Tree Advisory Commission Meeting

City of Urbana, Illinois Minutes of the Urbana Tree Commission Meeting Public Works Engineering Conference Room 706 S. Glover Ave. Urbana, IL 61802 Wednesday, September 3, 2014 1:30 p.m. Members Present: Barbara Anderson, Stewart Berlocher, Thom Fehrmann, Derek Liebert, Michael Stevenson Members Absent: Carol Augspurger, Jeff Dawson, Darin Eastburn Staff Present: Michael Brunk, City of Urbana Arborist Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 1:45 p.m. Approval of Meeting Minutes The minutes from March 5, 2014 were presented for approval. Stevenson moved to approve the minutes, Anderson seconded, and the minutes were approved. Public Input There was no public input. Former Business a. 312 S. Coler Hackberry Update Brunk announced that plans for any of the memorial ideas presented at the March meeting were on hold, as the city council did not approve the allocation of funds for the project due to the need to fund the Windsor Road reconstruction. Brunk said he had applied for a $5,000 grant to help fund the memorial, and that if the grant was awarded there would likely be a special meeting called to revisit the issue. New Business a. 301 Griggs Bur Oak Legacy Tree Nomination The Commission reviewed a legacy tree nomination for a private Bur Oak at 301 Griggs (see attached). Discussion ensued regarding the qualifications that the tree met, specifically the age of the tree and its probable connection to the Big Grove. After discussion, Stevenson moved to recommend approval of the tree to City council based on its historical value. Berlocher seconded, and the motion was approved. b. Summer Storm Damage Brunk presented photographs of several downed trees and limbs which fell during summer storms. Stevenson commented that reducing the City’s pruning cycle could help prevent some of this damage, since it would proactively remove damaged limbs before they fell. c. Climate Action Plan Commission members reviewed Goal 4, Action 2 and Action 4 of the Urbana Climate Action Plan draft at the request of Scott Tess, the City’s Environmental Manager. Goal 2 addresses the City’s pruning cycle, and recommends reducing it to more closely align with the industry standard of five years. Goal 4 addresses tree diversity, and recommends reducing tree species, genus, and family preponderance to 5%, 10%, and 30% respectively. Discussion ensued regarding the feasibility of these goals. Brunk confirmed that the City the tree population in the City is already relatively diverse, with no single species occurring at more than 6% and no single genus occurring at more than 20%. After discussion, Fehrmann moved to make an official recommendation of 5%, 15%, and 30%. Berlocher seconded, and the motion was approved. Commission members also discussed reduction of the City’s pruning cycle. Brunk noted that reducing the cycle to seven years would require the City to employ four full time arbor technicians as opposed to the current two. Fehrmann moved to support Goal 4, Action 2 as written. Stevenson seconded, and the motion was approved. d. Tree Commission Bylaws Fletcher-Washington said she would draft new bylaws for the Commission to review at the next meeting. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:29 p.m. Femi Fletcher, Recording Secretary Tree Commission  1~ ' ~- Urbana LEGACY TREE ASSESSMENT FORM ~yTr Evaluator: M YJ r' o" ~ Date: ~ VCl..._...f. I~ ?~ l'f Nominator: ·11.r. ,..o .f..\..,, l!J Po /Mw ,.,,..... Phone: ~~ 1421 Tree Species: ff!u ~ I'-.~ • ~ ~ 111A< Tb c"' ,.,,,,,,,._ DBH: ~fa.. s ., ( · Owner: 0,.. rl"> "'-L -: rJ p'..J ,,,,,. ,... ~ Height: P,c.j. 5 ' g~ ro-o.. N /~ ~S ~"- N/'iH Address : -:i._,.._ \ \, ....._, /..,r',ORs Crown Spread: 12-. ~ I!~ /,.,C\r ~ .J., ~' -u,," ~.Jot>~ Owner Phone: ~(.I 1421 -- Distance From Property Line: ?J!~ ""~;•...1.. c.1 I."' .,..·,~t A.~ v "',r_ Neighborhood: /~ .. , ~ ..._ I 0... .... •• -·~< n,,.,,J ~. ,.,,... . Yard Location: .,:-,.. .... ,..~ ' -...J ' - LOCALE ASSESSMENT Is the tree is visible from the ROW? ye<;, Is there a conflict with an overhead utility? ,...;o Distance from overhead Utility: - Is the tree o ~or City owned property? '5J_ S!.J. -tr~\'.:. C-au... tt:. .