East Marlborough supervisors discuss tree removal plan
07/25/2016 01:57PM ● Published by J. Chambless
By John Chambless
Fifteen trees on a wooded building site
on Fairthorne Drive in East Marlborough Township will likely be
removed by the owner of the lot, pending Board of Supervisors
Landowner Jeff Kane was at the July 11 board meeting to discuss the plan to remove the trees. Township engineer Jim Hatfield explained, “There are 15 specimen trees on the site. Twelve of the trees are deemed dying, diseased or hazardous. So Mr. Kane's landscape architect is making the case that those need to be removed, with no replacements. The other three trees are being replaced at the prescribed rate of 12 replacement trees for the three healthy specimen trees. Of those 12 replacement trees, nine will be installed on the lot. There are three others they really don't have room to install, so they want to provide the other three replacement trees to the township, for planting on a site wherever the township would like.
“The supervisors will need to decide if they are satisfied that the report from the landscape architect has demonstrated that these trees are dying, diseased or hazardous and should be removed,” Hatfield continued. “So if you agree with that, that part's taken care of. The second part is, of the 12 replacement trees, are you satisfied with putting nine on the lot and putting the other three somewhere else.”
Kane told the board, “We had the landscape architect from the township check it out about a month ago, and she determined that a lot of the trees we're showing were unhealthy, and we were allowed to remove them. One of them had fallen on a neighbor's property during a wind storm. They're really old and hollow at the bottoms. But we're saving what we can because there are some nice beech trees out there. Most of the tulips and oaks out there are kind of in the same condition – rotting from the inside out.”
Township Manager Jane Laslo suggested planting the three replacement trees in the new Unionville Park, and the board agreed.
Kane said, “We'd like to start clearing out there probably a week or two after board approval. We do have financing on projects that we deal with. We're a small business, and getting held up here for a couple of months tends to cost us pretty heavily.”
Hatfield suggested having the township's landscape architect, Glackin Thomas Panzak, review and confirm the landscape architect's plan that the trees must be removed. Pending a final number of trees, the board approved Kane's plan.
Kane thanked the board and Hatfield, and said, “We're open to doing whatever is recommended to get things rolling. That's our main concern here.”
Hatfield explained that the board was voting to approve the tree removal, pending Glackin's review. “If Glackin agrees with the conclusions of Mr. Kane's landscape architect, and we approve the stormwater related comments, then a land disturbance permit is issued, and they can implement their plan as currently proposed. Or, if Glackin comes back with a different recommendation about the number of replacement trees, Mr. Kane can accept their recommendation about how many trees need to be removed and how many can remain on the lot. If Mr. Kane accepts that, he could begin construction prior to the next board meeting on Aug. 1.”
To contact Staff Writer John
Chambless, email email@example.com.