- There has been a difficult time getting the main project before the
- The neighbors of the project want to get this hearing before the
Commission but they cannot file for a Discretionary Review without there
being an actual project.
- Everything should be heard together so she recommends that this be
continued to some time in April.
- There is no reason to delay any action or decision today.
- All the issues dealing with the tree can be discussed with regard
to the permit and the Variance.
NOTE: Motion to continue to April 14, 2005 did not receive a second
and did not move forward for the vote.
Re: Point of Clarity
- The permit was has been issued so it is impossible to file a Discretionary
- It is important to discuss all aspects of the tree at one time.
- This is not an abnormal request. It is a natural process.
Re: Merits of Project
Catherine Petrin - Appellant
- She is representing many other neighbors who could not be here today.
- The neighbors did not oppose the project. They support the Negative
Declaration issued in 2004.
- If the project would reflect the information of the first Negative
Declaration, they would not be here.
- She displayed a block and lot map showing the location of the project.
- She displayed photographs of the tree in question.
- There are certified arborists that state that the tree still has
a long life. The tree only suffers from a lack of maintenance.
- The project sponsor has not maintained or pruned the tree.
- She asked the Commission to help preserve this historic tree.
Wendy Hampton - Vandewater Neighbors
- The Planning Department has not done a normal process of investigation
for this type of project but is basing its findings on the recommendation
of an arborist.
- If this Negative Declaration is approved, the neighbors will protest
against the project and the Variance decision.
- This project should accommodate Vandewater's unique character
- The rear yard is related to saving the tree.
- He is puzzled. When the developer presented the project to a neighborhood
group, he stated that the tree would be preserved.
- If this were the case, the project would have been moved forward
with no damage to the roots of the tree.
Carolyn Blair - Tree Council
- They would not be here if the proposal to protect tree would have
- They hired unbiased arborists to make a determination on the tree.
- She asked the Commission to follow through with their requirements
to preserve trees.
(+) David Cincotta - Project Sponsor
- He understands the resident's concerns about the tree.
- This is not the process to deal with this issue. None of the speakers
addressed the Negative Declaration.
- In order to protect the tree it would need 30 feet of clear space.
- The City's arborist determined that the tree was in bad condition.
- The tree has nothing to do with the Variance.
- The tree does not satisfy the mid-block open space.
- The issues here have to deal with the Environmental Impact report.
- The decision has been delayed for five months already.
- The tree is dangerous even if the project did not go forward because
it has significant decay.
ACTION: Negative Declaration Upheld
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee, Olague