-,,_ru+ li ,...L Is the tree listed as a 'Notable' tree in the inventory? yt:.. S HEALTH AND CONDITION ASSESSMENT (score is fair or better) Rating - poor, fair, good; excellent (poor - excellent) Comments Crown and structural condition : "5" Vorv ~ vi':t"V Aif1 -c ~/+J.rv Scaffold branches: ~ w .. I/ ('...,.,,ll ~--6..,"\ \~~ °'~"'"' ........ t-s Annual shoot growth: :1, r.,,·, ./- 2 ,,. 1........ r r. ,... ,,.s '-/"'; S"' ,, >' -i .. l5 Foliage: I'~ ~11 \\a-+ Trunk condition : 4 ..,_,,...,u ..;,, ·...,J..-4- \U- ~·, , " \ w,..,..,R }-11}1', J..a-1.~ ~~ \.) I Competition: '/ Root flare/distribution: i.J fl.._,.( Pruning history: /',., du.llJ ow ...... ~.l. •..-bl..... ............ 1..... ~,,,,,.j)_ la .::.'4iOVdnC.C.. 4 - " - v Overall condition ~}/~ -:. 4.J"2? (...,~~ LEGACY STANDARDS ASSESSMENT Indicate yes or no Comments 1' Size >=top 1% of inventoried trees of its species 7 z::J '~ ...us 't1l.. • .,- .dhh - Rarity>= top 1% of all inventoried trees in Urbana 1 . 1?J~.. I -P,,,,,.. ~k... ~ t.1~4/,.., l ..J.: n<,, Documented association with historic or notable event Jl" Age >= 100 years or 75 years if next to HL home ve~ e_s..(, A- 1 u +o b.,,_ 6'4..W- M21 vrs "'IA 12.. C> ,..., , . , _ +- .., r . . . to""'6. }( Has special ecological value I- ,J., S. p.,·,~ x W ell known focal point or landmark ...Jes - Unusual I appealing visual characteristic and/or form I Illinois I Natl. Big Tree Register Other RISK ASSESSMENT** Likelihood Risk Consequences .!! ~ ;;! Failure Impact I Failure and Impact Rating Condition~ Tree Part Condition' ~ lmprobabh Possible Probable lmminen Very low low Medium High Unlikely Somewhat likely Very negligibl• Mino significant severe =.!! ee Target protedion like I of concerr ~ CV~ ~~ , hli*.~ ;t,W- ).,o,,">A.. . l?ra .... 1... Jd',fo,.. (r,'• Jt.;, , •• fl'),, ,, 1b'' 1S"' >~' ) i -? 1'.Jt.~.L ~ }.,. ........ ,.... ~ x x )r x Ix .x x x x x ~ L&.... 1 t>wr '•,,. ,, JU:' 1t;' y htc.-..~ k '-I. y x y _ov.~ ABATEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: 1''6n.e__ RECOMMENDED FOR LEGACY TREE STATUS: Yes )Jr No Circle te category: l ~acy Size Tree.) l~acy Age Trey Legacy Aesthetics Tree Legacy Rare Tree Legacy C:cology Tree Big Tree Reg ister ~gacy Histor~ ~ 1 Cl\ J I'... r.cv... --r ...... Legacy Location COMMENTS: \.Cil t\ 5 \N1ti...:."" f> j 6l"tt:>ll'- ~~~-e.o ~ 'c, ·"W\ b.&t 11~ "" 1~ 6tN.A....... If"~ Y" ~ h.--t-: • Health and Condition Assessment: Has to be in fair or better condition to be considered. 1= critical ; 2= poor; 3= fair; 4= good ; 5= very good ; 6= Excellent ••Risk Assessment: Has to be a moderate risk rating or less to be considered . \_/\~4- S/,~ :2r-1d Trees with a high risk can be resubmitted and revaluated at a later date once hazard has been corrected . Risk assessment will be completed by in-house Certified Arborists prior to Tree Commission Evaluation. T Client M \ 6Y' •:ij "i:> .ISA Basic Tree Risk Assessment :?e Form L...fjac'1 --r f'-e/l....., Date 4 If> 4 l'i Time l \ ~h"\ Address/Tree location '.?O I e:z,.: •jJ ~ ~e no. Sheet of Tree species l?u c 0 0 ¥- dbh :le Height 8cf Crown spread dia. IZ...... Assessor(s) M . 6 r unt=- Time frame 2.... kt"".S Tools used r, ('.'.'.'... n.D ry.,k...._ Target Assessment Target zone Occupancy rate 1-rare Target description 2 - occasional 3-frequent 4-constant 1 2 0 3 () 4 0 Site Factors Historyoffailures L'•ohl.._:· ~ 'Sl.,.,f.<.-.. \; -li k -4-o no c:.- (fec..\: TopographyFlat}li( slopeO _ _ _%Aspect _ _ Site changes NonelJ Grade chan~ D Site clearingD Changed soil hydrologyD Root cutsD Describe _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Soil conditions Limited volume D Saturated D Shallow 0 Compacted D Pavement over roots~~% Describe ho o~, ~ xcf. !.>l ts~ Prevailing wind direction ~ Common weather Strong wind* lceO SnowO Heavy rainO Describe .t;)"'f »l f h e1'¥J' Z y r UJ,.,,J_ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low D Normal fl( High D Foliage None (seasonal) D None (dead) D Normal ~ % Chlorotic _ _ % Necrotic _ _ % Pests _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Abiotic _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~-~-----,---_,..............