Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Uploaded: Monday, September 28, 2009, 5:21 PM

Citizens want lead in Cal Ave tree selection
Meeting with their own arborist, residents begin their education to discuss options at city meetings

by Sue Dremann
Palo Alto Online Staff

Posted by Howard, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Sep 28, 2009 at 7:05 pm

I'm sure this guy knows what he talking about, but do we really want to wait a year to replant? Is the marginal benefit worth it?

Posted by Anonymous, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 28, 2009 at 7:19 pm

I've always planted deciduous trees when they are dormant, i.e. late January and early February. There is a better selection and they are easier to handle.

Posted by tree buff, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood, on Sep 28, 2009 at 9:41 pm

None on the list appear to be natives. Why not plant California native trees? They need much less water, many are not deciduous and thus won't drop leaves in the fall, and they thrive in our climate.

Posted by SeriouslyFolks, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 28, 2009 at 9:56 pm

I say, put in fake trees. This sounds like a crank call, I know. But think.. We'd get our shade back. We can make them the perfect size right away, and they'll stay that size forever. No seeds and no sap. Great vehicle for recycled materials production. No irrigation and no pruning. Birds won't care and will still nest in them. Utterly impervious to disease. Slug, beetle, and moth free. No sidewall displacements years from now. Screw-in bases allow for easy updating when a new fashion-tree is selected years from now. Not only will the street have uniformity among its trees, it will have *identical* trees, like a perfect little diorama. Fireproof. Lightning resistant. No raking! Quick drying. Hypoallergenic. Mildew resistant. Perhaps some slight static cling on chilly mornings.

I know sarcasm won't help anything, but in a dark circus like this, there's got to be some gallows humor. What a mess.

Posted by bikes2work, a member of the Santa Rita (Los Altos) community, on Sep 28, 2009 at 11:05 pm

On Sunday morning I sat for an hour beneath a nice large "pine" tree at the Westwind Community Barn in Los Altos Hills. It wasn't until I was leaving that I noticed the strange metal boxes flanking it. Then I finally realized the "tree" was really just a cell tower in disguise. SeriouslyFolks is not all that sarcastic in reality.

Tree buff, what species are you proposing? I don't think any California natives are particularly suited to a business district. Web Link

Barrie Coate doesn't think so either.

Posted by Oh My God!, a resident of another community, on Sep 28, 2009 at 11:48 pm

Sounds like the City Website all over again! Come on folks don't we have more to worry about?

Posted by Aaron, a resident of the Leland Manor/Garland Drive neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 12:11 am

I like that there will be smaller trees on California. Can see the store fronts now. Really, what is the big deal. Trees grow and in thirty years we will be cutting them down again.

Posted by mj, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 1:02 am

The list of trees Barrie Coate provided is NOT a list of recommended street trees to choose from. The list was intended to give us some examples of the kinds of the kinds of things to CONSIDER when selecting street trees. Mr. Coate was emphatic that this list should not be used as any kind of definitive "master list" of trees to choose from. The list is only a starting point.

Barrie Coate also explained that around November 1 is the perfect time to plant new street trees in this area. The soil is still warm enough for new roots to begin to grow before the soil gets too cold and growth stops. This gives the young trees enough of a root system to withstand the stress of the hot weather their first spring and summer. Streets are especially harsh places for trees to live, and they need all the help they can get their first year so they can thrive and grow into healthy and healthy trees.

The new trees will be with us for many decades and the question is, do we want to rush the job just because the red maples are available for immediate planting? Or do we want to take the time to carefully select one kind of tree, or a mix of trees, that would be preferable to having red maples?

There is also quite a long lead time when ordering new trees because the tree nurseries have to pre-order them from Oregon each year, and the best sell out first. So in order to do this right we should really aim for a planting the trees a year from now, the fall of 2010.

However, I suggest there be a phased tree planting. Perhaps a few red maples since these are immediately available and would please those who are anxious to get something planted now, interspersed with others to be planted next fall.

