Tree Protection Board

TOWN OF SUMMERVILLE TREE PROTECTION BOARD – AGENDA July 12, 2021 – 9:00 AM Town Hall, Town Council Chambers The meeting will be live-streamed through the live-streaming link on the Town’s website: www.summervillesc.gov For additional information regarding items on this agenda including any public hearings, please contact the Planning Department at planning@summervillesc.gov or 843.998.3811. Applications and related documents for this meeting are available for review at any time at www.summervillesc.gov/AgendaCenter. Public that chooses to attend this meeting in person will be required to have their temperature scanned and abide by social distancing requirements. Approval of Minutes June 7, 2021 minutes Old Business New Business 1. 138 Comiskey Park Circle – Removal of one Pine tree 2. 114 Kapalua Run – Removal of one Pine tree 3. 100 Kapalua Run – Removal of three Pine trees Miscellaneous Adjournment Posted, July 6, 2021  Tree Protection Board Minutes Monday, June 7, 2021 Members Present: Kenny Sott David Morris Faye Campbell Ginger Reilly Staff Present: Jessie Shuler, Director of Planning Bill Salisbury, Arborist The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m. Mr. Sott asked for consideration of the May 10, 2021 meeting minutes. Mr. Morris made a motion for approval of the minutes as presented. Ms. Campbell seconded the motion. The motioned carried. Old Business New Business 1. 641 Central Avenue – Removal of two Pine and four Oak trees Property owner and contractor presented. The trees are in or right at the footprint of the garage; another pine is for proposed fire pit. Mr. Salisbury stated the Oak trees are not healthy, one has a hole all the way through, the Pines are healthy. The contractor is willing to leave the Pine outside of footprint. Ms. Campbell stated she is glad there are other trees in the yard. She made a motion to allow removal of trees #1 - #5, but to save #6. Ms. Reilly seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 2. 2029 Shoal Creek Court – Removal of two Pine and one Gum tree Property owner and neighbor presented. The owner stated he would like to remove the Gum tree due to safety issues; his wife has fallen twice and the Gum balls fall on the neighbor’s sidewalk as well. He also stated this will allow the Oak more room to grow. Mr. Salisbury stated there is a product available to prevent production of Gum balls. The neighbor stated this does not address the root issue (roots are 15’ from house); the owner stated Clear Blue Pools will be entering a pool permit today or tomorrow which is the reason for removal of Pine tree #2. Mr. Salisbury stated Pine tree #3 is damaged, the owner agreed with his assessment. Mr. Sott asked for any other reasons for removing the Gum besides Gum balls, as those can be addressed. Ms. Campbell stated the trees look better together. The owner stated Mt. Pleasant does not regulate Gum and Pine trees. Mr. Morris asked for the species of the Oak tree. Mr. Sott asked about any occluded bark on the codominant stems. The neighbor asked what could be done about the roots and the tripping hazard. Ms. Campbell suggested an elevated path. Mr. Sott asked about any foundation damage noted. The neighbor stated there are cracks in the garage but could not say if roots caused this damage; however, he has artificial knees and cannot lift legs very high. Ms. Campbell stated the purpose of the TPB is to exhaust all possibilities to save the trees. The neighbor commented it seems TPB is concerned more about protecting the trees over safety of people. Mr. Sott answered this by saying the TPB asks a lot of questions because there are requirements that need to be followed. Mr. Salisbury asked if mitigation could be considered. Mr. Sott stated mitigation would be required for a 15” tree; Mr. Salisbury stated 15” = 50% so 7.5”, about three trees, with six months to plant if planting in yard. Mr. Sott made a motion to allow  Tree Protection Board Minutes Monday, June 7, 2021 removal of Pine tree #3 and Gum tree #1 with required mitigation, Mr. Morris seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3. 821 Central Avenue – Removal of two Pine trees A representative for the church presented. They are concerned about the root system damaging chapel and limbs overhanging; also planning to expand chapel in that direction but has a lot of work that needs to be done. Ms. Campbell asked if there were plans for expansion at this time. The representative answered no and was not aware that was required. Mr. Sott asked is Tree #1 is in good health. Ms. Campbell said yes, but very close to power line. The representative stated the chapel is on six to seven acres with lots of trees but is willing the consider mitigation. Ms. Campbell made a motion to approve removal of tree #2 and to give Mr. Salisbury authorization to approve removal of tree #1 upon submission of plans for expansion. Mr. Morris seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 4. 119 Mackerel Lane – Removal of one Gum tree Owner not present. The tree is in the path of neighbor’s fence which is being rebuilt. Ms. Campbell stated she spoke to the neighbor about making a curve in the fence to go around the tree. Mr. Sott asked for clarification that the current owner has no concerns, the only issue is the neighbor’s plan to redo the fence. Mr. Salisbury confirmed this. Ms. Campbell made a motion to deny removal of tree but recommend change of fence design to accommodate tree. Ms. Reilly seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 5. 100 Paladin Drive – Removal of one 32” Oak tree Property owner presented. Thirty-five years ago, this tree was planted in the former Salisbury Clay Pit along with about 200 trees. It has grown out of proportion with roots damaging the street which has been redone once already, it blocks all light in front of the mobile home and will eventually damage the foundation piers. This MHP does not allow metal skirting only real brick. If permission is allowed, another tree will be planted in its place. Mr. Morris stated this is a tough one; Ms. Campbell questioned the possibility of root pruning. The owner stated this has been done previously a couple years ago when the road was redone, the roots have already grown back. Mr. Sott questioned the feasibility of root pruning due to large size of tree. Mr. Morris asked do the homeowners have to maintain the roads themselves; the owner affirmed. Ms. Reilly made a motion to approve removal of tree. Mr. Morris seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Miscellaneous: Mr. Sott stated the ordinance mentions public safety; should Gum balls on sidewalks, pathways, etc. be considered any different from falling in backyard? Ms. Campbell stated each situation is different. Mr. Sott stated it is something to be considered.  