|
|
|
Uploaded: Friday, October 9, 2009, 9:57 AM
Angry residents disrupt Cal Ave tree meeting
Debate turns to future planning for commercial 'streetscape' project
|
|
by Sue Dremann
Palo Alto Online Staff
Residents' outrage over the clear-cutting of 63 mature trees along California Avenue disrupt a community meeting to discuss potential tree-replacement choices on Thursday night.
The meeting at Escondido Elementary School was to have been an outreach planning and peacemaking gathering, focusing on types of trees to be replanted after 63 holly oaks were chainsawed the week of Sept. 14.
But residents said they didn't want the city to skirt the issues of how the normal city process went so wrong and they wanted the names of persons responsible made public. More than 100 residents attended.
It took more than an hour before moderator Steve Emslie, deputy city manager, could get the crowd focused on the meeting's purpose, to have four arborists describe the pros and cons of 15 species of trees that are potential replacements for the downed trees.
But before the tree-selection discussion took place, residents told Emslie they wanted to discuss the city's process for the planned streetcape beautification of the retail area. Some demanded a complete review of overall plans for the California Avenue district.
Emslie said the meeting "could be anything you want it to be," as residents angrily demanded answers.
But Ellie Eisner said the holly oaks were dangerous. She slid on fallen acorns in front of Keeble and Shuchat Photography and had six stitches.
"The city almost had a lawsuit from me," she said.
Others called for an independent review.
"I'd like to see an independent person such as (residents and city watchdogs) Herb Borock or Bob Moss do an investigation. I don't want to see Public Works investigating Public Works," a resident and businessman said, as others shouted in agreement.
Officials struggled to return the meeting to its original focus.
The shouting and shifting of topics at one point prompted the principal guest speaker, arborist Barrie Coate, to threaten to leave the meeting, in an aside to fellow panelists.
"I'm ready to walk out," he said quietly.
"Can't we talk about trees?" he later asked the audience, eliciting applause and some cheers.
Coate and other arborists had come to the meeting to discuss complexities of choosing the right trees for replanting. City officials hope the replanting can proceed by December.
City staff members Thursday night presented a "proposed concept plan" with tree choices, which the City Council is scheduled to review in mid-November.
The meeting turned to tree choices after a woman requested that each arborist name their top three choices and explain why.
Coate is a highly respected tree consultant from Los Gatos with whom residents had met in late September for a tree workshop. He warned residents that putting in the largest trees may not be the best choice and he would not recommend it.
He said most root stock of large trees is inferior. Tangled, overgrown roots would actually cause the trees to grow more slowly than if smaller trees were planted with appropriate soil preparation, he said.
He praised a plan by Dave Dockter, city planning arborist, to dig a wider, 5-by-5-foot hole for the trees and to add nutrients and soils that would stimulate growth of smaller trees.
Dave Muffly, an arborist and a board member of Canopy, a Palo Alto-based urban forestry organization, agreed. He said where Stanford University has moved huge, old trees, they have not done well, since roots must be cut back.
Plans to used red maples along the street have been scrapped, Eric Krebs, public works arborist, said.
City officials and arborists developed a list of 15 trees they agreed could do well along California Avenue.
Favored trees included Shumard red oak, 'Autumn Blaze' maple, 'Autumn Purple' white ash, silver leaf linden, Engleman oak, Holmford ornamental pear, Southern live oak, Canary Island pine, Brisbane box 'Elegans' and the local native coast live oak.
All of the arborists recommended a mixture of species and tree sizes, including evergreens that keep leaves in winter and deciduous trees producing brilliant fall foliage and drop their leaves.
All plans are on hold for any other changes to the street except for tree replacement, Assistant Public Works Director Mike Sartor said.
The streetscape plan had included reducing the avenue's four lanes to two, restriping some intersections for safety, adding bike lanes and adding new street furniture. All of those plans will go through the Planning and Transportation Commission, Sartor said.
Some residents said while the treescape plan goes through the city-approval process, something must be done to restore California Avenue in the interim. Some suggested adding large planter boxes for trees and other plants; others requested a special city council session to speed the process.
Emslie, Sartor and Krebs apologized for the tree cutting and promised that policies would be put in place that would ensure such a mistake will never happen again.
The staff choice to work closely with California Avenue Area Development Association (CAADA) and a small group of "stakeholders" was clearly a mistake the city will not repeat, Emslie said.
