CCMIN011696 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mayor Tarver supported the action on the basis that Council still has the ability to appeal. However, Council will have to review the action reports carefully. No action was required or taken on this item. Item 6b Appeal by Dolores and Daniel Gilmore of the decision bv the Public Works Director denyin~ herminion for removal of a Heritage tree at 7817 Flagstone Drive. (SR 96:21) Randall Lum presented the staff report. Dan Gilmore, 7817 Flagstone Drive, stated he requested to have the tree removed three times because of the damage it was causing to the roof of his home. Staff has denied the removal because there are no hazardous or unusual conditions affecting the tree. The second request had a letter from a licensed arborist, his contractor and a roofer, recommending removal of this tree. The problem, as he sees it, is the type of needle which drops from this tree. The needles have sharp points that get into the valleys of the shingles. They jam their way under the shingles and the only way to remove them is with a screwdriver or power water injection. Power water injection is not recommended because it can cause other damage to the roof. During the last rain the gutters ffiled up with small pine cones which backed up into the valleys which caused the roof to leak. He gave Council a video tape showing the litter caused by the tree. Mr. Gilmore indicated he can no longer get on the roof to clean the gutters and on a fixed income it is not feasible to hire someone to do the job. Dee Gilmore said the contractor indicated cutting the tree back would not solve the problem, but would only damage the tree. Debbie Smith, 7800 Flagstone Drive, a neighbor of the Gilmores, indicated her support for removal of the tree. It is grossly overgrown for the size of the lot and towers over their home. She feels it is a threat to the surrounding properties. They plan to replace the tree with a variety of oak which will be an asset to the street and the city. Ms. Dennis went to look at the tree and indicated she has never seen one this big in the Valley. She urged Council to uphold the appeal and to amend the Heritage Tree Ordinance so it is more specific and this kind of appeal is no longer necessary. She referred to the preamble of the ordinance which desires to preserve native and indigenous trees. It is illogical to define a heritage tree by trunk size only. She feels the ordinance could be revised to protect the trees that were here first, but to give people who plant trees some options. Mr. Pico felt it would be difficult to change the ordinance. He referred to many of the large eucalyptus trees in the area and Monterey pines that are now native to this area. I-Ie sympathized with problems with debris on roofs, but did feel the problems were insurmountable. He did not support changing the ordinance. 01/16/96 -4-