond, City Arborist Porter, and Administrative Secretary Harvey Guests:Boy Scout Troop #28: Charles Eigenbrot, Colin Culligan, Ryan Baker, Owen Eigenbrot, Matty McBride, Andy Schwenk, Mark Canton, and Tyson; Mr. Manfreddi, 1649 Coronado Way. Chairperson McGowan welcomed Troop #28 and introduced the Beautification Commissioners and the City staff in attendance. MINUTES - The minutes of the November 7, 2002 meeting were corrected to read under REPORTS - Locke: Commissioner Locke reported on the community workshop... and that, the Golf Center .. . could be improved if native shrubs were planted. Minutes were approved as corrected. CORRESPONDENCE Pictures of City Magnolia at 1649 Coronado Way, and letter from Parks & Recreation Director Schwartz to Mrs. Vivian Manfreddi informing her that her request for the removal of the City owned Magnolia tree would be placed on the December 5' agenda of the Beautification Commission for hearing. FROM THE FLOOR There were no comments from the floor. NEW BUSINESS Arbor Day / Spring Garden Seminar - The Commission discussed areas where the Arbor Day Ceremony could be held. After a brief discussion, Commissioner Lauder suggested the area in Washington Park, behind the Tennis Courts, where the large Oak tree was lost during the last storm. Superintendent Richmond thanked the Commission for their input. Chairperson McGowan reported that Matt Leddy, Director of the Horticulture Department from the College of San Mateo will be this year's Spring Garden Seminar speaker. NEW BUSINESS - Request for Removal of City Owned Magnolia Tree na, 1649 Coronado Way - ACTION - Arborist Porter reported that the property owners of 1649 Coronado Way have been requesting removal of the City owned Magnolia for some time due to leaf drop, too much shade for the lawn and not enough light from street light. The most recent request for removal was because the property owner is in the process of relandscaping and roots from the tree are on the surface of the existing lawn. Arborist Porter stated he has denied the requests for removal because the tree is a healthy tree; and that, the Magnolia has been routinely trimmed every four years. He added that he most recently met with and consulted with the property owners to discuss root removal, the placement of root barriers, and reseeding, rather than sod placement, in the first 6' around the base of the tree. Arborist Porter concluded that the property owners were not interested in the suggested methods of root pruning and placement of root barriers and has asked this item to be heard by the Beautification Commission. Request for Removal of City Owned Magnolia Tree (a, 1649 Coronado Way - ACTION - (Contd) Chairperson McGowan asked the Commission if they had any comments or questions of Arborist Porter. Commissioner Locke asked if the property owner had submitted any landscape plans; Arborist Porter responded "No". Commissioner Lauder asked Arborist Porter to explain the method for root pruning and placement of root barriers as described to the property owners. Arborist Porter stated that because mature Magnolias are very sensitive to root pruning, property owners are instructed that they can only cut and remove roots under 2" in diameter; any removal of roots larger than 2" in diameter must have prior approval from the Arborist. If property owners are planning lawn renovation underneath a mature Magnolia, they are advised to install root barriers 6' from the base of tree, place a thin layer of top soil in the 6' radius, and then plant the area with grass seed. Arborist Porter stated that sod can be installed in the area outside the root barrier; but if sod is installed up to the trunk of the tree, it will choke off air and keep the root zone area too moist. Commissioner Locke asked if the City sidewalk had been replaced by the City. Arborist Porter said, "Yes." Commissioner Locke noted that the area of the yard slopes, but perhaps if it were leveled, it would address the issue of the surface roots. She also noted that Coronado Way is primarily Magnolia trees and they add tremendous beauty to the neighborhood. Commissioner Locke then asked what the life expectancy is of this tree? Arborist Porter responded that a Magnolia tree could live approximately 100 years or more. Commissioner Webb asked if this tree will grow to a huge size? Arborist Porter stated "No"; that this variety is a Magnolia 'Samuel Sommers' and it has reached it's mature size. Chairman McGowan recognized Mr. Manfreddi. Mr. Manfreddi stated that they are going to spend $4,000 relandscaping the front yard. He stated that the City recently replaced the sewer line and the driveway that was damaged by the tree's roots and that the roots are all the way to the foundation of his house. He concluded that the tree is a "rogue" tree that needs to be removed and replaced. Commissioner Webb asked if the City paid for the sidewalk repair, sewer line replacement, and driveway repair? Arborist Porter clarified that only the City's portion of the driveway was paid for by the City, along with the sidewalk repair and sewer line replacement. Arborist Porter stated that the old sewer laterals in Burlingame are terra cota pipes, and that most have cracked. Once cracked, water seeps out of the broken line and the tree's roots gravitate toward the water; eventually the roots invade the lateral. He clarified that the City will only cover the cost for repairs of City sidewalks, driveways, and sewer/water lines that are within the City's right of way; anything on the private property side, is the responsibility of the property owner. Commissioner Ellis noted that some property owners in the area have planted lawn with seed, rather than sod or have placed rocks under the canopy of the tree. Arborist Porter responded that some property owners have also planted ground cover under the trees. 