HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/3/2026 Item 5g, Nichols
Joe Nichols <jnichols@tcsn.net>
Sent:Wednesday, PM
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Protect The TREE
In regards to the recent city council decision to remove the large Oak tree at Nipomo and Monterey streets: it
is time to slow down and rethink this.
Apparently city planners originally said the city owned tree would not be impacted by the development. The
lease which SLO Rep has for the land says "SLO REP shall take all reasonable efforts to preserve, protect and
maintain the large oak tree..." According to Jan Marx, " We were always assured that the tree would do fine all
the way through."
Now we are told the tree will not survive long term if the project is built as currently designed.
Please don't compound poor decisions with one more. What would a redesign look like that would allow the
tree to remain? How do we know that this is the only path when we haven't looked into options? Slow down
and take another look. Do the thorough work that should have been done in the beginning. SLO Rep has a
theater to use. They will continue on. This land is city land which means it is owned by the citizens. SLO Rep
is getting the land essentially for free at $1/year. The citizens should have the final word here. If this situation
were to occur with a private citizen with a proposed project, the city would tell that citizen to go back to the
drawing board. Likewise SLO Rep should should go back to the drawing board. We may be surprised how a
tree saving redesign might look. The citizens are owed this much. If no acceptable option is found then SLO
Rep needs to find another location.
If you cannot do this for the citizens, what does this mean? Is there is one policy for certain favored groups
and one for the rest of us?
Do the right thing finally.
Joe Nichols
1