HomeMy WebLinkAbout0001-1000 Remainder253
From:Floyd, Aaron
Sent:Tuesday, March 3, 2026 5:38 PM
To:Collins, Scott; Kacsinta, Madeline
Subject:Fw: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Hill, Robert <rhill@slocity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 5:12:12 PM
To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>
Cc: Floyd, Aaron <afloyd@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi)
<TTway@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>
Subject: RE: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Hi Jan,
It is SLO REP’s intention to handle the tree removal and associated expense. They’ve been seeking estimates from
various tree contractors. They are also seeking an estimate with a vendor that works with reclaimed wood for furniture
and public art.
I spoke with Public Works staff and understand that we are on track to open the parking structure on 3/17 and take
control of the site at that time. SLO REP’s lease states that they will take possession of the site based on that event.
They will still need to submit a few items for our final review, as well as secure their building permit, prior to beginning
construction.
The arborist’s report notes that some impacts to the tree occurred with site improvements associated with the parking
structure and that additional impacts would occur with construction of the theatre; it is the combination of all of these
activities that lead them to conclude the tree is unlikely to survive.
Thank you,
Bob
Robert Hill
Sustainability & Natural Resources Official
City Administration
Office of Sustainability & Natural Resources
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
E rhill@slocity.org
T 805.781.7211
slocity.org
From: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 11:10 AM
254
To: Hill, Robert <rhill@slocity.org>
Cc: Floyd, Aaron <afloyd@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi)
<TTway@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>
Subject: RE: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Thank you for getting back. Does the City or SLO Rep in fact control the timing of the demolition of the tree? Who
pays for the tree crew cost of taking out the tree? It is my understanding that the City restricted protection of the root
system to the drip line, and the Construction company followed that policy direction, therefore damaged the root
structure that extended beyond the drip line. If that is the case, then it is the City’s mistake that has caused the tree to
be compromised. In my opinion, the City should pay for it being demolished.
Jan
From: Hill, Robert <rhill@slocity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 10:47 AM
To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>
Cc: Floyd, Aaron <afloyd@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi)
<TTway@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>
Subject: RE: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Hi Jan,
Director Floyd asked me to provide a response to you on this question. I apologize for the delay in getting back to
you.
The SLO REP lease is in effect, however they do not take possession of the site itself until they complete their final
prerequisites with us and until Swinerton Construction (the City’s contractor for the new parking structure) completes
all of its final paperwork with us and formally relinquishes the site.
Thank you,
Bob
Robert Hill
Sustainability & Natural Resources Official
City Administration
Office of Sustainability & Natural Resources
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
E rhill@slocity.org
T 805.781.7211
slocity.org
From: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2026 7:53 AM
To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Floyd, Aaron
<afloyd@slocity.org>
Subject: RE: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Who has control over the oak tree after SLO Rep takes over the theater building site? The city or SLO Rep?
255
From: Marx, Jan
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2026 8:33 PM
To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Floyd, Aaron
<afloyd@slocity.org>
Subject: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Who has control over the oak tree after SLO Rep takes over the theater building site? The city or SLO Rep?
Answering this question can wait till Monday.
Thanks
Jan
Get Outlook for iOS
269
From:Gault, Walter
Sent:Tuesday, March 3, 2026 11:48 AM
To:Tway, Timothea (Timmi)
Cc:Cohen, Rachel
Subject:RE: Open Letter Regarding Downtown Oak – Request for 30-Day Delay
Ok, thank you Timmi, I’ll reach out to Bob.
Walter Gault
Urban Forestry Program Coordinator / City Arborist
Community Development
919 Palm St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218
E wgault@slocity.org
T 805.781.7578
From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 11:23 AM
To: Gault, Walter <wgault@slocity.org>
Cc: Cohen, Rachel <rcohen@slocity.org>
Subject: FW: Open Letter Regarding Downtown Oak – Request for 30-Day Delay
Hi Walter,
There is a request to have you go to the SLO Rep tree site to discuss with this member of the public.
Please work
with Bob to arrange a time if the member of the public is interested.
Thanks,
Timothea (Timmi) Tway
Director of Community Development
Community Development
919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
E TTway@slocity.org
T 805.781.7187
slocity.org
Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications
From: Hill, Robert <rhill@slocity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 10:38 AM
To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>
270
Cc: Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Floyd, Aaron <afloyd@slocity.org>
Subject: RE: Open Letter Regarding Downtown Oak – Request for 30-Day Delay
Hi Timmi and All,
Thanks for forwarding.
There are a few emails going around yesterday and today, as it appears (at least) that Mr. DePaoli is engaging us as
staff, Mayor Stewart and separately Council Member Marx, and with SLO REP staff and Board. And SLO REP is also
dialoguing with Council Member Marx.
