City Council Meeting - Monday, September 27, 2010

CITY OF TAKOMA PARK, MARYLAND
PUBLIC HEARING, REGULAR MEETING AND WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

Monday, September 27, 2010

(Minutes adopted January 3, 2011)

PRESENT:
Mayor Williams Council Member Wright Council Member Clay Council Member Robinson Council Member Seamens Council Member Schultz		City Manager Matthews City Clerk Carpenter Deputy City Manager Ludlow Public Works Director Braithwaite City Arborist Bolton HCD Director Daines Police Chief Ricucci

Council Member Snipper

The City Council convened at 7:30 p.m. in the Auditorium of the Takoma Park Community Center -- Sam Abbott Citizens' Center, 7500 Maple Avenue, Takoma Park, Maryland.

Ms. Clay noted that she attended a dinner at Roscoe’s with the Mayor, County Councilmember Leventhal, and others, to discuss what is happening in Haiti.

Mr. Williams congratulated the Takoma Park Play Committee for the Play Day event at Takoma Park Middle School. He noted the City’s opportunity to participate in the Let’s Move Cities and Towns program, which would require a number of actions to be taken over the next year.

Mr. Williams invited residents and other City Councilmembers to attend a session on October 6 in Prince George’s County to comment on the draft watershed implementation plans to clean up the Chesapeake Bay.

Mr. Wright thanked Franca Brilliant for her work on the Small Community Grant Committee (noting that her reappointment was on the consent agenda).

Mr. Wright commented on discussions in North Takoma related to permitting for use of parks and whether the City Manager shall or will issue permits. He encouraged all to think pragmatically about the question of when park permits should be required. Reservations for use of a park should require a permit, but it is not practical to require a permit for everything that happens in a park. He encouraged residents to call the Police Department about issues that arise in Belle Ziegler Park. He noted that if you look at Montgomery County response time versus the City’s response time, the City Police response time is quite good.

Mr. Wright said he continues to be interested in talking about trees on Maple Avenue. He noted that the neighborhood had met with the City Arborist about the issue of replacing the trees because of the utility lines above them but nothing has happened. He said we are losing precious time by not planting now.

Mr. Schultz reminded constituents in Ward 6 that he would be attending a meeting with the new owners in the Takoma Overlook Condominiums on October 7 at 7 p.m.

Pat Loveless, Maple Avenue, reported on peace and justice activities and encouraged people to vote.

Maxine Hillary, homeowner, former renter, commented that she was appalled that a homeowner can be penalized for tree actions. She said that homeowners bear the weight of the intent of the Tree Ordinance and it persecutes homeowners for trying to keep up their property.

Colleen Cordes, New York Avenue, commented on behalf of herself and a number of residents about the sidewalk and driveway apron work being done. She said the trees will be stressed by the sidewalk work, the plan threatens two neighbors’ retaining walls and one neighbor’s water line, and the work being done is wasteful spending because there seems to be no priority in the plan for areas with more urgent needs for traffic calming and sidewalks. In addition, Ms. Cordes said she believed the tree protection plan should have been posted for 15 days and subject to appeal to the Tree Commission.

Mr. Wright commented that this is a complex issue. The City is trying to do something new and provide good handicapped access. He said the City Arborist was engaged in every marking and decision about sidewalks that would be replaced and how the tree roots would be protected.

Mary Pat Waigand, New York Avenue, commented that she did not see any need to change, improve, or alter the sidewalks. She said the big need is for traffic calming. She agreed with Ms. Cordes that someone should take a good look at the situation and see if the money could be better spent elsewhere.

John Rogers, Baltimore Avenue, commented that the trees in North Takoma are facing significant stress and existing trees will be imperiled by the sidewalk work. He said the City should have carried out a tree protection plan process including assessment, posting notice, providing homeowners the opportunity to discuss it, and appeal it if necessary. Additionally, he indicated that the galvanized pipe connections from the homes to WSSC could be damaged in the process. He urged the Council to take another look at the issue.