That would mean there won't be a uniform row of trees all the same size for the first year or two, as preferred by CADA. But after a few years there won't be much, if any, difference. A mix of trees also has the advantage that if a disease strikes one kind of tree, they won't all be affected. Also, if there is a variety of trees with different live spans, they won't all reach the end of their lives at the same time.

Although there aren't many evergreen trees that make for healthy street trees, I hope that a few planting holes can be made big enough to accommodate at least some evergreens for winter color. All deciduous will look awfully bleak in the winter, especially considering the buildings on California Avenue aren't especially attractive.

Does any one know who the man is who videotaped Barrie Coate's talk?

Posted by Bev, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 9:21 am

Too many people, too much talk..NOT enough action........

Nothing will get done for quite awhile.

Posted by anciana, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 10:38 am

Has anybody talked to Dave Dokter about this?

Posted by another resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 10:45 am

1. Dave Dockter is the arborist for trees on private property; Eric Krebs, who took Dave Sandage's job, is the Public Works arborist for city trees. He strongly defended the trees on Middlefield Road during the Oregon Expy debate.

2. I hope whatever trees are selected are big enough to create a canopy, like we have downtown. Cal Ave is wide, we need big trees.

3. I also prefer deciduous trees, because it's nice to sit in the sun in the wintertime.

Posted by Radhika, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 10:52 am

Not sure why there appears to be a prejudice against planting California native trees. Many are hardy, need less water, less pruning and maintenance and are better for the local ecology and environment in the short and long-term.

For example there is the evergreen Catalina Cherry, it can be pruned as a small standard tree to hide the store facades all year around. It is resistent to oak root fungus and other pests. It provides berries, a natural food source for the birds in the winter and it is used to a harsh growing environment. Here is a pointer to some information about this tree from San Marcos growers. Web Link

For more information on choosing appropriate California native trees you can email anyone from the local Santa Clara valley chapter of the California Native Plant Society Web Link

Posted by Sid, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 11:03 am

I think that the city should provide some umbrellas for the street seating next summer while we wait for the trees to mature. I agree that as sad as the situation is, we should take our time and at least do the restoration right, rather than rushing to get a solution. We will live with the results of our actions for a very long time...

Posted by Sara, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 11:06 am

I enthusiastically support the suggestion that we plant a few trees right away and wait until next Nov. to complete the planting. Perhaps a few red maples would be the right choice. It depends on what is available immediately. No one wants a naked street for a whole year!

Posted by 2 cents, a resident of the Ventura neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 11:08 am

@ "Oh My God" and those with similar feelings:

If you are not interested in the Calif Ave Tree issue, then don't pay it any attention. We all pick and choose what issues we want to become involved in. If we directed all our attention to the so called "Big Issues", nothing would ever be taken care of at home. There's a reason that the emergency directions on an airplane are to place your own O2 mask on before helping those around you.... If you don't take care of yourself first, how can you take care of the rest of the world??

Posted by WilliamR, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 11:10 am

I'm not trying to be negative about this, but the first thing that came to my mind when I read the above suggestion for the Catalina Cherry was, 'what about the fruit?' There may or may not have been problems with the holly oak acorns, but at least acorns can be swept or blown off the sidewalks. But I imagine there would be complaints about fruits or berries falling on the sidewalks, getting stepped on, leaving stains, bird messes, etc. Just another thought to throw into the selection criteria....

I also liked mj's earlier suggestions about planting a few trees now to fill in some of the empty spaces, and leaving the others until later, as well as having a mix of species.

Posted by Cheryl, a resident of the St. Claire Gardens neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 11:20 am

I'm recommending carrotwood trees. There are some just outside Long's on Middlefield, dividing the parking lots. They are perennial, not messy, and suited to this climate. We planted one in our back yard years ago because they don't drop leaves in swimming pools. Ours never drops ANY leaves, has no pods or seeds, is green all year, and thrives on neglect.

Posted by Joel, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 11:22 am

I am a native tree fanatic. Please tell me why I should get therapy concerning my obsession.

