OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

City of Mountain View Parks and Recreation and Urban Forestry Board Meeting - December 12, 2025

City CouncilFriday, December 12, 2025
BodyMountain View, California
SessionCity Council
DateFriday, December 12, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:07:02
Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

i will now call to order the uh december wednesday december 10th meeting of the uh

0:07

city of mountain views parks and recreation and urban forestry board um allison can you please

0:13

conduct our roll call commissioner bryant yes commissioner felios here commissioner summer

0:22

here vice chair mitchner here and chair davis is absent

0:30

it all right we'll now move on to approval of the minutes um just first amongst our commissioners are

0:38

there any questions about the minutes or is there any public comment on the minutes

0:47

these would be the minutes from our november 17th meeting nothing online okay i'll entertain a motion

0:56

to approve the minutes. So moved. Sorry. Motion and a second. Let's conduct our vote.

1:07

Okay. Commissioner Bryant. Yes. Commissioner Felios. Yes. Commissioner Sommer. Yes. And

1:15

Vice Chair Michener. Yes. All right. We'll now move on to oral communications from the public.

1:22

this portion of the meeting is reserved for people wishing to address the commission on any matter

1:27

not on the agenda so not the two heritage tree appeals that we'll be hearing speakers are limited

1:34

to three minutes and state law prohibits the commission from acting on non-agenda items

1:40

if anyone in attendance would like to provide public comment please also fill out a blue card

1:46

Is there anybody in the room who would like to?

1:51

No public comment there.

1:53

Allison, is there anybody online?

1:55

No.

1:56

Right.

1:58

We'll close public comment and move on to new business.

2:04

Tonight we have two heritage tree appeals.

2:08

And I'm going to start off by introducing our two city attorneys that are going to be with us tonight.

2:15

and i may introduce you again after before the second appeal just in case somebody's not listening

2:20

yet um assistant city attorney diana fazelli will be representing city staff and senior assistant

2:27

city attorney dave wilgus will be representing the urban forestry board for the procedures that we're

2:35

going through um just to our first uh 5.1 is a heritage tree removal application at 3440 truman

2:46

avenue and i'm just going to run through the quick uh process that i will be following for this appeal

2:53

um we will first have a staff report um then following that the appellant uh

3:00

we'll have 10 minutes to speak.

3:06

And in that, since the appellant is not the original applicant,

3:10

if the original applicant and the appellant agree,

3:13

the original applicant can use some of that 10 minutes

3:17

for comments of their own if they choose.

3:22

Following that, the commission will be able to ask any questions that we have.

3:26

Then there will be public comments.

3:28

and then after that staff will have an additional two minutes for any closing comments and then the

3:37

appellant will have two minutes again and again they can allocate some of that time to the

3:44

to the applicant if they would like following that the prc will be make will deliberate and

3:51

make any motion that is appropriate so let's start off with our staff report we have urban forestry

3:59

manager russell hansen who will be making that report thank you commissioner let me get that

4:06

presentation up here

4:07

there it goes okay so again thank you commissioner um russell hansen urban forest

4:21

manager for community services here to talk about the appeal of uh to me at 3440 truman avenue

4:28

the tree in question is a pinus radiata or monterey pine approximately 20 inches in diameter

4:36

when measured at 54 inches above grade and we considered the tree to be both in fair health as

4:41

well as fair structure at a minimum the applicant had listed uh six criteria on the application

4:49

First was tree is in poor health.

4:51

Second, tree is in danger of falling.

4:53

Tree is near the end of its lifespan.

4:55

Tree does not have proper growth space.

4:58

Tree is interfering with utility service.

5:00

And the tree is growing in close proximity to structures and causing damage or will in the near future.

5:06

So those were the criteria that we were evaluating the tree on.

5:10

Additionally, the property owner had provided some comments about the roots having damaged the existing driveway.

5:17

They talked of the tree roots posing a risk of significantly damaging a new driveway, as well as the proposed house plan, as they would be closer to the tree.

5:26

The seat or sap from the tree makes the driveway completely unusable for any car parked on the driveway gets sap from the tree, which doesn't even get cleaned by a car wash.

5:39

On the road outside, our home parking is not allowed, outside of our home, parking is not allowed, and it is creating a lot of challenges.