Kate Rooney, public works landscape architect working on the replanting project, asked the audience to move forward.
"It's very hard to deal with the situation we're in right now," she said.
The Architectural Review Board will hear a presentation on the project on Oct. 15, and an overall plan and review will be presented to the Planning and Transportation Commission on Oct. 28.
The plan would then come back to the council for review and possible approval on Nov. 16.
Sartor said assuming the council approves the plan, planting sites would be prepared in December with trees planted in December or January.
Residents can choose trees they would like to see from the group of 15 and should get comments to Rooney before the Oct. 15 ARB meeting, she said. Comment cards with a list of the trees can be obtained by contacting Kate Rooney at kate.rooney@cityofpaloalto.org.
Updates and information will be available at www.cityofpaloalto.org/calave. The Media Center videotaped the meeting and a video will be available for public viewing at a later date.
Canopy will host a tree walk of the California Avenue neighborhood with Dave Muffly to educate the public about some of the options. The walk takes place Sunday, Oct. 11 from noon to 2 p.m. andeets at 410 California Ave., next to the European Cobblery.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by Lon Chaney, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 11:11 am All the peasants from the village, pitchforks and torches in hand, streamed toward Count Dracula's castle intent upon revenge for past evil deeds.
|
|
Posted by Cybele, a member of the Gunn High School community, on Oct 9, 2009 at 11:12 am Re the CA Avenue Tree Cutting Flap. It is time to move on, I think the issue is one of residents vs merchants; please give plenty of time to making the decision, red maples sound sort of so-so. This area is my favorite place to shop, I think the big oaks gave it a special and genteel feeling that small trees will not. Take you time, trees are important and a big investment.
|
|
Posted by Apologies arent enough, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 11:36 am This meeting may not have been the right place to punish the responsible people but if you can hold on to two thoughts at the same time, the punishment should not be pushed aside. This was a really incompetent act and the perpetrators, more than one most likely, can be found. A real lesson needs to be learned and heartfelt apologies don't do it.
|
|
Posted by Paul, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 11:46 am Gotta agree with Apologies...there are 2 subjects, closely related, and we should pursue both.
1) We need to determine the "best" approach and get on with replanting. "Best" is in quotes because with Palo Alto, so often it seems that "best" means my way only, especially to particularly vocal types - see the library fiasco for more details
2) Accountability - apologies are NOT enough - someone apparently went around the appropriate process. This should be examined and, if true, there should be real consequences. Perhaps it's a suspension or a firing, perhaps it's an unsatisfactory performance review (does city govt even have such things? I am so ignorant...). But by all means, we don't need to know the person's name or names, but we need plausible explanation as to what the cause was and what the consequences will be for whoever did this.
|
|
Posted by michael james, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 11:49 am unbelievable the head of public works wouldnt bless us with his presence
also note the building planning and public works have a head guy
both of them should have to sit in the corner
|
|
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 11:53 am There's no accountability in Palo Alto City gov't, only early retirement. Children's Theater? Website? Now this debacle.
Maybe someone from CAADA should have been at this meeting and accepted some responsibility and explained their rationale.
|
|
Posted by Resident, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 12:15 pm Where was Jim Keene, our City Manager and Glen Roberts, Manager of the Public Works Department? Were they hiding?
|
|
Posted by Julian, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 1:46 pm What is the point of "moving on" with new process when it's been so clearly demonstrated that some people at the city won't follow existing process? Waste of time to develop more process to likewise get ignored. There has to be some accountability to "move on".
|
|
Posted by PolicySage, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 1:46 pm This was a clear effort to encourage people to forget the tree-clearing fiasco and "move on". This "move on" idea is frequently used by culprits who want us to forget their misdeeds. Come on, folks, let's don't stand for this. What IS being done to investigate the matter, and identify and deal with those responsible? Does anybody know? I really would like to hear, and will be watching these comments.
|
|
Posted by Toady, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 2:19 pm They're *trees*.
|
|
Posted by Gail, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 3:18 pm I would like to see the Director of Public Works, Glen Roberts, fired, the head City Arborist fired, and the City Manager, Jim Keene, all fired. Don't allow these czars to "retire," so they receive lucrative retirement benefits, lifetime health insurance, etc. Fire them for incompetence, thus no benefits. The City Council has let us down, too, on so many levels. The High Speed Rail issue, and now the cutting of the California Avenue trees. This city council doesn't do their homework. Too bad we can't recall them, too.
|
|
Posted by CHinCider, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 3:31 pm To Gail -
Actually, you could recall the Council more easily than the empolyees could be fired.
