Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

that are posted to be removed at 249, 255, 261, and 265 Main. As a tree warden, my responsibility is to evaluate the condition, safety, and future of the trees under consideration and to make sure the public has the opportunity to be heard. Mr. Chang, you are more than welcome to speak from here on out with anything that you would like to go through.

Okay, so first of all, the trees there are all mature and it's all full grown and there's no damage. Most of the trees are not dead or leaning against one way or another. It doesn't pose that much of damage. So it provides shade to the mature trees. It provides shade and more aesthetic value to the downtown. as opposed to the new trees. So there's the environmental benefit of keeping the existing mature trees there. So that's one thing, and there's another aesthetic value of being a mature tree for the downtown whole Main Street area. So instead of like all the small little trees like I saw around the, the part that's already planted, it's like a very small, and it takes a year, like decades probably, like 10, 20 years, 30 years to become like these, the tree of existing size. So that's a, it takes a long time for the small, like a new tree to grow, to become like this, as the existing ones. So that's another thing, and It provides a better image for the downtime, I believe, to get the mature trees to be removed. I mean, talk about for all the trees in general, not only the specific one in the address provided. It will attract more people as being have all these existing trees there. the city wouldn't want like a image of like this very barren landscape along Main Street with new small trees as a downtown. So it had more character, it bring more character to the city, to the downtown, like these existing trees there. Yeah, these are some of the, like, beside that, and it's, and sometimes you have to, I see some of the proposal, like, paper over the, like, the mulch area, it's, we can, like, from my point of view, it's a, we can, like, leave it as existing with the mulches, because it provides much for the, kind of like a main street, once it rains, it's all, a lot of times, the flood, it's better for the flood control, I believe. So my view is, like, if we can leave the trees, the existing tree, without remove it, we can, like, enlarge the pit, and we do the sidewalk along the main street, like, so we can enlarge it, so we don't have to worry about upheaving on the sidewalk and the concrete area. So, I mean, that's one of my suggestion proposal if we want to keep the existing trees.

You guys want to chime in with your... Yeah, let me start.

I'm a civil engineer. My name is Rima Lokaitis. I'm with Martina's Couch and Associates, and I did design of this entire main street escape. So let's go quick, I prepared some slides to look over. If you look at the slide currently on the screen, the green squares, that's where existing trees compare what is coming with. And I'll come back later to the slide. Let's go next slide. So, existing sidewalk conditions and project need. So, last rehabilitation of existing sidewalk was done in 1991. That's where those new sidewalks were built. renovated and those trees that you have now, they were planted. It's been about 35 years since that. So city has secured funding to reconstruct existing sidewalks to provide continuous PROVAG and ADA compliance for pedestrian route. ADA stays for American with Disability Act, and PROVAG, it stays for Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines. So existing sidewalks constructed, as I mentioned before, 35 years ago, and exhibits vertical displacement and even sidewalks panels. Upheaving, cracking, localized ups and downs, dips, and walking surface, irregular running cross slopes, deteriorating pavement, and Ununiform surface locations do not provide the required accessibility characteristics. So, engineering objective. Reconstruct the sidewalks to establish consistent finish grade PROVAG ADA compliance slopes and durable pavement structures while addressing existing tree, root, and sidewalk conflict. And I get to that. So, let's take a look at the trees and pictures. If you look at this tree, at the base of the tree, you see how asphalt is heaving. Then if you look at the sidewalks, there are some areas that are darker and some areas lighter. Where you see darker, that's a low point that all dirt collects, and where it's higher, that's where roots are pushing the tree. Tree roots pushing the sidewalk, sorry. So that creates dangerous and challenge to people with disabilities, people who have vision problems, who has wheelchair, who have walkers, not just you and me who are healthy. So those people has to access this facility, and especially people who are impaired vision. So the tree is kind of in the middle of the sidewalk. you have all kind of sometimes like a commercial things or something the tree that store owners or restaurant owners placing against the wall and then you have a tree heaving so for those people in perversion or with wheelchair or walker or elderly with cane it's kind of very hard to navigate and these are Then again, the other side, the trees that you had mentioned. You see the dark areas? That's where water's standing. That's where the low spots. And where the clean sidewalks or repair, that's where the tree roots are pushing up. And that's where the cracks, heaving, and all. So it's more than you see what meets the eye. There is battle going on under this sidewalk, which would be sidewalk versus tree roots. So, existing roots and sidewalk complex. The existing trees were planted in 1991. The sidewalk is located within a constrained corridor. There is no way for us to push the sidewalk to make it ADA compliant. IDA requires at least four feet or preferably five feet constant slope and constant cross slope for IDA accessibility. So we have a state right-of-way curb, which we cannot touch. It's a state road. And then you have a sidewalk and you have a building. You have to work in between that area. As the tree matures, the root system expands laterally and within available soil volume. So, you have a curb and you have a building. The tree roots, there is not much where to go. So, roots grow beneath an adjacent existing sidewalk and increase in diameter. This has resulted in tree mature, roots expanded, Root and pavement interaction, vertical pavement displacement, uneven sidewalks, accessibility deficiencies. So the K engineering consideration, the problem is not simply deteriorating of the concrete. The existing pavement and mature root system occurring at the same limited horizontal vertical space. As was done, as was constructed in 1991, the streetscape required continuous replacement of the trees to respond to the age and condition of the plants, changes in accessibility standards, and changes in use of the sidewalk. So, I put in sidewalk requirements and sidewalk cross-section. So, the concrete, the standard concrete is going to be five inches. The sub-base is going to be 8 inches. That's already 13 inches that we have to excavate, and that's where the majority of the route system is. So it's underneath the sidewalk between the curb and the building. So the construction will establish controlled pedestrian surface with appropriate running slope, cross slope, vertical transitions, pedestrian clear width that's required, and then connection to existing pedestrian facilities like crosswalks, like restaurants, like stores. So that's not just what's happening at the surface, but there is gonna be construction beneath the surface. So, why reconstruction requires addressing the existing routes? Reconstructing the sidewalk required excavation and establishing new grids and pavement structures. Significant lateral and structural roots are most likely present in close proximity to existing tree trunk. Removing substantial roots from mature tree can reduce the tree's available root system, affect the structural stability and anchorage,

