|
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, not necessarily 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 first—you 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 9h.
<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 />EXHIBIT A
<br />10
<br />
|