~ Speciesfailureprofile BranchesD TrunkO RootsO Describe Nd ?oivt1"'\.t>""' ,...., f, v,,- c~ S ((t,.u,,,J.1"1 d n !!6f: t:;".( j Load Factors I Wind exposure Protected 0 Partial JE Full 0 Wind funneling 0 Relative crown size Small 0 Medium 0 Large Cf' Crown density SparseO Normal ~ DenseD Interior branches FewO Normal ~DenseO Vines/Mistletoe/Moss D - - - - - - - - Recent or planned change in load factors -.ct,~::::..L------------------------------- Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure - Crown and Branches - Unbalanced crown D } cR 1i:i._% Lightning damage D CracksD - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dead twigs/branches D ~%overall Max. dia. _J11_ CodominantD - - - - - - - - - - - - - Included bark 0 Broken/Hangers Number 0 Max. dia. Weak attachments 0 Cavity/Nest hole __% circ. Over-extended branches D Previous branch failures 0 _ _ _ _ __ Similar branches present 0 Pruning history crown cleaned .k( Thinned 0 Raised Dead/Missing bark 0 Cankers/Galls/Burls 0 Sapwood damage/decay 0 0 Reduced 0 Topped 0 Lion-tailed 0 Conks D Heartwood decay 0 - - - - - - - - - Flush cuts 0 Other t:<»h < lt111,...aa c.e... Response growth - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mar0c~(sk c;)J:' :s 0o[:r!;t;~ ~c::JB~r);r::Jesvn ye>\i: C6A MM o,,~ Load on defect N/A 0 Minor ~ Moderate D Significant 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Likelihood offailure Improbable 0 Possiblej\r Probable D Imminent 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Trunk- - Roots and Root Collar - Dead/Missing bark D Abnormal bark texture/color 0 Collar buried/Not visible D Depth_ __ Stem girdling D Codominant stems D Included bark 0 Cracks D Dead 0 Decay 0 Conks/Mushrooms D Sapwood damage/decay 0 Cankers/Galls/Burls 0 Sap ooze D Ooze D Cavity D _ _% circ. Lightning damage,a-teartwood decayD Conks/Mushrooms D Cracks 0 Cut/Damaged roots 0 Distance from trunk _ __ Cavity/Nest hole _ _ % circ. Depth _ __ PoortaperO Root plate lifting D Soil weakness D Lean _ _° Corrected? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Response growth=~ ,i .s eo....-U Jx. S:n,.., rL)J.J"j Response growth - . . . , . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Main concern(s) ~ ~ v- r"""f'J ~~ wo;{l. 6"" ...._.l....t>'"".-vl- Main concern(s) _ l\. ~'------------ ir., ...1= .,,,J..... t6~). (, ,...b N s~J..;.._ load on defect N/A D Minor)¥!' Moderate 0 Significant D Load on defect NIA) { Minor 0 Moderate 0 Significant 0 Likelihood of failure Likelihood o 'lure Improbable PossibleD ProbableD lmminentD Improbable Possible 0 Probable D lmminentD Page I of 2  . Risk Categorization ... QI .a E GI .D . Failure Likelihood Impact Failure & Impact Consequences .... .... GI .. ::i (from Matrix 1) c u E Risk c GI c IV ... :::s c :i5 .. .. .. ~ .. c rating t: .., t e 1: 0 Ji .. .. :i?' :ii N ·::; ~ E ~ &. :i5 ~ '6 v c 0 Tree part Conditions of concern 'iii t: IV Cl. :a ;f ~ GI e.o Target protection .D ~ e Q. :i5 0 0.. :i5 .D c .§ _g ~ ~ !i: .... 0 .. :0. ::i :ii: c .&. ~ :::i z .. !i: E 0 "' J!:' ~ :::i ~ 'iO ~ c ~ !E c "' l !JP f of part (from Matrix2) 5!Jr15 c7)!,. \,J.<m. ·l 1o" \S 1 i X' }( L6w 1\Jo"~ IX )( 1 ~;:;Jr un~ bf6nc-h -to r. ""\, ~ -s",k~)t. ~.J.L ~/')\..(...a.c:::> tc> I~ 2. )( x ~ ')( Low 2 l:?ra-t't-h- ""\::70'\U- ~ o~"' .s}- .· c.urb - bl'a,0, h, lo~ l (p'' 1~-1.o 3 ,X xx ~ Low 3 tr~n<h c:5~hC..l~ ~· - • lo ~Jt<:h Ci .1 \)re. l(p"" 1<·.JJ" t.l I}( IX x I(' I ... ·.! 4 kJra.n::t, o~ Y16.>>- harlh~~~ I~ I• \ "" ' l> "'-' Matrix I. