Out on a Limb Over Felled Oak : Woodland Hills: What a developer calls pruning could cost him a 10-year delay in the construction of his home.

Developer Andrew Railla says all he did was a little pruning.

But nearby Woodland Hills residents complained Monday that Railla’s pruning reduced a 25-foot tree to an 18-inch stump.

And now an arborist must decide: Did the developer chop down a separate tree protected by Los Angeles’ oak tree ordinance or an unprotected offshoot of a larger tree a few feet away?

If it turns out that Railla needed permission to cut down the tree--he calls it a limb--his permits for the 4,300-square-foot house he wants to build could be revoked and his lot could go undeveloped for 10 years, said Cindy Miscikowski, chief deputy for City Councilman Marvin Braude.

“The facts do not bode well for the developer,” she said.

Earlier this year, Braude helped homeowners secure City Council protection for the lot’s four oaks. Railla and homeowners disagree over whether the oak in question is one of the four oaks.

Railla, who plans to live in the house, charged that homeowners are using the oak trees as an excuse to delay his project. He said that because the tree in question is an offshoot of a larger oak, he is entitled to prune it to accommodate his plans.

Besides, he said, city Zoning Administrator Darryl Fisher had already approved the cutting. Fisher, however, did not work Monday and could not be reached for comment.

“I’m getting kind of upset over the whole thing,” Railla said. “We’re doing everything by the book. I have every right to do what I’m doing.”

Arborists said offshoots from mature oaks can pop up several feet away, drawing their nourishment from the same root system as the host tree. The arborist who will inspect the site Wednesday must determine whether the stump had its own root system.

The episode began Monday when Railla told neighbor Charles Kray that he planned to cut down the tree because it leaned into the proposed path of the house’s driveway. Kray, who crusaded to protect the site’s oaks from bulldozers, called police.

“It has always been that a developer does what he wants and cleans up the mess afterward,” Kray said. “This was to make it not happen that way.”

But the officers said the tree fell outside their jurisdiction. After they left about 9:30 a.m., the tree fell--this time to the ground. Neighbor Gordon Murley, who also lobbied to save the four oaks, grabbed a camera to photograph the cutting.

About three hours later, J. H. Hasselbrink, a senior inspector from the Department of Building and Safety, ordered work stopped because an arborist was not present when bulldozers were grading near the trees--a requirement imposed by the City Council. “I’ll be working near the oak trees the whole time,” Railla complained.

“Then you have to have an arborist here the whole time,” Hasselbrink responded.