The Northbrook Public Works Committee met Oct. 25 to review a tree removal permit appeal.
Here is the meeting's agenda, as provided by the committee:
The Village of Northbrook is subject to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Individuals with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who require certain accommodations in
order to allow them to observe and/or participate in this meeting, or who have questions regarding the
accessibility of this meeting or the facilities, are requested to contact Greg Van Dahm or Debbie Ford (664-
4014 or 4013respectively) promptly to allow the Village of Northbrook to make reasonable accommodations
for those persons. Hearing impaired individuals may call the TDD number, 564-8645, for more information.
NORTHBROOK VILLAGE HALL, 1225 CEDAR LANE
October 25, 2016, 6:30 P.M., TERRACE ROOM
The Public Works Committee of the Village of Northbrook Board of Trustees will hold a meeting on
Tuesday, October 25, 2016 at 6:30 p.m. in the Terrace Room of the Village Hall, 1225 Cedar Lane,
Northbrook, Illinois. The following will be discussed.
MEETING AGENDA
Please note: A light dinner will be provided for Board Members and Staff
1. Call To Order
2. Hear From The Audience
3. Tree Removal Permit Appeal – 2958 Stonegate Lane
4. Adjourn
Todd Heller, Chair
Public Works Committee
Members: Trustee Buehler
Trustee Israel
Village of Northbrook
Cook County, Illinois
October 25, 2016
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
VILLAGE OF NORTHBROOK
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Kelly Hamill, Director of Public Works
DATE: October 25, 2016
SUBJECT: Tree Removal Permit Appeal – 2958 Stonegate Lane
The property owner of 2958 Stonegate Lane applied for a permit on August 2, 2016 to remove seven (7)
trees from the property. Following a review of the permit and inspection of the trees included in the
permit for removal staff identified 2 of the trees, a 17.5 inch diameter Norway Spruce and a 13 inch
diameter Norway Spruce, as Landmark trees which would have required the replanting of approximately
10 - 3” diameter trees on the property or the fee of lieu of in the amount $4,500. With this, the property
owner chose to limit the trees being removed to a 28 inch diameter Silver Maple, a 15 inch diameter
Freeman Maple, two 11 inch diameter Pear trees, and a 15 inch diameter Mulberry tree.
The Silver and Freeman Maples as well as the two pear trees are considered protected trees which
require permits for removal, but do not fall into the category of Landmark or Heritage trees according to
the list of trees identified in the Annual Fee Ordinance. The Mulberry tree is considered a nuisance tree.
As required by the Municipal Code, the property owner had the option of replanting two 3” diameter
trees on his property or paying the fee in lieu of replanting. Despite the removal of the two spruces from
the permit request by the property owner, payment of the fee in lieu of/replanting requirement was
required because the trees being removed reduced the total number of inches on the property below 12
inches per 1,000 square feet. The property owner paid the $600 fee in lieu of replanting and a tree
removal permit was issued (permit #: PT16-0463).
Section 25-11(g)(1) of the Village’s Municipal Code allows any “person adversely affected” by the
Village’s decision to issue or deny a tree removal permit the ability to appeal that decision to the Public
Works Committee. Under this section, the property owner of 2966 Stonegate Lane filed an appeal on
October 4, 2016 of the Village’s decision to issue a tree removal permit for the Silver and Freeman
Maple located on the 2958 Stonegate Lane property. Furthermore, the property owner of 2966
Stonegate Lane is also appealing the Village’s decision to classify the two Spruce trees as Landmark
trees. The 2966 Stonegate Lane property is one property west of 2958 Stonegate Lane. A copy of the
appeal from the property owner of 2966 Stonegate Lane is included as is additional supplemental
information provided by the property owner.
The questions with respect to the tree removal permit for the Public Works Committee to consider are:
1) Was the Freeman Maple properly identified as a non-Landmark Tree?
2) Should the approval of the removal of the Silver Maple and Freeman Maple be revoked due
to their environmental benefits?
3) Were the Spruce trees properly identified as Landmark trees?
2
Separate from the tree removal permit appeal the property owner has requested the Village review its
procedures with respect to Tree Preservation.
Under Section 25-11(g)(3) all regulated tree activity associated with the permit being appealed is stayed.