Karin Anderson, commented on the selection of street trees. She said she was concerned with planting of sweetgums as street trees because they are not recommended for that purpose. The roots disturb the sidewalks and the balls from the trees are hazardous. She cited a Forestry Service report that indicates that they should not be planted as street trees.

Resident of Washington Adventist University commented on her concern over speeding along Carroll and Flower Avenues. She requested speed cameras or other enforcement.

Patty Butler, New York and Baltimore Avenue, echoed comments about the risk to the trees with the sidewalk work being done.

Kay Daniels-Cohen, President of S.S. Carroll, spoke on behalf of the City Emergency Preparedness Committee. She distributed emergency preparedness pamphlets and noted the end of Emergency Preparedness Month. Ms. Daniels-Cohen noted the importance of having a plan, having a kit, and keeping informed.

Catherine Tunis, Larch Avenue, commented to the Tree Ordinance and proposed revisions to be discussed. She noted that she has a Master’s Degree in Forestry. Ms. Tunis commented that the tree replacement plan should not be subject to appeal. The replacement requirement or fee should be commensurate with the loss to the canopy. She said there is no need to establish a 501(c)3 entity since people can already make a voluntary contribution to the City and take a tax deduction. People should be required to bear the cost of ecosystem services lost when a tree is removed. She said that with the benefits trees provide to the community, it will always be better to keep trees rather than remove them to install solar panels. She supported the idea of providing credit for future tree planting and allowing residents to have input on street tree species.

Melanie Fosnaught, Elson Place, noted the Tree Commission’s response to suggested changes to the Tree Ordinance. She commented that the Commission would not be supportive of presuming in favor of solar panels when taking a tree down. She said that the issue could be addressed on a case by case basis, on appeal. Sustainability issues can come into evidence before the Commission. She said the Commission feels that the current law already provides for that consideration.

Carol Hotton, Sheridan Avenue, said the Tree Commission is opposed to modification of the Tree Ordinance to favor removal for installation of solar panels. Ms. Hotton commented that trees provide many positive ecosystem services that solar panels do not. Ms. Hotton supported resident input into tree selection with the City Arborist. She supported disclosure of the Tree Ordinance in real estate contracts. Ms. Hotton did not support removing the full time status of the City Arborist. Ms. Hotton also commented on the sidewalk issue in North Takoma. She said the City is not in violation of the Tree Ordinance as the City Manager has decision authority over all trees in the right-of-way. She said it would be desirable for residents to have more input.

Sat Jiwan Ikle-Khalsa, Conrad Avenue, said he would like to see a compromise that maintains trees and reduces consumption. He suggested that the City champion the idea of a community or co-op solar system. He suggested ensuring that the new roof at Public Works will accept solar and exploration of using new and existing roofs on schools without creating conflict with trees. Mr. Ikle-Khalsa also noted an upcoming tour of solar homes in the region.

Patrick Earle, Grant Avenue, advocated for an appeal process for the tree replacement requirement. He noted that a tree he removed had a 26 inch diameter branch that was extremely hollow. He said by removing the tree he was removing a hazard, but was told that he had to plant 23 trees to replace the tree. He said he feels that has to be some type of maximum tree replacement requirement. He also said the new higher fees for the City Arborist should be eliminated. He said the higher fees will cause residents to avoid seeking the advice of the Arborist. Mr. Earle advocated for there to be room for both solar and trees. He said that in some situations, the benefits of solar will outweigh the cost of the removal of a tree.

Ms. Matthews reported on the Public Works Facility project. She said that the contractor had discovered that there was concrete construction debris in the area where the new driveway is being installed. The removal will cost approximately $11,000. Additionally, some bad soil was found near the Oswego Avenue entrance. Some of the soil will need to be removed and stone put down. Finally, some tiles in the building may contain asbestos. The tiles will be tested.