From the conversations I have had and from what I can tell, no one has actually met with Mr. DePaoli so far. In an
effort to (hopefully) be efficient and effective, I think it makes sense for Walter Gault and me to offer to meet with him
onsite. Please let me know if you concur.
I remain concerned by the logic problem with the statement, “The intent would not be to reopen the
Council’s decision or require redesign, but simply to obtain site-specific data before
irreversible action occurs.”
Also adding Aaron who was looped into other emails earlier.
Thanks,
Bob
From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 10:07 AM
To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Hill, Robert <rhill@slocity.org>
Cc: Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>
Subject: FW: Open Letter Regarding Downtown Oak – Request for 30-Day Delay
Hi,
The access to the site is beyond my expertise, let me know your thoughts please.
Thanks,
Timothea (Timmi) Tway
Director of Community Development
Community Development
919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
E TTway@slocity.org
T 805.781.7187
slocity.org
Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications
From: Nicholas DePaoli < >
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 10:06 AM
To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>
271
Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>
Subject: Re: Open Letter Regarding Downtown Oak – Request for 30-Day Delay
Hi again Timmi,
I hope you’re well. I’m writing to follow up briefly on your note indicating that the City was
discussing the ideas presented in my prior message.
In the meantime, I received clarification from the SLO REP board about their limitations and
that the site remains under City control until the garage is formally completed and permits
are secured. Given that timing, I wanted to ask a narrow procedural question.
If independent funding were secured to cover the full cost of a limited, non-invasive root
investigation (for example, targeted air-spade exploration and/or GPR), would the City
consider allowing short-term site access for that purpose while it retains control?
The intent would not be to reopen the Council’s decision or require redesign, but simply to
obtain site-specific data before irreversible action occurs. All coordination, professional
services, and associated costs would be independently arranged.
If this is not something the City would be able to permit, I appreciate that clarity as well.
Thank you again for your time and consideration.
Best,
Nicholas DePaoli
On Feb 17, 2026, at 9:47 AM, Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> wrote:
BCC:Council_All
Hello Nicholas,
Thank you for your email, it has been received. We are discussing some of the ideas presented and
will get back to you shortly.
Thanks,
Timothea (Timmi) Tway
Director of Community Development
<image001.png>
Community Development
919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
E TTway@slocity.org
T 805.781.7187
slocity.org
272
<image002.png>
<image003.png>
<image004.png>
<image005.png>
<image006.png>
Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications
From: Nicholas DePaoli < >
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 12:58 PM
To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>
Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica
A <estewart@slocity.org>
Subject: Re: Open Letter Regarding Downtown Oak – Request for 30-Day Delay
Hi Timothea,
Thank you for providing the arborist report and for clarifying the anticipated
timeline.
After reviewing the report and associated plan sheet, I wanted to ask a focused
procedural question given the window we are already working with.
The CRZ encroachment percentage appears to aggregate all “disturbance” into a
single category. However, the plan suggests that the disturbance zone includes
both:
• deep structural excavation (foundations, footings, trenching), and
• surface hardscape or entry areas that may potentially be constructed using low-
impact or no-dig methods.
Additionally, the CRZ radius appears to be based on a standard diameter formula
rather than site-specific root mapping. Given the former structure historically
occupying part of the site, there may be significant asymmetry in actual root
distribution and disturbance implications, even maintaining current building
footprint design.
Before irreversible action occurs, is there a mechanism for the City to accept or
consider supplemental technical clarification within the current window prior to
mid-March? Specifically:
1. Differentiation of disturbance by type (structural excavation vs.
potentially low-impact hardscape)
2. Focused root mapping at key locations to better understand actual
root context
3. An updated arborist interpretation if hardscape construction methods
are adjusted to minimize excavation and compaction.
273
The intent is not to invalidate the existing report, but to determine whether the
86% encroachment figure may overstate destructive impact by combining
materially different construction activities into a single disturbance classification.
If further clarification confirms that viability remains unlikely, that conclusion
would be strengthened by a more site-specific basis.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best,
Nicholas
On Feb 13, 2026, at 10:37 AM, Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> wrote:
BCC: CC
Nicholas,
Thank you for your email and associated letter regarding the Oak tree at the future SLO
REP site. I appreciate the time that went into the letter and your interest in this topic.
The City Council’s decision last Tuesday night to adopt a Resolution approving the
removal of the tree is a final action of the City Council and cannot be amended, delayed,
or changed by staff.
Regarding the timing of the removal of the tree - the tree removal will not take place
within the next 30 days. SLO REP will need to take control of the property before they
are able to move forward with the tree removal, which is not expected to take place until
around mid-March, at the earliest.
While not included in the staff report for the tree removal item, there were a few
elements of the public comment during the hearing from SLO REP’s Managing Artistic
Director, Kevin Harris, that may provide additional context regarding the tree removal.