The property owner of 2958 Stonegate Lane has complied with this requirement.
Chapter 25
Exhibit E FY16/17
Chapter 25 - Tree Protection and Preservation, Vegetation
Section: 25-2:
Nuisance Tree All trees of the following listed species located in the Village regardless of DBH:
Box elder (Acer negundo)
Buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica)
Cottonwood Female Only (Populus deltoids)
Ginkgo Female Only (Ginkgo biloba)
Mountain Ash (Sorbus spp)
Russian Olive (Elaegnus augustifolia)
Siberian Elm (Ulmus pumila)
Tree of Heaven (Ailanthus altissima)
White Mulberry (Morus alba)
Willow (Salix species)
Section 25-2(k) &
Section 25-21:
(Subdivision and
Development Code
4-103D)
Heritage Tree:
Shall include all genus, species, varieties, cultivars and sizes of trees as listed
below that: (I) represent the very best specimens of landmark trees; (ii) either predate or
correspond with the incorporation of the Village at the beginning of the 20th Century, or have
survived catastrophic diseases that have killed off trees of similar genus and species either
regionally or nationally; and (ii) are determined by the Village Manager to be in good health
and structurally sound. Heritage trees shall include all trees listed below, with a diameter at
breast height (DBH) as indicated, in the Village:
Any Oak with a DBH equal to or greater than 30”; any Hickory with a DBH equal to or
greater than 16”; any Ironwood with a DBH equal to or greater than 10”; American Elm
with a DBH equal to or greater than 36”.
73
Chapter 25
Exhibit E FY16/17
Chapter 25 - Tree Protection and Preservation, Vegetation
Section 25-2
(Subdivision and
Development Code
4-103D)
Landmark Tree:
Shall include all genus, species, varieties, cultivars and sizes of the trees, as listed below that
are determined by the village manager to be in good health and structurally sound.
Landmark trees shall include all trees listed below, with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of
12 inches or more as indicated, except where a smaller DBH is indicated, in the Village:
Deciduous Trees: BASSWOOD
BLACK WALNUT
BUCKEYE
GINGKO (male)
HICKORY (6"DBH)
IRONWOOD (6"DBH)
KENTUCKY COFFEETREE
NORWAY MAPLE (including Schwelder and Crimson King)
OAK (8"DBH including Bebb, bur, chinquapin, English, pin, red, sawtoogh, shingle, swamp white and white)
RED MAPLE
SUGAR MAPLE
Coniferous Trees BALD CYPRESS
CEDAR (Red and White single stem tree form only)
DAWN REDWOOD
FIR
SPRUCE (including Colorado, Green, Norway, White)
WHITE PINE
74
Chapter 25
Exhibit E FY16/17
Chapter 25 - Tree Protection and Preservation, Vegetation
Section 25-2(v) &
Section 25-21:
Tree Replacement:
Planting Approval
Required
Tree replacement list: The following trees may be used as eligible trees for replacement:
Section 25-20(a) All Trees on the Tree Replacement List, with oak trees having a minimum size between 2" and 2 1/2" in
diameter at breast height (DBH) and all other genus and species having a minimum size between 2 1/2"
and 3" diameter at breast height (DBH)
Acceptable Limited
Use (Overplanted) Acceptable Limited Use (Overplanted)
ARBROVITAE (Thuja occedentalis)
AUSTRIAN PINE (Pinus nigra)
COLORADO SPRUCE (Picea pungens)
HONEY LOCUST (Gleditsia triacanthos)
LITTLELEAF LINDEN (Tilia cordata)
