Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Forest topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission denies homeowner request to remove Canary Island pine at 347 Indiana Avenue
Summary
The Community and Human Services Commission voted unanimously to deny a homeowner’s request to remove one Canary Island pine at 347 Indiana Avenue, finding the tree healthy and not meeting the city’s hazardous‑tree criteria; staff said the owner may pay removal and replacement costs if the commission overturns staff later.
Chair called the commission to consider a request from the owner of 347 Indiana Avenue to remove a Canary Island pine located on the Michigan side of the property.
Staff presentation and finding Carrie Delman, the city’s community services manager, told the commission the subject tree is healthy, has been trimmed in January 2020 and May 2024, and does not meet the city’s hazardous‑tree criteria (dead branches, cavities, rotten wood or fractures). Delman said staff recommended denial of the removal request but noted an alternative in the municipal tree policy: an owner may pay for removal and replacement with two trees, at an estimated cost of just over $2,200.
Owner testimony and neighbor responses Property owner Richard Suter spoke during public comment, saying multiple trees on his short street have fallen in recent years and asserting he can “prove with certainty” that the tree would fall onto his house and endanger his and his wife’s safety. Suter said the owners are willing to pay removal and replacement costs. Neighbor Sandy Leopoldo urged the commission to retain the Michigan Drive pines, saying she had no recollection of failures on Michigan Drive and praising their appearance.
Expert assessment and commission discussion City arborist Richard Hecker described the city’s tree‑risk assessment process (TRAQ), saying evaluators consider the tree’s likelihood of failure, the health of the tree, its location and other factors to reach an expert judgment. Hecker stated the tree in question rated as a low probability of failure. Commissioners pressed staff on whether the owner’s claim of a "high probability" could be quantified; staff responded the owner’s reports about other neighborhood trees do not constitute objective evidence that the subject tree is hazardous.
Motion and outcome Commissioner Brower moved to deny the removal request; Commissioner Scott Tu seconded. The commission conducted a roll call vote and the motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Silva absent.
Next steps and alternatives Delman reiterated that if the commission or staff later determine removal is appropriate, the municipal policy allows the owner to pay for removal and required replacement plantings. Commissioners also urged the resident to pursue mitigation measures discussed at the meeting (for example, documenting conditions and returning with additional evidence if circumstances change).