Importantly, upon receiving the arborist’s report, SLO REP did explore different options
and consulted with their architect, theatre design consultants, structural engineer, and
civil engineer to determine how the tree may be able to remain on the site. As described
by Kevin, the options included:
1. Modify the design of the building to protect the minimum amount of critical root
structure recommended. The design team noted that this would represent nearly
starting from scratch and redesigning the building would cost approximately
$550,000. SLO REP reports that they have already spent over $800,000 on
design expenses and now have final construction documents complete. Although
a redesigned theatre would necessarily be smaller, the construction cost
estimator concluded that protecting the critical root structure remaining after
redesign would add approximately $225,000 to $250,000 in overall expenses.
This option is estimated to delay the project 6-10 months and would likely result
in a theatre design that is economically infeasible because there would be a
reduced number of seats, and therefore ticket sales.
2. Move forward with the current design but take additional measures to protect
critical root zones through modified foundation construction. This option was
estimated to result in cost increases of approximately $500,000 to $600,000 and
274
a project delay of 2.5-3 months. In this case, there is still a strong possibility that
the tree may not survive; construction requires both trenching and construction of
foundations, as well as partial removal of overhead tree canopy.
While the City is not in possession of any studies or analysis regarding the cost
estimates above, the City Council based their decision on an arborist report prepared by
a Certified Arborist, Rodney Thurman, which is attached to the City Council staff report
here.
Your email and letter have been provided to the City Council and SLO REP for their
awareness.
I hope this information is helpful, Thank you,
Timothea (Timmi) Tway
Director of Community Development
<image001.png>
Community Development
919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
E TTway@slocity.org
T 805.781.7187
slocity.org
<image002.png>
<image003.png>
<image004.png>
<image005.png>
<image006.png>
Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications
From: Nicholas DePaoli < >
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2026 12:04:11 PM
To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>
Subject: Open Letter Regarding Downtown Oak – Request for 30-Day Delay
Mayor and Council Members,
Following the February 3rd vote, I have written the attached open letter
requesting a brief 30-day delay to explore preservation alternatives for the
downtown oak at the performance art theater site.
My intention is not to re-litigate the deliberation, but to propose a
constructive, technically grounded feasibility review before irreversible
removal proceeds.
I am circulating this to a small group of architects, arborists, and
community stakeholders in hopes of identifying viable pathways.
Thank you for taking the time to review.
275
Respectfully,
Nicholas DePaoli
276
From:Collins, Scott
Sent:Tuesday, March 3, 2026 11:25 AM
To:Kacsinta, Madeline
Cc:Floyd, Aaron
Subject:FW: Oak tree & SLO Rep
FYI. Can you please confirm what if any damage CADPS may have done to the tree?
Thanks,
Scott
From: Floyd, Aaron <afloyd@slocity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 11:14 AM
To: Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>
Subject: FW: Oak tree & SLO Rep
From: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 11:10 AM
To: Hill, Robert <rhill@slocity.org>
Cc: Floyd, Aaron <afloyd@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi)
<TTway@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>
Subject: RE: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Thank you for getting back. Does the City or SLO Rep in fact control the timing of the demolition of the tree? Who
pays for the tree crew cost of taking out the tree? It is my understanding that the City restricted protection of the root
system to the drip line, and the Construction company followed that policy direction, therefore damaged the root
structure that extended beyond the drip line. If that is the case, then it is the City’s mistake that has caused the tree to
be compromised. In my opinion, the City should pay for it being demolished.
Jan
From: Hill, Robert <rhill@slocity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 10:47 AM
To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>
Cc: Floyd, Aaron <afloyd@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi)
<TTway@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>
Subject: RE: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Hi Jan,
Director Floyd asked me to provide a response to you on this question. I apologize for the delay in getting back to
you.
The SLO REP lease is in effect, however they do not take possession of the site itself until they complete their final
prerequisites with us and until Swinerton Construction (the City’s contractor for the new parking structure) completes
all of its final paperwork with us and formally relinquishes the site.
Thank you,
277
Bob
Robert Hill
Sustainability & Natural Resources Official
City Administration
Office of Sustainability & Natural Resources
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
E rhill@slocity.org
T 805.781.7211
slocity.org
From: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2026 7:53 AM
To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Floyd, Aaron
<afloyd@slocity.org>
Subject: RE: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Who has control over the oak tree after SLO Rep takes over the theater building site? The city or SLO Rep?
From: Marx, Jan
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2026 8:33 PM
To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Floyd, Aaron
<afloyd@slocity.org>
Subject: Oak tree & SLO Rep
Who has control over the oak tree after SLO Rep takes over the theater building site? The city or SLO Rep?
Answering this question can wait till Monday.
Thanks
Jan
Get Outlook for iOS