NORTHERN RED OAK (Quercus rubra)
NORWAY SPRUCE (Picea abies)
NORWAY MAPLE (Acer platanoides)
RED MAPLE (Acer rubrum)
75
Chapter 25
Exhibit E FY16/17
Chapter 25 - Tree Protection and Preservation, Vegetation
Large Trees (Over 45 feet)
AMERICAN LINDEN (Tilia Americana)
BALD CYPRESS (Taxodium distichum)
BLACK LOCUST (Robinia pseudoacacia)
BLACK TUPELO (Nyssa sylvatica)
BLACK WALNUT (Juglans nigra)
BUR OAK (Quercus macrocarpa)
CATALPA (Catalpa speciosa)
CHINQUAPIN OAK (Quercus muehlenbergii)
CRESCENDO SUGAR MAPLE (Acer saccharum)
EXCLAMATON! LONDON PLANETREE (Platanus x acerifolia)
HACKBERRY (Celtis occidentalis)
DAWN REDWOOD (Metasequoia glyptostrobies)
ENGLISH OAK (Quercus robur)
EUROPEAN LARCH (Larix deciduas)
FREEMAN MAPLE (Acer x fremanii)
GINKGO (ginkgo biloba)
HYBRID ELM (Ulmus species)
KATSURA TREE (Cercidiphyllum japonicum)
KENTUCKY COFFEETREE (Gymnocladus dioicus)
76 LACEBARK ELM (Ulmus parvifolia)
Chapter 25
Exhibit E FY16/17
Chapter 25 - Tree Protection and Preservation, Vegetation
SHANTUNG MAPLE (Acer truncatum)
SHINGLE OAK (Quercus imbricaria)
SHUMARD OAK (quercus shumardii)
SILVER LINDEN (Tilia tomentosa)
SWAMP BUR OAK (Quercus x schuettii)
SWAMP WHITE OAK (Quercus bicolor)
SWEETGUM (Liquidambar styraciflua)
TULIP TREE (Liriodendron tulipifera)
TURKISH FILBERT (Corylus colurna)
WHITE OAK (Quercus alba)
WILSON'S ELM (Ulmus wisoniana)
ZELKOVA (Zelkova serrata)
Medium Trees (30 feet to 45 feet)
AMERICAN HORNBEAM (Carpinus caroliniana)
AMERICAN YELLOWWOOD (Cladrastis kentukea)
AMUR CORKTREE (Phellodendron amurense)
CALLERY PEAR (Pyrus calleryana)
EUROPEAN HORNBEAM (Carpinus betulus)
HEDGE MAPLE (Acer campestre)
IRONWOOD (Ostrya virginiana)
STATE STREET MIYABE MAPLE (Acer miyabe)
OHIO BUCKEYE (Aesculus glabra)
PERSIMMON (Diospyros virginiana)
RED HORSECHESTNUT (Aesculus x carnea)
RIVER BIRCH (Betlua nigra)
77 WITCHHAZEL (Hamamelis virginiana)
Chapter 25
Exhibit E FY16/17
Chapter 25 - Tree Protection and Preservation, Vegetation
Small Trees (Under 30 feet)
ALLEGHANY (Amelanchier laevis)
AMUR MAPLE (Acer ginnala)
CHINA SNOW PEKING LILAC (syringa pekinensis)
COCKSPUR HAWTHORN (Crataegus crus-galli)
CRABAPPLE (Malus species)
EASTERN WAHOO (Euonymus atropurpureus)
FOX VALLEY RIVER BIRCH (Betula nigra)
JAPANESE TREE LILAC (Syringa reticulate)
PAPERBARK MAPLE (Acer griseum)
PAW PAW (Asimina triloba)
REDBUD (Cercis canadensis)
SHADBLOW SERVICEBERRY (Amelanchier arborea)
TATARIAN MAPLE (Acer tataricum)
Conifers
BALSAM FIR (Abies balsamea)
BLACK SPRUCE (Picea mariana)
DOUGLAS FIR (Pseudotsuga menziesii)
EASTERN HEMLOCK (Tsuga canadensis)
EASTERN RED CEDAR (Juniperus virginiana)
SERBIAN SPRUCE (Picea omorika)
WHITE FIR (Abies concolor)
WHITE PINE (Pinus strobus)
WHITE SPRUCE (Abies glauca)
78
To: Northbrook Public Works Subcommittee, Board of Trustees
Subject: Appeal of the Tree Removal Permit PT16-0463 for 2958 Stonegate Lane
From: Douglas Gerleman, 2966 Stonegate Lane, Northbrook
Date: October 18, 2016
I am asking the Village of Northbrook to withdraw its approval of the removal of 2 of the 5 trees
requested from my neighbor’s yard. These two trees, a 28” Silver Maple and the 15” Freeman’s Red
Maple, are critical to ensure stormwater from both my and my neighbor’s property is absorbed on site.
