Tree Protection Board

TOWN OF SUMMERVILLE TREE PROTECTION BOARD – AGENDA February 7, 2022 – 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 strongly encouraged to wear a mask and abide by social distancing requirements. Approval of Minutes January 10, 2021 minutes Old Business New Business 1. 311 Black Oak Blvd – Removal of two Gum and two Oak trees 2. 201 E Luke Avenue – Removal of one Live Oak tree 3. 104 Upcerne Road – Removal of one 22” Pine tree Miscellaneous Adjournment Posted, January 31, 2022  Tree Protection Board Minutes Monday, January 10, 2022 Members Present: David Morris Peter Wallace Kenny Sott Faye Campbell Staff Present: Jessi 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 December 6, 2021 TPB meeting minutes. Mr. Morris made a motion to accept the minutes as presented. Mr. Wallace seconded the motion. The motion carried. Old Business New Business 1. N. Maple St/Old Dairy Road – Removal of 31 Pines, 21 Oaks, 39 other trees Chris Campeau (applicant) was out for Covid quarantine; Mr. Salisbury has been out several times and reported a good job has been done saving what could be saved, although it is getting into some of the trees' driplines. Mr. Sott asked if the PUD was met, and Mr. Salisbury affirmed. Mr. Sott stated that they will need to have a mitigation plan. Mr. Wallace asked if only two places, and Mr. Salisbury stated that they would be boring under wetland, so yes only two places, and he is content with it. Mr. Wallace made a motion to accept with mitigation for trees impacted; Mr. Morris seconded the motion. The motion carried. 2. 201 W. 9th North Street, Unit 312– Removal of one Pine and three Gum trees No representation present. Mr. Salisbury stated the trees are healthy but roots are growing underneath the slab. It looks like Sweet Gum roots but there is no cracking found; no evidence of big Pine tree roots growing toward building. Mr. Wallace questioned feasibility of removing two of the three Gums and leaving one. Mr. Sott stated trees two and three are so close it would be difficult to remove them without damaging the root system of another. Mr. Salisbury stated his preference to save the Pine over the Gum trees. Mr. Wallace made a motion to allow removal of gums and deny the Pine tree; Ms. Campbell seconded the motion. The motion carried. 3. 213 W 2 nd South Street – Removal of one Pine, ten Oak and nine other trees Ms. Shuler introduced and explained the site plan and constraints. Mr. Wallace asked what the material is for the promenade. Jeff Roberts (developer) stated pavers, and Patrick Head (developer) stated all pervious. Mr. Morris asked about another tank. Mr. Roberts stated it is from the 1800s, and most likely leaked as well. Mr. Head stated it would be a slow release from underground storage of stormwater most likely at W. 2 nd South Street. Mr. Morris asked if the area in red had to be removed. Mr. Roberts stated possibly, but they do not know how much until additional testing shows that. Mr. Sott stated the main issue is a mitigation plan for the large Live Oak adjacent to the driveway. Mr. Wallace made a motion to approve the trees requested and to pay particular attention to the Live Oak on adjacent property through the development of a mitigation plan for any impacts. Mr. Morris seconded the motion. The motion carried.  Tree Protection Board Minutes Monday, January 10, 2022 4. 110 Carroll Court – Removal of four Pine trees The homeowner presented; wanting a guest house and looking to redo pool on property in the next few years. He is working with his son-in-law, and this is the best spot. Mr. Wallace stated this is not the same location as considered out at lot and mentioned the discussion about saving the 34" Pine. The owner stated that he does not want to get too close to the 32" PIne, and there are some grading issues. Mr. Sott asked if it could be located on the right side. The owner stated that it is not recommended to put a structure on old pool site. Mr. Wallace would like to see some type of compromise to save the 34" and 32" Pines. Mr. Sott asked about setback requirements of the accessory structure. Ms. Shuler stated ten feet. Mr. Sott agreed with wanting to save the 34” Pine; to push the structure at least ten feet to not impact root system. The owner stated he is fine with that, and thinks it will work. Mr. Wallace made a motion to allow removal of the three central Pine trees and to plan to save the 34” Pine, but if in the future it becomes impossible to return to TPB for additional discussion. Mr. Morris seconded the motion. The motion carried. Miscellaneous Ms. Shuler stated that the TPB is still short one member, so if they know of anyone who would like to serve, ask them to apply. ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:39 a.m. on a motion by Mr. Sott and a second by Mr. Wallace. The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Date: January 31, 2022 Bill Salisbury Arborist/Natural Resource Planner Approved: Kenny Sott, Chair _________________________________________; or, Faye Campbell, Vice Chair _________________________________________  STAFF REPORT Tree Protection Board Meeting February 7, 2022 To: Town of Summerville Tree Protection Board From: Bill Salisbury, Arborist/Natural Resource Planner Date: January 31, 2022 GENERAL INFORMATION Property Applicant: Heather Hansen Owner: Heather Hansen Requested Action: Removal of two Gum and two Oak trees Location: 311 Black Oak Blvd 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: #1 – 25” healthy Oak tree is 10’ from house #2 – 16” healthy Oak #3 – 18” healthy Gum #4 – 10 ½” Gum is in poor condition  STAFF REPORT Tree Protection Board Meeting February 7, 2022 To: Town of Summerville Tree Protection Board From: Bill Salisbury, Arborist/Natural Resource Planner Date: January 31, 2022 GENERAL INFORMATION Property Applicant: Broadstep Academy of SC Owner: Shawn Newsome Requested Action: Removal of one Live Oak Location: 201 E Luke Avenue 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: Live Oak tree is damaging the sewer line  STAFF REPORT Tree Protection Board Meeting February 7, 2022 To: Town of Summerville Tree Protection Board From: Bill Salisbury, Arborist/Natural Resource Planner Date: January 31, 2022 GENERAL INFORMATION Property Applicant: David Alexander Owner: David Alexander Requested Action: Removal of one Pine tree Location: 104 Upcerne Road 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 22” Pine tree is healthy, located 5’ from house