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood Ukeljhood of !mpactlng Target of FailureVery low Low· Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Very likely ~ Probable uiinkety Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely - - __ _.._ ___...._~--I-- Possible UnliKely Unlikely Unlikely • somewhat likely Improbable Unlikely , Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely T ··-- - -- -r----- ·-+·--r Matrixl. Risk rating matrix. Ukelihoodof _ •• Consequences of Failure t- -,- -- ; Failure & Impact Negligible Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low . Moderate High ' · Extreme Ukely '~ Low Moderate High' High North Somewhat likely Low Low Moilerate Moderate ( Unlikely Low Low Low Low \ ) ,/ -- Residual risk _ _ __ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R e s i d u a l risk _ _ __ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R e s i d u a l risk _ _ __ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R e s i d u a l risk _ _ __ Overall tree risk rating ~ Moderate D High D Extreme D Work priority 1D 2D 3D 4D Overall residual risk Low D Moderate D High D Extreme D Recommended inspection interval ---"~ '""'-...:iy~r ____ Data ,P{Final D Preliminary Advanced assessment needed}1No DYes-Type/Reason - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Inspection limitations DNone DVisibility iJ'Access OVines DRootcollarburied Describe (?-ro~J \,...5r4:0..., o..., ly This datasbeet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and is intended for use by Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (TRAQ) arborists - 2013 Page 2 of 2  ·. Ii City of Urbana Public Works Department t l l i I Legacy Tree Owner Consent Form I Name of Property Owner .Jh, roM 1 Nt; ll t'l1a. rt Y'\ Date I Address 3 0 I w. G-r ~ ~ ef< ~ stl 4..rb4 oo~hone ..; ¥.Y- /,Y~7 I l5il"I have read and understand the benefits available to owners of designated Legacy II Trees and the process for designating a nominated tree. Ml have read and understand the terms for de-listing a designated tree. Il .Ji(! have read and understand the recommended practices to ensure the long-term health of a Legacy Tree and that following these practices may cause some j detriments to the future use of my property. I ! II la' I hereby consent to allow the City Arborist and the Urbana Tree Commission to assess and potentially designate the nominated tree(s) on my property. ll j D I do not consent to allow the City Arborist and the Urbana Tree Commission to assess and potentially designate the nominated tree(s) on my property. l1 f2t' I hereby consent to allow the City Arborist and the Urbana Tree Commission to install a Legacy Tree ] plaque on my property. l l 0 I do not consent to allow the City Arborist and the Urbana Tree Commission to install a Legacy Tree I l plaque on my property. I I Nameof PropertyOwner(lO ~~ Signature of Property Owner(jll I Please attach any Interesting facts or stories about your nominated tree(s). City Arborist use only Signature of City Arboris..__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D a t e - - - - - - - - Comments.~--------------------------------~ Please return completed form to the Urbana City Arborlst at Urbana Public Works, 706 S. Glover Ave, Urbana IL 61802 www.urbanaillinois.us/legacytree  City of Urbana Public Works Department Legacy Tree Nomination Form Any Urbana resident may nominate a tree. Nominated trees will be evaluated by the Urbana City Arborist and approved by the Urbana Tree Commission pending property owner consent. Tree Information *denotes required field. Please print legibly. TreeSpecies/CommonName Que c6us macro earfq Lt3u....rr Oct. I< *Addresswheretreeislocated 30 I W. Grt.·Jl 6 5f1 *Property owner Name ~~rofh.y /\/cu ma.v1 q I *Property owner Address Jo; vV • Gr l (t-£ :"") S+ Is the tree located on public or private property? ~Public 0 Private Is the tree readily visible from the street or sidewalk? ~Yes D No Is the tree within 15 feet of overhead utilities? i;ves D No Why should this tree be designated as a Legacy Tree? ar'Size D Rarity ..a(Age D Historic/Notable Event D Ecological Value D Location D Aesthetics D IL/US Big Tree Register Indicate trunk diameter at breast height (4.5 ft ff6m ground). Use the sketch as a guide. I I Image source: University of Minnesota Extension J3 : I o /, S /t' ,._a-1.---•-holtMIDIHl Nominator Information ! Nominator's Name J'};roft-'/ ;Ve,u.Wl Q..YLYl Phone S "7'¥- /-Y'e?Z f I Nominator's Address JC> I W. ~.. 'f<if S $_f- . How did you learn about the Legacy Tree Program? _ ... a.___.C-=r_.1:..=e~cd-=------------- Please explain your choice and share any information or stories about the tree(s) you're nominating. Feel free to submi ttachments. ~