Cities Index.
Attachment 8 - 2008 Denial Letter

Santa Rosa City Council
June 4, 2024

Document
Attachment 8 - 2008 Denial Letter
Meeting
June 4, 2024
Body
Santa Rosa City Council
Original file
537 KB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on legistar.granicus.com. That file is the official record.

Attachment 8

May 29, 2008

Michael J. Woodruff
The Salvation Army
USA Western Territorial Headquarters
180 East Ocean Boulevard, 9th Floor
Long Beach, CA 90802-4709

Dear Mr. Woodruff:

I am in receipt of you letters of March 13 and May 19, 2008 in which you request a permit for the removal of the Bunya Bunya tree that is on the Silvercrest property.

I understand that the City denied this permit, and the time to appeal has come and gone.

The Salvation Army’s general counsel has written to advise the City that the tree poses a grave health and safety risk because of the cones it sheds. Attached to this letter is a letter from a certified arborist saying the same. SA relies upon a section of the City Code (17-24-030(A)(3) that allows emergency removal of a tree that poses an immediate threat of injury. Under that section, a permit is not required, only permission from any of the department heads: Police, Fire, Public Works, Utilities, Recreation and Parks, Community Development, City Manager. SA insists that the City grant it permission to remove the tree based on the foregoing. SA has threatened further legal action if its request is denied.

The City's arborist, Lisa Grant, says the tree is healthy, as does the SA's arborist. The tree sheds cones, which condition is a foreseeable risk of injury if the cones are not removed, are allowed to shed naturally, and the tree is not maintained regularly. To manage this risk, the City regularly maintains the bunya bunya trees on its property by, among other things, removing the cones. To date, there have been no reported bunya bunya-related injury claims in the City.

ISSUE: Is the bunya bunya on SA's property a hazardous or dangerous condition which requires immediate action to protect life or property?
ANSWER: No.

DISCUSSION: Clearly, what is contemplated by City Code Section 17-24-030(A)(3) is the emergency removal of a condition that poses an immediate threat of injury, e.g., a hanging branch, partially felled tree. This condition is not present here. As long as the tree is regularly maintained and the cones are professionally removed, it does not pose an immediate threat of injury to passersby. This is consistent with the conclusions contained in Ms. Grant’s report.

Sincerely,

JEFF KOLIN
City Manager

JK/sks

c: Susie Murray, Community Development Technician

f:\manager\jck\salvationarmy.doc

← All documents from this meeting