HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-07
RESOLUTION NO. 2009-07
UPHOLDING PLANNING DIVISION DENIAL OF TREE REMOVAL
APPLICATION (TR09-007) REQUESTING REMOVAL OF ONE TOWN-
PROTECTED REDWOOD TREE
(APN: 202-202-016-DA VIS)
WHEREAS, Jill Beeman, on behalf of Kelly and Brian Davis, requested approval of Tree
Removal application TR09-000?, to allow the removal of one Town-protected Redwood tree
in the side yard of a 0.23 + / - acre site; and
WHEREAS, the subject site is located at 111 Gatetree Court and is further identified as
Assessor's Parcel Number 202-202-016; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Danville Tree Preservation Ordinance requires approval of a Tree
Removal permit prior to the removal of a Town-protected tree; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Division denied TR09-000? on March 10, 2009; and
WHEREAS, Jill Beeman, on bahlf of Kelly and Brian Davis, submitted a letter appealing the
Planning Division's action on March 16,2009; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the project at a noticed public hearing on
March 31, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the project has been found to be Categorically Exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Section 15304); and
WHEREAS, the public notice of this action was given in all respects as required by law;
and
WHEREAS, a staff report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission
deny the appeal; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all reports, recommendations,
and testimony submitted in writing and presented at the hearing; now, therefore, be it
RESOL VED that the Planning Commission of the Town of Danville denies the appeal and
upholds the Planning Division's denial of Tree Removal application TR09-0007, and makes
the following findings in support of this action:
1. Town Staff has determined that the Redwood tree is not in poor condition with
respect to its health, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing structures, or
interference with utility infrastructure or any other site improvements. The Arborist
report also confirmed that the tree displayed no signs of insect, disease, or structural
issues that would suggest it is at risk.
2. The necessity to remove the tree(s) to allow for the reasonable use, enjoyment, or
development of the property. The owners are not developing the property and the
tree is not affecting the reasonable use of the property as a residential dwelling.
Although the tree in question does seasonally drop needles and debris, that is a
natural process and cannot be used to make the findings to authorize removal. With
respect to view shed protection and preservation; it has been the Town's practice to
not interpret" reasonable use, enjoyment. . ." in the context of authorizing removal of
a Town-protected tree, for the purposes of protecting views.
3. T~e effect of the removal of the tree upon soil erosion or whether its removal will
result in a significant diversion or increase in the flow of surface water. This
criterion is insignificant, as the property is relatively flat. Removal of the tree will
not increase, decrease, or result in a diversion in the flow of surface water.
4. Based upon the number, species, size and location of other protected trees in the
area, the removal of the Redwood tree will have a negative effect upon shade and
the scenic beauty of the area.
PAGE 2 OF RESOLUTION 2009-07
APPROVED by the Danville Planning Commission at a regular meeting on March 31, 2009
by the following vote:
AYES: Antoun, Combs, Overcashier, Nichols, Storer
NOES: Morgan, Radich
ABSTAIN: -
ABSENT:
L/4~/
.
Chair
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
n~t3 L
City Attorney )
t~f!(;r-
PAGE 3 OF RESOLUTION 2009-07