To The Menlo Park City Council.
 
"We The People" of Cotton Street express our concerns about the Pilot
Reforestation Program ongoing now in our area.
 
According to the City staff, the planning of this Pilot Study "has been
going on for the past two years. Both the Environmental Quality
Commission and City Council have reviewed and endorsed the project at
the public meetings over the last year." Why were we not notified about
it before October 20, 2006 ? This notice included "the option for
property owners to request that the tree adjacent to their property not
be removed." That option has been exercised from the beginning, but
after receiving more information about this nondescript plan with no
roadmap, with many **inconsistencies, we are asking the City Council to
consider leaving Cotton St. out of the Pilot Study, and instead to
properly maintain and preserve these Heritage trees which - in many ways
- are great assets for the home owners of this neighborhood and to the
whole Tree City of Menlo Park USA !
 
Further more, it might be good for the Pilot Study, which is
experimental, to see what can be achieved by preserving these
magnificent Heritage trees with better care than they have recieved so
far, and compare the results with the other streets (Polizer and Hesketh
are also Liquidambar monocultered) which are going ahead with the
Program.
 
In the planning phase, was it taken into concideration what an impact
for the environment and to the immediate neighborhood it will be to
remove so many large trees (400+) in this size area in a relatively
short time ?
A decade mentioned is short time for the new trees to replace the old
ones which took 50+ years to become trees which can be viewed, said
Canopy Executive Director Catherine Martineau, as utility that provides
"ecosystem services" : 1) energy conservation (less need for
air-conditioning in summer, and as a windbreak mature trees cut heating
costs). 2) air quality improvement (trees reduce the impact of
greenhouse gases by removing carbon dioxide and releasing oxygen - one
large tree can produce a day's supply of oxygen for four people
according Canopy.) 3) trees also act as a noise buffer.
 
November 1. we received second notice to "clarify" the plan, inform us
about The Tree Walk on November 4, and the deadline Nov. 6 for appeals.
The tree walk was good but hurried, not enough time had been allocated
for the numerous questions which arouse. EQC action subsequently
approved: "removals are expected to begin the week of November 20th. All
trees will be planted by the end of December at the latest. It is
important to get new trees in the ground by then so that they will get
plenty of rain and grow roots before warmer spring weather begins to
bring out their foliage". We feel that this plan has really been
"forced" upon us, there is fear of deforestation !
 
At the time of the November 4 tree walk, two former members of the City
Council (Dubock and Winkler) suggested that the Pilot Study be postponed
until next fall to deal with many unresolved issues regarding the
Program.
 
** Following are some examples of inconsistensies creating confusion:
 
1. At the EQC meeting on January 3, 2007, when several well informed
residents had not yet returned from their holidays, and couldn't attend,
it became evident that it was not any more that important "to get the
new trees in the ground before the end of December, at the latest".
We were told that they can be planted later in the spring, but not when
it is hot.
 
2. The question of the lifespan of these trees, now ~55 years old.
 EQC: most of the trees are nearing the end of their natural life
expectancy". Consulting arborist, Barrie Coate: "Liquidambar trees are
often recommended as street trees and if well-cared for (watered deeply
and not topped) can live over a hundred years easily. The soil of this
area is so good and so deep that most species of trees are very
succesful here and develop into larger specimen than one might see in
other areas in this part of California".
 
3. The degree of street damage worried: Barrie Coate: "We noted that
the American sweetgum on these streets are, by and large, not producing
the degree of pavement damage one might see in other settings. That is
partly because they are in a lawn or landscape area behind the blacktop
sidewalks as on Cotton St., and as a result, have root systems over a
broader area than they would if they were growing in standard sidewalk
and curb environment, but this is primarily due to the depth of the
A-horizon soil and its exellent quality". According to his survey, none
of the Liquidambars cited for removal on Cotton St. have caused street
damage.
 
4. About the limb attachment = limb drop: Barrie Coate: "Some
individual trees on the other hand seem not to produce these defective
limb attachments, and as a result, are individually far less susceptical
to branch breakage. In some cases, the hazard caused by these structural
defects can be reduced by endweight reduction". EQC: "pose minor
safety problems".
 
5. About trip hazard: 1 - inch hard round seedpods pose a trip hazard.
The recommended replacement trees drop 1/2 to 1 + inch hard, round and
egg shaped acorns !
 
6. Concern of momculture ! Why did the City approve monoculture on
Santa Cruz Ave. and El Camino Real ?
 
7. EQC: Phase one will remove 10 % of the trees - Barrie Coate:
remove 30% in the next few years.
 
EQC: "After tree removals and replacements have been completed, a
survey will be taken of the residents about the effectiveness of the
pilot project."
 
IT IS TOO LATE THEN !!
 
Respectfully,
 
Tuula Berg
1300 Cotton Street
 
Received on Thu Jan 25 10:00:01 2007