I can't believe it, I just turn it off.

Sorry about that, I truly believe that I turn it off. Adversely affect the tree health if we remove the system, increase susceptibility to wind-related failure, and potential result in delaying decay and mortality of the tree. So if you remove the substantial amount of roots because you're installing new sub-base and new sidewalk to sustain accessibility and provide structural integrity, the trees become not healthy. and could be unstable when you have any winds or hurricanes and could be potential and to pedestrians and to surrounding structures around. So in the engineering approach where mature root system directly conflicts with the required sidewalk construction, the tree removal eliminates the existing root and bituminous or in this concrete pavement conflict and allows a new sidewalk to be constructed to require grades and elevations. New trees then can be placed in a larger tree pit and the cycle begins again. So, the trees, as far as we know, were constructed. There were no restrictions, and at that time, 35 years ago, there was not required to have any true root, tree root barriers. So, now, technology and everything's, in the 35 years involved, a new approach that we are working on. proposing. So, there is going to be replace with new selected, the removal trees will be replaced with new trees selected for a constrained urban sidewalk environment. So, the new planting design will incorporate root barrier to direct and limit the growth of the roots away from the sidewalk. So, I have section of the root planting. So, there's going to be root barrier on one side, another side to control root growth and contributing to sidewalk deterioration in the future. So, the root barrier are intended to contain root growth, reduce the potential for failure of pavement displacement, maintain separation between the root zone and sidewalk pavement, and provide more comparable long-term relationship between the trees and pedestrian facilities. The tree selection and plants location we're considering based on the newly available Cultivar, mature tree size, rooting characteristics, available soil volume, utilities, sidewalk clearance, and long-term maintenance. And now I'm going to come.

My name is Terry Hahn. I'm the landscape architect. We started this project back in 2018. And in 2019 was the first time that we walked the site. to try and determine what the condition of the trees were, what could be saved, what couldn't be saved. And the overall discussion was that the plants that were done in 1991 were very effective. They did their thing, but they had a 30-year life. That was what the intent was. That was how it was always going to work. And we looked at each of the individual trees. Can I have the clicker? Sure. So again, when we look at the trees at this moment, specifically the five trees that were highlighted in your address, we have tree A, which is the one in front of the bank building, which is clearly not healthy. It's not fully flushed out. There are dead branches. It's not doing what it's supposed to. Tree B is also, again, not in good condition. given the trunk size, the way that the canopy is written, that that's not a normal canopy for that kind of tree. And also here in tree B, what happens is that the crosswalk has been reconfigured so that the existing grade around that tree is radically being changed. It seems like on a surface level that that's not a big deal, but a four inch grade change grade is significant for all the feeder roots and the stuff that is happening underneath the sidewalk. The other tree is Tree C. Again, we have an issue with proximity to the hydrant and some utility components here. And the idea is that these are Tree C, D, and E, for whatever reason, were planted into the sidewalk. That mulch area that you were talking about back in 1991, that was intended to be something totally different than what it has become and is no longer functioning the way it was originally designed. And so these trees, again, D and E, you have root girdling, you have displacement of the sidewalk, you have some odd low spots in the sidewalk and a number of elements so that the idea is that we would then take those trees down and install new trees in order to sort of, again, like I said, start the cycle of the next 30 years. When we look at trees, typically for treescape elements where these are 30-year cycles, and those trees that currently exist will not make it through those cycles. So the idea is to start fresh. I think that's the end.