The Silver Maple is particularly critical for absorbing this stormwater, especially from both of our
roofs. Picture 2427 shows how this Silver Maple and rain garden receives stormwater from two
downspouts from my roof. Picture 2425 shows water from my neighbor’s roof aimed at this same rain
garden and Maple tree.
The Freeman's Maple is a cross between a Red and Silver Maple. (see http://www.mortonarb.org/treesplants/tree-plant-descriptions/freemans-maple.
It takes the form and characteristics (e.g. harder wood
and open canopy) of a Red Maple. It is a Landmark Tree.
The website www.TreeBenefits.org was developed by Davey Tree Experts and Casey Trees to estimate
the benefits of these trees – 4688 gallons/year for the Silver Maple and 1604 gallons/year for the
Freeman's Maple. I created my rain garden to take advantage of this Silver Maple and keep my and my
neighbor’s stormwater on site - out of the Village stormwater system which is over-burdened. These
trees also reduce atmospheric carbon by absorbing 1872 pounds/year and 912 pounds/year of carbon
dioxide respectively. Another benefit to everyone.
Here are pictures and supplemental information to support of my Appeal of the Tree Removal Permit
PT16-0463 for 2958 Stonegate Lane.
Picture 2432:
My house, 2966 Stonegate Lane, is on
the left; my east side rain garden is in the
middle. The Silver Maple I want the
Village to save is center left. It is huge
(28"). Both Davey Trees, who trimmed
this tree for me last year, and my
landscape architect, Sustainable
Landscapes, reported today that this is a
very healthy tree. And, no herbicides –
pesticides have been used that damage or
undermine its health. It should live
another 20-40 years.
I have never had any flooding in my house. If the Village allows this 28” Silver Maple tree to be
removed, I will hold them responsible for any future flooding.
Picture 2427:
This picture is taken from the back of my house.
It shows my front and back roof downspouts
which send stormwater into my rain garden. The
trunk of the Silver Maple that I am asking the
Village to save is near the center of the picture.
Picture 2425:
This shows my neighbor's roof gutters and downspout aimed at my
property. If the Village saves the Silver and Freeman's Maple there
should be enough stormwater absorption so I can let my neighbor
continue to send his stormwater towards my house into my rain
garden. Otherwise I am concerned that we will have a problem with
flooding.
This diagram shows the Silver Maple located between my and
my neighbor's houses. My house is on the west side of the
rain garden. Note that my house is down hill from my
neighbor, so I will get all of his roof stormwater unless it is
absorbed by my rain garden and his Silver Maple. I will hold
the Village responsible if they allow this tree to be removed
and my house floods.
Picture 2444: Freeman's Red Maple
Picture looks east from my home at 2966 Stonegate. It
has an open canopy with lots of light coming through
to my neighbor’s house. It is shaded by the dense,
dying Spruce tree in front.
Picture 2442: Freeman's Red Maple
This picture looks west showing the same shade of the
dense dying Spruce behind the Red Maple. The Spruce’s
shade covers my neighbor’s house.
Picture 2440: Spruce trees infected by deadly fungus will be dead in 2 years – not Landmark Trees.
Douglas Gerleman
2966 Stonegate Lane
Northbrook
847-498-1155
Continuation of appeal of Tree removal Permit for 2958 Stonegate lane:
1. This Tree Benefits Table is the “Davey – Casey Tree Experts” estimate of benefits of the
Silver & Freeman’s Red Maple trees. These trees are required to absorb my and my neighbor
roof & property stormwater. This is consistent with the Village Planing goals:
• Comprehensive Plan: “Promote Sustainable Development”
• Stormwater Management: reduce building & street flooding, manage property flooding
• Sustainability Plan: “Implement Stormwater BMP”, “Increase potable water BMP”
The 28” Silver Maple is most effective at pumping stormwater into the atmosphere and
sequestering carbon. The Freeman’s Red Maple is also effective for pumping stormwater out
of the ground. The Freeman’s has harder wood, a longer life, and a different form than the
Silver Maple. It is a great backup for the Silver Maple and its open canopy allows lots of
sunlight into the home.