Ms. Matthews said that as a follow up to the discussion about permitting issues for the parks, she had consulted with the City Attorney. The City Attorney felt that the City Manager was acting in compliance with the City Code in the existing permitting process.

Chief Ricucci provided an update on issues with use of Belle Ziegler Park and on recent crimes in the City.

Mr. Wright asked the City Manager to ensure that the roof at Public Works would be suitable for installing solar panels later on if funding becomes available.

Ms. Daines noted that the public hearing was intended to seek public comment on future use of Community Development Block Grant funds. The focus of the funding is on low and moderate income residents, housing, and a suitable living environment.

Colleen Cordes, New York Avenue, said she wondered if the Council could encourage a focus on countering gang activity through more positive and constructive programs.

Ms. Ludlow provided additional information that she had learned about Class D licenses. She indicated that where permissible, the Board of License Commissioners has directed applicants to a Class A license instead, because there are not many controls on businesses with a Class D license. Class A licenses are not permitted in Takoma Park.

Council discussed this new information.

Mr. Schultz suggested amending the resolution to support issuance of only the Class B license at the present time. He said he had asked the question about Class D licenses because of a letter from a resident on Sherman Avenue who was concerned that the small stores at Maple and Sherman might be able to sell beer and wine.

Mr. Wright suggested language be added to the resolution related to the "veto." He said that what the Council was really asking for is that both the City and the Board of License Commissioners mutually agree that a license should be granted before it is issued. He also supported requesting only the Class B license for Takoma Park at this time.

Mr. Seamens expressed his disagreement with any change to the law. He said Takoma Park is a very diverse community with different interests. He asked if someone could buy a single can of beer to consume on site or to take with them.

Ms. Ludlow said with any of the licenses a shopper could purchase a single sealed unopened can or bottle to take out. Either Class B or D allow consumption on site.

Mr. Williams supported seeking the Class B license only. He noted that despite the testimony heard against changing the law, he heard from many residents individually who supported the change to allow some carry out beer or wine.

Mr. Robinson said he was not in favor of supporting sales in one area and not another. He said he would support Class B and D, or Class B and A. He commented that if it is good for the Co-op to be able to sell beer and wine, then why not allow the Maple Market to sell it. He said he was persuaded based on Ms. Ludlow’s comments that the County would listen to the City if it has concerns about a license to be issued. He asked what is the process for requesting that a license be revoked.

Ms. Ludlow said that it is based on complaints or investigations.

Ms. Ludlow noted that if the Council was requesting mutual agreement with the Board of License Commissioners on licenses, the Council would have to develop criteria.

Mr. Wright commented that the Council would expect to have to develop a process. He noted that many people originally supported the change in their comments to him. Although the number is down slightly, there is still strong support. People want to be able to walk to establishments that sell beer and wine to go. They think it would support economic development, but they are also concerned about the potential negative impacts.

Ms. Clay said she would support just the change to allow Class B licenses at this time and see what happens.

Mr. Seamens said that when he looks at the potential changes to the character of a neighborhood, the overall benefit to this is minimal and the potential damage is great.

Mr. Wright requested a further amendment to the resolution, deleting a whereas clause that said "very few members of the public commented on the proposal . . . . "

The majority of Council concurred with this change.

Pat Loveless, Maple Avenue, spoke in opposition to the resolution.

Motion to adopt Resolution 2010-56 as amended, Requesting a Change to State Law Regarding Sale of Beer and Wine in Takoma Park - Montgomery County Class B Licenses for Bars and Restaurants and to Request Veto Authority. Moved by Council Member Wright, seconded by Council Member Schultz. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Council Member Wright, Council Member Clay, Council Member Robinson, and Council Member Schultz; AGAINST: Council Member Seamens; ABSENT: Council Member Snipper)

Resolution 2010-56 (attached)

Joe Edgell, Elm Avenue, commented in opposition to installation of speed humps because they slow emergency response vehicles.