5:50

In addition, they had mentioned their two-year-old child has severe skin allergies, and that they were concerned that the sap falling from the tree had led to allergic reaction on their child.

6:02

um when we look at the tree itself um there is a burl on the west side of the tree approximately

6:10

a foot and a half two foot tall and equivalent kind of around the trunk really only goes around

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Parks and Recreation█████████████████████████████████████████████87%
Engineering And Infrastructure████8%
Procedural███5%
Summary of Proceedings

City of Mountain View Parks and Recreation and Urban Forestry Board Meeting - December 12, 2025

The Parks and Recreation and Urban Forestry Board met on December 12, 2025, at 6:00 PM (noting the agenda indicated a 3:00 PM start time but the meeting was called to order at approximately 6:08 PM). The board considered two heritage tree removal appeals, approved the previous meeting minutes, and honored outgoing Commissioner Steve Filios.

Consent Calendar

  • Approval of Minutes (November 17, 2024): The board unanimously approved the minutes with no public comment or commissioner questions. (Bryant, Felios, Sommer, Mitchner in favor; Davis absent.)

Public Comments & Testimony

  • No public comments were made for items not on the agenda.

Discussion Items

Heritage Tree Appeal – 3440 Truman Avenue

  • Tree: Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), approximately 20 inches diameter at breast height, rated in fair health and fair structure by staff.
  • Appellant/Property Owner: Prithvi Raj (owner of the property) spoke in favor of removal, citing: (1) her two-year-old child’s severe skin allergies, which she correlated with tree sap; (2) nuisance from sap on the driveway, which is the only parking area (street parking prohibited during school hours); (3) previous root damage to the existing brick driveway, and concern that a new driveway and a home moved 7 feet closer will be damaged; and (4) the tree’s large burl and unbalanced canopy that could pose a fall risk toward the house.
  • Staff Position (Russell Hansen, Urban Forest Manager): Recommended denial of removal. Staff found the tree’s health and structure were fair; no evidence of pest/disease or structural failure that could not be addressed by corrective pruning. The driveway can be repaired using a modular paver system that minimizes root disturbance. The child’s allergies were acknowledged but not medically linked to this specific tree via a clear allergy test. Staff stated that if additional medical evidence is provided, the application could be reconsidered sooner than the typical two-year moratorium.
  • Commission Deliberation: Commissioners expressed sympathy for the child’s health concerns but found insufficient evidence linking allergies to the tree and noted the other issues (sap, parking, root damage) did not meet the city’s heritage tree removal criteria. They emphasized that staff’s analysis was thorough and that the tree could be preserved with pruning and driveway repair.
  • Motion & Vote: Motion to adopt the resolution to deny the appeal and uphold staff’s decision. Unanimously approved (Bryant, Felios, Sommer, Mitchner in favor; Davis absent).

Heritage Tree Appeal – 2415 Benjamin Drive

  • Tree: Fern pine (Podocarpus gracilior), approximately 22 inches diameter at breast height, rated in good health and fair structure by staff.
  • Appellant: Jill Gordon (neighbor) was not present at the meeting; no representative spoke. The original applicant was the property owner.
  • Background from Staff Report: The tree is located close to the property owner’s house (about 50 inches) and even closer to the neighbor’s garage (about 43 inches). The appellant (neighbor) had submitted receipts for a $59,000 sewer line replacement, which the neighbor believed was damaged by tree roots. The property owner also cited concerns about the tree’s proximity to a PG&E gas line and to structures.
  • Staff Position: Recommended denial. Staff concluded that the tree is in good health and structure; the recently replaced sewer line (HDPE pipe) is unlikely to suffer root intrusion; the gas line is flexible, low pressure, and typically buried 24–36 inches, making root interference unlikely. No construction improvements were proposed adjacent to the tree. The tree provides significant neighborhood value.
  • Commission Deliberation: Commissioners noted the tree’s aesthetic value and that the only potentially applicable removal criterion was utility interference, but staff’s explanation satisfied them that the risk is minimal. They also acknowledged the neighbor’s financial burden but reasoned that the sewer line replacement should be durable.
  • Motion & Vote: Motion to adopt the resolution to deny the appeal and uphold staff’s decision. Unanimously approved (Bryant, Felios, Sommer, Mitchner in favor; Davis absent).