Good luck with your bitterness and vindictiveness.
|
|
Posted by John, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 3:46 pm I find it interesting that so many Palo Altans want blood over the issue of the cut trees on Cal. Ave. This while our city budget is going to hell, without any serious interest. Has it occurred to those who are demanding heads to roll, that we do not have any more money? We are tapped out. All of the demands for new processes and selective tree plantings will increase the costs for this project, projecting the possibility that nothing will get done.
We all don't need to get along, but we all must obey the harsh realities of budgets. What is really going on?
|
|
Posted by Ellen, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 4:40 pm John - how much did it cost to chop down the trees?
|
|
Posted by Civility Needed, a resident of another community, on Oct 9, 2009 at 4:45 pm Not only is civility needed, the people at this meeting who acted out their anger are a time-wasting embarrassment. Demand a separate meeting to have your issues addressed. In the meantime, read an etiquette book and grow up.
|
|
Posted by John, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 5:05 pm Ellen - The original cost to chop the trees was part of the original bid. Now that an uncivil war is going on, it will cost MUCH more to "fix" the issue, if we are going to run this thing to its logical end game.
Given the current budget crisis, it is more likely, than not, that no trees will be planted.
My view is to let the original plan go through. Vengeance can come after the red maples are planted, for what it is worth.
|
|
Posted by Tyler Hanley, online editor of Palo Alto Online, on Oct 9, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Tyler Hanley is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online The following comments were added to duplicate threads on this topic (the duplicate threads are now closed):
Posted by Gary Ruppel, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, 4 hours ago
Not having been at the meeting, I can't comment on what when on other than to trust that the writer of the article was accurate. There is a growing lack of civility among a small number of Palo Alto citizens as evidenced by taking out their anger by shouting and disrupting civic meetings. Perhaps a reflection of society as a whole, however as a long term resident of the city I have come to expect more of our citizens.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by EJ, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, 4 hours ago
I wish I could have attended the meeting. Sue Dremman's reporting has always been outstanding and accurate, so I have no reason to think her description of the meeting was an inaccurate portrayal. Gary's right; the lack of civility in public discourse is alarming in society in general. I too am outraged by the clear cutting of all the Calif. Ave. trees, and I get a sick feeling every day when I come down there. But when a respected outside arborist gives his time to voluntarily dispense advice on what trees to plant now, and then threatens to walk out because of people's emotions trumping their public concern, well, folks, then we have a problem. Shouting demands at public officials isn't going to bring us a resolution to this mess. I have absolutely no confidence in CAADA's sole stewardship of this "beautification" plan, but ultimately they will have to be involved in some way. Let's figure out a way to work together to come up with a viable plan, so that we can get the right trees planted in as timely a manner as possible.
Just an aside, for the sake of some levity: Now that the trees are down, can we also "clear cut" the creepy little gnome sculpture at Calif. and Ash?
--------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Susan Stansbury, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, 3 hours ago
I attended the meeting because, along with others, I was shocked and saddened by what happened on California Ave. However, I had hoped that this meeting would be focused on how to move forward. I was looking forward to hearing more from the distinguished panel of arborists on their recommendations. The hostility of the crowd was a bit alarming. How far have we evolved from the days of public hangings? I can understand why people were upset; but wish we could have stayed focused on constructive ways to move forward and how to select the best trees for the project.
However, some good information did come out of the meeting, that was not shared in the article. We learned that the city plans to do extensive soil preparations for the trees. Dave Muffly, one of the arborists also described how we need to make sure the roots of the trees are healthy, and that smaller trees would likely have healthier root systems, grow faster and be more viable long term. Another creative idea is to use trees in planter boxes to augment the plantings while the trees are small. I think these are all important points to ensure both the beauty and viability of CA Ave's landscape.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Fred Balin, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, 3 hours ago
There was definitely some tension and pointed remarks in the first hour. Staff had begun by opening up the forum to attendee comments on the upcoming process.
Not everyone in the audience was aware of, or ready to tune into, the awaiting excellence of the panel that was seated at a nearby table.
After an hour, citizens spoke up (myself included) that we needed to move on to the main goal of the meeting (tree-replacement options) and interact with the special expertise in the room.