So, engineering solutions and long-term benefits. Existing conditions, the sidewalk, it's 35 years old, and there is proposed going to be new sidewalk. The existing, it's uneven displacement panels, existing ADA deficiencies, mature routes beneath the sidewalk, routes related to pavement heaving, mature trees conflicting with reconstruction, and recurring root and pavement conflict remains. The proposed control finish grades, improved ADA compliance pedestrian route, new planted root zone, root barrier sidewalk comparable with replacement trees, design separation between the roots and sidewalks. So the key takeaway, the objective is to replace deteriorating and inaccessible pedestrian infrastructure while establishing new trees and route management system specifically designed for the constrained urban sidewalk environment. This approach addresses both the existing accessibility deficients and the underlying route payment conflict, providing more durable long-term solution. New plant materials will grow and provide the future canopy for the main street. This time, there is a variety of the tree species and use of the new cultivars that have grown planters better suitable for limited zone between the building and the traffic. And I want to go back to the first slide that So, as we look at the trees, green squares, the existing trees are versus proposed design. Those trees are in the middle of the ADA compliance continuous walkway, which is obstructing people with disabilities continuous line, and it's conflict with the requirements of IDEA and PRO-AG. This area is State Railway, State of Connecticut Railway, and we have to comply. We work within State Railway, and this project will use state funding. We have to comply with PRO-AG, which requires to provide continuous without obstruction, accessibility for people with disabilities, not just for regular folks.

PRO-EG has advanced far more complicated requirements than just standard ADA requirements. So DOT and the state is requiring that we upgrade the sidewalk system to the higher standard.

So that will conclude my presentation. Any questions? from anyone?

Well, if it's, if it's, if it's just an ADA compliant, if it's feasible, if it's have a minimum amount for ADA width for the sidewalk, then would it be possible just to leave the trees, the certain trees that's there, and as long as it's ADA compliant, it's not like, have a certain negative fee or more with, to the sidewalk.

So, at the building, they have all kind of, access to the building. The sidewalk is not completely flat, and we cannot make it flat because the road does exist. We can't raise the main street. The building, first floor, it exists. So we have to work between the building and the sidewalk. It's 1.6% recommended cross slope by the PROVAG. So 1.6% of the slope, it's very little, just a quarter of the inch. The existing... as build existing road and existing building, it's not that in that elevation. 35 years ago, there were no PROVAG and there were not considering ADA compliance. So what we design, we design the area for a trees closer to the road then you have a five feet path for people with disabilities, and then you have to provide less than 5% access to the buildings, to the restaurants, to the facilities. So that's entire main street is designed. So the five feet that in the middle that you have, see the squares, those squares are five by five. So the trees are smack in the middle of that path. that provided for ADA accessibility and has to be straight track as much as possible. You can weave in between the trees. When you have one thing, it's when something you have in, I don't know, in the middle of the woods and other things, when you have this area where people live and we cannot deny access to anyone. or that people would impair vision, that there are some sort of objects all the time they have to fight to go from one point to another point. So PROVAG says that when you are redoing sidewalks, you have to provide continuous run with required cross slopes and longitudinal slopes, for people with disabilities. So this is what this downtown design trying to achieve. And that's where the trees are, they're in the middle. Their root system ruining sidewalk, heaving up and down. And that's what design we believe achieve. And this is portion of the design being constructed. And if you go and look at everything, nice straight areas, locations, and paths providing for everyone and including people with disabilities. That's from engineering point of view.

I will note that it probably took us about two years to configure all of those in order to be in compliance. It was not a slow, simple, easy process. And all of these elements were taken into consideration.

So could I just please speak to the chair?

Oh, apologies. So it was a long design process. It was not random. It wasn't simple. It was very complicated.

No, please.

Yeah, it's went to approvals through DOT approval because this is state, by the way, city maintains this area, but city do not own this area. So Connecticut DOT review and approve these plans, allow us to go for bid. And their landscape architect as well reviewed the plantings and including the trees.

Do you have anything else while we leave from the city?

Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to thank Mr. Chin. Am I pronouncing your name right? Yes. I see where you're coming from. You're coming from a really good place. Similar to you, we would love to keep as many trees as possible, but this is not the case here because this is a totally new project, and in order to accomplish it as designed, we had to take down some of the existing trees because they cannot survive. However, we are planting new ones. This is basically what it boils down to. We are not taking anything down. We are actually taking it down and planting new ones. So we are not reducing the overall number of existing trees, which is a very important aspect to the whole community. Similar to you, everybody cares about the canopy we have and would like to have it in the future. And I believe what we have, and so you, Mr. Chairman, the landscape architect can explain. The ones we have will actually fit better into the existing environment we have. I'm talking about the new ones. That's all what I have to say, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. I believe that's all. I'm going to sit down and walk it again and make my decision on the existing trees there, and we'll move forward from there. I'll notify Mr. Chang of my decision.