Motion to accept First Reading Ordinance 2010-44 Authorizing the Installation of a Speed Hump on the 100 Block of Sherman Avenue. Moved by Council Member Robinson, seconded by Council Member Wright. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Council Member Wright, Council Member Clay, Council Member Robinson, and Council Member Seamens; AGAINST: Council Member Schultz; ABSENT: Council Member Snipper)

First Reading Ordinance 2010-44 (attached)

Motion to accept First Reading Ordinance 2010-45 Authorizing the Installation of a Speed Hump on the 200 Block of Grant Avenue. Moved by Council Member Wright, seconded by Council Member Robinson. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Council Member Wright, Council Member Clay, Council Member Robinson, Council Member Seamens, and Council Member Schultz; ABSENT: Council Member Snipper)

First Reading Ordinance 2010-45 (attached)

Motion to adopt Second Reading Ordinance 2010-40 Authorizing FY 2011 Budget Amendment No. 1. Moved by Council Member Wright, seconded by Council Member Robinson. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Council Member Wright, Council Member Clay, Council Member Robinson, Council Member Seamens, and Council Member Schultz; ABSENT: Council Member Snipper)

Second Reading Ordinance 2010-40 (attached)

Ms. Clay moved to convene as the Stormwater Management Board. The motion was seconded by Mr. Robinson. The motion carried unanimously.

Ms. Matthews explained that the purpose to the budget amendment was to provide additional funds for the purchase of a street sweeper because the purchase amount exceeded budgeted funds.

Motion to accept First Reading Ordinance 2010-46 Authorizing FY 2011 Stormwater Budget Amendment No. 1. Moved by Council Member Clay, seconded by Council Member Wright. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Council Member Wright, Council Member Clay, Council Member Robinson, Council Member Seamens, and Council Member Schultz; ABSENT: Council Member Snipper)

First Reading Ordinance 2010-46 (attached)

The Council appointed 20 individuals to serve on the Task Force: Hailu L. Aichehi, Lorig Charkoudian, William Coulter, Kay Daniels-Cohen, Steve Dubb, James DiLuigi, Megan Gallagher, Rosalind Grigsby, Seth Grimes, Andrew Kelemen, Howard Kohn, Linette Lander, Katrina Oprisko, Lorraine Pearsall, Jennifer Sisane, Susan Robb, John Salmen, Roger Schlegel, Jeffrey M. Trunzo, Ellen M. Zavian.

Ms. Clay noted that she would be naming one more appointment in the near future.

Motion to adopt Resolution 2010-57 Providing for Appointments to the Takoma Junction Task Force. Moved by Council Member Clay, seconded by Council Member Robinson. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Council Member Wright, Council Member Clay, Council Member Robinson, Council Member Seamens, and Council Member Schultz; ABSENT: Council Member Snipper)

Resolution 2010-57 (attached)

A. Resolution 2010-58 Providing for Reappointments to the Small Community Grant Committee (attached)

B. Resolution 2010-59 Providing for Reappointments to the Ethics Commission (attached)

C. Resolution 2010-60 Providing for a Reappointment to the Tree Commission (attached)

Motion to adopt the consent agenda. Moved by Council Member Seamens, seconded by Council Member Wright. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Council Member Wright, Council Member Clay, Council Member Robinson, Council Member Seamens, and Council Member Schultz; ABSENT: Council Member Snipper)

(9) Discussion of Proposals for Revision to the Tree Ordinance and Related Matters

City Arborist Bolton made a presentation on tree evaluation and replacement requirements. He indicated that he likes the system as it is because the formula means that his decisions are not arbitrary. He said he does not want to negotiate tree replacement requirements because it would not be fair.

In response to questions from Councilmember Wright, Mr. Bolton commented on desirable tree species and tree replacement. He said the list of desirable trees predates his tenure with the City. Some of the undesirable species are invasive exotics and some are on the noxious weed list. In a tree replacement plan, the trees must be replaced with an equivalent or better species. He referenced the tree selection guide. Mr. Bolton said that a silver maple tree would not be a desirable species for a small residential lot.

