Sonoma City commission approves three tree-removal permits; requires replacement trees and root protection

The Parks, Recreation and Open Space Commission voted Sept. 10 to approve three separate permits to remove trees at 19330 Natalina Court, 404 Montini Way and 697 Avenue Del Oro, requiring replacement trees chosen from the city's approved master tree list and site measures such as root barriers where appropriate.

Commission discussion ranged from concerns about sidewalk displacement and trunk proximity to shallow water lines to the practical difficulty of homeowners who must prune trees regularly to preserve rooftop solar output. The commission recorded identical vote tallies on each permit: four votes in favor, one opposed and one absent.

Staff said the Natalina Court oak had sprouted as a volunteer tree and that the property owner reported the canopy was blocking solar panels and that the trunk was within several feet of two water service lines. City arborist John Meserve told the commission he did not make a specific recommendation on the first tree and left the decision to the commissioners: “I didn't specifically make a recommendation on this one. I was going to leave that up to you folks,” Meserve said during the hearing.

For the Natalina Court permit, commissioners recommended removal with a replacement small‑stature tree selected from the city's approved list, installed with root barriers to limit lateral root growth near water lines. Commissioners discussed allowing the owner to relocate panels, the cost and cadence of regular pruning, and whether a cash-in-lieu option exists; staff said a formal cash-in-lieu program is not currently established and that, in practice so far, most applicants have planted replacement trees.

At 404 Montini Way, the arborist's report described a tree in relatively poor condition and sidewalk lift caused by root growth; commissioners noted there had been confusion over which specimen was inspected in the field and ultimately approved removal with replacement, recommending staff finalize a site verification if any discrepancy remains. At 697 Avenue Del Oro, commissioners discussed redwood roots lifting a neighboring driveway and noted the owner had asked that a decision not be delayed while they explored root-pruning options; the commission approved removal with replacement trees from the approved list.

For all three approvals the commission included the expectation that replacement trees be chosen from the city's master tree list and meet siting guidance (small‑stature species where appropriate). Staff noted that permits include a five‑year survival/maintenance requirement and that failure to keep a required replacement alive can trigger a penalty under the city's code.

The commission's action letters and the arborist reports will be made part of the permit records; staff and the arborist will follow up with homeowners to confirm replacement species, planting location and any required root‑barrier detail.

The commission's vote counts and the recorded roll-call responses are included in the meeting minutes and in the actions array below.