PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF 12/15/03

 2003-0827- Appeal of a decision of the Director of Community Development denying the removal of a Podocarpus tree.  The property is located at 1007 Payette Avenue in an R-1 (Low-Density Residential) Zoning District.  (APN: 326-04-011) JM

Jamie McLeod, Project Planner, presented the staff report.  She gave the history of the tree removal application for a Podocarpus, which has been denied twice. Staff stated that the application claims that roots are damaging the driveway and the adjacent resident's house foundation, shed cement base and the sidewalk.  She added that the applicant expressed safety concerns because of the uneven sidewalk.  Staff reported that the City Arborist recommended some techniques such as cutting the roots and putting a barrier to deflect the roots from growing back.  Staff determined that removal of the tree would have a negative impact on the overall streetscape of the neighborhood.  Staff was unable to make the required Findings and recommended denying the appeal and upholding the decision of the Director of Community Development denying the removal of the tree.

Vice Chair Moylan asked staff whether the City Arborist inspected the site prior to denying the permit.  Staff responded that on November 3, the City Arborist visited and inspected the site.

Vice Chair Moylan asked staff what other remedial alternatives could the neighbor do should the removal of tree be denied. Staff responded that the City Arborist recommended several alternatives such as cutting the root or installing roots barriers.

Chair Babcock asked staff what would be the size of the tree at its full growth potential or whether the tree would stay at its current size. Staff responded that currently it is not at its full growth potential; however, with required pruning, the tree could stay at its current size.

Bryant Yount, resident, speaking on behalf of the applicant, stated that most of the Findings are true that the tree is healthy.  However, he stated that the tree is still growing rapidly and the root that is damaging the neighbor's property has a diameter of 14" which appears to be the main artery for the tree.  He expressed concerns that if the root is trimmed, the tree would be unstable and, therefore a hazard. He stated that if the tree is left as it is, it would continue to be a hazard.  He also stated that the applicant has trimmed the roots as recommended by the City Arborist two years ago.  However, the damage has shifted to the other side of the tree.  He commented that, based on the City Arborist's recommendation, trimming this root would be more than 20% of the root structure and; therefore, would not maintain the health of the tree.  He stated that the applicant is willing to replace the tree with an appropriate tree specie.   He also presented an independent arborist report stating that pruning the root would not be a safe alternative and recommended removal of the tree.  He urged the Commission to grant the appeal and approve the removal of the Podocarpus.

Vice Chair Moylan asked where the root diameter measurement was taken from.  Mr. Yount pointed out where he took the measurement from on a graphic display.

Further, Vice Chair Moylan commented that during his site visit he noticed a telephone line that goes through the middle of the ball of the tree and asked whether it is being affected. Mr. Yount responded probably but felt that it is not their concern at the moment.  He stated that the concern is the damage being caused by the tree to their property and the next door neighbor and that he felt that no alternative would prevent the damage.

Oscar Ozdemir, resident, stated that the root is damaging his property such as lifting up the sidewalk area and the cement base of his shed. He expressed his concerns that the roots may go under the house foundation and cause more damage to his property.  He stated that he feels that the City Arborist did not inspect the tree properly. 

Chair Babcock closed the public hearing.

Vice Chair Moylan made a motion on Item #2003-0827 to grant the appeal and approve the removal of the Podocarpus tree.

Motion failed due to lack of second.

Comm. Simons made a motion on Item #2003-0827 to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Director of Community Development denying the removal of the Podocarpus tree.  Comm. Hungerford seconded.

Comm. Simons agreed with the City Arborist and that there are several techniques to minimize the effect of the tree to the properties such as working with trenches, installing a root barrier or removing the roots. He stated that he values the opinion and recommendation of the City Arborist.  He encouraged the applicant that should there be a change in the condition of the tree to contact staff for another review.

Comm. Hungerford agreed with the City Arborist's recommendation and felt that the removal of the root would prevent further damage.

Vice Chair Moylan commented that he was able to make the required Findings #2.  He stated that the applicant has made an excellent argument that the tree is a hazard.  He stated that the Commission should decide independently of the City Arborist's recommendation and determine whether one of the required Findings could be made.

Chair Babcock supported the motion and encouraged the appellant to try the recommended techniques by the City Arborist.

Motion carried 3-1 with Vice Chair Moylan dissenting.

Ms. Ryan stated that the decision is final.