Mr. Bolton said that the alternative in the City Code is to pay $175 per replacement tree. As an example, a person who takes down a large tree that requires 23 replacement trees might put three trees in his or her yard, and the City would plant 20 trees in the City. He said that taking down a tree that does not need to come down will cost a resident extra money.

Mr. Wright commented that in our ecosystem, most trees are in close proximity to a house and that maybe there should be some refinement of what are considered undesirable trees.

Mr. Bolton agreed. He said that those decisions are made based on personal experience or an understanding of the literature.

Mr. Schultz commented that he had defended the Tree Ordinance as not being arbitrary, but he said there is a problem in that people do not understand the Tree Ordinance. He urged the City to do a better job communicating with residents. He commented that Mr. Bolton’s position was divided between enforcement and education.

Mr. Bolton agreed that it is difficult to deal with issues like invasives when there are tree disasters waiting to happen.

Mr. Schultz noted an instance where a resident had a mature tree that was dying but the tree replacement fee was $1,200 in addition to the $2,600 cost to remove the tree.

Mr. Bolton explained that if the tree were completely dead, there would be no replacement trees required. There is a sliding scale between hazardous, dying, and trees that are inconvenient or damaging a sidewalk. If you want to take a tree down that does not have to come down, it will cost extra money.

In response to a question from Mr. Williams, Mr. Bolton explained that the tree protection plan can be a two step process. You either need a tree protection plan or show how you will protect the trees. He said he used to do the protection plans verbally or by e-mail. He said he believes the code gives a clear idea of the expectations.

Mr. Bolton addressed the idea of preplanting trees. He said he was not opposed to it if a way can be found to account for the trees that is not labor intensive.

Mr. Seamens noted the complaints heard about planting of sweetgums as street trees. He asked why the Arborist recommends that they be planted when some experts say that they are not good street trees.

Mr. Bolton responded that there is not a large species that will not lift the sidewalk. He said he recommends not planting more than 30 trees of one family, or 10 percent of one variety. There are currently no sweetgum trees in the City’s tree inventory.

Mr. Seamens asked about PEPCO’s aggressive tree pruning and its effect on the tree canopy.

Mr. Bolton said if a tree is the wrong variety in the wrong place, PEPCO will prune or remove the tree. He said he has a pretty good working relationship with the PEPCO forester.

Mr. Bolton commented on two other issues that had been raised. He said he believed that requiring disclosure of the Tree Ordinance in real estate transactions would be a good idea. Regarding planting of trees on private property, there could be a problem with tracking what happens to the trees when a property is sold.

Mr. Schultz suggested that, generally, the Tree Commission could be in a position to help draft informational materials about the Tree Ordinance for lay people.

Carol Hotton, Chair of the Tree Commission, commented that the Commission would like to do more public outreach to educate the community and could simplify the information to some degree. She said that, fundamentally, if you are going to prune it, remove it, or do work around it, call the City Arborist. She described some of the outreach that has been done by the Tree Commission. Ms. Hotton said the Commission can play a role to educate the public on the value of trees. Removal cost can be substantial and replacement cost is an issue that we should continue to discuss, but we should think carefully before weakening the Tree Ordinance. She said the Commission does not think there should be modification of the Tree Ordinance to allow for solar panels.

Patrick Earle, Grant Avenue, commented on the calculation of tree replacement. He said the calculation goes up exponentially. He said the benefits of his silver maple tree were quite weak in proportion to its size. Mr. Earle said he thinks we need to look carefully at our attempts to become a sustainable, green city. He noted the impact of using power from coal (54 percent of PEPCO’s power), and said Takoma Park needs to take a leading role in the switch to renewables. He said the City is wrapped up in the status quo, but as climate change intensifies, we will lose more trees. He advocated that the City reevaluate its position on tree removal for solar panels.

The City Council adjourned at 11:32 p.m.