The needed self-regulation occurred, and we entered into a fine interactive discussion with arborists Barrie Coate, Dave Muffley, David Docktor, and Eric Krebbs.
Thanks to preparatory staff discussions and planning, attendees received a 21-page color-glossy packet, including a concept plan, ratings chart for 15 tree options, and color pictures of the trees. Staff also distributed a 2-sided 5.5” x 8.5” color comment card listing all the trees and the manner in which they would be planted in the proposal. Staff also stated that they intend to post this material on the city’s web site.
There was excellent input on tree selection, soil preparation, initial planting size, timing, and other important considerations from both the panel and the audience.
Staff stated its commitment to return at a second community forum with updated plans based on input from the meeting and via the comment cards.
The meeting continued for about two and half hours with many folks lingering afterward to chat with the panelist, staff, and each other. I spoke with Barrie Coate at the end of evening; he was in good spirits and glad that the meeting had moved ahead.
The session had an edgy start, and a very informative second act. The event was taped by The Media Center for broadcast. Those of you with a craving for heat, catch the first hour; those, for light, study the balance.
Interacting directly with the public, especially on a matter that stems from a painful event, is not always smooth and neat. But on balance, last night was an excellent and productive meeting. Thank you to all of you who attended.
|
|
Posted by Tyler Hanley, online editor of Palo Alto Online, on Oct 9, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Tyler Hanley is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online Continuation of comments from duplicate threads:
Posted by lawman, a resident of Menlo Park, 6 hours ago
I am curious to know what the arborists came up with in response to
"The meeting turned to tree choices after a woman requested that each arborist name their top three choices and to explain why."
Anyone know?
--------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Marvin, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, 6 hours ago
"Instead, residents demanded that those responsible for the decision to cut the 63 trees be revealed publicly, and that there be a complete review of overall plans for the California Avenue business district."
They can start by voting Larry Klein out of office. He was on the council--hard to believe he did not know of the plan. Now he is claiming that he did not know and pointing fingers, as usual for him.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, 6 hours ago
Glad to see some righteous anger finally get expressed at the Palo Alto "leadership".
Personally I feel like whatever promises "promised that policies would be put in place that would ensure such a mistake would never happen again" are just a way to get this episode behind them until the next time when they will do the same thing again.
The public is ignored and then placated and condescended to when something is done that generates an uproar. As someone said fascism is when the people fear the government, and democracy is when the government fears the people. At this point in the Palo Alto mismanagement I think people do not trust that that blindly accepting yet another apology or excuse is not going to generate the requisite fear to ensure that the will of the people is respected, let along followed if it happens to get in the way of developers.
Something is going to have to change so that Palo Altans are satisfied they can govern their own city instead of live passively with whatever bad decisions are thrown their way, even if there are apologies to go with them.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Bev, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, 6 hours ago
I thought the CAADA committee took the lead in picking the trees to be planted.
Any response?
--------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by robit noops, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, 6 hours ago
It is a shame that the trees were cut down, but now it is time for people to move forward to remedy the damage. I agree that arguing about the process was just wasting the guest arborists time. A seperate meeting should be scheduled to discuss what went wrong and how the trees got cut with no public notice.
|
|
Posted by Whiner, CA, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 8:54 pm Man, let's change the name of this burg to "Whiner, CA". You want to cut something down to size? Start with the rude loudmouths who travel to City meetings with their disrespectful behavior. Throw the bums out of city meetings. Who needs these people, anyway. They're hopelessly infatuated with their own self-righteousness. They are often the same people - meeting to meeting - and they give our City a bad name, a far worse name than bureaucratic snafus. What a bunch of spoiled brat teething crybabies! Why don't they just go home and suck on their Zweiback, and let civil citizens discuss heated issues in a civilized manner. I wonder how many products these whiners use that result in the daily death of trees? How many read the newspaper, for instance? Hypocrites! As for the clear cut, get on with life, whiners! New trees are going to be planted. and oh, btw, what are we paying for in Palo Alto's bureaucracy when a PROFESSIONAL arborist has to take gaffe from local lnaturist amateurs and wannabe tree huggers? What's with that, anyway? Here's a personal message to Palo Alto City Hall. YOU have the mandate, and you have the money. Plant the trees that YOU think best, and ignore the whiners, habituated to perennial dissatisfaction and complaining within their dumb little cabals that have cost this town so much money that it makes one's head spin. They may have Ph.D's and live in $M homes, but they are a pretty hapless bunch - kinda like the old Brit Blue Bloods. Crisis is like fertilizer to that bunch; they feed and grow in it. Plant the darn trees, now, and let' em eat fertilizer!