I see there's one tree right across from the crosswalk that's a music center. That tree is to be saved.

The big oak tree you're talking about?

Yeah, big oak tree right in the corner.

That is staying. The big, huge oak tree there? Yeah, yeah. The issue with that tree, we've been saving that tree for years. And yes, that is staying. That is not on the plan to be removed. And I know I didn't post that tree. It's by the old library. Yeah, by the old library, music center.

Yeah, no, we made certain efforts to save certain trees that were actually existing in 1991 so that we were able to do that. Pretty much all of the trees that are proposed to be removed were planted specifically in 1991, so it's a cycle that you have to go through.

Yeah, and there is issues with that tree, though. It is dying back, but we keep maintaining it every year and try and... You know, the big trees that are there, those are the ones that are staying. I believe there's three or four of them that are, you know, slated to stay. But the little Zalkovas and stuff that are all dying back, those are the ones that are proposed to be removed.

When we can do something to this tree, then we cannot do something to the trees we mentioned. Because we have to be keeping this tree for so long. That's why this tree is still there, because we still saved it in the past, and we can still save some trees now if it's possible.

I'm going to look at it.

That's one of the examples, because we saved it in the past, and that's why it's so big. If we cut down all the trees, like in 1991, we cut down all the trees back then, then we wouldn't have the tree from the music center. I'm understanding that, yes.

So you, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask you, Mr. Chen, everything we do is actually online. If you like, I can give you my business card. Send me an email. Everything that is being done, we have a dedicated website showing exactly what we are doing, which phase.

Proposed plan.

Yeah, everything. So that will give you a better idea of what we are doing and the new trees that we are going to plant it. Just for your own info, Anything that we are planting was actually the outcome of a lot of community engagement. It was not a decision by us. It was by the whole community. So everybody was on board about taking down some of the existing trees, but planting new ones that are recommended by our community. So it was not a solo decision. It was a community decision.

Mr. Chair, I can also note on the proposed planting. At the time in 1991, Zelkovas were like the thing. They were readily available. What we were trying to do back in, it wasn't my design, but landscape architects in general in 1991 were trying to get the elms back. And the issue of the vase shaped and the Zelkovas were supposed to do that. Over time, these zelkovas have been damaged, which is what's causing them to sort of fluff out. So instead of having a regular leader and the way that they're supposed to branch out, they now have multiple ones, which causes them to do this puffball thing. That is not a natural condition, and the species that have been chosen now are the result of 30 years of development of cultivars, For urban conditions, they're skinnier, they respond better to the urban environment, and they're just different. Also, what we see is that in 1991, there was more or less a monoculture of Zelkovas that were planted. That's not the case this time. What a bird. 14 different plant species being proposed throughout the area. And it's a totally different planting palette for these here. So we're hoping to avoid some of the difficulties that had come up over the last 30 years.

You mentioned the ADA compliant for the sidewalk, it's a five feet minimum width, or is it less? It could be less.

It cannot be less. So if it's straight track and you're not making any turns in your wheelchair, it's four feet. But if you have to turn 90 degrees and go into the store, it's five feet minimum. It's the same as would be building or will be outside. Okay. The width has to be five feet, not more. ProVag IDA allows 2% cross slope, ProVag recommends 1.6% of the cross slope in that location. So the sidewalk has to be very level. But then you have to meet the curb, and then you have to meet the, would be the store, restaurant, or building, or other facility to enter. So those slopes, are different shape and allow different. That has to be less than 5%. So it was back and forward, back and forward while we able to achieve the trees, new trees, accessibility walkway, crosswalks, access to the buildings, maintain the positive pitch for drainage. We want to pitch everything away, all water into the road because there's no any storm inlets there. So this is what we're able to achieve. And as proven on phase one, which is Ive Street, the downtown green area, all being constructed on phase one. Then now it's been just recently constructed. We call it phase 2A. And it seems that everything looks great, in my opinion. And the trees are, they grow. but they're going to be in control manner, which we are providing root barriers so we can sustain the tree within the certain location and hopefully prolongate the life of the tree itself and sidewalks so we don't have to do reconstruction next 35 years. Maybe it's going to be 45. Who knows?

Any other questions?

I'm good.

I really think we're going to adjourn then. I second your motion. Did we hear a motion to adjourn? I second. Mr. Chen, thank you.

Nice meeting you. Mr. Chen, again, please just look at our website. You will see a lot of information.

Yeah, I already looked at the plans. That's why I know some of it. Okay.