PICKERINGTON TREE COMMISSION
CITY HALL, 100
LOCKVILLE ROAD
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST
29, 2007
TREE COMMISSION
WORK SESSION
6:00 P.M.
The following Tree Commission members were present: Mr. Goodrich, Mr. Malone, Mr. McKinley. Ms. Shelts arrived later. Others present were: Diana Fuller and one resident.
Mr. Goodrich stated the first sentence should be changed to read - is taking a planned approach to the impending arrival of the Emerald Ash Borer instead of taking a proactive approach to the impending arrival of this pest. The third sentence should be changed to read – With the city being responsible for over 1,200 Ash trees, the detrimental effects of not being prepared would cause to home values, public safety and quality of life cannot be ignored. The 4th sentence should be changed to read – This plan would address the city’s preparation and response to the Emerald Ash Borer on three fronts: public streets, parks and green spaces, and private property.
3. APPROACH OR SCOPE.
Mr. Goodrich stated that the approach would need to include the use of the database to help us with this process. Mr. McKinley stated the sentence about the database would fit with minor tweaking as the second sentence. Mr. Malone stated that when it was talked about as “Scope” as a separate item we decided to innumerate both things that might already be done as well as what we are planning to do. Mr. Malone stated that first would be to ID, count and locate where all the Ash trees are and then to develop a tracking database so that as we go through and replace and update we can keep track of where we are working. We would also monitor the progress periodically using this information we have developed from the database. Mr. Malone stated the description needs a little more than a sentence when you’re talking about what the “Scope” might be.
Mr. Malone stated that one point that Carol brought up that might be a good addition to the public streets was to try to target removal of trees around the perimeter of the city and the firebreak approach. Mr. Malone stated she felt we should look at that area first as opposed to other areas. Mr. Malone stated it may or may not work but it is worth a try if we are going to prioritize. Mr. Malone stated instead of making it a separate item it was talked about adding it to the sentence about consideration will be given . . . Mr. Malone stated at the same time that we will want to prioritize the outer perimeter of the city in order to try to establish this ash free zone, then within subdivisions, within streets and so forth. Mr. McKinley stated that the only thing with that is what happens if the infestation starts just down the street because then it’s already within the city limits. Mr. Malone stated that’s why we would put it down as one of the priorities now while we don’t have as strict of an issue. Mr. Malone stated that once it is within the city then we will have to go after 1 and 2 in particular and then prioritize the rest of them in the area as well. Mr. Goodrich stated that also it was a better way of being more proactive because there were fewer trees in the outer perimeter.
Mr. Goodrich asked if we should move the sentence “Ash trees will be replaced with a variety of different species to help avoid future infestation as it is currently done” to either the Scope or Purpose section.
5. PARK TREES
Leave as is.
6. PRIVATE PROPERTY.
Mr. Malone stated that the first sentence should be clarified to state that if the tree is a hazard to the city we could require them to take it out. Ms. Shelts stated that the first sentence should read - remove or retain healthy ash trees, rather than just ash trees. Ms. Shelts stated that the 3rd sentence should be changed because it sounds like the city will help them remove the trees. Mr. McKenzie stated we would rewrite it to say . . . We strongly encourage residents who are removing ash trees from their private property to contact a licensed and bonded contractor service. Mr. Malone stated the beginning of that sentence should say . . . For safety and liability reasons – we strongly encourage.
7. WOOD DISPOSAL
Mr. Malone stated the other item suggested was to list citation of where the information could be obtained. Mr. McKinley stated we could put – if you need additional information or further contacts see the following resources. Mr. Malone stated we should still put - see below - because we are talking about specific guidelines and should try to direct people to the right resources.
8. POSTPONED WORK
It was agreed to add the word resources and to leave the rest of the paragraph as is.
9. BUDGETING
It was agreed to remove the whole paragraph dealing with budgeting. The resident asked whether the Urban Forestry budget was inaccessible for this project. Mr. Malone stated the way the Urban Forestry budget is structured is from monies collected from the developers and given to the city to allow us to put the trees in as the work is done in each subdivision. The resident stated the funds would come from the General Fund. Mr. Malone stated that is correct. The rewrite from the proactive approach pretty much reflects the lack of resources. Mr. Malone stated there is also a sense that a lot of communities have come down on one side or the other. Either they believe it’s better to get rid of healthy and diseased ash trees and not take a chance on having the problem in the community or they would rather leave everything alone because in the future something may be developed to protect the trees rather than cut them down.
10. ADJOURNMENT.
Their being nothing further, the Tree Commission work session closed at 7:10 PM.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________________
Diana Fuller, Administrative Assistant
____________________________________
Edward Drobina, Service Manager