Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - BC - 1983.04.077 N O T I C E BURLINGAME BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION MEETING: THURSDAY - APRIL 7, 1983 A G E N D A I ROLL CALL II MINUTES OF MARCH 3, 1983 III COMMUNICATIONS IV REPORTS A. Chairman B. Commissioners C. Park Director V OLD BUSINESS A. Great Resource Rally - April 18-24 VI NEW BUSINESS A. Removal of Heritage Trees on ECR B. Clean Campus Program at Elementary School level VII ADJOURNMENT s '.-r '1 "I w DATE: APRIL 6, 1983 TO: BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: R. QUADRI - DIRECTOR OF PARKS RE: MEETING OF 4-7-83 As you may be aware, at its meeting of 4-4-83 the City Council referred the matter of Eucalyptus removal on El Camino to the Beautification Commission for consideration at this week's meet- ing. This is an extremely sensitive issue, and is coming to you on short notice. Because of this, Chairman Bowling will be contact- ing each of you by phone this evening to discuss the matter. It is intended that the meeting be informational, and we do not anti- cipate any action to be taken at this time. However, there is likely to be a sizable and possibly vocal audience present. Our City Attorney also will attend to render any opinions you feel are necessary. The enclosed information is all we have available at this time. I will present a complete briefing before the matter is discussed. rp- � L 7 Richard P. Quadri Director ofParks Enclosures RPQ/kh "I I? . DATE: MARCH 31, 1983 TO: D. ARGYRES - CITY MANAGER FROM: R. QUADRI - DIRECTOR OF PARKS RE: CALTRANS TREE REMOVAL ON E.C.R. On March 18, 1983 I met with Tom Hafley, Caltrans Maintenance Superintendent, to discuss pruning and/or removal of a number of Eucalyptus on E1 Camino Real. At the time we inspected three trees which were being recommended for immediate removal. One had heart rot through most of the trunk, another had a severely split crotch, and a third had been damaged in a previous storm and appeared to be structurally unsound. All three trees pre- sented an immediate concern, and removal was authorized under authority of our Heritage Tree ordinance. At this meeting, I discussed our permit procedure with Mr. Haf- ley and it was agreed that no further trees would be removed un- til a qualified arborist had inspected the trees. It was further agreed that a representative from Caltrans would attend the April 7, 1983 Beautification Commission meeting to discuss the situa- tion. Due to the sensitive nature of this problem, another Cal - trans representative (I can't recall his name or title) indicated they would provide press releases to the Times and Boutique ex- plaining what they intended to do, and the reasons for it. John Petersen, Caltrans Tree Supervisor, made a visual inspection of all the Eucalyptus on E1 Camino and felt that approximately 40 warranted further study. The State now has an arborist under contract to provide an evaluation of these trees. I should be noted that -the three trees in front. of St. Paul's Nursery School were not among those first scheduled for review. Since that time, however, St. Paul's has retained the same arborist to re- port on the three trees in question. His report recommends re- moval of all three, but raises some questions as to whether or not the trees can actually be saved. Since he does not indicate they are an immediate hazard, I don't feel I have the authority to authorize removal until the matter has been brought before the Beautification Commission and/or Council for their review. (Cal trans has temporarily postponed removal). In regard to the arborist's report, I am familiar with Mr. Blair's reputation as a reputable consulting arborist, and find his report to be acceptable as far as it goes. However, as part of his re- port he indicates that "If preservation were desired a complete crown inspection would have to be performed " Because of the number of trees involved, I believe it would be wise to have such an inspection undertaken. It would seem appropriate to start with the three trees in front of=St. Paul's Nursery since they have already received a preliminary inspection. Even if further tests support removal, the knowledge gained will help in future assess- ments. I have attempted to call Mr. Blair, and will discuss his report in greater depth when he is able to get back to me. In -'N 4 r R Nwr the mean time, I feel that in view of the obvious varience of pub- lic opinion regarding these trees, we should retain a consulting arborist to help establish criteria for determining what steps must be taken to preserve these trees, and which trees need to be removed. Caltrans is bringing in at least pruning along E1 Camino. Their is encouraging. In many cases, immediate concern. It is hoped be held to a minimum. one extra crew to assist with prompt response to this problem pruning will take care of the that in this way, removal will Given the age and apparent condition of many of the trees involved, it may be that we are about to be faced with the removal of a sig- nificant number. I feel that it is imperative that we remove only those that constitute a real hazard, and only after thorough study on a tree by tree basis. Further, replacement of those trees re- moved with a more suitable variety of Eucalyptus is necessary to preserve the character of our community and particularly the E1 Camino. With the Winter season almost past, it serves no purpose to rush into a wholesale removal that can never be reversed. Richard P. Quadri Director of Parks '1 Mkl