Trees vs. Views

Over a year ago, I took a few pictures of Orpheus park. I took the photos because I was going use them to make the case that we should cut down some of the park's trees. Much more important issues came up and it was not until the Highway 101 tree issue surfaced that I went back into my archives for the old photos. I planned to pitch the idea of making a sacrificial offering to the arborists to appease them. They take the Orpheus trees and we keep the 101 trees.

Notice that the Orpheus park sign has a sunset on it. The most important intrinsic attribute of this park is the panoramic ocean view. It is perfect for sunsets. I'm sure the sunset potential of the location was recognized when the park was built. They even put in this really cool bench at the top of the knoll so you can sit and watch the sun go down.

The problem was that the city planted a bunch of trees right down the center of the view corridor. These trees obstructed the richest part of the horizon. The most important natural feature of the park had been crowed out by trees.

I am for cutting down the trees right in the middle of the park. Take a look at these photos. The first is from 2007.

click to enlarge photo

This photo is from last night. Drew was sitting in the tree right down the middle. Once his tree gets cut down the views will be awesome. Take home message: Kevin C. does not want to save all these trees. Keep that in mind as you read some of the following burning questions.

1. Does the city really have an agreement to keep the neighbors' views unobstructed?
2. Since when does the city record important and costly agreements in their head instead of on paper?
   
3. Was the public, or even the council, ever aware of the agreement?
4. The neighbors were given some seriously valuable rights with the "agreement". What did the city get in return, and why on earth was that trade not documented? Was there something to hide?
   
5. WHO has the authority to give the neighbors a view easement? I'd want the council to be involved in setting perpetual land use agreements.
   
6. Why on earth did the city pay for the tree removal? Why not have the neighbors getting the fifty thousand dollar views pay to remove the trees?
   
7. Since when does Dan Dalager care about the property values of park neighbors?
8. Isn't Stocks famous for telling people that if they want a view they should have bought their neighbor's property to protect it?
   
9. If there really was an agreement, why on earth wasn't that considered when the park was designed. Why were trees planted where they would encroach into the view easement?
   
10. Is Barth micromanaging by questioning the process that resulted in the city paying to cut down its own trees for the benefit of the neighbors (who have no documentation of their view easement)?
11. Do Jerome or Dalager ever question city hall management processes? When they do, is that micromanaging? There is a huge valley between oversight and micromanagement.
12. How much is this protest costing taxpayers?
    
13. Who obtains a VERY VALUABLE view easement without having it recorded? (Again, why the hell not? Was this just another good ol' boys agreement?)
    

I am fine with the end result. How this all went down has an odor that no one other than Barth seems interested in trying to eradicate.

7 points about the looming Leucadia 101 tree removal

The following was posted by Kevin C. in the comments section of this blog:

1. The three sets of opinions by the aborists were not fully consistent. There were a number of important differences in the recommendations.

2. Now, I have to admit I don't know what the arborists were asked to do. You can't tell by their analysis (or lack there of). Were they asked to do a risk assessment? Were they asked to do establish a health prognosis? Where they asked, "do you think we should cut those trees down? or, How can we save those trees? Actually, it is pretty clear they weren't asked the last question.

3. Sure, the justification looks good on the surface, but when you look closely at the reports they are pretty thin on providing justification for the immediate removal of the trees. There is no real risk assessment, no structural analysis, or real biological analysis which explained why the trees needed to come down NOW. I don't doubt that such an analysis could result in a conclusion that some of the trees should come down promptly, but I remain highly suspicious for many of the trees.

4.Why do each of these trees have to come down now? You won't find the answers in the reports. [The trees are a the number one asset on 101 and their great size makes L101 fairly unique. The city should make sure that question was addressed. ] That was worth repeating.

5. We have two reports. That doesn't mean that we have two reports that are good enough. The fact that the reports say we should cut down a tree simply because it has some dead canopy should make you want to see a complete analysis of the trees' prognosis.

6. Why do you say the trees are at the rear of their "life-cycles"? What is the evidence? I don't even think the tree trimmer made that claim.

7. How was the outside arborist selected? Did the city hire him or did L101 hire him? He seems to be a bit of a self-promoter and some sort of reinvented landscaper/broker. I don't know that he brings engineering skills or perspective or biological skills or perspective. That is probably fine for most of the things he works on, but if he is not producing an analysis and instead he is just creating straight practitioner's opinion, we should keep that in mind.

click image for large view
The report calls for 8 trees to be cut down, however the new word around town is that 16 Hwy101 trees will be cut down in February.

*I would like to add a point about the perceived danger of old growth Eucalyptus trees. At the last city goal setting meeting Jim Bond talked at length about how branches from Eucs will "go off like a gun" and fall without warning. This is true but, those branches are easy to spot in advance. If the city had any kind of regular maintenance schedule for the 101 trees fear of falling branches would not be an issue.

