HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB 5 TREE REMOVAL 09-16-85 · ' 4" - ~ ',,/1~~~9-16-859-16-85
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
TO:
FROM:
S U BJ ECT:
WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
BOB LEDENDECKER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER
REQUEST FOR TREE REMOVAL
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Tustin City Council, at their meeting of September 16, 1985, authorize
the removal of four trees and the replacement of three or four trees along the
Second St. frontage of Mr. De Iorio's property per Case II of City Policy
authorize the planting of trees at City expense along the remaining portions of
both sides of Second Street.
BACKGROUND:
A request has been received from Mr. Fred De Iorio, owner of the apartment complex
at 190 Centennial Way at the corner of Second Street and Centennial Way, to have
four ficus trees removed from the parkway along the Second Street frontage of his
property. A copy of Mr. De Iorio's letter is attached.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has reviewed these four trees and found the following:
Se
be
The building setback along the Second Street frontage is minimal and with
the size of the trees as they currently exist, the foilage is immediately
adjacent to the structure.
The parkway is six foot wide, but due to shallow water throughout the
trees lifespan, the trees have developed large ground surface roots which
are a problem to Mr. De Iorios lawn and will eventually present a problem
to the curb and gutter and sidewalks. Pictures of these trees are
attached for reference.
Following is a recap of current City Policy:
Case I
Problem tree causing current or future damage to curb and
sidewalk will be removed by the City and replaced with a fifteen
gallon size tree at City expense subject to availability of
funds.
Case II
Undesirable tree (City approved) due to extensive litter or
other problems will be removed by the City and replacement cost
(tree, labor, materials) at the expense of the adjacent property
owner.
Case III
Unapproved tree (not of a problem or desirable species) will be
removed by the City and replacement cost (tree, labor,
materials) at the expense of the adjacent property owner.
SEPTEMBER 5, 1985
PAGE 2
Mr. De Iorio's request falls under Case II, but Mr. De Iorio has requested that
the trees not be replaced because there are no other street/parkway trees existing
on Second Street between Centennial Way. Apparently, at the time of development
of remaining portions of Second St., there was no requirement to plant trees or
they have been removed over the years.
Staff would suggest that if the City desires to continue its tree program that the
Case II Policy be upheld and that either three or four trees be replaced at the
property owner's expense and that the City plant trees along the remainder of
Second St. on both sides of the street.
Bob Ledendecker
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
BL:jr