Atherton commission approves removal of heritage coast redwood at 50 Lilac Drive amid code-enforcement concerns
Loading...
Summary
The Planning Commission approved a permit to remove a heritage coast redwood (tree number 10) at 50 Lilac Drive after staff reported the tree was damaged by unpermitted work; the applicant had paid a damage fine and proposed large replacement trees as conditions of approval.
The Atherton Planning Commission approved a heritage tree removal permit for a 31.9-inch coast redwood on a property at 50 Lilac Drive after hearing that the tree was damaged during unpermitted patio and hardscape work.
Town Planner Britney Bendix opened the item, saying the tree (identified as tree number 10 in the staff report) was damaged during work that was not shown on approved plans. Bendix said the site first came before the commission in 2021 for a variance related to garage work, permits were issued in 2022 and 2023, and the town arborist was notified in the fall of 2024 when private arborists reported root damage. Bendix told commissioners the applicant had not filed a permit for the outdoor patio that caused the damage and recommended denial; the town arborist likewise recommended denial.
Code enforcement provided appraisal and fine details on the record. Lisa Marie Veil, the town’s code enforcement officer, said the arborist’s appraisal valued the tree at $21,900 and that the jurisdiction charged the applicant $10,950 for the damage (half the appraised value), noting that an illegal removal would have doubled the penalty to roughly $42,000.
Applicant representatives and the property owners described the damage as the result of a general contractor’s excavation and said the work was not intended to harm the tree. Architect Chris Franklin told the commission the contractor began the patio work before a formal plan submittal and that the project team engaged an arborist after the town alerted them to the damage. The owners said removing the tree was a last resort and described concerns about pollen affecting a child and the tree’s proximity to a proposed outdoor living area.
Why it matters: Atherton’s tree ordinance protects certain “heritage” trees and imposes fines for unpermitted damage. Commissioners judged competing interests — neighborhood tree preservation and the property owner’s desire to use the outdoor area safely — while also noting the site’s history of prior variances and the contractor’s role.
Vote and conditions: The commission voted to approve the heritage tree removal permit (permit HTR 24-4) by roll call with Commissioners Tonelli and Vice Chair Polito recorded as voting yes, Commissioner Levinson recorded as no, and Chair Lane ultimately voting yes. Commissioners discussed replacement conditions: the town arborist recommended replacement planting including a 60-inch oak and a 36-inch oak; commissioners noted the applicant had already installed a large oak on the driveway and required confirmation of replacement plantings at final inspection. The motion on the record referenced CEQA categorical exemption Section 15304 (minor alterations to land).
Discussion highlights: Commissioners and staff discussed chronology (variance in 2021; permits 2022–23; damage noticed fall 2024), the citation and fine, and the town’s enforcement expectations for contractors and property owners. Multiple commissioners expressed frustration that the work was performed without permits and urged outreach to the contractor. Staff and commissioners also noted a code provision that fines double if a damaged tree dies within a year of the citation.
Next steps and compliance: Conditions include replacement planting per the town arborist’s direction and final plan checks. Staff said they would undertake outreach to ensure the contractor and property owners understand permitting requirements; commissioners asked that any outreach be reviewed by the town attorney before distribution.