Commission and Staff Announcements

  • Tree Lighting Event: Director Marchand reported a successful annual tree lighting on Monday, December 8, with a large crowd and cross-departmental support.
  • New Staff: Gally Basson has been hired as a Community Services Project Coordinator, starting two weeks ago. She will serve as a liaison between Community Services and Public Works.
  • Upcoming Meetings: The next meeting is January 21, 2026 (one week later than usual), starting at 6:00 PM. The board will review the next draft of the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan and elect officers. February will return to the regular schedule with two heritage tree appeals and a review of trees at the Public Safety Building project.
  • New Commissioner: City Council is expected to appoint Idaho Sylvester to fill the upcoming vacancy.

Farewell to Commissioner Steve Filios

  • Commissioner Steve Filios completed his second term on the board (approximately 14 cumulative years of service, first serving in the late 1990s/early 2000s). Chair Mitchner, Commissioner Bryant, Commissioner Sommer, Vice Chair Michener, and Director Marchand all expressed gratitude for his balanced, pragmatic, and respectful contributions, his background as a teacher and youth coach, and his dedication to the city. Commissioner Filios thanked the board and staff, noting the positive changes he witnessed and encouraging continued involvement with the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan and Recreation Master Plan.

Key Outcomes

  • Vote 1 (3440 Truman Ave): 4-0 to deny appeal, uphold staff’s denial of heritage tree removal.
  • Vote 2 (2415 Benjamin Dr): 4-0 to deny appeal, uphold staff’s denial of heritage tree removal.
  • Minutes Approved: November 17, 2024 minutes approved unanimously.
  • Next Steps: The board will reconvene on January 21, 2026, at 6:00 PM to discuss the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan and elect officers.

Meeting Transcript

i will now call to order the uh december wednesday december 10th meeting of the uh city of mountain views parks and recreation and urban forestry board um allison can you please conduct our roll call commissioner bryant yes commissioner felios here commissioner summer here vice chair mitchner here and chair davis is absent it all right we'll now move on to approval of the minutes um just first amongst our commissioners are there any questions about the minutes or is there any public comment on the minutes these would be the minutes from our november 17th meeting nothing online okay i'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes. So moved. Sorry. Motion and a second. Let's conduct our vote. Okay. Commissioner Bryant. Yes. Commissioner Felios. Yes. Commissioner Sommer. Yes. And Vice Chair Michener. Yes. All right. We'll now move on to oral communications from the public. this portion of the meeting is reserved for people wishing to address the commission on any matter not on the agenda so not the two heritage tree appeals that we'll be hearing speakers are limited to three minutes and state law prohibits the commission from acting on non-agenda items if anyone in attendance would like to provide public comment please also fill out a blue card Is there anybody in the room who would like to? No public comment there. Allison, is there anybody online? No. Right. We'll close public comment and move on to new business. Tonight we have two heritage tree appeals. And I'm going to start off by introducing our two city attorneys that are going to be with us tonight. and i may introduce you again after before the second appeal just in case somebody's not listening yet um assistant city attorney diana fazelli will be representing city staff and senior assistant city attorney dave wilgus will be representing the urban forestry board for the procedures that we're going through um just to our first uh 5.1 is a heritage tree removal application at 3440 truman avenue and i'm just going to run through the quick uh process that i will be following for this appeal um we will first have a staff report um then following that the appellant uh we'll have 10 minutes to speak. And in that, since the appellant is not the original applicant, if the original applicant and the appellant agree, the original applicant can use some of that 10 minutes for comments of their own if they choose. Following that, the commission will be able to ask any questions that we have. Then there will be public comments. and then after that staff will have an additional two minutes for any closing comments and then the appellant will have two minutes again and again they can allocate some of that time to the to the applicant if they would like following that the prc will be make will deliberate and make any motion that is appropriate so let's start off with our staff report we have urban forestry manager russell hansen who will be making that report thank you commissioner let me get that presentation up here there it goes okay so again thank you commissioner um russell hansen urban forest manager for community services here to talk about the appeal of uh to me at 3440 truman avenue the tree in question is a pinus radiata or monterey pine approximately 20 inches in diameter when measured at 54 inches above grade and we considered the tree to be both in fair health as well as fair structure at a minimum the applicant had listed uh six criteria on the application First was tree is in poor health. Second, tree is in danger of falling. Tree is near the end of its lifespan. Tree does not have proper growth space.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com