Unfortunately, Northbrook Public Works did not classified this 15” Freeman’s Maple as a
“Landmark” tree even though it exceeds the Village 12” requirement and has characteristics
of a Red Maple. I ask the Village Board Public Works Subcommittee to classify it as
“Landmark”.
In addition, my neighbor would like to remove his two spruce trees that greatly reduce the sun
light into his house. I support my neighbor’s request. The Tree Preservation Officer,
however, identified these spruce trees as “Landmark” even though they both are infected with
the same deadly fungus as the Spruce tree one house to the west. All 3 of these Spruce are
likely to die within 2 years as are most infected Spruce trees in the North Shore. The disease
is spreading very quickly. It makes no sense to declare these “landmark” trees.
In addition, my neighbor tells me that if he can remove his spruce trees without major penalty
he will not remove the Silver Maple that is critical to pumping stormwater from our homes.
Therefore, I ask the Public Works Subcommittee to remove the “Landmark” designation
for the unhealthy Spruce trees.
Benefits of Silver Maple & Freeman Maple at 2958 Stonegate Lane
Stormwater CO2 sequestered in tree
Trees absorbed + reduced energy CO2 Energy Savings
Silver Maple – 28” 4688 gallons 1872 pounds/yr 346 kilowatt hrs saved *
Freeman Red Maple – 15” 1604 gallons 912 pounds/yr 257 kilowatt hrs saved *
(They block hot afternoon sun in summer; let sun in to warm house in winter)
Tree Benefit Calculator: www.treebenefits.org/calculator
* Maple trees are on south & west side of house; Reduce energy use & related CO2.
2. I also request that the Village update its procedures for the Tree Preservation process.
These changes are important in order to “promote a collaborative decision making practice”
(re: Northbrook Comprehensive Plan Community Goals).
a. Northbrook should require that any arborist who has evaluated trees for removal be
required to sign his name on the Northbrook Tree Removal Application. My neighbor was told
by his arborist that the Silver Maple was infected by ants and that there was an insurance
problem. According to my Davey Tree arborist and my landscape architect who evaluated
these trees today, these statements are false and misleading. They appear to be aimed at
getting him a job. My arborist and landscape architect completely disagree with this assertion.
b. The Northbrook Tree Preservation Officer should also be required to document his opinion
on the eligibility of any tree removal proposed as part of the Northbrook Tree Removal
Application, and sign it. He should be held accountable for his findings.
c. In addition, the Tree Preservation Officer should be required to notify neighbors about any
proposed actions to remove trees, his findings, and the process for appeal of a Village
decision. In fact, because the significance of tree preservation and its impacts on stormwater
and climate change to the entire Village, these tree removal applications and evaluations
should be posted on the Village Website to allow public comment. In this era of climate
change we all need to be aware of actions that impact Village stormwater and carbon
sequestration.
Footnote:
It is important for Northbrook to seriously promote the use of trees on residential yards and
business property to absorb stormwater and atmospheric carbon. Flooding, drought and
severe storms are increasing and can best be managed using nature’s plants and its
ecosystems of soils, insects, birds and other life.
The engineering tactic of pushing stormwater into retention basins or other storage facilities
has the problem of being very expensive, increasing mosquitoes and other unwanted pests,
as well as concentrating heavy metals, yard pesticides/herbicides and other toxic chemicals.
Pesticides & herbicides that kill “pests” also kill natural insect predators and plants as well as
the target pest, so this process usually end up creating more fast breeding pests. It is best to
maximize stormwater management on site by holding it in the ground to support trees and
other plants, cooling land and buildings with nature’s air conditioning, and recharging aquifers.
Pushing water into sewers can only handle a small fraction of the stormwater we are
beginning to experience from severe storms. Even MWRD admits their tunnels and basins
can’t handle the large volume of stormwater America is now experiencing. And, to simply
send water to downstream communities is not sustainable in today’s and tomorrow’s climate.
We need it in the ground in Northbrook to sustain life stressed by dry air and droughts. It is
more cost-effective to spend Stormwater money regenerating healthy yards.
Douglas Gerleman, President
Go Green Northbrook
2966 Stonegate Lane
Alerts Sign-up