Board of Adjustment Meeting - May 29, 2019: Appeal of Abatement for Loren Property
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Board of Adjustment Meeting - May 29, 2019
The Board of Adjustment met on May 29, 2019, to consider approval of previous meeting minutes and an appeal of the Hearing Officer's April 16, 2019 decision to approve abatement of public nuisance items at the Loren Property, 1220 South Mill Avenue. The appellant, Jody Loren, argued that the city's actions were harassment and that the dead tree in her backyard housed a honey bee colony. After public testimony and deliberation, the board voted 6-1 to deny the appeal, upholding the abatement order.
Consent Calendar
- Unanimously approved (7-0) the February 27, 2019 meeting minutes as presented.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Appellant Jody Loren presented her case, stating that the city's actions were based on anonymous complaints she could not verify, and that the 80-year-old tree in the front had been removed, but the stump remained. She argued the backyard tree is not visible from public areas, houses a honey bee colony, and she planned to remove it when the property sells. She requested the tree be allowed to stand until sale.
- City Code Compliance Representative Andres Larrey stated the property received multiple anonymous complaints (five total, starting March 8, 2018) and the hearing officer's decision to abate the dead tree and stump was correct. He noted the front stump still needed grinding to ground level.
- Public Commenter Karen Gittless (1206 South Ash) testified she observed the dead backyard tree and an 18-inch stump in the front yard, and stated the owner had listed three properties for sale, implying no hardship. She requested the board deny the appeal.
Discussion Items
- The board discussed the interpretation of City Code §21-3-B-8 regarding substantially dead landscaping. Board members noted that the city's complaint‑driven enforcement policy does not require disclosure of complainants. Concerns were raised about the inconsistency between staff statements that the front yard was in compliance and the abatement cost still including stump grinding. The cost estimate of $2,527 covered removal of the dead backyard tree, grinding the front stump, and a police officer on site. The board also addressed the presence of a live honey bee colony in the backyard tree, with staff agreeing to handle bee removal professionally.
- Board members expressed varied opinions: some felt the ordinance clearly applied and the appeal should be denied, while others were uneasy about the selective enforcement and the lack of clarity on the front stump. Chairman Lyon analogized to speeding enforcement, stating that selective enforcement does not invalidate the rule.
Key Outcomes
- Motion to Deny Appeal: Board member Noggle moved to deny the appeal of the April 16, 2019 Hearing Officer's decision to approve the abatement. The motion was seconded by Baker. The board voted 6‑1 in favor, with Commissioner Confer dissenting. The denial upholds the hearing officer's order requiring the dead tree in the backyard and the stump in the front to be abated within 180 days from March 13, 2019.
- Staff noted that the bee colony would be handled professionally, and that the abatement cost (potentially reduced if the front stump is already ground) would be a lien on the property if not completed by the deadline.
Meeting Transcript
All right, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Board of Adjustments for May 29th, 2019. We have a short agenda tonight, but uh sure it'll be a juicy one. Uh like to begin by doing an introduction of our board members. Our tradition here is to have each board member do their own introduction. So if you just push your microphone button and introduce yourself Dave Noggle. Kevin Collins. I'm Chairman David Lyon. Vice Chairman Jim Frazy. Richard Watson. Whitney Baker. Okay, and we also have with us uh Ryan LeVake and Lee Himenais and uh oh Brittany Nelson from City Staff. Our first item of business will be to vote on approval of our meeting minutes from our previous meeting, February um 26th, was it? We have reviewed those meeting minutes. Let's see. Uh sorry, February 27th is the date on that. We've reviewed those minutes, and we have not found any corrections to be made. Uh therefore I'd like to hear a motion regarding approval of those minutes, please. Board member Baker. I motion that we approve the minutes as is. Okay, do I hear a second? A second. Okay, motion to approve from board member Baker and seconded by Vice Chair Frazy. All those in favor by show of hands, please. And the motion passes 7-0. So with that, we will move on to our one and only item of business, which is the Lauren property. Um we've done a slight revision to the order of how we we're doing things. They've asked us to ask the appellant to come and speak first and uh present their case. Would you be willing to do so for us, ma'am? Absolutely. Thank you. Um, so I'll tell you that we've all had a chance to review the packet, and um we've read the things that you've supplied, but if you want to hit the important notes and direct us to the things most important, uh that will do quite well. And I have a few exhibits. Can I submit those as well? Yeah, if the uh overhead is working. There we go. Can you hear me okay? Yeah. Okay. Um, we were initially here on two separate matters. The initial um harassment began with the removal of a large 80-year-old tree. Very quickly. Could we just have you state your name real quick so it's in the record? Sure. Jody Loren. Thank you. Absolutely. Uh, the removal of my 80-plus-year-old tree, which was brought to my attention a mere two days of purchasing my home in April 2018. Ironic, the same thing happened when I purchased the property just south of my home in May of 17 at 1290 South Mill Avenue. A notice was literally sent two days after the sale of that, I mean, after the purchase of that property as well. Ironic, I don't believe so.
openpublica.com