Saratoga News

News

Martin barking up the wrong tree at planning--she's headed to council

By Shannon Burkey

A recent planning commission decision to deny an appeal of a minor modification to a design approval has left one Saratoga resident feeling the city has failed her.

"I guess I naively thought the city would do the right thing," Yolanda Martin said.

The trouble began in November when Martin realized her neighbor had put a cement walkway on his property--a walkway which she said is on top of the roots of two of her olive trees and an oak tree and is causing them severe damage.

When the neighbor, Paul Qian, went before the planning commission in 2003 for design approval on the construction of his new home, the commission added a condition of approval. The walkway would have to be of a pervious material to protect the trees it would be in proximity to.

"A pervious walkway needs to be there because my trees will suffer, and down the road they may die," Martin said.

But three years later, the city has signed off on the project, the Qians have taken up residence and an impervious walkway is in place where a pervious one should be.

"I was led to believe that the city would require him to put in a pervious material," Martin said. "My only concern was to protect the vegetation and trees on my property, but the city wasn't very reactive to the issue. The city dropped the ball on this project, and because of it my trees have suffered."

From the beginning of construction, Martin said, there have been several issues that have concerned her, and on several occasions she has contacted the city to express these concerns. During construction, a utility trench was dug, which she claimed severed the roots of two of her olive trees, and no protective fencing was put up around the construction site.

"All of my calls would go unanswered time and time again," she said.

So when she noticed the cement walkway, she said she was finally forced to make a formal complaint in writing, hoping that would get the attention of the city.

Upon receiving the complaint, city arborist Kate Bear began looking into the issue. Qian also hired his own arborist. The two came to the same conclusion--the cement needed to be moved from the area under the oak tree, but the olive trees would be fine with the cement.

"It's my opinion that both olive trees are viable," Bear said to commission members at their Jan. 10 meeting. "I have not seen olives go through deterioration and die because of something like this. They are pretty resilient trees."

After receiving the reports of the two arborists, Community Development Director John Livingstone made the decision to make a minor modification to the condition of approval, allowing the cement to stay in place under the olive trees but be removed under the oak tree and replaced with a pervious material.

"We started with the enforcement action and at some point the owner was going to come in and ask for a modification, but the city arborist and his arborist both agreed on their findings. To force him to come in and remove the whole walkway is counter-productive," Livingstone said.

But Martin did not agree with the decision and filed an appeal. She said she feels the only reason the decision was made was to protect the city.

At the planning commission meeting to make a decision on the appeal, Martin told members she was there to save her trees, and without the help of the commission her trees would be doomed.

Although commission members expressed displeasure with people disregarding their conditions of approval, they placed a tremendous value on the reports of the arborists.

After much discussion the commission voted 4-1 to deny Martin's appeal. Commissioner Robert Kundtz, the lone dissenting vote, said he wanted to send a message with his vote.

"People worked long and hard to determine it was important for the survival of the trees that the walkway be made of a pervious material," Kundtz said. "I wanted to go back to the root cause, that if you are given a condition of approval you better live by it."

Although she is disappointed by the decision, Martin said she is not all that surprised by it and plans to appeal it to the city council.