CGVC Tree Permit Decision Reports: Appeals by 19 April

Tree Removal
YELLOW: Too many trees are being removed from the lot, including some valuable smaller fruit trees that could be relocated without much effort. We strongly encourage the applicant to relocate the smaller trees. We also believe that the large and well-conformed Black Sapote tree, within a few meters of the west border, and the Pongam tree, along the east border, could easily be saved and built around. The mid-sized tamarind is also in great condition along the west border, outside of a building zone.

It is unclear from the application, which lacks palm identity and size, which palms are to be relocated vs. removed. But a loss of 19 palms is too much. We encourage the applicant to save the larger royal palms, at least by relocation.

It is unclear why and how much of the large strangler fig would be pruned, and more information is needed. Given its location in the corner, it does not seem to impede construction in any way.

Tree Mitigation
RED: The mitigation plan is inadequate. Only two small buttonwoods and four small palms would replace more than 25 larger tree removals on the lot, which will likely be filled with a large home and much impermeable surface. Moreover, only five small trees will be planted in the ROW. The additional ‘contribution to the tree trust fund' does not compensate for the loss of urban tree canopy in this neighborhood. We strongly suggest the planting of larger specimens of native tree species on the property.

Recommendation
DO NOT APPEAL: The application is probably not worth an appeal given the exorbitant current appeal costs; but we request the owner consider relocations and additional plantings to offset the considerable loss of urban tree canopy in a neighborhood where major losses of canopy are being compounded.