Also, Leucadia 101 has been the scene of many car accidents, including fatalities. Yet the city is slow to respond to addressing traffic safety on the 101. Why fear of trees? The city might tell us, "The Streetscape will solve traffic safety issues and we will replant trees during the Streetscape." The problem is that the Streetscape timeline is in limbo.

Enviro-Barney Climbs Wrong Tree

Leucadia-4:35pm, January 30, 2009.

Jobless hippy kid climbs "tree" in Orpheus Park in weak attempt to stave off tree trimmer's axe.

Apparently, Drew (the tree climber) doesn't read the Leucadia Blog.

At first I wanted to tell the kid, "Dudebro, don't you read the Leucadia Blog? There are trees that provide community value on L101 that are being cut down without adequate justification. Heck, the cypress tree is being cut down because there is some dead canopy and that is not a complete argument that the tree poses a liability or that it suffers from a terminal illness."

Then I realized that I didn't want this kid to have anything to do with the L101 trees.

Local media coverage:
Coast News, Protester goes to great heights
NCT, Tree-sitter blocks removal of park tipu tree
SDUT, Jru tree-sits, children chant as trees fall in Leucadia park

Encinitas Uglification Committee Approves Ruining Historic Leucadia

The Encinitas Uglification Committee planning their vision for Leucadia's historic Hwy101.

The black arrows mark tiny dead trees that the city never watered in one of Leucadia's many neglected coast highway center medians.

The Encinitas Uglification Committee spent hours arguing what kind of weeds should grow in Leucadia's center medians.

The EUC's successful scorched Earth program at it's finest.

Locals and tourist alike love Leucadia's historic tree canopy therefore the EUC won't rest until every coast highway tree has been chopped down.

The Encinitas Uglification Committee, working hard for you since 1986.

North Leucadia Big Euc marked for removal

The large tree in the foreground of the photo has been marked for removal by the city of Encinitas. It is in the first center median at the northern entrance to Leucadia, across from Rebel Rents. I cant quite figure out which tree it is on the list of trees to be removed in early February.

click image for large view

Send Mayor Maggie Good Vibes, Thoughts and Prayers

Encinitas Mayor Maggie Houlihan recently announced that she is battling a recurrence of endometrial cancer. Encinitas politics are divisive but please take a moment to send Mayor Maggie some positive thoughts and prayers. Thank you.

Mayor Maggie vs Cancer

Encinitas mayor says her cancer has returned
By Tanya Mannes
Union-Tribune Staff Writer

ENCINITAS — Mayor Maggie Houlihan announced last night that she is battling a recurrence of endometrial cancer and said that she doesn't plan to wear a wig when she loses her hair during five months of chemotherapy.

She fought the disease in 2006.

“I'm doing everything I can both traditionally and alternatively to beat this darn thing,” Houlihan said in a brief statement at the close of a City Council meeting. “So if you see the bald woman in town, or maybe walking on the beach with friends, it's me.”

Afterward, she was surrounded by supporters, including her husband, Ian Thompson. A friend presented her with a bouquet of flowers.

Houlihan, 60, was first elected to the council in 2000, and she was the top vote-getter in the 2004 and 2008 elections. Known for her “slow-growth” stance, she has called for more restrictions on development, such as buildings that would block scenic views. Houlihan also supports environmental regulations such as a pending plastic-bag ban. –T.M.
source

Home Depot Expo store off Leucadia Blvd is closing

The era of buying overpriced widgets with your easy money equity from your newly acquired McMansion is over, so Home Depot if closing down it's Expo store off Leucadia Blvd.

MSNBC: EXPO to Close San Diego Stores

I bought a kitchen faucet from there and the staff was helpful and friendly. Now we are going to have another huge empty building in our town. I vote for a multi-plex movie theater to replace the AMC that we lost. Not that anyone can afford to go to the movies anymore...

California!

Below is a recent Reuters article on the state of the state of California. As usual they blame Prop 13 for the economic woes of the 8th largest economy in the world.

California's "train wreck" a golden opportunity?

By Dan Whitcomb

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - With California facing a $42 billion deficit in the current economic downturn, a glum Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has warned that the Golden State is on the brink of insolvency.

More people have left California than any other U.S. state over the past year, some disenchanted with snarled traffic, scarce jobs and some of the highest taxes in the nation. Add the prospect of still higher taxes and fewer public services, and normally sunny Californians have little to celebrate.

Still, experts say the most populous U.S. state and the world's eighth-largest economy is well placed to rise again and that this crisis could spur major changes in the economy that will pay dividends in the long term.

Abundant natural resources, big ports, access to the Pacific Rim, a large, relatively young work force, entrepreneurial draw and tech-oriented industries augur well for the future, economists and historians say.

"The prophets of doom and gloom are just not looking at the reality of California," said Jerry Nickelsburg, senior economist at the UCLA Anderson Forecast.

