Laserfiche WebLink
resident about removal of a tree lawn tree. She expressed the administration's concern about the <br /> logistics involved in meeting these requirements and possible delays to tree work if the notices <br /> are mistakenly not sent. She asked for ways to incorporate more flexibility. She remarked that <br /> both versions prioritize improved communications with the public and expressed support for an <br /> annual report to be presented to the Tree Board. <br /> Director Ducu stated that residents are notified 30 days in advance of hazardous tree removals <br /> and that trees are removed in accordance with the professional assessments of City arborists. He <br /> also added that the deficiencies in Lakewood's tree canopy is related to the private property side, <br /> rather than public property. He affirmed the department's commitment to preserving and <br /> growing the tree canopy. <br /> It was clarified that hazardous trees scheduled for removal would have a notice posted near the <br /> tree. <br /> Councilmember Rader asked Councilmember Kepple if she would yield to suggestions by the <br /> Law Department to incorporate greater flexibility regarding the 30 day notice. Councilmember <br /> Kepple hesitated to embrace such a change and stated that it seems to convey that public notice <br /> is optional. <br /> As related to 565.06 Care of Trees During Building Operations, Councilmember Rader asked <br /> how the requirements of this section compare to the City's existing practices. <br /> Ms. Swallow replied that Planning Commission and ABR frequently look at landscape plans and <br /> makes recommendations. She expressed some concern about holding up development by waiting <br /> for tree issues to be heard by the Tree Board. This section only applies to City trees impacted by <br /> private development, which is not a common occurrence. <br /> The Committee asked the administration to discuss the interface between the Public Works and <br /> Planning Departments regarding trees, especially in the commercial corridor. Director Ducu <br /> stated that both departments interact and communicate on this topic. <br /> Councilmember Bullock expressed concern that the ordinance does not invite more input from <br /> residents. Director Ducu responded that ultimately the removal of a tree is decided by arborists <br /> based on professional standards. He spoke of the property damage and outages caused in Storm <br /> Sandy as a result of failure to make such decisions. <br /> David Sangree spoke a member of the former Tree Task Force. He expressed concern that the <br /> City may rush too quickly to remove trees. He expressed support for the original version of the <br /> ordinance, which he viewed as more robust in its protection of trees. <br /> Mayor George replied to Mr. Sangree, stating that she had the same concern as well. To be sure <br /> that the City was making the right calls on trees she had ODNR come out and re-examine some <br /> decisions made by our City arborists. Ultimately, ODNR professionals agreed with the City <br /> arborists. She learned from this process that even if the stump of a tree looks healthy that it does <br /> not tell the entire story. She feels confident that the City's certified arborists will only <br /> recommend removal of trees for good cause. <br /> 3 <br />