Laserfiche WebLink
8.A <br /> Page 46 <br /> meetings, visits to homes of affected parties, analysis of the neighborhood context, and <br /> correspondence with interested parties throughout the application review process. <br /> Furthermore, to the extent members of the community feel their interests have not been <br /> fully considered by City staff, they may utilize the City's established appeal process <br /> under Article 48 of the Redwood City Zoning Ordinance to ensure adequate review. <br /> 3. (a) The policy and practice of permiiting healthy urban trees to be removed by <br /> properfy owners when reasonable means are available to preserve such trees. <br /> The Redwood City Municipal Code allows removal of trees pursuant to Chapter 35 <br /> thereof, and the City staff s review of an application for an Architectural Permit under <br /> Article 45 of the Redwood City Zoning Ordinance includes an assessment of natural <br /> features such as trees. City staff follows an established tree services program, which <br /> includes Best Management� Practices for planting, pruning, maintenance, preservation <br /> and removal. More information about the City's tree services can be referenced at the <br /> following website http://www.redwoodcitv.orq/publicworks/trees/index.html. In this case, <br /> the City's decision to approve a design requiring removal of a tree was based on the <br /> professional recommendation of a Certified Arborist who is a registered member of the <br /> American Society of Consulting Arborists and a member of the International Society of <br /> Arboriculture. The recommendation for removal was also peer reviewed by the City's <br /> Urban Forestry Specialist prior to the Zoning Administrator rendering a decision. <br /> (b) The policy and practice of applying inappropriate, environmentally unsound <br /> standards and methodologies when monetarizing the value of healthy urban <br /> trees. <br /> The valuation of the tree was based on the professional recommendation of the <br /> aforementioned Certified Arborist as documented on the Appraisal Worksheet <br /> referenced in the Arborist Report, which is a recognized practice. <br /> 4. The policy and practice of undervaluing or ignoring the legitimate legal, equitable, <br /> and community privacy interests of neighbors, especially when reasonable <br /> means are available to profect such interests. <br /> The City does not have a privacy policy and therefore cannot render a decision <br /> associated with an Architectural Permit on such an issue. According to Article 45 of the <br /> Redwood City Zoning Ordinance the purview of the Architectural Permit process is <br /> limited to: 1) Portions of structures facing upon a public street or place; 2) Portions of <br /> the sides of a structure, and rear in the case of a corner lot, which are within fifty (50) <br /> feet of any portion of the structure which faces upon a public street or place; and, <br /> 3)Roof overhang, roofing material, and siding material only, in the case of a single or <br /> finro (2)-family dwel(ing. <br /> In an effort to address appellants concerns, City staff worked with the applicant to <br /> consider privacy interests of neighbors. The applicant has offered to build a screen wall <br /> on the rear deck. Further consideration has also been given to the type and location of <br /> 2 <br />