"The government has created kind of a mess and that's a problem to be solved, but the negatives are actually fairly small. I think you can expect a lot of good out of California," he said.

The typically upbeat Schwarzenegger made international headlines this month when, instead of delivering his usual cheery "state of the state" speech, he issued a short, bleak message about California's roughly $1.5 trillion economy.

"A ROCK UPON OUR CHEST"

"California is in a state of emergency," said the former actor and bodybuilder, whose second term ends next year. "Addressing this emergency is the first and greatest thing we must do for the people. The $42 billion deficit is a rock upon our chest and we cannot breathe until we get it off."

Controller John Chiang then told Californians he would delay sending out $3.7 billion in tax refunds and other payments because the state was running out of money.

The dismal state of the state would have been hard to imagine in California's post-World War Two golden years, when incomes were rising, land was plentiful, homes were affordable and wide-open freeways stretched in all directions.

The good times came to a screeching halt with the 1973 OPEC recession, said Dowell Myers, a professor of urban planning and demography at the University of Southern California, and in some ways they have never really returned.

At the heart of California's problems, economists say, is the government's heavy reliance on personal income taxes, which produces wild swings in revenue as its coffers overflow in good years and dry up in leaner times.

California is a pioneer state famous for its entrepreneurial spirit. But an entrepreneur who might make $2 million in boom times could go bust in a recession.

A big reason for the state's reliance on income taxes is Proposition 13, a voter-approved change to the state Constitution that limits property tax increases and requires any plan to boost taxes to receive the approval of at least two-thirds of the legislature. read the whole article here.

Arborist

The city hired a consulting arborist to review the trees already slated for removal by West Coast Arborists. Here is his report.

Arborists are a lot like realtors. There are good ones and a lot of bad ones, and they all have a license/certification.

I had tried to speak with the West Coast arborist who gave the city their first tree evaluation. I gave up after I saw their crews on Leucadia Boulevard working on Torrey Pines trees that did not need their assistance.


Here are some questions and recommendations:
Recommendation #1: Never ask the guy you pay to cut down your trees, "Do you think this one needs to go?"

I am assuming that West Coast Arborists get paid by the tree and don't have a blanket tree maintenance contract (Leucadia's trees have been neglected, why?)

Comment #1: After that first guy says the trees have to go, you box yourself in a corner that requires a lot of effort and expense to get out.

Question #1: How was West Coast selected to be the city's tree trimmers? And how were they selected to be the consultants who evaluated the trees?

Comment #2: The large Monterey cypress is slated for removal because, "This specimen has very little canopy left". That is not evidence or reasoning to justify removing this tree.

Question #2: Why does the Monterey cypress need to be removed? Why does it have to be removed right now?

Comment 3: I am under the impression that no new trees will be put in to replace removed trees. It could be a year or more before they are replaced.

Question #3: Why the rush to remove trees all of a sudden? Trees 1, 3, and 5 are small and don't appear to pose any particular IMMEDIATE risk of canopy failure. The new arborist does not say there is any immediate danger, so why not wait to remove these (or some) trees until a replacement plan is ready to be executed?

Comment #4: The new arborist's evaluation does not appear to be independent of West Coast's evaluation. Given that, if the city was trying to save the L101 canopy, it could have required the trees be evaluated for relative risk of immediate removal, delayed removal, and sustained maintenance. The arborist also noted that he only did a visual inspection and did not identify the species of fungi infecting some of the trees.

Question #4: Given that no new trees will be planted anytime soon and L101 will look be even more uninviting with fewer trees, why weren't the larger Euc's evaluated for their short-term prognosis? Why not wait for the fungus to be identifiable and why not check the wood for the level of decay already experienced?

Question #5: No arborists are claiming that all these trees need to come down immediately. What is the rush?

Question #6: Why didn't the city want me to have the arborist's report until after a decision was made?

Question #7: Who made the "final" city decision?

Encinitas Taxpayers Assoc Newsletter Jan '09

The Jan 2009 ETA newsletter has lots of juicy info and tasty charts and graphs.
ETA Notes
PDF link to Jan Newsletter

8 Leucadia 101 trees to be cut down

click image for large view

More Leucadia Big Trees to be Removed

All of the big trees in the center median in front of Scott's Automotive are posted for removal. As you can see from this photo the city has not been trimming branches or taking care of these trees so they look a bit raggedy (the one in the center looks pretty good). The city says it is going to plant replacement trees but nobody can tell you when or what kinds of trees. The iconic Leucadia Hwy 101 tree canopy is going to completely gone soon. *sigh*

I heard that the big Torrey Pines in front of the Cardiff library are getting cut down this week. Efforts to save them from disease didn't pan out.*
*Correction: the Cardiff library Torrey Pines were not diseased, their roots had been cut when the library was built which led to their doom. I also hear that new trees will not be planted. Bummer.

No More Bush $25

LOL, classic Leucadia. Thanks to Fred Caldwell for sending me this.