Are there not trees that thrive that have lived here for years?

Posted by YSK, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 11:25 am

I have not been on California Ave for a few weeks. I received many calls exclaming 'OMG, have you SEEN California Avenue lately? It's hideous'. I went and looked, couldn't believe how bad it looks. Really, Palo Alto is known for its trees. 30 years to grow new ones? Ridiculous. This was an incredibly bad decision.

Posted by YSK, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 11:26 am

Cheryl? Great Comment....Thrives on Neglect....sounds like my ex husband lol

Posted by JO, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 12:07 pm

Thank you Ann and Fred Balin, and everyone else who helped put together the event. Sunday was a hot day, and many of us missed the shade of the holly oaks. While Barrie Coate did say that he wouldn't select holly oaks to plant TODAY because of susceptibility to disease, he also said that many of the holly oaks that were removed were not diseased (and he was very familiar with the Cal Ave trees).

After listening to the replacement tree choices presented and the list of "desirable" characteristics of street trees, I am even more convinced that the 30-year old holly oaks were irreplaceable, and that the City's removal of all of these trees was inexcusable.

Look at Barrie Coate's starting list of potential replacement trees, which is comprised almost completely of deciduous trees (save for one). I recall that he said a London Plane variety is the most popular overall street tree choice among municipalities and that it would also be his pick as the best all-around choice. (It has a long life, convenient growth habits and creates a nice canopy for most of the year). I, for one, do not want to see London Plane trees all along California Avenue. It's bad enough to have El Camino lined with a monoculture of London Plane trees. I don't want California Avenue to look like another "Any Street, USA." (And, what if a new disease or pest starts attacking London Plane trees? What will our streets look like then?)

Asked about native trees, Barrie Coate said that the only natives he would suggest are Coast Live Oak and Valley Oak, but these will drop acorns. (He also mentioned an acorn pest of Coast Live Oak). (From what I know about these oaks, they grow rather slowly, but are very long-lived. So planting these trees may provide a great legacy to future generations, but they won't provide much immediate gratification).

I agree with mj that, going forward, we should consider a phased planting. Plant some immediately available trees. Select (a mix of?) other trees (with a lot of public input)and plant these at the optimal time next fall. A few years from now, if any red maples are not doing so well (as predicted by some residents and Barrie Coate), replace the red maples with other trees.

This won't "fix" the problem the City created by removing all the mature trees on California Avenue, but it seems a better solution to me than the alternatives. But then, the "uniformity" of the street trees is not a top priority for me.

Posted by Paul Berry, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 12:14 pm

Please, evergreens? Things that don't lose their leaves all at once? They would save us from having naked branches one third of the year.

My favorite: podocarpus gracilior

See lots on a street in southern California at

Web Link

There's a close-up of the foliage at

Web Link

Discussion of hardiness at

Web Link

Posted by PS, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 12:42 pm

In all this talk, I've read nothing to educate the public, that planting bigger trees is not an answer to the CA AVE debacle! Spending $20,000 more $$$ to make it SEEM like there are shade trees will not help the trees to develop better root systems. That really happens when the tree is young and NOT root bound in some big box.....In this case BIGGER IS NOT BETTER!

Another "Only in Palo Alto"....

Posted by Michele, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 1:04 pm

The pistache trees on Cambridge Ave, just North of California Ave, are very beautiful - what about those trees?

Posted by MJ, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 2:08 pm

I too enjoy the pistache trees on Cambridge Ave. Especially the shade for walking. I was really annoyed when the previous evergreen trees where chopped down just as they were reaching a nice mature size, but I must admit their little black berries were prolific and very messy.

However, it has been a pleasant surprise to see how quickly the pistache trees have filled in. They now provide a lovely shade canopy in the summer as well as spectacular fall color. I would also love at least some native trees on California Ave, but only if they can be strong and healthy and have a sufficient canopy to provide summer shade for pedestrians.

As for umbrellas on California Avenue, perhaps the building owners who comprise CADA and were the driving force to get all the shade trees chopped down at once, supply them.

