HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/9/2018 Item 10, Lopes
From:James Lopes <
To:E-mail Council Website; Bell, Kyle; Combs, Ron; Allan Cooper; Sandra Lakeman
Subject:Today's agenda - Item 10 - Renton Appeal of Tree Committee
January 9, 2018
City Council
City of San Luis Obispo
RE: Item 10 - Appeal of Tree Committee decision / Renton
Dear Mayor Harmon and Council Members:
The staff report is mistaken, if not misleading about the request and expands the discretion of your Council in a
dishonest way: Trimming the existing Ficus tree will not harm or jeopardize this project! Removal of the tree would
harm the existing surrounding environment. Therefore the Tree Committee was correct that the proposed removal
should be denied. Your staff and you are supposed to determine if the decision was incorrect; you are not supposed to
look elsewhere or make up reasons to reverse one of your commissions' decisions! You are supposed to uphold the
regulations, guidelines and processes of the City of San Luis Obispo.
The staff summary is misleading because it relates what the ARC thought about Ficus trees, as some sort of rebuttal to
the wisdom of the Tree Committee. The summary actually shows the ignorance of the ARC members about downtown
and the Ficus trees; and the ARC's Tree Committee representative was not even at this meeting to provide some
context. The trees downtown all require significant maintenance; it is not their fault that the City does not fund the
Arborist's timely tree trimming everywhere in the City. The ARC, and your Council, cannot invent some rationale to
support a nice developer, to showcase his building with replacement trees. Actually, the proposed six replacement
sycamores would screen the building even more than this Ficus!
The emphasis of the report should be on the required, contained discretion about tree removal in general, represented
by the City's limited findings, which are intended to limit your discretion as well! Your Council's discretion should be
within the same three findings which the Tree Committee uses. If you think not, then you might agree that tree
removal is the purview of the Tree Committee, and their findings should be the basis of whether they were correct in
interpreting them.
I have to say I'm disappointed in the NEW approach being taken by staff and the applicant - to plant a small tree in a big
box, which will take decades to reach any semblance of the height of the existing Ficus. The Ficus is a signature tree in
downtown; until someone says that they are unwanted, I say they are individually important to sustain their overall
presence and present a rhythm of Ficus trees in the Marsh Street corridor. Their presence implies that the City values
the street environment highly in a strong, planned and designed statement. This Ficus is itself important as a node along
this corridor of impressive tree canopy.
I think the proposed New Zealand Christmas tree is a gaudy distraction from even the building proposed to be next to
it. If that's the best that can be found, then it is a no-brain option to keep the Ficus and trim it to fit with the
building. The Ficus and other trees are trimmed next to buildings throughout downtown; they are not an impediment to
development. And, the Tree Committee made the right decisions that removal of the tree right next to the Granada and
this one will harm the environment and surroundings!
1
The owner of the Granada was given the responsibility to trim and see how the tree will work next to that building. This
Ficus should have the same opportunity to be trimmed and then see if the building can be developed and operate
well. If trimming does not result in a feasible development, then the City could make the first required finding that the
tree will cause a hardship to the developer! This might be an alternative approach which relates well to the Tree
Committee's decision about the Granada's request at the same meeting.
Keep our Sense of Place,
Jamie Lopes
912 Bluebell Way
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
2