|
|
Posted by anneke, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 9:36 pm
I could not believe the heading of the article dealing with last night's tree meeting: "Angry residents disrupt Cal Ave tree meeting." The meeting was disrupted? It did not do what it set out to do? Its agenda was derailed? Rowdy rabble interfered with the democratic process? Come now. When I left, I commented that the meeting had been suprisingly civilized, given the strong feelings of many of the participants. The agenda was adjusted at the beginning of the session to accommodate people's desire to question, comment on, and suggest improvements to the process that had led to the tree-cutting fiasco. This adjustment to the agenda was made with the agreement and cooperation of the moderator. To suggest that he was forced to fight for more than an hour to get the crowd to focus on the "real" purpose of the meeting is a gross misrepresentation: at the beginning the agenda was in fact to discuss the problems with the process. This part of the meeting was definitely lively, emotions ran high, and people did not always wait to be recognized. But disruptive? People were certainly on topic, listened and responded to each other, and engaged in their democratic right to free speech. An hour or more on the process topic may have been somewhat too long, but people clearly felt the need for an opportunity both to vent their feelings and to provide input. When the agenda moved to trees, discussion continued at a lively pace, and there were many useful comments and suggestions from the crowd. To call this a disruptive occasion does a disservice to the concerned residents at Thursday's tree meeting.
|
|
Posted by Fred Balin, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 10:35 pm The 15 tree options presented on Thursday evening-- 6 evergreen, 9 deciduous -- can be now be viewed on individual plates (pages 16-21) within the presentation PDF posted on the city's web page for the California Avenue Streetscape Improvements at Web Link .
The overall criteria chart has been reduced and scanned but unfortunately it is very hard to read. Maybe someone in the city could redo it and repost it.
A comment card as a PDF is also available via the same site, but you can also email comments directly to Kate Rooney, in Public Works, kate.rooney@cityofpaloalto,org .
It is probably best so submit comments before Thursday, when the meeting Architectural Review Board meets at 8 a.m. in the City Council Chambers to discuss the California Avenue streetscape improvements including tree selection. The staff report was posted this afternoon at Web Link
|
|
Posted by Tim, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 10:58 pm This is crazy! They were just trees.
So many more important issues to deal with.
Two of the four businesses on California Av were HAPPY that they are gone... they told me that they were blocking their store front from the street.
|
|
Posted by zanon, a resident of the Esther Clark Park neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 11:06 pm Trees are people and are more important to palo alto than anything else, including children.
Less houses. Less children. Less schools. More trees!
The only thing more special than trees to me is barak obama!
|
|
Posted by Reply to Whine, CA, a resident of another community, on Oct 9, 2009 at 11:13 pm Man, you hit this one on the head! It's a little rough, but you nailed it. Most of the loud mouth whiners are "want to be" or "tree huggers". They get their message across by continuing to spurt out the same venemous dribble.
I agree. THEY ARE JUST TREES! New ones will grow and it will look wonderful after everyone who is pissing and moaning is long gone.
GET OVER IT! PLANT NEW TREES AND GET ON WITH THE REAL BUSINESS AT HAND.
|
|
Posted by Nora Charles, a resident of Stanford, on Oct 10, 2009 at 12:27 am Fred Balin, thanks very much for the information.
Sometimes "moving on" is not the best solution. There should be consequences to the tree debacle; firings are absolutely in order.
To those who say they are "just trees," it is clear you will never get it. But it is curious that you choose to live in a town with an abundance (well, not as many as there used to be) of beautiful trees. Perhaps you would all feel more at home in some blighted inner city?
|
|
Posted by Andrew, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 2:15 am To Tim:
Just who are these two businesses ("Two of the four businesses on California Av were HAPPY that they are gone... they told me that they were blocking their store front from the street") that are unnamed and, apparently, just talk to you.
|
|
Posted by Alan, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 2:20 am It's clear from the comments of "Whiner" from "Another Palo Alto Neighborhood" that s/he has no close relationship to the California Avenue area. If the city of PA came into that Another Palo Alto Neighborhood and removed ALL of its trees I wonder who would be "whining" then!
|
|
Posted by Alan, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 4:28 am "Angry Residents Disrupt... Meeting" is a completely misleading headline.