My second suggestion is that the building owners also install large enough awnings for instant shade to encourage us to visit California Avenue and patronize the shops and restaurants. If the city code is too restrictive, this would be a perfect opportunity to either provide exceptions or change the code.

Posted by PolicySage, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 3:06 pm

Why all this "ad hoc" talk about the need to create yet another group to focus on the California tree-cutting fiaso?

We already have a group of experts and concerned citizens. I refer, of course, to Canopy www.canopy.org which already exists, and is already fully engaged in this serious situation. If you want to help, contact Canopy.

Posted by no to Canopy, a resident of Stanford, on Sep 29, 2009 at 3:10 pm

Canopy knew about the fiasco ahead of time and did nothing about it. Now they are acting all outraged, since they like many city people, do not want to accept responsibility for their actions or lack thereof.

I definitely think that Canopy needs to stop meddling in private property tree removal requests--they put homeowners through a living hell to remove a dead tree from private property but have no problem with major tree removals on public property. They are untrustworthy as far as I am concerned

Posted by sally, a resident of the The Greenhouse neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 3:39 pm

Glad to see the input about trees... but let's not forget the fact that the first newspaper article mentioned that the two lane road would be narrowed to one lane. Excuse me! that would be very problematic... with all the in and out parking, traffic would come to a complete halt .... this is troublesome. Why, why, oh why, would city planners want to reduce the traffic flow and circualtion. Enough of these "improvements" which hurt our quality of life on this wonderful neighborhood street.

Posted by Canopy fan, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 4:19 pm

Canopy knew that the City was considering a plan to plant trees where existing street trees had died. They were NOT aware of any plan to slaughter and replace the whole street full of trees. They would never have supported such an unnecessary act.

They also have nothing to do with private property tree removal requests. They plant and care for trees on public property period!

Posted by EMS, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 4:44 pm

I completely agree with the above statement about Canopy. There is written proof that they

knew about the removal of ALL STREET TREES before it happened. Only after 63 trees were cut down and the outrage began, was a letter written in the Daily Post about their "shock" and disappointment. It seems to me that Canopy works at the pleasure of the city and developers and not the average tax payer. It is time for us to stand up and keep voicing our opinions and NOT leave it to the so called experts!

Posted by jb, a resident of the Leland Manor/Garland Drive neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 5:59 pm

I observed on a Sunday walk up and down Calif Ave business district that I could not see 63 places where trees can be planted. On the north side of the street there are numerous new cement rectangles in the sidewalk, and there are a few new cement rectangles on the south side of the street. I saw only a handful of holes in the sidewalk where trees could be planted. Not so many stumps, either; I counted about 12 or 14 on the south side of the street, not counting the turn-around by the tracks.

Ironically, one recently planted small tree near Mollie Stone is a broad-leafed OAK similar to the oaks planted last summer at a local school. Maybe Calif native oaks are just too ugly. There are quite a number of folks in our town whose nervous systems are quite shattered by a view they consider ugly, tacky, or homely.

Will 63 trees be planted in a median that will take up the traffic lanes that will be eliminated? About those traffic lanes, I think someone thinks Menlo Park's Santa Cruz Ave is just too cute, and we need one too. Numerous readers have pointed out that there is no through traffic that needs calming on California Avenue.

Posted by jb, a resident of the Leland Manor/Garland Drive neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 6:11 pm

About evergreen trees. They DO drop their leaves; a leaf can't work forever. Evergreen trees just don't drop all their leaves at once (with a period of leaflessness), and those that are not monsoon trees, drop leaves all year long. Do you remember the soft layer of pine needles under a pine tree, or the bushels of leaves dropped all summer by magnolias? Neither of these trees ever goes bare naked.

Posted by Oh My God!, a resident of another community, on Sep 29, 2009 at 10:07 pm

To "2 Cents"

Point well taken!

