|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Danville Planning Commission approved a resolution at their most recent regular meeting that will allow plans for a subdivision on a 2.19 acre property in the northern part of town where one single-family home currently sits, with amendments to an associated tree removal request that would require minimizing the number of mature trees removed to make way for the project.
Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the subdivision request and to amend the tree removal request for the proposed project at 824 Danville Boulevard on Tuesday (March 28).
While they were generally supportive of the subdivision proposal and plans to redevelop the property, discussions ahead of that night’s vote centered around concern about the initial request to remove 38 town-protected trees, and ways to reduce that number to maintain as many trees as possible on the property.
“The tree removal permit / request is to be further coordinated with final development plans and associated setbacks so that trees that are in those setback areas are further evaluated to potentially maintain as many existing trees as possible,” Commissioner Lou Paladino said while making an amended motion at the end of discussions on the project.
Jason Bond, the applicant for the project and owner and current resident of the property, was also supportive of taking measures to preserve the maximum number of mature trees possible on the property, with the prospect of removing any being difficult for him to come to terms with.
“Just to give you a little context of the whole situation … my dad bought this place in the ’50s, my grandmother lived there for 30-something years,” Bond said. “When she passed, I moved in. I’ve been there ever since around 2000 or so. Regarding the trees I have to say that it’s been very difficult for me to think about removing these trees. I’ve been very attached to the property my whole life, so it’s been a process.”
Despite seeking ways to accommodate as many trees as possible in the ongoing design plans for the four single-family homes proposed for the subdivided property, Bond said he’d had to accept that some would have to come down. However, he has been actively seeking ways to minimize that number.
“Clearly with the lot layouts, the creek setbacks and the road setback, we’ve had to be creative with how we’ve designed this thing to try to meet the requirements for square footage. So, unfortunately a lot of the trees in the interior are just not savable in that sense,” Bond said.
“Just last week I sent forth a list of trees particularly on the periphery that seem like they can be preserved,” Bond continued. “I’m attached to this property. I have a vested interest. I’m planning on living there and building a house for myself. So I certainly share the desire to make this a beautiful, livable place for myself and the neighborhood.”
Despite his attachment to the trees, Bond noted that some were in poor health and already present hazards to his existing residence on the property and to neighboring residences.
“A lot of these trees are dangerous. There’s been some that have fallen the last few years,” Bond said. “One of them fell right behind the house and grazed (it). Literally took paint off the side of the house and pulled the fireplace back a few feet. So a lot of them are in pretty poor condition and dangerous not only for my house but the neighbors’ too. There’s one tree that’s big enough to take down the neighbor’s house across the creek…”
One neighboring resident spoke on behalf of herself and her husband during the public comment session at the meeting, also expressing support for the project but expressing concerns about the tree removal request.
“We have a long relationship with the family, the Bond family, and my husband has talked to Jason many times,” Celeste Gurule said. “We’re very in favor of the project overall. We’re excited to have the property be upgraded. We had some concerns about fire hazard with the current structures and all of that, and I think it will just be a great development for the neighborhood. But we are concerned about the trees.”
Gurule noted that the mature trees were part of the character of the town, and that they weren’t easily replaced.
“It’s very much part of the beauty of Danville and we would not like to lose the beauty, and I think the new homeowners would appreciate some of those already established trees since they take a very long time to get to that level,” Gurule said.
With her family’s property adjacent to Bond’s property, Gurule said that she and her husband were especially concerned about losing the trees near their property line, despite being aware of the threats to their property posed by the potential falling of large trees in poor health.
“We’re very concerned mostly about the perimeter,” Gurule said. “We understand there’s the roadway where houses are going to go but we hope that we can keep and maintain the beauty around the property but also do understand the issue of trees that are in poor condition because those could fall on our house as well.”
In particular, she said she was hoping to protect a large redwood tree straddling her property and Bond’s, which she and her family had been taking care of.
“We built a fence around it in conjunction so that we could make sure we really take care of that tree,” Gurule said. “It’s a very large redwood, it’s protected … and that fence line was not on the plans. We’re hoping that can be identified and we currently take care of that property and we were wondering if there’s some way to maintain that fence around it so we can continue to maintain the health of that tree.”
Commissioners concluded that the redwood tree and fence specifically would have to be a matter that Gurule and Bond came to agreement over privately. However, they largely echoed her points otherwise, emphasizing the desire to maintain as many trees as possible on the property.
“I like the idea of only clearing the lots and the driveway and then seeing where we come out because I’d like to save as many trees as possible,” said Commissioner Robert Combs said. “And, actually, for the owner or the seller of those homes once they get built, you’re going to see a lot of value from saving as many trees as possible, so it is a huge thing to have mature trees on a lot, especially when it is new construction,”
Paladino called for further design, architectural and design plans that would seek to accommodate as many trees as possible, rather than a vote to approve the tree removal permit as it stood before the commission that night.
“I believe that the tree removal request needs to be further coordinated with the final development plans, with the input of the arborist, to allow as many trees as possible to be maintained,” Paladino said before making the amended motion.
The subdivision request approved that evening, despite amendments to the tree removal permit, means that Bond and developers will continue working toward plans to split the property into four single-family lots of approximately one-half-acre each, and to demolish the existing residence that Bond inherited from his grandmother.
Appeal over redevelopment project at old Chevron HQ coming to San Ramon councilApril 6, 2026 10:32 pm
