Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Heritage Tree Removal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Urban Forestry Board upholds staff, denies removal of two heritage liquid-amber trees at 1851 Apple Tree Lane
Summary
At its April 9, 2025 meeting the Board denied a homeowner's appeal to remove two heritage liquid-amber (American sweetgum) trees after staff said the trees were in good condition and alternatives existed for driveway repairs. The Board's decision preserves the trees but leaves the homeowner the option to reapply if conditions change.
Get email alerts on the Heritage Tree Removal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Urban Forestry Board on April 9, 2025 voted to deny an appeal from the homeowner of 1851 Apple Tree Lane seeking removal of two heritage liquid-amber (American sweetgum) trees, upholding staff's recommendation that the trees be preserved.
Board members and staff said the trees are healthy and that removal was not yet justified because alternatives exist for the homeowner's driveway repairs. Russ Hansen, Urban Forest Manager for the City of Mountain View, told the Board the two trees were rated in "good health and good structure" and that staff could not confirm the size or number of roots lifting the driveway without removing the concrete first. "We weren't able to determine if that's sufficient enough that requires removal of the tree," Hansen said.
Why it matters: Removing heritage trees requires meeting city criteria intended to favor preservation. The Board noted that if the homeowner exposes the roots while repairing the driveway and discovers a change in condition, staff will accept a new application and re-evaluate removal.
Details of the case: Hansen said the property owner reported lifting and cracking along a driveway and submitted a removal application listing insufficient growing space, interference with utilities and damage to structures as reasons. Staff inspected both trees and identified surface roots in some spots but said they could not determine overall root size without demolition of the driveway and walkway. Hansen told the Board that "without seeing [the roots], I just can't make an educated or informed decision."
Homeowner David Charles said the issue was not an attempt to expand the driveway but to address repeated lifting that has made parts of the driveway difficult to use and costly to repair. "If I spend lots of money in fixing the driveway and fixing this side walkway, what's the guarantee that same problem is not gonna happen 5 years from now?" Charles asked the Board.
Neighbors and advocates spoke against removal. Patrice Horvath, who lives next door at 1843 Apple Tree Lane, told the Board the trees have been on the street for decades and that cutting healthy trees would alter the street's character. Bruce England of Green Spaces Mountain View urged the Board to avoid removals where trees are healthy and to preserve the neighborhood canopy.
Board action: A motion to adopt a resolution denying the homeowner's appeal and uphold staff's decision was approved by roll call (Commissioner O'Brien: yes; Commissioner Filios: yes; Commissioner Summer: yes; Vice Chair Michener: yes; Chair Davis: yes). The Board therefore denied removal; the homeowner may submit a new application if removal becomes necessary after root exposure during driveway work.
What happens next: Staff said the denial does not prevent the owner from repairing the driveway; if excavation during a repair reveals large structural roots that change the condition, the owner can return with new evidence for reconsideration. The Board and staff encouraged the owner to coordinate with staff about timing and testing to avoid prolonged permit suspensions.
Ending note: The decision preserves the two heritage trees for now while leaving a clear administrative path for re-evaluation if the physical evidence changes.