Posted by cieboy, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2009 at 10:13 pm

I vote for native species. I still am very puzzled how "they" managed to cut down all those trees without anyone knowing about it and I would like to hear of someone (other than our City manager) having the courage of taking responsibility for it. Thanks Mr. and Mrs. Balin for taking the lead on this.

Posted by even the trees are tired of delay, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 1:47 am

Canopy is overrated. It does some good, but it's often a meddling organization. Trees are important, but trees need to co-exist with human culture. Grow up, Canopy! Funny how nobody here has said even one word about the merchants on California, and what they need as a consideration for the least business disruption. Why is that? Do all these "planners" and "people with opinions" know what disruptions cost merchants? Then they howl when their fav merchant leaves? There has been a decision for red maple, or pistash. They're both pretty trees. Plant' em! and be done with it. Give the merchants a break.

Posted by Civitas, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 8:01 am

Informed resident input will lead to better decisions, accountability.

Posted by EMS, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 8:44 am

I just want to remind the poster above that is so concerned about the merchants. Their president of CADDA, Ronna Divencinzi, was the one who pushed this beautification and tree

removal process in the first place. Now that my lovely walking street looks like hell, I have no

sympathy for the shops! Why should I care about them? Oh, go down and spend money in an

area that will take a long time to look pretty again? No thanks...

Posted by Tim Gray, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 9:52 am

Thank you Fred and Ann Balin for organizing this Community Outreach. The fact that they were able to arrange a meeting that the City stated would be impossible, speaks for itself.

This shows that we don't have to be victims of the Palo Alto Process. I'm sure that Mr. and Mrs. Balin have other kindred spirits that will rise to future challenges as well. Thanks to Mr. and Mrs. Balin for showing the way.

Tim Gray, an inspired and fearless Candidate for Palo Alto City Council Web Link

Posted by mj, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 9:56 am

EMS,

The MEMBERS OF CADA that Ronna Devencinzi represents are THE BUILDING OWNERS. And she is a realtor. The individual businesses that RENT are NOT members of CADA and were NOT consulted.

The owner of Palo Alto Sol spoke passionately at the Farmer's Market about how he didn't know anything about the tree removal, and how much not having the shade tree for his customers is going to adversely affect his business.

So please don't penalize the little stores that don't own their buildings.

Also, If they go out of business and either 5 or 10% of retail spaces in the California Ave Business District become vacant, the city lets the building owners convert empty retail space to office.

Posted by JO, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 10:10 am

Re PS's comment about bigger box trees and poor root systems.

Barrie Coate spoke to that point. I recall that he said that 24-inch or even 36 -inch box trees would do okay, but only if they received regular deep watering during the first few years while the roots got established. This would mean a greater amount of care than other cities usually give to newly planted trees, but he was confident that Palo Alto would provide the necessary care these larger-boxed trees needed to get well-established.

One of the reasons for waiting a year to plant any trees that need to be ordered is to be able to get choice specimens that may not be available this late in the year. As noted by mj above, Barrie Coate indicated that trees should be planted in (early?) November in order to give them the best head start.

Posted by Palo Alto resident, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 10:17 am

I'm surprised there has not been much discussion about the hazards of planting one kind of tree, whatever kind. Hasn't history of tree-lined streets in the U.S. shown us the perils of "monoculture"? When along comes a fungus, virus, etc. that causes diseased trees, it's much easier to spread, and typically wipes out the trees on a whole street. Maybe we could turn this slight "disaster" into a teachable moment, and use appropriate spots on California Avenue to plant various species, ideally those which require less water and are native, appropriate to specific micro-locations along the avenue (high traffic; desire for deciduous; desire for evergreen, etc.). This could provide an attractive, but "natural" look...

The initial decision for the project along California Avenue was misguided. Though I'm appalled by the management of the process that was supposed to take into consideration public input, I'm even more appalled that in this economy, with budget shortfalls, and many residents in Palo Alto just barely holding on to their jobs (or not), the City would decide to fell healthy trees not currently causing damage or hazards, and then spend more money to replace them.