2 M Request for Removal of City Owned Magnolia Tree (at, 1649 Coronado Way - ACTION - (Contd The Commission briefly discussed the City's tree planting program, as well as the removal and replacement program. Arborist Porter stated that in order to prevent future sidewalk damage, the City has become very proactive in developing street tree lists that only allow for certain tree species in certain size planter strips. He added that when a City's tree needs to be removed, due to poor health or safety issues, only trees that are on the approved street tree list can be planted back in the area. Chairperson McGowan reread the letter dated June 1, 2002, from the City Arborist (to the property owners) denying the removal of the Magnolia tree based on the the reasons that: 1) The tree is a healthy, well formed specimen. 2) The tree has been trimmed every 4 years. 3) Roots that have invaded the private lawn area may be removed by the property owner. Following the discussion, Commissioner Locke moved to deny the appeal for the removal of the City owned Magnolia tree based on the reasons stated by the City Arborist in his letter dated June 1, 2001 and also that the species is consistent with, and of significant value to, the surrounding neighborhood and the City Arborist had outlined a plan that allows the property owner to plant lawn under the tree, seconded (Sesselgren). Motion carried 6 - 0 -1 (absent/Carney). Chairperson McGowan advised Mr. Manfreddi that he would be notified in writing of the Commission's decision as well as the appeal procedures if he should wish to appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council. REPORTS Richmond - 1) The Fall tree planting has been completed with approximately 80 trees being planted. 2) The EOC was opened during the November 7 & 8 storm; there were 12 whole tree failures. 3) The City Hall tree lighting ceremony will be held on Friday, December Oh- children's choral groups will be participating. 4) Parks & Recreation Director Schwartz's memo outlines process to expedite appeals for tree removals. 5) Arborist Porter has noted that there are 3-4 trees missing a Rector Cadillac and has notified the General Manager; staff will research further to determine resolution. 6) The removal of a liriodendron tree at 212 Stanley may be on the January agenda; merit injections for aphid control has been ineffective because of the tree's impenetrable root mass. McGowan - Chairperson McGowan noted that construction materials and debris are being stored at the base of the City tree at 1636 Coronado. He also stated that the Mayten trees at the apartment building on the corner of Ansel and Floribunda have been removed and still need replacing. Webb - Commissioner Webb asked that a discussion clarifying criteria for the removal of City trees be placed on the agenda of the January Commission meeting. 3 REPORTS - Contd. - Lauder - Commissioner Lauder reported that she attended the North End Rollins Road Specific Plan Workshop; she stressed at the workshop the importance of creating and maintaining as much natural areas as possible. Chairperson McGowan asked if residential is being considered in that area? Commissioner Lauder responded that it is one of the considerations being discussed at the workshop. Locke - Commissioner Locke also attended the workshop and presented a map to the Commission showing the area the public workshop is discussing. She stated that several ideas the committee has expressed are: The northern section of El Camino to Murchison being "tree lined", as well as heavy greenery in the same area that serves as the "gateway" to the City of Burlingame. She added that the committee also discussed developing a small natural area or small park in the vicinity of the Broadway Train Station. She concluded that the next workshop meeting will be in January. There being no further business, Chairperson McGowan adjourned the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, CVt&-2. 11�r Karlene Harvey Recording Secretary 4 CITY CITY OF BURLINGAME URLIN' E PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT f 850 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame, California 94010-2899 Telephone (650) 558-7300 Parks / Trees (650) 558-7330 c•'"""T`D`• Fax (650) 696-7216 E-mail: burlrec@aol.com June 1, 2001 Mrs. Manfreddi 1629 Coronado Way Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: REQUEST FOR THE REMOVAL OFA CITY -OWNED MAGNOLIA TREE @ 1629 CORONAD0 WAY- BURLINGAME Dear Mrs. Manfreddi: I reviewed your request for the removal of the City's Magnolia tree at the above address. Based on my inspection of the tree I have made the following determination: 1) The tree is a healthy, well formed specimen. 2) Records indicate that the tree has been trimmed every 4 years. 3) Roots that have invaded the private lawn area may be removed by the property owner. (Any removal of roots that are 2" inch in diameter or greater, must first by approved by the City Arborist.) Based on the above, your request for the removal of the tree is denied. This decision may be appealed to the Burlingame Beautification Commission by filing a written appeal by June 18' , 2001. Sincerely, Steven Porter City Arborist - (ISA #WC-3073) (kh)