I attended that meeting and it was my first town meeting in Palo Alto despite many years of residence here.
I was very impressed by the civil and courteous tone of the meeting. Sure, there are a few people who are still in their anger stage and wanted to vent, but the overwhelming majority of the people came to discuss replacing the trees, to understand the options, and ask questions of the arborists and city staff.
The headline wants to make it sound like it was like one of those health reform town meetings. It wasn't. I left proud of Palo Alto and its city employees and its residents.
|
|
Posted by OutLawtheGop, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 6:08 am The anger was understandable because as usual, there will be no accountability and the person/s responsible for the tree cutting debacle will face no consequences. I'm a strong union and workers supporter but this is a classic case where people should lose their jobs and obviously, nobody will.
|
|
Posted by Alan, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 9:12 am Our anger IS understandable, and that is why the agenda was opened up to allow people to make statements and ask questions regarding the tree cutting and the failure of proper procedure.
But with four arborists on the panel, plus the presence of a city landscape architect and the assistant city manager, plus representatives of Canopy, all there to provide information and answer questions, it would have been a wasted evening if sooner or later we didn't return to the announced subject of the meeting, which was what kind of trees to choose to replace the ones that were destroyed.
And the hundred + people that were there mostly came to deal with that announced subject, which is not without contention itself.
|
|
Posted by Eileen Stolee, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 9:33 am Some of us (me included) came with pent up anger and frustration at the loss of our shady walking street and the realization that no one has been held accountable. For those who say, "it's just trees, get over it, new one will grow back" (in 5-10 years) perhaps don't come to this area very much or at all. I think if you were a daily visitor you might feel differently. This whole project could have been a win win situation if the tree cutting was done in phases allowing some shade trees to remain until new trees grew a bit. Anyway, the trees are gone and it's true that the focus should now be on how we can make California Avenue enjoyable again in the near future, not 5 years for now. The city has limited money so perhaps each merchant can invest in some temporary potted plants, umbrellas, fresh paint to make the street scape and buildings look better and help attract customers. I think most of the people posting on this forum agree that the area looks pretty darn ugly right now. Will itty bitty trees change that in the short term?
|
|
Posted by andrea, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 11:19 am One of the main reasons the planet and the human race face the clear and present possibility of extinction is that there are far too many people and far too few trees in the world. To the poster who smugly suggested that we care about trees more than people:if we want to survive, we must dramatically reduce the number of people in the world through education, birth control, enlightenment and all other democratic means and conversely increase the number of trees, starting by avoiding the unnecessary removal of tree and an immediate halt of all rain forest destruction.
|
|
Posted by Alan, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 12:00 pm Eileen Stolee is on the right track. I would go one step further and not ask businesses for donations unless they supported the CAADA proposal. Since CAADA sold the "beautification" idea to City Hall CAADA should accept responsibility (which they have not done) and donate money to really beautify that area. That probably won't happen because the idea behind the CAADA plan was for the realtors to make money not donate money to restore California Avenue.
|
|
Posted by Adam, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 12:33 pm Kudos to Marvin of Midtown. Let me reiterate his comment, it's really important. If no one in the city acknowledges responsibility the same kind of snafu will occur again.
Here's Marvin's comment:
"Instead, residents demanded that those responsible for the decision to cut the 63 trees be revealed publicly, and that there be a complete review of overall plans for the California Avenue business district."
They can start by voting Larry Klein out of office. He was on the council--hard to believe he did not know of the plan. Now he is claiming that he did not know and pointing fingers, as usual for him.
|
|
Posted by Whiner, CA, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 1:28 pm Stollee..."The city has limited money so perhaps each merchant can invest in some temporary potted plants, umbrellas, fresh paint to make the street scape and buildings look better and help attract customers."
Why don't you take up a collection? How absurd that anyone should suggest that hard-working, over-taxed merchants should pay to make the street look better. Are you voting for the business license tax? I'll bet you are. Honestly, after 12 years of living in this city, it's amazing to watch the circus of hubris appear, time and time again.
The trees will be replanted. Shop local and support the merchants instead of asking them to pay for something that YOUR tax dollars are supposed to pay for.
|
|
Posted by Lon Chaney, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 2:12 pm Put all the California Avenue tree clearcut miscreants into public stocks and dunking pools on City Hall Plaza. Sell tickets to view the spectacle to offset the City budget deficit.
