|
TAI: None. That's what I am saying. I, like I said, I am only speculating, okay? I doubt both
<br /> inspectors know trees more than I do. I know very little. In fact, the 15 trees that Mr.
<br /> [inaudible] added on, okay, on the spot, those most of those, I believe, they call African Tulip. I
<br /> don't think he knows. Those I think are trees that are totally useless, okay, and invasive, okay?
<br /> Now, like I said, I don't really care what's, what is violation and not violation now. The fact is
<br /> the 51 trees being tagged, whether they are posing imminent danger or not, I have instructed and
<br /> paid Backyard Monkey to do whatever it needed to take care of it, and you can confirm that by
<br /> talking to Mr. Barrios.
<br /> RAFFIPIY: Okay, so Backyard Monkey knew about the letter that you got from the Department
<br /> of Public Works?
<br /> TAI: I think they would know, because I told them when they were there. I said, is this a
<br /> violation, that's why the inspector was there. The letter was very simple, all right? It only says
<br /> is you either remove the trees or you do a letter, right? This is exactly what I told them. In lieu
<br /> of removal, a letter, I said I'm more than a letter,I need a complete report;because I want to
<br /> know what's happening to trees on my side, notnecessarily what is affecting the neighbors.
<br /> There are many trees there if you go out there. You know, you cannot find, and these numbers,
<br /> they put on, and some only like a three when you see the firs"u know, it's hard to tell. I'm
<br /> glad that Mr. I forgot his name now—was there, and it was the first time for him, too. You
<br /> know, he still has to look, all right? But',the fact is all these are being taken care of or will be
<br /> taken care of. It would have been taken care of if the inspector showed up on December 91h
<br /> RAFFIPIY: All right. Thank you very much. I don't have any more questions.
<br /> CLARKSON: I, excuse me, I have a question for the Director.
<br /> RAFFIPIY: Go ahead.
<br /> CLARKSON: While I see that this issue speaks to,the inclination of the applicant or, not
<br /> applicant in this case, the property owner to conform with the conditions of the original rezoning,
<br /> isn't it true that this tree issue would be identical regardless of whether the property was zoned
<br /> Multi-Family Residential or Single-Family Residential? So, is it really relevant to the zoning of
<br /> the property?
<br /> YEE: It's not relevant in terms-of the specific zoning. There was a violation that we were then
<br /> made aware of on this property which led to now this action. I guess I would say this violation is
<br /> only one of the issues that Maija had gone through in her report to us. So, there are other issues
<br /> beyond just this violation.
<br /> CLARKSON: Thank you.
<br /> AU: Mr. Chair, I have another question.
<br /> RAFFIPIY: Go ahead, Mr. Au.
<br /> DRAFT
<br /> 10
<br />
|