Tree Protection Board Minutes Monday, June 7, 2021 ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:58 a.m. on a motion by Mr. Sott and a second by Ms. Campbell. The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Date: July 5, 2021 Bill Salisbury Arborist/Natural Resource Planner Approved: Kenny Sott, Chair _________________________________________; or, Faye Campbell, Vice Chair _________________________________________  STAFF REPORT Tree Protection Board Meeting July 12, 2021 To: Town of Summerville Tree Protection Board From: Bill Salisbury, Arborist/Natural Resource Planner Date: June 6, 2021 GENERAL INFORMATION Property Applicant: Thad King Owner: Thad King Requested Action: Removal of one Pine tree Location: 138 Comiskey Park Circle Guideline Citation: UDO Section 13.9.1.G Decisions/Justifications: The TPB may approve, deny, or approve with conditions the application for the removal of a Grand Tree. No approval shall be granted unless the following one or more of the following conditions are determined to exist: 1. The Grand Tree is diseased, dead or dying; or 2. The Grand Tree poses a safety hazard to nearby buildings, utility lines or pedestrian or vehicular traffic; or 3. The Grand Tree prevents essential grade changes or all reasonable utility installations; or 4. The Grand Tree prevents all reasonable site configurations; or 5. The removal of the Grand Tree is the only reasonable means by which building, zoning, subdivision, health, public safety or other Town requirements can be met; or 6. Grand Tree is located on the construction site and up to ten feet around the perimeter of the construction site of an approved building and related driveway parking area when every measure has been explored to preserve existing trees has failed, including the reconfiguration of the building and or driving/parking areas around the tree; or 7. The lot is of such density with existing trees that the removal of certain protected trees is considered beneficial; or 8. The removal of the Grand Tree has otherwise been approved by the Town Council. Evaluation: The Pine tree is healthy but is very close to the Town sidewalk.  STAFF REPORT Tree Protection Board Meeting July 12, 2021 To: Town of Summerville Tree Protection Board From: Bill Salisbury, Arborist/Natural Resource Planner Date: June 5, 2021 GENERAL INFORMATION Property Applicant: Gary Smith Owner: Gary Smith Requested Action: Removal of one Pine tree Location: 114 Kapalua Run Guideline Citation: UDO Section 13.9.1.G Decisions/Justifications: The TPB may approve, deny, or approve with conditions the application for the removal of a Grand Tree. No approval shall be granted unless the following one or more of the following conditions are determined to exist: 1. The Grand Tree is diseased, dead or dying; or 2. The Grand Tree poses a safety hazard to nearby buildings, utility lines or pedestrian or vehicular traffic; or 3. The Grand Tree prevents essential grade changes or all reasonable utility installations; or 4. The Grand Tree prevents all reasonable site configurations; or 5. The removal of the Grand Tree is the only reasonable means by which building, zoning, subdivision, health, public safety or other Town requirements can be met; or 6. Grand Tree is located on the construction site and up to ten feet around the perimeter of the construction site of an approved building and related driveway parking area when every measure has been explored to preserve existing trees has failed, including the reconfiguration of the building and or driving/parking areas around the tree; or 7. The lot is of such density with existing trees that the removal of certain protected trees is considered beneficial; or 8. The removal of the Grand Tree has otherwise been approved by the Town Council. Evaluation: Tree has Pine Bark beetles which should not harm the tree.  STAFF REPORT Tree Protection Board Meeting July 12, 2021 To: Town of Summerville Tree Protection Board From: Bill Salisbury, Arborist/Natural Resource Planner Date: June 15, 2021 GENERAL INFORMATION Property Applicant: Bud McPartlin Owner: Bud McPartlin Requested Action: Removal of three Pine trees Location: 100 Kapalua Run Guideline Citation: UDO Section 13.9.1.G Decisions/Justifications: The TPB may approve, deny, or approve with conditions the application for the removal of a Grand Tree. No approval shall be granted unless the following one or more of the following conditions are determined to exist: 1. The Grand Tree is diseased, dead or dying; or 2. The Grand Tree poses a safety hazard to nearby buildings, utility lines or pedestrian or vehicular traffic; or 3. The Grand Tree prevents essential grade changes or all reasonable utility installations; or 4. The Grand Tree prevents all reasonable site configurations; or 5. The removal of the Grand Tree is the only reasonable means by which building, zoning, subdivision, health, public safety or other Town requirements can be met; or 6. Grand Tree is located on the construction site and up to ten feet around the perimeter of the construction site of an approved building and related driveway parking area when every measure has been explored to preserve existing trees has failed, including the reconfiguration of the building and or driving/parking areas around the tree; or 7. The lot is of such density with existing trees that the removal of certain protected trees is considered beneficial; or 8. The removal of the Grand Tree has otherwise been approved by the Town Council. Evaluation: Tree #1 has rot in the trunk, trees 2 and 3 look healthy.