Posted by YSK, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 11:31 am

and PLEASE, NO MORE MAGNOLIA TREES~ those trees shed leaves all year around, and are a real pain to clean up after. The leaves don't break down and actually form a kind of ground cover shading growing plants if they are not cleaned up at least once a week. Same for Liquid Amber Trees.....ENOUGH!

Posted by Bev, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 12:18 pm

thank you MJ.....Ronna represents the BUILDING owners...NOT the merchants. DO NOT boycott the merchants for what the OWNERS did...

BUT, you can always K&S He OWNS the building and the business.

Posted by EMS, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2009 at 12:55 pm

mj above...I am angry at the people responsible for making my lovely walking street look like hell. If CADA and Ronna Devencinzi are the ones responsible then they should be called out. To say we should now just go back to shopping as usual and forget that this area will look ugly for years to come just does not sit right with me. The businesses should have spoken up when they had the chance. You can't have it both ways! I'm not going back down there for a long, long time. Period!

Posted by robit noops, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Oct 1, 2009 at 12:10 am

Im not too worried about trees at this time of year. It will be daylight savings soon enough, shorter days, less sun and heat. The street looks ugly, but those are the breaks. Im curious if itll look like SF or Oakland on wet gloomy days.

Posted by Horticulturalist, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Oct 1, 2009 at 4:40 pm

Larger trees do not root as solidly nor better than smaller trees, and would not make much more of an impact than planting the right size trees and allowing the roots to establish.

Street tree requirements are not conducive to using native trees, as they are not normally accosted by exhaust from vehicles, reflected heat and light from pavement, and compaction around the roots required for the limited space of growth.

For aesthetics, the mixed grouping and phased planting would be more "natural" in this unnatural landscape, and would allow for phasing of tree life as they die out, or overgrow.

Though it would be more pleasant to have "instant" trees to clothe this naked landscape, it may run into greater costs as those "instant" trees would tend to have weak limbs, weedy behaviour in growth, root problems, and would need to be removed soon after they are at a good height, if not sooner.

The Fake Tree idea isn't a bad idea, and may work for spot locations as a temporary fix. There are some like that in San Diego in an artsy part of the town.

Posted by second thought, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 1, 2009 at 5:06 pm

Yesterday along California Street, I watched the last squares of dirt, where former oak trees stood, get covered in grey concrete. Unbelievable. All the money spent cutting down those 30-yr old trees, and all the money spent grinding the stumps, and now, the labor and resources for putting in the concrete to hide what once was. Money and labor wasted. All of it taxpayers' responsibility. And what do we have?? A lot less than we did.

Posted by Mama, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Oct 2, 2009 at 8:06 am

second thought - The cement is temporary. It is my understanding that in order to make walking safe and to remove ugly barricades that a thin cover of cement was used temporarily while tree species are determined. It will then be easily removed once the trees are ordered and planted.

Posted by mj, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 2, 2009 at 4:27 pm

To EMS

But the retail businesses WEREN'T given the choice to speak out, unless they OWNED their building. They were completely disenfranchised by CADA and Public Works. Just as we residents have been.

Our local little businesses on California Avenue had no idea CADA had made a request to Public Works that all the trees be cut down ASAP.

By the way, if you read Mayor Keene's report for the City Council (just made available) you would believe that Public Works had given residents and interested parties many opportunities to weigh in on the California Avenue landscaping over the last several years, and by implication the tree removal intention.

Who are all these people? Let's have the dates, times, who was invited, how were these meetings publicised, and what was presented at them. I don't think Public Works can produce this information because I don't think it exists.

This debacle is a huge breach of the public trust.

Posted by Fred Balin, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 2, 2009 at 5:29 pm

The transcript of renowned arborist Barrie Coate's presentation, and responses to audience questions, at last Sunday's California Avenue Farmers' Market is now posted at the following link:

Web Link

This is must reading for anyone who wants to be part of the informed conversation with regard to tree replacement options for California Avenue.

Please download and read, and then forward to as many people as possible.