Make an example of them through public shaming, just as in Old New England. Horsewhip the worst of them, jsut as in the Old West. Only in this way will the public be appeased.
|
|
Posted by pat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 8:12 pm I agree with Anon. and others who brought up the lack of accountability in the city. That’s why people are angry.
The tree cutting is the latest in a series of incidents (Children’s Theatre, Utility Department and Public Works scandals) that are never brought to closure.
What was discovered during the CT internal administrative investigation? Have we heard anything about the Feds raiding the UD?
I don’t think those responsible for the tree cutting should be set out in the public stocks, but residents deserve to know that real action was taken and what policies and procedures have changed to ensure accountability.
City Manager Keene has said that he has to sign any future order to cut trees. But we can’t have his signature required for every single action taken in the city!
It’s the culture of the council and staff that needs changing!
|
|
Posted by Lon Chaney, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Oct 11, 2009 at 8:58 am THe problem at City Hall during and since the Benest era is not with the qualified professional engineers in the Public Works Department. The problem is with the bureaucratic Rasputins in places like the Human Resources Department. These people operate behind the scenes to craft damage control strategy. They investigate then investigate the investigators. They give political advice the City Manager, a civil servant. Their work is a total waste of taxpayer money. Clean them out to make City Hall more transparent, more accountable.
|
|
Posted by EJ, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2009 at 12:33 pm Reply to Tim ("Two of the four businesses on California Av were HAPPY that they are gone... they told me that they were blocking their store front from the street"):
So, does that mean ALL the merchants were happy? You should go talk to the owner of Palo Alto Sol if you really think so; he'd willingly give you an earful on how UNhappy he is with losing the tree that gave ample shade to his outdoor diners.
If a couple of merchants had concerns about their store fronts being blocked, why couldn't a solution such as pruning have been discussed? Or the removal of a particular tree? Why did all 63 have to come down? That's what people are so incredulous about.
|
|
Posted by jazzman, a resident of another community, on Oct 12, 2009 at 1:16 pm Don't know why the City just could not answer the simple question as to who authorized the removal, that is all the citizens want to know.
City officials just skirted around the issue, typical coverup type gov't. Just answer the primary question --- who within the city authorized it and also who let it slip by
|
|
Posted by Lon Chaney, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2009 at 3:20 pm The Keene regime acts a lot like the Benest regime beacuse Keene has some of the same advisors as Benest.
That said, this time they can't use the old playbook for damage control of scandals since the public is wise to them. The heat is alos burning hot under the City Council.
They can't push all the blame down on a clerk or junior engineer in Public Works. They can't claim all the misdeeds were done by people who have already retired or left for another job, as they did in the Children's Theatre investigation scandal.
They can stack the decks in an internal investigation of the California Avenue trees affair, however. That way they can find a sacrifical lamb in the mid-ranks or if push came to shove actually push a Department Director under the bus to save the rest of the top management and the City Council.
|
|
Posted by Fred Balin, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 15, 2009 at 3:17 pm Video of October 8 public hearing Is now available.
Via TV:
10/15/09, 3:30 PM, Channel 29
10/16/09, 5:00 AM, Channel 29
10/16/09, 4:00 PM, Channel 26
10/17/09, 6:00 PM, Channel 26
10/18/09, 4:00 PM, Channel 26
10/19/09, 12:00 PM, Channel 26
10/20/09, 2:00 PM, Channel 26
10/20/09, 4:00 PM, Channel 29
10/21/09, 4:00 PM, Channel 29
10/22/09, 8:00 AM, Channel 26
10/23/09, 8:00 PM, Channel 29
Via Purchased DVD:
Contact the Media Center, 650-494-8686 ext.35
|
|
|
| |
2007 Awards from the California
Newspaper Publishers Association
Palo Alto Weekly
First Place
Local News Coverage
Local Breaking-News Story
Feature Story
Second Place
Feature Story
Environmental Reporting
Sports Coverage
General News Photo
Photo Essay
Freedom of Information
The Almanac
First Place
Environmental Reporting
Editorial Pages
Lifestyle Coverage
Second Place
Environmental Reporting
Mountain View Voice
Second Place
General Excellence
Editorial Comment
Front-Page Design
|
|
|
Send this story
Print this story
