ST0701-CS081009
Page 1 of 2
Rhonda Adloo - Re: trees
From:Ken Griffin
To:Jim Witt
Date:10/9/2008 9:01 AM
Subject:Re: trees
CC:Clay Phillips; Keith Marvin; Rhonda Adloo
Interesting email. My staff spent time with Mr. Moore on Tuesday and then I spent about 15 minutes
with him discussing the trees. Before I go into what he was told, there is a mistake in is email - The
new road is 44 feet wide, not 24 feet. About 25 - 30 feet of the width will occur to the south side
(toward the trees) of the existing road. Also, where Mr. Moore references the "southern easement" he
actually means the southern back of curb.
During his conversations with the City he was told:
1) The revised plans just came in and they now show removal of all 7 trees on the south side. Staff has
not had time to review the plans, so we can not tell if all the trees will eventually come out. Two of the
trees are under the road and one is right on the curb line. Those three have always been showed to be
removed. The other four range from 5 to 15 feet behind the curb (not 20 feet), however, there is also 2
to 5 feet of fill going around them. The fill is required to obtain proper drainage back to the creek.
2) Mr. Moore specifically asked me who makes the decision to remove the trees and I told him "that
would be me". So, I not sure why he cannot find the "source for the decision to remove the trees".
When the final plans are approved, as always, ever effort will be made to save the 2 (and possibility
3) eastern most trees. During plan review, two options will be explored: 1) Instead of creating a flat
area for future sidewalks on the south side, we may begin our sloping toward the creek at the back of
curb. This could eliminate 1-2 feet of fill. 2) We will explore the option of constructing a tree well
around 2-3 trees.
It seems that the email to ask for political intervention on the design of the road is premature.
However, we always welcome input from the citizens on street designs.
ken g
>>> "kmoore" <kent.moore3@verizon.net> 10/8/2008 3:37 PM >>>
Jim:
The southwestern road blueprint shows that all fo the pecan trees are marked for removal.
The new road is 24'; the existing road is 22'. The new road will have a sidewalk on the borth side, so add 6 feet.
The easement to the south is quite large. It encompasses the area where the trees are.
The curious point is that I cannot find the soruce for this decision to remove the trees. Maybe it was the land
owner, but since it is in the easement, it seems that decision would have come from the City. I have written the
mayor asking for a reconsideration.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\radloo\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\48EDC853City_...8/26/2009
Page 2 of 2
The elevation changes are not significant, so I am having a hard time figuring out why someone would
recommend felling the trees.
Look, we shouldn't be cutting down trees out of convenience. If there is a need, that is another matter, but those
trees are a good 20' from the southeren easement. It appears we are going to soften the curve, and that will
mean removing the two trees to the west -- btu as for the other four trees, they are far from the roadway, or
could be if someone was motivated to keep the trees.
As I wrote to Doug, those trees are a unique and rare feature of the community. Forty year old trees are hard to
replace. Those are producing trees too. The pecans are delicious. People ahve been stopping by the roadside
for years to pcik those pecans. The entrance to any future development will likely be 100' or more from the
bridge, so those trees would make a nice natural landscaping buffer.
Is there any room for reconsideration on this Jim?
Kent
file://C:\Documents and Settings\radloo\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\48EDC853City_...8/26/2009