Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-05-09-TREE-min Lexington Tree Commi?ee Minutes 5.9.24 1. The mee?ng was called to order at 7:32 AM by co-chair Mark Connor. Present were members Mark, Pat Moyer (co-chair), Jim Wood, Nancy Sofen, Barbara Tarrh, Gerry Paul, and Gavin Grant. Also present were Dave Pinsonneault (head of DPW), Charlie Wyman, Joe Pato (select board representa?ve), Charles Hornig, Alicia Morris, Rachel Noack Summers. (see below). 2. Rachel and Alicia applied to be associate members, and were recently approved by the Select Board. We welcomed them and reviewed the membership status. 3. Items reviewed with Dave Pinsonneault: a. 2 trees were planted 4/26 at an Arbor Day celebra?on b. Of the 500 trees ordered from the Mass. Tree Warden Assn, not all arrived, and not all species requested arrived either. Barbara has picked up 150 for use by the TC for Discovery Day and the Harrington gradua?on. (These are oaks and hornbeams). c. 75 trees requested by residents were planted in residen?al setbacks in the last 6 weeks (this is the Town’s spring plan?ng). Dave reported that ci?zen reac?ons were posi?ve and that Forestry staff enjoyed doing this work. Julie in the DPW office kept many strings running smoothly. Staff is inpu?ng those trees into the town inventory. d. Dave will get the April hazard trees removed report to Pat soon. e. Dave noted Forestry is down 2 ac?ve staff (out of 5). Difficulty recrui?ng. f. UVM will present us with possible replies to the canopy study requests a?er 7/1. g. Watering bags were purchased (75) and will be given out to the residents who got the setback trees with instruc?ons for use. There are a few le? which may be put on town trees and monitored by staff. h. Dave referred us to Shawn Newell or Mike Cronin or the Diamond Principal re: progress on spacing the London Plane Trees. It is out of his hands. i. We discussed the issue raised by an insurance company requiring a town resident to remove several trees including one or two that were town trees (see a?ached). Dave pledged to put her name high on the list for fall tree plan?ng. All present (Dave, Joe P., and the commi?ee) expressed a sense of urgency to find out more about this issue and what the rights of the Town and the individual homeowner are. j. We reviewed the town’s various discussions on the two trees for Emery Park. The Town is back to wan?ng 2 trees planted. Dave said this will probably happen in the fall, given current ?ming, and that the DPW s?ll favors the Kentucky Coffee Tree. k. Re informa?on on how the Tree Fund is spent, Dave has sent me an outline of funds in/out over last few years, and wants to know what else we want. 4. Gerry Paul confirmed that basic Tree Fund accoun?ng is and has been available in the town budge?ng literature. Pat will discuss with Gerry. 5. Nancy will informally follow up on the insurance company situa?on and may consult informally with other commi?ee members. 6. The commi?ee con?nues to be unhappy with the selec?on of the Kentucky Coffee tree for Emery Park. Pat will invite Dave, Chris, Ma? Fo? to the commi?ee’s Tuesday 1 pm mee?ng where regula?ons are being wri?en; the group will focus on alterna?ve NE na?ve trees suitable for the area. The commi?ee would like those trees in the ground this spring if suitable species available. 7. Jim was roasted for his successful partnership with Chris and Dave around ge?ng 75 trees in the ground for residents this spring! Kudos also to Julie, who coordinated communica?ons. 8. Gavin brought us up to date on the Harrington tree giveaway. The superintendent and the principal Ms. Daley have ok’d the project. Metco students, if they do not have access to land on which tree can be planted will be offered a site on the school grounds. We favored giving these trees to graduates at gradua?on in mid-late June. An issue is number of trees and species (see item 3b above). More trees have been ordered and hopefully will be available by the gradua?on ?me. Chris has ordered 150 ¾” x 3 inch tags for species ID, and Julie has prepared instruc?ons. We need to discuss again in June. 9. Nancy presented the updated large shade tree list. Commi?ee approved, wondered if silver maple should be added. The Tuesday group will consider. 10. Barbara brought us up to speed on prepara?ons for Discovery Day, Saturday, May 25. She has reserved us a space. Pat will bring tent and table and a couple of chairs. Hours are 10-3. Pat will arrive at 9 and due to not totally func?onal arm will need help se?ng up tent. Pat will pick up some informa?onal literature from Nancy before the day. Barbara will coordinate staffing. Ideas for ac?vi?es: leaf rubbings; interac?ng with residents about their tree concerns, publicizing tree giveaway, finding out residents’ concerns about street in their neighborhoods; have a couple of demos about tree ages (circular slices). 11. Planning early (now) for fall plan?ng. Dave wants some street trees and we agree. Good to have balance of large and small. We need some large trees. We discussed hell strip issues. Nancy shared info from a recent Peter del Tredici session. An idea emerged: how about picking one area of town, and having 1-2 members drive around with Dave during the summer and demarcate say 40 suitable areas. Do we want to do this? Shall we broach it? We concluded business at 9:40 AM. ADDENDUM: Note sent to Dave about the incursion of insurance company demands to homeowners re trees: At the Arbor Day celebra?on Barbara and Nancy were told of an elderly woman who was pressured to cut down several trees, on short no?ce, under threat of not having her homeowner's insurance renewed. They spoke with her later that day at her home at 58 Paul Revere Road. She was very upset, as she had maintained those trees well for decades, and didn't want to cut them down. Nancy and Barbara later consulted the inventory and found that two of the removed trees were town trees. The resident may not know this . Discussion of this topic is on Thursday's Tree Commi?ee agenda for a few reasons. First, we want to ensure that this resident is on the list for new street and/or setback trees for the fall plan?ng. Second, this is not the first ?me that we've heard of people in town being told by their insurer that they must remove trees that they didn't want to remove and that may not have posed a threat to their property. We'd like to understand why this is happening, what op?ons residents might have if approached by their insurance company in this way, and what the process would (should?) be when town trees are involved. We don’t know if the Town has op?ons or policies that we should know about, either. We suspect some residents, such as the one just men?oned, may really not know which of “their” trees belong to the Town, and what they can or should do about it—especially under this kind of threat. We’re wondering if this is a new insurance company threat, what you/Dave/arborists in the area and across the Commonwealth have been made aware of, and what recourse towns may have. Respec?ully submi?ed, Pat Moyer